# Israeli Air Force Gears up to Strike Iran.



## Kompromat

*Israel gets ready to strike at Iran's nuclear sites - media*







Israeli air force have practiced simulated strikes at Iran's nuclear facilities using airspace of at least two unidentified Arab countries, a newspaper published in east Jerusalem reported.

According to Al Manar paper, several Israeli combat jets carried out in late February bombing drills "targeting" known Iranian nuclear sites "in two Arab countries in the Persian Gulf, which are close territorially with the Islamic republic and cooperate with Israel on this issue."

Al Manar said Israel had received the permission to use the airspace from the top leadership of these countries and Washington "gave a blessing" to Tel Aviv to conduct these exercises.

Despite broad international efforts to persuade Tehran to halt its uranium enrichment, both the United States and Israel have not ruled out military action if diplomacy fails to resolve the dispute over Iran's nuclear program.

Iran, which is currently under three sets of UN sanctions for refusing to halt uranium enrichment, insists it needs nuclear technology to generate electricity, while Western powers suspect it of pursuing an atomic weapons program.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has recently called for the international community to impose a new set of 'crippling' sanctions on Iran to make the Islamic republic scrap its controversial nuclear program.

*MOSCOW, March 29 (RIA Novosti)*

Israel gets ready to strike at Iran's nuclear sites - media | Top Russian news and analysis online | 'RIA Novosti' newswire


----------



## Kompromat

Where the Heck are those 250 Su-30MKM Iran was buying


----------



## Creder

Black Blood said:


> Where the Heck are those 250 Su-30MKM Iran was buying



they dont have a single decent fighter not one, they're gonna wipe the floor if israel goes after them


----------



## Kompromat

Creder said:


> they dont have a single decent fighter not one, they're gonna wipe the floor if israel goes after them



Mig-29's F-4's , Tomcats , F-5's and their domestic jets will certainly lose to IAF .

Iranians have been sleeping tight and never bothered buying an Advanced Platform for their defense neither of those fighters have been upgraded.

They have over 330 Combat jets and who knows how many of them are combat ready & i think Iranian air force can defend its skies if it outnumbers Israeli jets .

For doing that they would need early warning which they dont have and they would need to get their whole fleet air born before the IAF struck.

provided their really good Air defense system proves effective , an Israeli Attack "Can be fooled" with this existing fleet as Israelis won't bring more than 100 F-16's and F-15's.

If Iranians succeed Knocking IAF out of the sky that would be an acchievment.
But Iranins lacking a platform like Su-30 wont be able to Strike back but they would have to fire Missile stockpile.

Regards:


----------



## desiman

Black Blood said:


> Mig-29's F-4's , Tomcats , F-5's and their domestic jets will certainly lose to IAF .
> 
> Iranians have been sleeping tight and never bothered buying an Advanced Platform for their defense neither of thoe fighters have been upgraded.



Dont the Iranians have homemade jets that are supposed to be good. Sorry i have no idea about Iran's Air force, anyone with insights ?


----------



## Creder

here you do the math*

Israel*




*
Iran*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Creder

desiman said:


> Dont the Iranians have homemade jets that are supposed to be good. Sorry i have no idea about Iran's Air force, anyone with insights ?



yeah the best they could make was a "saqaeh" or something which they said is better than the F-18, apparently they didnt do they're research on wikipedia..if they had they'd have found that its more close to the F-5, but hey atleast it flies

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## desiman

Creder said:


> yeah the best they could make was a "saqaeh" or something which they said is better than the F-18, apparently they didnt do they're research on wikipedia..if they had they'd have found that its more close to the F-5, but hey atleast it flies



Thanks for the post, all i can say is Gud Luck Iran lol wow they are living in a different Era of aviation lol


----------



## Kompromat

desiman said:


> Dont the Iranians have homemade jets that are supposed to be good. Sorry i have no idea about Iran's Air force, anyone with insights ?



Yes they do have one its called Saeqeh and its capabilities are unknown .

furturemore they do have some 24 Mirage F-1's too.

This is saeqeh.



As i said before if they get airborn in time they can outgun Israelis.


----------



## Kompromat

Iranian air force also lacks BVR capability thus they may rely upon Air defense systems ie SAM's.


----------



## Creder

Black Blood said:


> Yes they do have one its called Saeqeh and its capabilities are unknown .
> 
> furturemore they do have some 24 Mirage F-1's too.
> 
> This is saeqeh.
> 
> 
> 
> As i said before if they get airborn in time they can outgun Israelis.



Bro are you serious ? they can outgun israel ? did u even look at the inventories ??

