NUCLEAR

Niloufar

but what do i know. perhaps instead of all this nonsense we should be launching a pre-emptive attack against the russians?

Why do you accuse others of wanting to start a war? Yes Russia has at times threatened Iran. Most of us regard war as a last resort and a sign of failure. We also know that there is no guarantee of victory against Russia. Then there is the issue that we don't even share a border! Please do not put words into people's mouths.

This left wing BS is not getting you or anyone far. Believe me it has been over 20 years since any significant number of Iranian people bought into that stuff. I know American left wingers still do; because they have not lived under one of these "enlightened" regimes. But not Iranians. I am considered a very liberal person for US politics. I want single payer; I support gay rights and so on. But I don't buy the "anti-imperialist" stuff for one second. God I wish Iran would go back to the pro-imperialist policies of the Shah! I would take that any day over the ant-imperialist Mullahs! The old leftist cause died with the Soviet Union! It was the wrong cause proven by the fact that even the Soviet people themselves did not support it. No one wants the "cause" except for a handful of left wing ideologues.

me naive if you like, but i

me naive if you like, but i have not forgotten a man named cheney who was just itching to bomb iran for eight years, and another man by the name of rumsfeld, and a presidential candidate who danced to the tune of 'bomb iran' on camera in order to attract votes, and a woman candidate by the name of clinton who threatened to obliterate iran on camera yet went on to become the sec of state. obama is not of their ilk but the vultures are constantly trying to change the agenda.

Don't need to go hysterionic on me. You talk as if no one else was concerned except you...And if you think with Obama the geopolitical calculus has changed, you're mistaken. I'm not into idol worshipping or idol hating. Aside, personality politics, the facts are facts and not going to change whether we like or not.

As long as the IRI Not Iran continues on its path as it has done in the past, there will always be a threat of war against IRI not for the sake of capturing territories but to topple the regime. As long as you support the IRI, Iran will always be in danger of being vaporized even if they obtain the nuclear weapon. That is my opinion based on geopolitical implications and fall out of nuclear- armed proxy client state of Russian and China. What I have is not superior wisdom, it's utter fear of my loved one being bombed to death and losing another one of my loved ones. That is what I have..

vildermose

call me naive if you like, but i have not forgotten a man named cheney who was just itching to bomb iran for eight years, and another man by the name of rumsfeld, and a presidential candidate who danced to the tune of 'bomb iran' on camera in order to attract votes, and a woman candidate by the name of clinton who threatened to obliterate iran on camera yet went on to become the sec of state. obama is not of their ilk but the vultures are constantly trying to change the agenda. i am sure your superior wisdom knows better than all these 'rumours', but i am gullible enough to take such threats seriously, epsecially when the un security council is constantly being pushed into a war position with iran, and particularly as the country in question has a near-psychotic history of such violations of international law. but what do i know. perhaps instead of all this nonsense we should be launching a pre-emptive attack against the russians?

are you saying that the

are you saying that the russians are threatening the territory of iran? what makes them more important than others? where are the russian soldiers stationed around iran? are there more russians there or americans, brits and other nato soldiers right on the borders of iran? is it the russians threatening to bomb iran or the israelis and americans?

NP: Are you suggesting the US is threatning the territory of Iran and wants to occupy Iran?? Are you suggesting the Islamic Republic Leadership did not forsee this scenario when helping the US both in Afghanistan and Iraq??

I believe the Islamic Republic uses this 'being circled" by American troops as a ploy to further warmonger so they can silence the dissidents and divert attention from the real problems. If they were truly worried about being attacked, they wouldn't have assisted the US army in toppling both Saadam and the Taliban...

AO jaan

totally agree :)

good night

good night niloufar jaan

or good day, as the case may be.  I think we both have said all we want to say. :-))

AO

are you saying that the russians are threatening the territory of iran? what makes them more important than others? where are the russian soldiers stationed around iran? are there more russians there or americans, brits and other nato soldiers right on the borders of iran? is it the russians threatening to bomb iran or the israelis and americans? i am afraid, it is you who plays an ideological game with facts about who is threatening iran. but have another rant about the left if that is what you need to do.

niloufar

Unlike the other ones that you mentioned, Russians are relevant for various reasons.  Here they are: 1) It is Iran's neighbor, 2) its has committed those atrocities in Iran's neighborhood (much closer to Iran than Palestine / Israel -which is the argument that I hear from IRI's lackeys about IRI's obsession with Israel / Palestine: they are in Iran's neighborhood); 3) It sold most of the weapons that Saddam used against Iran, including his scuds (i note that the U.S. helped him also, but not nearly as much as Russia and France--so, please don't go there) and 4) It's IRI's sugar daddy and its main supporter.  That's why Russia is more relevant.  

