Iran - Sanctions - Blockades - War - Treaties - to name a few possibilities
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
So what, they are in the country on business. I thought that you were complaining the IAEA not having access. Anyway your radio report is the same propaganda that the US had been doing since Iran kicked them out in '79', you kanow back when they endorsed Iran having n-power plants.
Perhaps the IAEA will put more trust in their own inspections and toss out anymore laptops dropped in their lap by the Mossad. How gullible are they anyway, distrust anything Iran says and suck up anything Israel promotes as being the Gospel. Does the IAEA even know they should be inspecting Israel's n-power site?
LMAO! Seriously?
Dude... the Iranian Navy already tried that and lost 25% of their navy to the US Navy in a matter of hours. They have yet to recover. We called their bluff and sailed a carrier right through the Straits of Hormuz. They know better.
I don't know why you are so obsessed with a US vs Iran War. If you want a war so bad petition your own government for one.
Didn't you hear, we are building up for a sneak attack on Germany, from inside their own borders.
Germany and other NATO countries spend big bucks to send pilots for training in Moose Jaw, how would a Canadian base in Germany differ?
500: Last episode 1/2 - NATO Flying Training Canada Graduation Video - YouTube
500: Last episode 1/2 - NATO Flying Training Canada Graduation Video - YouTube
There is one option that could be used short of just giving up. Use the old tried and true
Neutron Bomb it kills people with minimum damage to property. If we kill them all their
can be no land claim disputes and we could sell the land mass to Re max for resale. In
turn we can sell the mineral and oil rights to others and get back the money spent on the
bombs.
In addition we would assure the nations in Asia that use Iranian oil the supply would continue
at a slight reduction. Of course there should be little terror counter attacks the terrorists will
all be dead.
The time is coming when for financial reasons or security reasons war with Iran is inevitable
unfortunately. We cannot have a nation making threats and asserting its power in the face of
the major powers, if that continues political and international instability will spill over in other
parts of the globe. We did help these people get to this point just like the west build up Hitler
the same out come has occurred. The west in this case Britain, France, Germany and our
friend Russia supplied the stuff and the know how originally and now they are confronted with
the problem.
Neutron Bomb it kills people with minimum damage to property. If we kill them all their
can be no land claim disputes and we could sell the land mass to Re max for resale. In
turn we can sell the mineral and oil rights to others and get back the money spent on the
bombs.
In addition we would assure the nations in Asia that use Iranian oil the supply would continue
at a slight reduction. Of course there should be little terror counter attacks the terrorists will
all be dead.
The time is coming when for financial reasons or security reasons war with Iran is inevitable
unfortunately. We cannot have a nation making threats and asserting its power in the face of
the major powers, if that continues political and international instability will spill over in other
parts of the globe. We did help these people get to this point just like the west build up Hitler
the same out come has occurred. The west in this case Britain, France, Germany and our
friend Russia supplied the stuff and the know how originally and now they are confronted with
the problem.
You support exterminating 76 million people for the benefit of large multinational oil corporations because your idiot box claims their leaders are secretly trying to build a nuke without any supporting evidence. Was that sarcasm or were you serious?
I have an idea. Why don't we act based on the known facts instead of made up crap. That's how the US convinced millions of idiots to support an unprovoked war of aggression with Iraq which killed hundreds of thousands of people and made millions homeless refugees.
Are you one of those people who still believe Iraq had WMD stockpiles and links to the events of 9/11?
I have an idea. Why don't we act based on the known facts instead of made up crap. That's how the US convinced millions of idiots to support an unprovoked war of aggression with Iraq which killed hundreds of thousands of people and made millions homeless refugees.
Are you one of those people who still believe Iraq had WMD stockpiles and links to the events of 9/11?
Who supports that???
It appears the Ruling Thugs are not interested in negotiations. Now the West will increase sanctions, and ensure they are tighter than before.
Eventually Iran in my opinion will make a major strategic error as the tensions are high, the Rev Guard has many hardliners that would prefer a war. So whether by hook or by crook, escalation up to war is more possible.
Please note that the US military is against war - Have not made provocative moves or statements.