They are comparing this Saeqeh to F-18





You tell me what does it look more similar to, the hornet or the F-5 ( Dumbledore )


----------



## SekrutYakhni

If it is true than Good luck Iran. 
You will do the job InshAllah!

We as Pakistanis should support Iran morally. 

God will bless you. 
InshAllah

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

I appreciate Iran indigenous development of F-5 copy but its good to replace original F-5s and for advance training. 
without disrespect Iran should get rid of old fleet of fighters in her inventory all those defected fighters F-1/su24/25..Its about time Iran retire those F-14s and F-4s and order su-30s, upgrade those defected mig-29s and F-7 are relatively in good shape keep them flying.
f-1/mig29/f-7/su24/su25/f-5/f-5 copy/f-4/f-14 this is madness maintenance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zagahaga

bomb the **** out of isreal

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

Creder:

Bro yes they can outgun Israelis and this is how they can do it.

1: Provide Early warning of the Attack to the Air force
2: Air force must be at a silent alert already
3: Transfer the info to Ground based SAM sites.
3: Get the WHOLE Fleet Air born of 300+ Jets.
4: Protect the Nuclear sites with SAM's and AAG's.

Now as i said before Israelis wont bring their whole air force down to iran , they would bring a mixed fleed of 100 F-15 Strike eagles escorted by F-16Sufa.

Remember it is a surgical strike and even 100 planes are vunrable to iranian defense.

Now Iranians lack in technology but they can compete them in the air to provide SAM's time to Choose and Kill israeli Fighter jets and not to mention Iranian SAM systems are quite good.

F-4's , F-5's , F-1's , F-14's and F-7's can Keep Israelis busy in chasing their cooardinated defense Missions while MIG-29's should intercept the Fighters along with SAM systems.

if 50 out of 100 IAF jets are shot down the mission is failed and then it would be time for iranians to unleash their Missile attacks on Israel.

BTW this Iranian jet wont stand a minute against F-16's


----------



## mshoaib61

IF they dare to attack iran. Oil prices are going to shoot up .
and paf have to stay alert also so no one enters into our territory.


----------



## Luftwaffe

Creder...and did i say scrap them at once? duh! talk about heads with no brains.

No big deal Iran is just trying to squeeze every last drop out of these air fleets with most as good as dead. Iran has money Russians are slow in delivery to their customers but they do sell no us/arab or someone else's pressure. But yes it'll take longer.


----------



## Kompromat

luftwaffe said:


> I appreciate Iran indigenous development of F-5 copy but its good to replace original F-5s and for advance training.
> without disrespect Iran should get rid of old fleet of fighters in her inventory all those defected fighters F-1/su24/25..Its about time Iran retire those F-14s and F-4s and order* su-30s*, upgrade those defected mig-29s and F-7 are relatively in good shape keep them flying.
> f-1/mig29/f-7/su24/su25/f-5/f-5 copy/f-4/f-14 this is madness maintenance.



I dont think Russia will sale Su-30 to Iran anytime soon , even if they do its going to take a while !


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Pakistan should be on alert if the news in credible.


----------



## Kompromat

mshoaib61 said:


> IF they dare to attack iran. Oil prices are going to shoot up .
> *and paf have to stay alert also so no one enters into our territory.*



I would love to shoot down an intruding IAF Sufa


----------



## SekrutYakhni




----------



## Kompromat

saad445566 said:


> Pakistan should be on alert if the news in credible.



We are always ready

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mshoaib61

Black Blood said:


> I dont think Russia will sale Su-30 to Iran anytime soon , even if they do its going to take a while !



Even if they get su -30 on priority bases. they have to go under training and get used to fly the aircraft which would take several months of training.

All they can do is get s-300 from russia which they might have it already .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Comet

Oh... this is not looking good. I see geopolitical situation changing. I see proxy wars in Lebanon, Pakistan, Syria etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Creder

Black Blood said:


> Creder:
> 
> Bro yes they can outgun Israelis and this is how they can do it.
> 
> 1: Provide Early warning of the Attack to the Air force
> 2: Air force must be at a silent alert already
> 3: Transfer the info to Ground based SAM sites.
> 3: Get the WHOLE Fleet Air born of 300+ Jets.
> 4: Protect the Nuclear sites with SAM's and AAG's.
> 
> Now as i said before Israelis wont bring their whole air force down to iran , they would bring a mixed fleed of 100 F-15 Strike eagles escorted by F-16Sufa.
> 
> Remember it is a surgical strike and even 100 planes are vunrable to iranian defense.
> 
> Now Iranians lack in technology but they can compete them in the air to provide SAM's time to Choose and Kill israeli Fighter jets and not to mention Iranian SAM systems are quite good.
> 
> F-4's , F-5's , F-1's , F-14's and F-7's can Keep Israelis busy in chasing their cooardinated defense Missions while MIG-29's should intercept the Fighters along with SAM systems.
> 
> if 50 out of 100 IAF jets are shot down the mission is failed and then it would be time for iranians to unleash their Missile attacks on Israel.
> 
> BTW this Iranian jet wont stand a minute against F-16's



your highly overestimating iranian capability to respond to an attack and highly underestimating Israelis, remember this is the nation that whipped arabs back into stoneage