AO

you got some russian obsession? don't forget the chinese. i doubt you are a maoist. greatest atrocity in history. stalin came second to mao in terms of numbers killed. russian atrocities in afghanistan pale in comparison to stalin's and he was closely followed by hitler if i am not mistaken. how about the rwandans? they committed atrocities. pol pot? or shall we talk about chingis khan? while we on this weird subject: did you know that out of the top ten atrocities committed throughout history, only 2 were committed by muslims? and those two? saddam hussain and Sukarno (indonesia). hardly your islamist type leader. so what was that about the russians you wanted to discuss?

It's not history niloufar

it was less than 20 years ago.  But if it makes you feel better to compartmentalize your mind and put Russian atrocities in the category of "ancient history" in your brain so that you can ignore it...well, that's your business, not mine.  I guess the hope that Russia will sell the IRI S-300's justifies it all.  :-)))

AO

i don't think i have ever written any historical pieces. what's with the inquisition? it makes you feel better about yourself somehow? how come?

my nut-o-meter says: JB>>>>>>>>>>BOR>BS

John Bolton, on October 14, 2009 suggested that Israel should nuke Iran.  Any freaking nut-case who says BS like that (John Bolton: Israel Should Nuke Iran, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) is on my “you-know-what” list.  I can go on regarding bill-o and BS also, but compared to JB, they are x10 less bad.

AO: Thank you for exposing

AO: Thank you for exposing the Russian agent provocauteurs...lol

Thank you AO. I think the

Thank you AO. I think the IRI in large part gets its marching orders from Kermlin too. There are documents that indicate Khamenie was trained by the KGB in Berlin...

niloufar

and what about the atrocities?  Not relevant at all I assume?  BTW, what about the more than one million Afghanis who were killed by the Soviets?  Have you ever said anything about that?  If so, can you please point me to your writings on that subject?  or was that not relevant either because...oh...I don't know...perhaps the Afghanis started the war?!!

AO

yes it was the georgians who started that conflict, not russia. not important to this discussion.

vildemose

today's Toudehis are in bed in with the IRI and get their marching orders from them.  That's where the money, and the ideological gravy train is these days.  

Niloufar, Russians were the "good guys"?!!!!

I think you just proved my point that you are really not against atrocities and imperialism, so long as the ones engaging in that conduct are "your" guys.  Perhaps you should read these two reports as examples of what the Russians, the "good guys" were doing in Georgia:

//www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4543756.ece

//www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4553499.ece

I guess they are considered "good guys" so long as they promise to see the IRI S-300's so that it can shoot down U.S. planes (keyword: promise).   

Dear AO

AO: Are Toudehis still supported by Russia? Do they still get their marching orders from Kermlin?

How many Toudehis are still working for Russia?

AO

this is a cold war era kind of request, don't you think? russia was indeed guilty of crimes in chechnya, but not in georgia btw. they were the good guys in georgia apparently.

but if you really want to know what i think of the IRI, read this. it is a very genuine piece. jargon-free too :)

VPK

we agree on the stupidity of war, but this is where i really question your objectivity. read your last post to me again and you will see that you are looking at the conflict scenario like an american movie plot with no real iranian character or will in existence! if installations, boats and what not are sitting ducks, then they are on both sides, not just the iranian ones.

the missiles would be directed at US forces, not america herself. they have large slow-moving ships and huge military camps in the persian gulf. sitting ducks. iran has also developed high speed underwater torpedoes that cannot be intercepted easily. they can destroy naval ships and oil tankers with relative ease. 

but enough of this. i think we have argued this one to death :)

niloufar

no disrespect noted.  However, to prove me wrong, I do like you to point out one comment, blog or article that you have written, on IC or any other place, where you have criticized Russia for its atrocities in Chechnya, its attack on Georgia, or its other aggressions against, and occupations of other nations.  This way, I will take your stance against aggression, occupation and "imperialism" seriously.

Niloufar

well i guess they will be putting their attack on iran on hold till they fix the glitch?

The glitch was to shoot down a pretend missile! It has nothing to do with Iran. 

The reason they are not attaching is because they don't need to. IRR is on its way out. Why should the US get in a fight for no reason? They are better off letting the Iranian people kick out the IRR. They may do a few things to push it but all out war is not in the works. It is only if IRR does a major violent massacre and kills many thousands that the US will have the "excuse" to go in. At that time they may well attack and trash the IRR. By then no one will mind. Most Iranians will welcome it.

One way or other the IRR is doomed. They can take some money and go hide in Venezuela now. Or they can wait and face the wrath of the people. The choice is theirs.

AO

well i guess they will be putting their attack on iran on hold till they fix the glitch?

your tone is totally wrong AO. but that is cool with me. 

first, it is a bit of a stretch to say that the us has pulled a fast one on iran. it would be more appropriate to say that the us is in a quagmire and rather lost about what to do in iraq and afghanistan.

second, what on earth makes you think that anyone is 'hoping for an apocalyptic conflict between "East" and the "West"'? from what i can see, it is you who is itching for a conflict between the west and iran. i am only giving you reasons why the west does not attack iran.

as for being tired of 'rants', try not ranting all the time. your last 2 paras are nothing but meaningless rants. it not good for your blood pressure.

no disrespect intended AO.

