Iran Invasion: Imminent

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Iran is to shift its foreign currency reserves from dollar to euro and use the euro for oil deals in response to US-led pressure on its economy.


In a widely expected move, Tehran said it would use the euro for all future commercial transactions overseas.

The US, which accuses Tehran of supporting terrorism and trying to obtain nuclear weapons, has sought to limit the flow of dollars into Iran.

It wants the United Nations Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran.

Dollar squeeze
Analysts said Tehran had been steadily shifting its foreign-held assets out of dollars since 2003 and that Monday's announcement was unlikely to affect the value of the dollar, which has weakened significantly in recent months.


There will be no reliance on dollars
Gholam-Hussein Elham, Iranian spokesman


An Iranian spokesman said all its foreign exchange transactions would be conducted in euros and its national budget would also be calculated in euros as well as its own currency.

"There will be no reliance on dollars," said Gholam-Hussein Elham. "This change is already being made in the currency reserves abroad." The currency move will apply to oil sales although it is expected that Iran, the world's fourth largest oil producer, will still accept oil payments in dollars.

Nuclear trigger
Washington has sought to exert financial pressure on Iran, which it accuses of flouting international law by trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Tehran denies this, saying its nuclear research is for purely geared towards civilian uses. Most international banks have stopped dollar transactions with Iran and some firms have ceased trading with Iran altogether in anticipation of possible future sanctions.

The dollar slipped slightly against the euro in New York trading although analysts said they did not expect the reaction to be too severe. "It is something they have been saying they are going to do for quite a long time now, so I wouldn't expect any market reaction," said Ian Stannard, an economist with BNP Paribas.
The BBC's Tehran correspondent Frances Harrison said Iranian businessmen were complaining about delays in securing letters of credit and saw current conditions as a prelude to the imposition of sanctions.

Tehran has urged Iranian businesses to open letters of credit in euros in the future.





Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/business/6190865.stm
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Do you actually beleive the US will invade Iran ITN?

I don't think they will.

Even if they pull out of Iraq, the outcome could be worse in Iran.
 

Logic 7

Council Member
Jul 17, 2006
1,382
9
38
Iran is to shift its foreign currency reserves from dollar to euro and use the euro for oil deals in response to US-led pressure on its economy.


In a widely expected move, Tehran said it would use the euro for all future commercial transactions overseas.

The US, which accuses Tehran of supporting terrorism and trying to obtain nuclear weapons, has sought to limit the flow of dollars into Iran.

It wants the United Nations Security Council to impose sanctions on Iran.

Dollar squeeze
Analysts said Tehran had been steadily shifting its foreign-held assets out of dollars since 2003 and that Monday's announcement was unlikely to affect the value of the dollar, which has weakened significantly in recent months.


There will be no reliance on dollars
Gholam-Hussein Elham, Iranian spokesman
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/business/6190865.stm


Imminent invasion for what exactly?? because iran is 10 years away to get their first nuclear weapons? because iran want to use euro dollars? because iran isnt controlled by world bank?? just like north korean , like was afganisthan and iraq, certainly not for supporting terrorism, the cia has the longest list of all of supporting terrorism around the world, same for the US military, so explain to me why there will be an invasion in iran??


There is just none at all.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
Personally, I don't think an invasion of Iran is possible politically, militarily, or economically at this time.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
The US cannot invade Iran because of Iraq. Probably this was Iran's plan all along.

Iran and Israel both manipulated the US into invading Iraq. Iraq was the carrot on a stick. America's weakness was greed.

Iran has now put the US/Israel in the same situation as the US put the USSR in Aghanistan during the 1980's.

http://experts.about.com/q/European-History-670/Collapse-Soviet-Union.htm

Related:

Tehran, Iran, Feb. 07 – The Islamic Republic’s armed forces have a “unique superiority” in asymmetrical defence in the Middle East, Iran’s Defence Minister said on Monday.