Iran has NO AWACS or early warning system in place, and as for the sams and those old birds that you think are gonna be engaging Isareli F16I and F-15's ..they're dead meat. Iranians arent exactly known for having the best pilots ya know, israel on the other hand is one of the most professional airforces in the world.. There isn't even anything to compare and not to mention if Israel goes after Iran, for sure uncle sam's gonna be there providing cover from all over and throw UAE in there too..what say you ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

Terrible times for Iran frankly..


----------



## Creder

luftwaffe said:


> Creder...and did i say scrap them at once? duh! talk about heads with no brains.
> 
> No big deal Iran is just trying to squeeze every last drop out of these air fleets with most as good as dead. Iran has money Russians are slow in delivery to their customers but they do sell no us/arab or someone else's pressure. But yes it'll take longer.



Su-30

A no go for both iran and russia

J-10

No go, china rebuked the claims

whats left ? and easy on the brain remarks, i got mine intact lets hear an argument not snide remarks


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Black Blood said:


> We are always ready



InshAllah this time IAF pilots will not go back!

Iran cannot fight against F16s but GOD is still HERE. IF Israel has to be bombed than no one can stop it and if Iran has to be bombed than no one can stop it either but this time I hope that it is Israel's turn.

We will defend.
InshAllah

United we stand and together we fight. 
The mission Iran is going to is nothing less than a suicide but the dignity she will earn will last forever. 

*Iran will win!*


----------



## Luftwaffe

Creder...read my post again brain drain..
"Iran has money *Russians are slow in delivery* to their customers but they do sell no us/arab or someone else's pressure. *But yes it'll take longer.*" Am I clear colonel?


----------



## Creder

luftwaffe said:


> Creder...read my post again brain drain..
> "Iran has money Russians are slow in delivery to their customers but they do sell no us/arab or someone else's pressure. But yes it'll take longer."



ok sherlock, obviously your neurons are unable to process information..i'll spelll it out for ya

*
Su-30*

*"Sukhoi Co. has refuted today the reports of some foreign media about its alleged negotiations to deliver Su-30 jets to Iran. "*

Sukhoi Doesn't Negotiate Su-30 Delivery to Iran - Kommersant Moscow
*
J-10
*
*
China denied Thursday published reports it had agreed to sell its homegrown fighter jets to Iran, saying no talks had taken place.
.."It's not true, it is an irresponsible report," Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao told reporters. "China has not had talks with Iran on J-10 jets." *

China denies sale of warplanes to Iran based on Israeli know-how - Haaretz - Israel News


----------



## ptldM3

This is bad for both sides, if Israel wants they can decimate the entire Iranian airforce.


----------



## zagahaga

bro chill ..... iran has missels.... soo isreal would defenately would not do anything.... all show


----------



## desiman

Black Blood said:


> We are always ready



Are you in the PAF black blood ?


----------



## SekrutYakhni

ptldM3 said:


> This is bad for both sides, if Israel wants they can decimate the entire Iranian airforce.



True but the respect never dies.
Respect cannot be compared with precious and innocent lives but the mission itself is a self suicide. Miracles happen quite often in front of us. 

Hope for the best.


----------



## Creder

ptldM3 said:


> This is bad for both sides, if Israel wants they can decimate the entire Iranian airforce.



The sooner Israel does this, the sooner Iran can get rid of ahmedinajad and the country can get out of this nightmare


----------



## Luftwaffe

and you think russians should disclose anything they are looking to sell or negotiating? ok brainac if your insider into russian defense ministry because i wouldn't take those online news since russian has done that too many times those refutes and denying and did sell weaponry to many nations.

Incase of J-10 its all clear Pakistan will be the first export customer so no other nation is getting them before Pakistan.

creder..*The sooner Israel does this, the sooner Iran can get rid of ahmedinajad and the country can get out of this nightmare *

Look at your seniority on this forum and look at your posts..you're willingness to see bothside have civilian casualties with one strike from israel and the response of Iran and a total declaration of war..therefore i was right talk about heads with no brains.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Creder said:


> The sooner Israel does this, the sooner Iran can get rid of ahmedinajad and the country can get out of this nightmare



The sooner Pakistan will confront Israel also.
You cannot stop a monster. Someday, Israel will consider us as a threat after Iran.