Anonymous Observer

I stopped taking limo Ommano seriously a
long time ago.  He's a frustrated former Toudeie who has invested all his hopes in the IRI.  See my comment below.

Thank you my friend. I agree with you. The danger I see is  these people pretend to be "Iran experts". They get their BS published and Americans hear them. So without a robust response from us they will have the whole floor and their voice will be mistaken for that of the Iranians. We need to be more active in responding.

Right now on IC we are very vocal. But we must take our positions beyond IC. What is there to stop us from publishing and making our point of veiw known?

VPK

I stopped taking limo Ommani seriously a long time ago.  He's a frustrated former Toudeie who has invested all his hopes in the IRI.  See my comment below.

Niloufar

The test you refer to ia test of an experimental weapon against a "made up" Iranian missile. They were trying to hit a missile going full speed in the air. In a war in Persian Gulf the targets will be stationary installations or relatively slow moving mobile systems or boats. They are not going to be moving at several times the speed of sound. Those installations; boats and what not would be sitting ducks for the US.

As for the "scenario". These test scenarios are not targeted towards Iran. I say this unequivocally: The idea of Iran shooting a missile to US is ludicrous. Anyone who thinks that Iran is going to shoot missiles to US mainland needs to get help. I think the real reason for these tests is to build up defenses against Russia. The US does not want to say that because it goes against the whole "we are friends " with Russia. That is why Russians so much against these "defense " systems.

You are welcome to think as you wish about Iran's mil,itary abilities against US. My position is clear: I don't want a war between Iran and US. I don't want Iranian people or treasure lost over a stupid; ; ill-advised; uncessecary; ideological battle.

Niloufar

So what?  A test failed.  Happens all the time.  I'm sure they will improve the system and try again.

As far as your "topsy turvey" logic comment about U.S.occupying other countries, let's not conveniently forget that when the U.S. was occupying those countries, the great leader of the "oppressed", and the champion of anti-imperialism struggle, the IRI, was actually helping that evil occupier, both in Iraq and Afghanistan, going even as far as offering to assist its pilots if their aircraft were shot down by enemy forces, and giving the U.S. all in the intel it had gathered in Afghanistan through its allies there!!! The great imperialist slayer, the IRI, only became disappointed with the evil imperialist occupier when it became clear that said evil imperialist had pulled a fast one on it and was not going to give it a piece of the pie.  

And when it comes to hoping for an apocalyptic conflict between "East" and the "West", you cannot deny the fact that the you and other leftists have been itching for that for decades.  Just be honest, with us, and more importantly, with yourself.  You know that there is an unholy (no pun intended) alliance between the godless radical left and the messianic religious right in Iran (case in point: Ardeshir Ommani).  You know that these leftists were hoping for the conflict to happen when the Soviet Union was in charge, but now they have all their hopes in the IRI since the USSR was relegated to the trash bin of history.  You know that they (and you) are not against any war in which you can see the U.S. and the amorphous "West" humiliated.  You know that the only conflict that you are against is the one that the West may be on the winning side. If I recall correctly, weren't you cheering Russia when it was attacking Georgia, just because you saw Georgia to be an ally of the "West"?  Wasn't (and isn't that to this day) a war of occupation?  

I'm just tired of the radical left and IRI sympathizers ranting about how bad war and imperialism is when you yourselves don't hesitate for a minute to cheer on every aggressor and imperialist so long as they are your aggressors and your imperialists.  You are no different than the people who you criticize.  As I said before, there is a strong desire on the part of the anti-West crowd to see a conflict between Iran and the "West".  In fact, they can't wait for the IRI to get its hands on nuclear weapons before that conflict happens so that they can once and for all "teach the West a lesson."  And the interests of Iran and the Iranian people are totally non-existent in that equation.  They are considered sacrificial lambs.  It will be nice for one of you to come out and just admit it, though.  This way, we can have a nice, honest discussion about issues without having to "beat around the hush".    

VPK, AO re: US military 'might'

check this out: U.S. fails to hit missile mimicking Iranian strike

here's a quote:

A U.S. attempt to shoot down a ballistic missile mimicking an attack from Iran failed after a malfunction in a radar built by Raytheon Co, the Defense Department said.

The botched $150 million test over the Pacific Ocean coincided with a Pentagon report that Iran had expanded its ballistic missile capabilities and posed a "significant" threat to U.S. and allied forces in the Middle East region.

the article goes on to make a list of sorry excuses and to reiterate the 'threat' from iran to us forces occupying foreign lands surrounding iran... another example of topsy turvy 'logic'!

VPK

I have not forgotton about you! I will respond as soon as I find some proper time.