Speaking at a ceremony launching the production line of the shoulder-fired missile “Mithaq 2” at the Defence Ministry's Shahid Kazemi Industrial Complex, Brigadier General Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar said, “The armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran enjoy a unique superiority in asymmetrical defence in the entire region, relying on their own defence capabilities”, the Fars news agency, which is run by the Office of the Supreme Leader, reported.

Mohammad-Najjar said that Tehran had been deprived of the missile production industry before the 1979 Islamic revolution.

He added that currently the Defence Ministry is designing and producing more than 1700 different defence products.

Mithaq 2 is capable of destroying choppers and jet fighters which fly at low altitude and use radar blind spots. It can be used in electronic warfare and it can also hit fake targets.
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5680

Russia has begun deliveries of the Tor-M1 air defence rocket system to Iran, Russian news agencies quoted military industry sources as saying, in the latest sign of a Russian-US rift over Iran.

"Deliveries of the Tor-M1 have begun. The first systems have already been delivered to Tehran," ITAR-TASS quoted an unnamed, high-ranking source as saying Friday.

The United States has pressed Russia to halt military sales to Iran, which Washington accuses of harbouring secret plans to build a nuclear weapon.
Moscow has consistently defended its weapons trade with Iran. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said the contract for 29 rocket systems, signed in December last year, was legitimate because the Tor-M1 has a purely defensive role.
ITAR-TASS reported that the rockets were to be deployed around Iran's nuclear sites, including the still incomplete, Russian-built atomic power station at Bushehr.
In August, Washington announced sanctions against several companies, including Russian arms exporter Rosoboronexport, for supplying technology to Iran that could allegedly be used to develop missile technology and weapons of mass destruction. Under the sanctions no US company can deal with foreign companies on the sanctions list for two years...
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/24/061124134543.qth288nm.html

Eventually Israel will be invaded by tens of thousands of angry militants, not directly associated by any specific country, armed with state of the art, man portable munitions:

http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jdw/jdw060807_1_n.shtml

American/Israeli success in the middle east does not serve Chinese or Russian interests. That's why they are willing to share man portable munition technology with Iran, who in turn shares with the insurgents.

Since no country is directly attacking Israel, Israel's nukes are useless.

This is the same war which started in 1990. Desert Storm was phase one. The "No-Fly Zones" and "Economic Sanctions" were phase two. Iraq invasion/occupation, phase three. The current insurgency is phase four. The current phase is an insurgent revolt which will eventually engulf most of the region. Eventually the militias will invade Israel. Their motivation will be Palestine's liberatio. Many of the militants will be Palestinian refugees from Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia...

Israel had 58 years to find peace with the people they displaced. Time is nearly up.

The US and the insurgents/militants are really proxies for a war between Israel and Iran.
 
Last edited:

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
"Since no country is directly attacking Israel, Israel's nukes are useless."

Wanna bet? Israel is not in the mentality to have its entire population butchered by games of semantics.

"Oh? These aren't Iranian soldiers just Iranians with guns? Well this isn't an Israeli nuclear strike, its a nuclear strike which just happens to be from an Israeli citizen"

How can you make peace with people who don't recognize your right to live? Its gone far and above. Syria still hasn't made peace with Israel, but Israel has unilaterally stopped bombing the crap out of Syria.

The only country to make peace with Israel is Egypt, and Israel has given back alot of Egypt and treats it quite fairly.

The Middle east seems to think the modern "rules of war" were developed in some way to hinder them, to hurt their ability to defend. It is there to protect them from the ravages a massive industrialized nation could do if they too fought as terrorists.

A suicide bomber targetting civilians is bad, a fleet of aircraft spraying nerve gas over every major population center is worse. Suicide bombers targetting civilians aren't even a problem if the target responded in kind, just carpet bombed population centers and shot civilians on site.

If the Middle-east ever engaged in truly large scale and dangerous assymetric warfare, It would be a big mistake. The rules of war are a gentlemens agreement based upon the fact that if one side stops obeying them the other will too.