I hope Iran wins (if) there is any war.


----------



## FreekiN

Iran is doomed.


----------



## Creder

saad445566 said:


> The sooner Pakistan will confront Israel also.
> You cannot stop a monster. Someday, Israel will consider us as a threat also after Iran.
> 
> I hope Iran wins (if) there is any war.



An unstable iran is absolutely no good to us we cannot do trade with it because the whole world is against it, we cannot have any links with the people or have any energy projects, something which Pakistan direly needs.

As for Pakistan, our program is wayy more mature than iran's so Israel wont dare attack because the results would be catastrophic for them. Our army is much more capable of taking care of any eventuality from Israel, we provide the nuclear umbrella to all arab nations, the block-60's would be here before Israel has the chance to take off. Israel tried but they were wise enough to realise that pakistan is no iraq and retreated, its not the same with iran ..it infact is worse than iraq

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Creder said:


> An unstable iran is absolutely no good to us we cannot do trade with it because the whole world is against it, we cannot have any links with the people or have any energy projects, something which Pakistan direly needs.
> 
> As for Pakistan, our program is wayy more mature than iran's so Israel wont dare attack because the results would be catastrophic for them. Our army is much more capable of taking care of any eventuality from Israel, we provide the nuclear umbrella to all arab nations, the block-60's would be here before Israel has the chance to take off. Israel tried but they were wise enough to realise that pakistan is no iraq and retreated, its not the same with iran ..it infact is worse than iraq




Whatever the case might be. I don't know that Iran is doomed or it will survive the attacks. 
The fact remains the same i.e. Neighbourhood, cultural similarities, religion and so on.
If we cannot support them in real time than we can/should pray for them at least.

I am saying this again.

Iran will win InshAllah..
^^ Not a fantasy but a request sent to my God.


----------



## Creder

luftwaffe said:


> and you think russians should disclose anything they are looking to sell or negotiating? ok brainac if your insider into russian defense ministry because i wouldn't take those online news since russian has done that too many times those refutes and denying and did sell weaponry to many nations.
> 
> Incase of J-10 its all clear Pakistan will be the first export customer so no other nation is getting them before Pakistan.
> 
> creder..*The sooner Israel does this, the sooner Iran can get rid of ahmedinajad and the country can get out of this nightmare *
> 
> Look at your seniority on this forum and look at your posts..you're willingness to see bothside have civilian casualties with one strike from israel and the response of Iran and a total declaration of war..therefore i was right talk about heads with no brains.



hey man your senior than me but i dont see anything in your arguments except your deep concern for my brains..as i explained, while iran is in this position Pakistan is incapcitated to do any trade with the country, had iran not been hell-bent on creating a nuke the energy crisis within Pakistan wouldnt have been this bad, a country with which we share a huge chunk of our border and cannot do any trade with how is that good for us ? how is that good for iranians ? 

I provided source for your "claims" how about you provide any source to back what your saying ? your yakin off the top of your head without having any credible source to back up your claims and you have the audacity to question my thinking capabilities ?


----------



## zagahaga

this is how iam going to break it up for you guys..... its my little eposide for isreal vs. iran..... isreal comes in with 100 f-15 strike eagles and 60 f-16 ....iran is alerted ..... 10 minutes later IRAF and IAF come face to face isreal takes out half of irans air force by amramms what left is mig 29 and f 14 ... IRAF takes immedeate action and with the help of sams take out SOME air planes but there still more left the skilled IAF pilots take out the rest of the IRAF agressors and sam sites..... iran hit the red button BOOOOOOM ..... all over isreal alarms go off blastic missel incoeming!!!!!!!! and boom isreal go for full conventional warfare with iran which america dosent support beaucse america has nothing to do with it ...... form the war isreal cant do nothing why? iran army is too big for isreal to handel soo it gives up and boath go for a stale mate ... iran gose back to the stone age for nuclear power and isreal is left to rubbel beacuse of iran balastic missels. lol that went throught my head in 10 seconds.....


----------



## gambit

saad445566 said:


> The sooner Pakistan will confront Israel also.
> You cannot stop a monster. *Someday, Israel will consider us as a threat after Iran.*
> 
> I hope Iran wins (if) there is any war.