But the Iranian Military is not as controlled and highly disciplined as the US Military.
Elections are coming soon in Iran, unemplyment is sky high, inflation is rampant, goods are scarce, the middle class business are going broke. Clearly the Thugs will be out for the voting followed by coercion and killings, arrests. Then the people will demonstrate, be labeled enemies of Islam and Murdered in the streets, mass arrests late at night followed by show trials.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/0...clear-watchdog-quits-iran-after-atomic-talkBy Fredrik Dahl and Parisa Hafezi
VIENNA/TEHRAN — The UN nuclear watchdog ended its latest mission to Iran after talks on Tehran’s suspected secret atomic weapons research failed, a setback likely to increase the risk of confrontation with the West.
France said Iran’s refusal to allow the inspectors to see a key military site used for suspected atomic weapons research was a “missed opportunity” that could undermine chances of reviving wider talks between Tehran and world powers.
In a defiant response, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran’s nuclear policies would not change despite mounting international pressure against what the West says are Iran’s plans to obtain nuclear bombs.
“With God’s help, and without paying attention to propaganda, Iran’s nuclear course should continue firmly and seriously,” he said on state television. “Pressures, sanctions and assassinations will bear no fruit. No obstacles can stop Iran’s nuclear work.”
Possessing a nuclear bomb, he said, “constitutes a major sin,” he told a group of nuclear scientists.
As sanctions mount, ordinary Iranians are suffering from the effects of soaring prices and a collapsing currency. Several Iranian nuclear scientists have been killed over the past two years in bomb attacks that Tehran has blamed on its arch-adversary Israel.
The collapse of the nuclear talks came as Iran seems increasingly isolated, with some experts seeing the Islamic republic’s mounting defiance in response to sanctions against its oil industry and financial institutions as evidence that it is in no mood to compromise with the West.
Elections on March 2 are expected to be won by supporters of Khamenei, an implacable enemy of the West.
A lot like poking a stick at an animal, the West should have their collective pee-pees slapped wit a big stick. So the West can provoke Iran endlessly over something that already had their approval. No wonder Iran kicked their asses out.
And you know what the 'hardliners' want how? Seems like the war with Iraq was their last war and it was totally defensive including Iran being the one to not start the war. How many million has the West killed since the Iran?Iraq war ended, 5 mil maybe, I'm counting 1M babies in Iraq during UN sanctions.
CIA WhistleBlower EXPOSES Everything! "Extreme Prejudice" - YouTube
Yes I see what you mean.
1893 – Hawaii (Liliuokalani; monarchist): success (OF)
1912 – China (Piyu; monarchist): success (OF)
1918 – Panama (Arias; center-right): success (SE)
1919 – Hungary (Kun; communist): success (CO)
1920 – USSR (Lenin; communist): failure (OF)
1924 – Honduras (Carias; nationalist): success (SE)
1934 – United States (Roosevelt; liberal): failure (CO)
1945 – Japan (Higashikuni; rightist): success (OF)
1946 – Thailand (Pridi; conservative): success (CO)
1946 – Argentina (Peron; military/centrist): failure (SE)
1947 – France (*; communist): success (SE)
1947 – Philippines (*; center-left): success (SE)
1947 – Romania (Gheorghiu-Dej; stalinist): failure (CO)
1948 – Italy (*, communist): success (SE)
1948 – Colombia (Gaitan; populist/leftist): success (SE)
1948 – Peru (Bustamante; left/centrist): success (CO)
1949 – Syria (Kuwatli; neutralist/Pan-Arabist): success (CO)
1949 – China (Mao; communist): failure (CO)
1950 – Albania (Hoxha; communist): failure (CO)
1951 – Bolivia (Paz; center/neutralist): success (CO)