Middle eastern nations have more to lose than to gain if they followed a large scale strategy like that.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
All sides have resorted to terror against innocent civilians. Israel's leaders are not morally superior to their adversaries.

We all know these stories:

...The suicide bomber struck just as the city's youth were descending on seafront clubs and bars, targeting a queue of dozens of young people waiting outside the Stage nightclub, a popular beachfront venue in a neighbourhood packed with bars, ice cream stalls, nightspots and embassies.

Parked cars were wrecked and spattered with flesh and pavements were bloodied. The front of the nightclub was ripped off and other buildings scarred as shrapnel from the explosion tore through the busy Tel Aviv night. "The bomb went off. I felt the earth move and then everyone was screaming "Pigua" [the Hebrew word for terrorist attack]," said Sachi Elman, 20, who was standing 10 metres from the club at the time...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1425963,00.html

But far fewer of us are aware of these stories:

Israeli War Crimes in Gaza Strip: F-16 Warplanes Deliberately Bomb Apartment Building Killing Seven Children

Last night the Israeli air force bombed a residential building with F-16 warplanes in Gaza City killing at least 10 civilians, among them seven children.

In addition to these seven children, at least three adults were killed in the attack. An additional 17 children were wounded, thirteen of them under the age of 12.

According to eyewitness reports from Gaza , two F-16 warplanes circled the two-storey residential building at around midnight as the residents were sleeping. One bomb was dropped on the building which reduced it to rubble and also destroyed walls of more than ten surrounding buildings.

The killing of 10 people, among them seven children, as they slept is a war crime of the highest magnitude. Israel clearly knew that they were bombing a residential building which housed several families. There is no excuse or justification for this crime that deliberately targeted and killed innocent civilians.

The killing of the seven children brings the total number of Palestinian children in the West Bank and Gaza Strip killed by Israeli soldiers this year to 117. This is the highest number of Palestinian children killed in any year since the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967.

The deaths last night confirm three trends noted by DCI/PS over the last three years:

1. The Israeli military is killing an increasing number of children. In the first seven months of this year, 117 children have been killed. This number exceeds the number killed each year in 2001 and 2000. In the year 2000, 105 children were killed by Israeli soldiers or settlers, in 2001 this figure was 98. Every year since 1990, Palestinian children have made up over 20% of total Palestinian deaths in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

2. The Israeli military is killing younger children. In the first seven months of the year 2002, 48% of Palestinian children killed were aged 12 years and under. This number exceeds the proportion in the year 2001, both relatively (48% compared to 34%) and also in quantitative terms (56 children compared to 33 children). It should be stressed that the figures for the year 2002 cover the first seven months of the year while those for 2001 include the whole 12-month period. An examination of data concerning children killed between 0-8 years shows a further disturbing trend. The number of children killed in this age group has been increasing on an annual basis, with 7 deaths documented in 2000, 12 in 2001, and 35 in the first 7 months of 2002. In addition, the percentage this age group of children represents is increasing within the context of total number of children killed annually. In 2000, deaths of Palestinian children 0-8 years constituted 6.6% of total children killed (7/105). In 2001 the percentage increased to 12.2% (12/98). In the first 7 months of the year 2002, deaths in this age group constituted 29.9% (35/117) of total child deaths. Thus, in the span of two years, the percentage of children in this age group that have been killed has increased by over 450%.

3. The Israeli military is using increasing levels of force in the killing of children. In 2002, nearly one half of the children killed sustained multiple fatal injuries to more than one part of the body (49.5%) as compared to one-third of children in 2001. In other words, the level of deadly force used by Israeli soldiers in 2002 has increased dramatically. This trend is also indicated by the cause of death, 37% of children this year have been killed by rockets, shelling or machine gun fire. Six children were killed when their houses were demolished on top of them.