1951 – DPRK (Kim; stalinist): failure (OF)
1951 – Poland (Cyrankiewicz; stalinist): failure (CO)
1951 – Thailand (Phibun; conservative): success (CO)
1952 – Egypt (Farouk; monarchist): success (CO)
1952 – Cuba (Prio; reform/populist): success (CO)
1952 – Lebanon (*; left/populist): success: (SE)
1953 – British Guyana (*; left/populist): success (CO)
1953 – Iran (Mossadegh; liberal nationalist): success (CO)
1953 – Costa Rica (Figueres; reform liberal): failure (CO)
1953 – Philippines (*; center-left): success (SE)
1954 – Guatemala (Arbenz; liberal nationalist): success (OF)
1955 – Costa Rica (Figueres; reform liberal): failure (CO)
1955 – India (Nehru; neutralist/socialist): failure (CO)
1955 – Argentina (Peron; military/centrist): success (CO)
1955 – China (Zhou; communist): failure (CO)
1955 – Vietnam (Ho; communist): success (SE)
1956 – Hungary (Hegedus; communist): success (CO)
1957 – Egypt (Nasser; military/nationalist): failure (CO)
1957 – Haiti (Sylvain; left/populist): success (CO)
1957 – Syria (Kuwatli; neutralist/Pan-Arabist): failure (CO)
1958 – Japan (*; left-center): success (SE)
1958 – Chile (*; leftists): success (SE)
1958 – Iraq (Feisal; monarchist): success (CO)
1958 – Laos (Phouma; nationalist): success (CO)
1958 – Sudan (Sovereignty Council; nationalist): success (CO)
1958 – Lebanon (*; leftist): success (SE)
1958 – Syria (Kuwatli; neutralist/Pan-Arabist): failure (CO)
1958 – Indonesia (Sukarno; militarist/neutralist): failure (SE)
1959 – Laos (Phouma; nationalist): success (CO)
1959 – Nepal (*; left-centrist): success (SE)
1959 – Cambodia (Sihanouk; moderate/neutralist): failure (CO)
1960 – Ecuador (Ponce; left/populist): success (CO)
1960 – Laos (Phouma; nationalist): success (CO)
1960 – Iraq (Qassem; rightist /militarist): failure (CO)
1960 – S. Korea (Syngman; rightist): success (CO)
1960 – Turkey (Menderes; liberal): success (CO)
1961 – Haiti (Duvalier; rightist/militarist): success (CO)
1961 – Cuba (Castro; communist): failure (CO)
1961 – Congo (Lumumba; leftist/pan-Africanist): success (CO)
1961 – Dominican Republic (Trujillo; rightwing/military): success (CO)
1962 – Brazil (Goulart; liberal/neutralist): failure (SE)
1962 – Dominican Republic (*; left/populist): success (SE)
1962 – Indonesia (Sukarno; militarist/neutralist): failure (CO)
1963 – Dominican Republic (Bosch; social democrat): success (CO)
1963 – Honduras (Montes; left/populist): success (CO)
1963 – Iraq (Qassem; militarist/rightist): success (CO)
1963 – S. Vietnam (Diem; rightist): success (CO)
1963 – Cambodia (Sihanouk; moderate/neutralist): failure (CO)
1963 – Guatemala (Ygidoras; rightist/reform): success (CO)
1963 – Ecuador (Velasco; reform militarist): success (CO)
1963 – United States (Kennedy; liberal): success (CO)
1964 – Guyana (Jagan; populist/reformist): success (CO)
1964 – Bolivia (Paz; centrist/neutralist): success (CO)
1964 – Brazil (Goulart; liberal/neutralist): success (CO)
1964 – Chile (Allende; social democrat/marxist): success (SE)
1965 – Indonesia (Sukarno; militarist/neutralist): success (CO)
1966 – Ghana (Nkrumah; leftist/pan-Africanist): success (CO)
1966 – Bolivia (*; leftist): success (SE)
1966 – France (de Gaulle; centrist): failure (CO)
1967 – Greece (Papandreou; social democrat): success (CO)
1968 – Iraq (Arif; rightist): success (CO)
1969 – Panama (Torrijos; military/reform populist): failure (CO)
1969 – Libya (Idris; monarchist): success (CO)
1970 – Bolivia (Ovando; reform nationalist): success (CO)
1970 – Cambodia (Sihanouk; moderate/neutralist): success (CO)
1970 – Chile (Allende; social democrat/Marxist): failure (SE)
1971 – Bolivia (Torres; nationalist/neutralist): success (CO)
1971 – Costa Rica (Figueres; reform liberal): failure (CO)
1971 – Liberia (Tubman; rightist): success (CO)
1971 – Turkey (Demirel; center-right): success (CO)
1971 – Uruguay (Frente Amplio; leftist): success (SE)
1972 – El Salvador (*; leftist): success (SE)
1972 – Australia (Whitlam; liberal/labor): failure (SE)
1973 – Chile (Allende; social democrat/Marxist): success (CO)
1974 – United States (Nixon; centrist): success (CO)
1975 – Australia (Whitlam; liberal/labor): success (CO)
1975 – Congo (Mobutu; military/rightist): failure (CO)
1975 – Bangladesh (Mujib; nationalist): success (CO)
1976 – Jamaica (Manley; social democrat): failure (SE)
1976 – Portugal (JNS; military/leftist): success (SE)
1976 – Nigeria (Mohammed; military/nationalist): success (CO)
1976 – Thailand (*; rightist): success (CO)
1976 – Uruguay (Bordaberry; center-right): success (CO)
1977 – Pakistan (Bhutto: center/nationalist): success (CO)
1978 – Dominican Republic (Balaguer; center): success (SE)
1979 – S. Korea (Park; rightist): success (CO)
1979 – Nicaragua (Sandinistas; leftist): failure (CO)
1980 – Bolivia (Siles; centrist/reform): success (CO)
1980 – Iran (Khomeini; Islamic nationalist): failure (CO)
1980 – Italy (*; leftist): success (SE)
1980 – Liberia (Tolbert; rightist): success (CO)
1980 – Jamaica (Manley; social democrat): success (SE)
1980 – Dominica (Seraphin; leftist): success (SE)
1980 – Turkey (Demirel; center-right): success (CO)
1981 – Seychelles (René; socialist): failure (CO)
1981 – Spain (Suarez; rightist/neutralist): failure (CO)
1981 – Panama (Torrijos; military/reform populist); success (CO)
1981 – Zambia (Kaunda; reform nationalist): failure (CO)
1982 – Mauritius (*; center-left): failure (SE)
1982 – Spain (Suarez; rightist/neutralist): success (SE)
1982 – Iran (Khomeini; Islamic nationalist): failure (CO)
1982 – Chad (Oueddei; Islamic nationalist): success (CO)
1983 – Mozambique (Machel; socialist): failure (CO)
1983 – Grenada (Bishop; socialist): success (OF)
1984 – Panama (*; reform/centrist): success (SE)
1984 – Nicaragua (Sandinistas; leftist): failure (SE)
1984 – Surinam (Bouterse; left/reformist/neutralist): success (CO)
1984 – India (Gandhi; nationalist): success (CO)
1986 – Libya (Qaddafi; Islamic nationalist): failure (OF)
1987 – Fiji (Bavrada; liberal): success (CO)
1989 – Panama (Noriega; military/reform populist): success (OF)
1990 – Haiti (Aristide; liberal reform): failure (SE)
1990 – Nicaragua (Ortega; Christian socialist): success (SE)
1991 – Albania (Alia; communist): success (SE)
1991 – Haiti (Aristide; liberal reform): success (CO)
1991 – Iraq (Hussein; military/rightist): failure (OF)
1991 – Bulgaria (BSP; communist): success (SE)
1992 – Afghanistan (Najibullah; communist): success (CO)
1993 – Somalia (Aidid; right/militarist): failure (OF)
1993 – Cambodia (Han Sen/CPP; leftist): failure (SE)
1993 – Burundi (Ndadaye; conservative): success (CO)
1994 – El Salvador (*; leftist): success (SE)
1994 – Rwanda (Habyarimana; conservative): success (CO)
1994 – Ukraine (Kravchuk; center-left): success (SE)
1996 – Bosnia (Karadzic; centrist): success (CO)
1996 – Russia (Zyuganov; communist): success (SE)
1996 – Congo (Mobutu; military/rightist): success (CO)
1996 – Mongolia (*; center-left): success (SE)
1998 – Congo (Kabila; rightist/military): success (CO)
1998 – United States (Clinton; conservative): failure (CO)
1998 – Indonesia (Suharto; military/rightist): success (CO)
1999 – Yugoslavia (Milosevic; left/nationalist): success (SE)
2000 – United States (Gore; conservative): success (SE)
2000 – Ecuador (NSC; leftist): success: (CO)
2001 – Afghanistan (Omar; rightist/Islamist): success (OF)
2001 – Belarus (Lukashenko; leftist): failure (SE)
2001 – Nicaragua (Ortega; Christian socialist): success (SE)
2001 – Nepal (Birendra; nationalist/monarchist): success (CO)
2002 – Venezuela (Chavez; reform-populist): failure (CO)
2002 – Bolivia (Morales; leftist/MAS): success (SE)
2002 – Brazil (Lula; center-left): failure (SE)
alrighty comrades
So the role of the Military is to wage wars rather than being there as a prevention to war. I think a whole lot of taxpayers are going to want a refund.