The killing of the seven children confirms another indisputable fact - the vast majority of children killed by the Israeli army have been killed in circumstances where there were no clashes or confrontations occurring. Eighty-four percent of children have been killed this year in circumstances where there was no confrontation occurring at the time of the death. This indicates beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Israeli myth that children are dying because they are caught in "crossfire" is absolutely false. It should also be stressed that those children killed in demonstrations - 19 in the year 2002 - were killed when there was no exchange of fire. In other words, Israeli soldiers shot and killed unarmed children participating in demonstrations against the occupation of their land...

http://www.dci-pal.org/english/display.cfm?DocId=87&CategoryId=1

That was Gaza in 2002. Gaza has only gotten worse since. Just because most of us are ignorant of Israel's war crimes doesn't mean they don't happen.

All sides in this conflict have their war criminals.

Canada's only involvement should be a safe haven for the innocent on all sides. Canada should not continue repeating the same mistake over and over:

The coming to power of Hitler in early 1933 and the establishment of Nazism in Germany led over the remaining years of the 1930's to a set of increasingly severe measures against Jews that were to end, in the course of the Second World War, with the Holocaust, an attempt to annihilate an entire people and in which an estimated 6 million European Jews were to die. In the 1930's, the boycotts initiated in 1933 and 1934, the Nuremberg laws (1935) and Kristallnacht (1938) gave clear signals to the Jews of Germany that they should seek asylum in other countries. The main problem they faced was that few countries opened their doors to them. Canada only admitted around 5,000 Jewish refugees in the 1930's. What explains such a low number?...
http://www2.marianopolis.edu/quebechistory/readings/CanadaandJewishRefugeesinthe1930s.html

These people are just as persecuted:


UNRWA appeals for $246m in emergency funds to address deplorable humanitarian conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory


Amman - Living conditions amongst Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank have slumped to levels unseen since 1967. Every aspect of life has been affected. The crisis that began in September 2000 has deepened dramatically during 2006, as a result of the international isolation of the Palestinian Authority (PA), the conditions of siege imposed on Gaza and the ongoing fragmentation of the West Bank. The majority of Palestinians are now dependent on food and cash handouts. Violence, poverty and despair are overtaking hopes for recovery and prospects for development. ...more (full text of Emergency Appeal 2007)


http://www.un.org/unrwa/english.html

Sad that a nation populated by people who have suffered injustice and cruelty would impose injustice and cruelty on others.
 
Last edited:

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Since when was it Canadas responsiblity to support the all the peoples of the world?

If the conditions are so terrible, the people suffering have the oppition of voting in a government that is not a terrorist group and recieve aid again.

Under international law, we can not support the present Governemnt, as it is tantamount to supporting a terrorist group.

It is as simple as that.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Personally, I don't think an invasion of Iran is possible politically, militarily, or economically at this time.
I think anything is possible, but it sure as hell doesn't seem feasible nor wise, to me. As Logic said, Iran is years away from nuclear power anyway, so why not try other options first? Of course, the US administration and CIA do not seem to have a proclivity for being smart nor wise (hence my comment about anything being possible).
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Since when was it Canadas responsiblity to support the all the peoples of the world?

If the conditions are so terrible, the people suffering have the oppition of voting in a government that is not a terrorist group and recieve aid again.

Under international law, we can not support the present Governemnt, as it is tantamount to supporting a terrorist group.

It is as simple as that.
I think terrorists are everywhere, myself. Anyone that intentionally kills non-combatants is a terrorist in my books. Or even anyone that knows that the deaths of non-combatants would be a result of some activity they have done is a terrorist, whether it be intended or not, IMO.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Actually Earth as One, people do know the "other" statistics.

but if Israel really wanted the Palestinians dead, hell, if any industrialized nation REALLY wanted a group of people dead. They would be dead. All of them, within a few days, a few weeks to get rid of stragglers.

Ask yourself this, If you gave Hamas a nuclear arsenal tommorow what would happen? Would they sit on them for 50 years? Or just whipe out Israel tommorow?

What has Israel done with its weapons? Zilch.


Thats how we know who the group we want to win is.
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
The thread title was sarcastic. I suppose it is difficult to convey that via forum.

When the Iraq war started in 2003, the conspiracy theorists came up with an "alternate" motive for the war.