Wars Iran has fought in during the last 60 years. Iran/Iraq war and they were attacked.
All the condition the West wanted to burden Iran with, you seem surprised, do you not remember the Iraq sanction program, name one thing you listed that wasn't affected by sanctions.
It would seem the West should want to keep the existing Government in control before the ones who don't like the West take over. You statement could be akin to the Pope guiding the Herper program.
Nothing the west has done pertaining to Sanctions is illegal - Nothing the US Military has done in traversing the Straits is illegal.
Now Iran has raised the tension levels in the past few months.
There are many factions within the Iranian thugocracy. We both know that.
Some as in the hardliners would love to have a war.
Next - The Iranian military is riven by these same factions.
It takes the mistake level higher, so the chance of hostilities is also raised due to errors in tactics, judgment and some wackos thrown in.
Check out how many have to approve a round going downrange on a US Destroyer.
Iran assassination plot leaves subtlety out of the bid | Full Comment | National Post
In a recent article in The Guardian entitled, “Iran seems an unlikely culprit for the attacks on Israeli diplomats”, University of London scholar Arshin Adib-Moghaddam contends that Iran wouldn’t plan attacks in India, Thailand and Georgia because Tehran enjoys good relations with these countries. Mr. Adib- Moghaddam is either very naive or enjoys good relations with the Iranian regime but either way, his article flies in the face of very damning evidence. A long look at Iran’s state-sponsorship of terror would indicate to the most casual observer that the regime couldn’t give a damn about it’s multilateral relationships with those countries.
Mr. Adib-Moghaddam even floats the absurd theory that these were dissidents belonging to an anti-regime faction or part of the “Indian Mujahedeen” ostensibly bent on wrecking relations between India and Iran.
As more details emerge about the Iranian cell’s activities in Bangkok, the first thing I examined were their flight records. At least four of the six Iranians flew to Bangkok on direct flights originating in Tehran – and in the case of Leila Rohani, the woman involved in the plot – on a flight directly back to Tehran. I don’t have much experience as a dissident, but it seems to me that I’d probably want to avoid any travel that would ultimately take me into the waiting arms of the regime’s security services. But it’s not just the direct flights; it’s the airline they used. As it happens, the members of this cell flew on Mahan Air, an Iranian commercial airline that was designated by the U.S. last year under Presidential Executive Order 13224 blacklisting it due to links to Iran’s support for terrorism.
Mahan Air is known in counter-terrorism circles as “IRGC Air” due to its busy schedule ferrying IRGC-QF/Hezbollah/MOIS operatives, weapons and money around the world. The U.S. is especially displeased with Mahan Air as it emerged that the airline was covertly flying IRGC-QF officers in and out of Iraq to engage in all manner of mayhem directed at coalition forces and in support of the Shia militias in the south of that country. Mahan Air has also been one of the air links facilitating weapons transfers between Iran, Syria and their enfant terrible, Hezbollah, based in Lebanon. The cargo manifests belonging to this airline have a long history of omitting certain shipments that are transferred between these three countries.
Also emerging from the plot in Bangkok is the use of stickers bearing the word “SEJEAL” to mark possible target zones at various points along a 1.5-km route on roads and public transit in Bangkok. These stickers were similar to ones located at the house where the first blast occurred and at another house rented by Leila Rohani. The stickers were also found under the seat of a seized motorcycle belonging to the Iranian cell. As it happens, Iran-sponsored Hamas refer to their rockets as “Sejeal Stones” after a passage in the Koran that tells of a miracle when birds dropped “Sejeal Stones” on an army attempting to kill Mohammed.
Iranians flying on Iranian documents from Tehran to Thailand on Mahan Air and caught en flagrante on one of the busiest streets in Bangkok with their stickers, explosive devices and motorcycle would seem to point in directions other than the “Indian Mujahedeen”. I’m curious to know how far The Guardian’s writers and editors will bend themselves into contortions of Iran denial before they just end up looking silly. The only “false flag” I can detect is flying from the roof of the British newspaper.
Last edited:
While letting the US/Israel side to do whatever the **** they want without having to answer for their actions? Still like to see how the place came to be under surveillance, perhaps a tip from a Moosehead handler.
I would think that blowing a leg off it would have to be in his pockets, maybe even remotely. About those surveillance photo's, how did the house come to be on camera in the first place, usually a sting op or a anonymous tip. Same thing, a set up. Afetr all that is the only way the FBI can catch a 'potential bomber'.
originally I said that what a country did within its boarders was it business. The more I
watch this situation I realize there is a problem Houston as it were. If Iran gets a bomb
there will be an arms race within the Middle East and all the countries around it outside
the area around it.
Prior to WWII we saw diplomats and world leaders try to head off fascist ambitions by
negotiating deals giving away some nations or parts of them and world leaders signing
agreements of non aggression. The Russians signed one and Neville Chamberlain brought
home a piece of paper with Mr.Hitlers signature and said We have peace in our time.
the result was the world was in deadly conflict within six months. The civilized world woke
up from a denial slumber and scrambled to save itself. Let us look forward several decades
later. We are confronted with a fascist regime with ambitions of dominating the region they
are in and affecting the sea routes and trade balances as happened prior to the war.
Once again we have diplomats, the UN, the world leaders doing everything from making
compromises to deals to safe the day.
All of this is like finding a dozen solutions to help one quit smoking, but eventually all the aids
go by the wayside as the person has to quit. That is where we are today either we draw the
line in the sand and stand there or we compromise until the war begins.
Sanctions partly effective. blockades, again party effective, treaties are not worth the paper
they are written on just like Chamberlain's. There is one possible solution an ultimatum and
if it doesn't work the alternative is to bite the bullet, and admit the only alternative is war.
watch this situation I realize there is a problem Houston as it were. If Iran gets a bomb
there will be an arms race within the Middle East and all the countries around it outside
the area around it.
Prior to WWII we saw diplomats and world leaders try to head off fascist ambitions by
negotiating deals giving away some nations or parts of them and world leaders signing
agreements of non aggression. The Russians signed one and Neville Chamberlain brought
home a piece of paper with Mr.Hitlers signature and said We have peace in our time.
the result was the world was in deadly conflict within six months. The civilized world woke
up from a denial slumber and scrambled to save itself. Let us look forward several decades
later. We are confronted with a fascist regime with ambitions of dominating the region they
are in and affecting the sea routes and trade balances as happened prior to the war.
Once again we have diplomats, the UN, the world leaders doing everything from making
compromises to deals to safe the day.
All of this is like finding a dozen solutions to help one quit smoking, but eventually all the aids
go by the wayside as the person has to quit. That is where we are today either we draw the
line in the sand and stand there or we compromise until the war begins.
Sanctions partly effective. blockades, again party effective, treaties are not worth the paper
they are written on just like Chamberlain's. There is one possible solution an ultimatum and
if it doesn't work the alternative is to bite the bullet, and admit the only alternative is war.
Not very bright to let them install cameras either, lol
26:00 min mark
David Icke - Behind The World Events - 1.20.2012 - YouTube