Iraq switched from the US Dollar to the Euro.

Is history repeating itself?
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Since when was it Canadas responsiblity to support the all the peoples of the world?

If the conditions are so terrible, the people suffering have the oppition of voting in a government that is not a terrorist group and recieve aid again.

Under international law, we can not support the present Governemnt, as it is tantamount to supporting a terrorist group.

It is as simple as that.

I would agre with you... except Canada voted in favor of creating Israel. I believe all nations must take responsibility for their actions.... including Canada:

...The 33 countries that voted in favour of the partition, as set by UN resolution 181: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Belarus, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, South Africa, Ukraine, United States, USSR, Uruguay, Venezuela...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Actually Earth as One, people do know the "other" statistics.

but if Israel really wanted the Palestinians dead, hell, if any industrialized nation REALLY wanted a group of people dead. They would be dead. All of them, within a few days, a few weeks to get rid of stragglers.

Ask yourself this, If you gave Hamas a nuclear arsenal tommorow what would happen? Would they sit on them for 50 years? Or just whipe out Israel tommorow?

What has Israel done with its weapons? Zilch.


Thats how we know who the group we want to win is.

Actually Hamas maintained a unilateral ceasefire for nearly two years. During that time that Hamas appealed for peaceful negotiation, Israel killed innocent Palestinian civilians and assassinated Hamas leaders.

When Hezbollah captured and killed Israeli soldiers along the Lebanese/Israeli border in a disputed area, Israel responded by bombing Lebanon from one end to the other. Only after two days of Israeli bombardment and about a hundred innocent civilian casualties, did Hezbolah declare war without limits and begin targeting Israeli civilians.

Israel assassinated the Hamas leader which successfully got the three main Palestinian militant groups to agree to a ceasefire as per the "Roadmap to Peace".

I have already backed these facts up on previous posts on this website.

In the Israel/Lebanon battle last summer Israel killed about twice as many Hezbollah soldiers but about 25 times as many innocent civilians. So how can anyone claim that Israel is more careful about not harming innocent civilians???
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Hamas did "declare" a unilateral cease fire.

Unfortunately, the didn't back up their declaration. Not that they could, most of the dirty work is done by splinter cells they create and no longer control.
 

Shia

New Member
Dec 24, 2006
18
0
1
Since when was it Canadas responsiblity to support the all the peoples of the world?

If the conditions are so terrible, the people suffering have the oppition of voting in a government that is not a terrorist group and recieve aid again.

Under international law, we can not support the present Governemnt, as it is tantamount to supporting a terrorist group.

It is as simple as that.
hmm democratically hamas did win over fatah! but unfortunately, that was not accepted by other nations!! since they couldnt have their puppet party up in palestine... they cut off all the aids.. how sweet... kill the whole nation because they choose the wrong party!!

why is israel wasting its time.. I mean, they should just finish off the job...blow up whatever part is left..and get it over with...kill all those innocent lives....sounds fair-enough!!

(incase anyone didnt notice...my eyes were rolling the whole time)

I am not fond of a nuclear hollacast... but what isreal has been doing with palestinian's and what it has done with syria... I wouldn't mind supporting iran!!
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
The conservative antiwar.com has published several articles over the past few months which also agree that Bush wants to invade Iran. Had his invasion of Iraq been a success there is no doubt that the criminal traitor would have done it to Iran as well.
 

Shia

New Member
Dec 24, 2006
18
0
1
I doubt it... Iran unlike afghanistan and iraq have a much better economy and have alot of support from much of the Arab world. On the other hand...US already had its hands full in afghanistan...and iraq... they cant bare to go in iran with this whole "terrorist crap"!! its not possible..
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
In addition, unlike Iraq which was greatly divided, Iran is unified in that it strongly supports the democratically elected theocratic government. Iran also has contracts with Russia and China for oil and other resources whose services would be disrupted by war. Bush and Israel hate Tehran, but much of the world views it favorably. Therefore, he will never get a "coalition" to support any invasion plans.