Then by reducing the appearance of a threat, Pakistan's security is enhanced. Pakistanis should ask themselves on how and why is Israel a security threat to Pakistan. Even Saddam Hussein had to make up a Kuwaiti threat to Iraq. What would Pakistan gain by being militarily victorious over Israel?


----------



## Creder

gambit said:


> Then by reducing the appearance of a threat, Pakistan's security is enhanced. Pakistanis should ask themselves on how and why is Israel a security threat to Pakistan. Even Saddam Hussein had to make up a Kuwaiti threat to Iraq. What would Pakistan gain by being militarily victorious over Israel?



Israel and pakistan will never goto war one on one period.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Creder

zagahaga said:


> this is how iam going to break it up for you guys..... its my little eposide for isreal vs. iran..... isreal comes in with 100 f-15 strike eagles and 60 f-16 ....iran is alerted ..... 10 minutes later IRAF and IAF come face to face isreal takes out half of irans air force by amramms what left is mig 29 and f 14 ... IRAF takes immedeate action and with the help of sams take out SOME air planes but there still more left the skilled IAF pilots take out the rest of the IRAF agressors and sam sites..... iran hit the red button BOOOOOOM ..... all over isreal alarms go off blastic missel incoeming!!!!!!!! and boom isreal go for full conventional warfare with iran which america dosent support beaucse america has nothing to do with it ...... form the war isreal cant do nothing why? iran army is too big for isreal to handel soo it gives up and boath go for a stale mate ... iran gose back to the stone age for nuclear power and isreal is left to rubbel beacuse of iran balastic missels. lol that went throught my head in 10 seconds.....



dude if iran actually fired a missile at tel-aviv 90% chance that it'll hit tehran instead


----------



## TOPGUN

Iran will fire what ever airdefence they got like mad men.. anti aircraft guns, sams, missles etc.... plus alot of small arms fire. Iam sorry to say but they will not be able to hold off too long from the IAF .. its reality you are talking about one of the best airforces in the world with one of the best pilots if not the best sorry just being real i dont hate as much as i love for my country and love for our armed forces IAF has high tech fast aircraft with awsome state of the art wepons one can not compare with this power . It will be deadly showdown the sky of Iran will be lit up with wepons from the ground iam sure of it i sure hope this does't happen but again Iran is not Iraq they are crazy and fill fight to the death to save there land.


----------



## UFC101

...........................................


----------



## zagahaga

Creder said:


> dude if iran actually fired a missile at tel-aviv 90% chance that it'll hit tehran instead




that is what is was thinking about as well i mean the worst case senerio is that it can hit plastine ... god forbid.... .... but is isreal strikes iran should go for a balastic response


----------



## Creder

UFC101 said:


> I hope Iran gets bombed back to the stone age



easy mate you let a girl get to you that bad ? be cool


----------



## zagahaga

UFC101 said:


> I hope Iran gets bombed back to the stone age



hey cow boy what up that kind of non sence it stupied to say beaucse iran can do the same to isreal


----------



## Creder

UFC101 said:


> those pathetic mods will never ban her. only me.



she's the only gal here on these forums.. but rest assured you aint the only one there lots of other people she's p**sed off ..just keep reporting her offesive posts she'll get banned.. in the meanwhile, try to contribute here positively and be the bigger man

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## recond1te

Turkish proverb 'A dog that barks does not bite.' sums up this conflict.But lets say they did strike Iran.One thing we can all agree on that the losers are and will be the Palestinians themselves and the winners will be once again the extremists on all sides.


----------



## jinxeD_girl

UFC101 said:


> I hope Iran gets bombed back to the stone age



Oh come on UFC101... Iranians are not that bad.. why so much hate against Iranians ? http://img248.imageshack.us/i/21226404.gif/http://img248.imageshack.us/i/21226404.gif/http://img248.imageshack.us/i/21226404.gif/http://img248.imageshack.us/i/21226404.gif/http://img248.imageshack.us/i/21226404.gif/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mshoaib61

Israel might use suter also to fully control air defence systems .

Suter is a military computer program developed by BAE Systems that attacks computer networks and communications systems belonging to an enemy. Development of the program has been managed by Big Safari, a secret unit of the United States Air Force. It is specialised to interfere with the computers of integrated air defence systems.[1]

Three generations of Suter have been developed. Suter 1 allows its operators to monitor what enemy radar operators can see. Suter 2 lets them take control of the enemy's networks and direct their sensors. Suter 3, tested in summer 2006, enables the invasion of links to time-critical targets such as battlefield ballistic missile launchers or mobile surface-to-air missile launchers.

The program has been tested with aircraft such as the EC-130, RC-135, and F-16CJ.[1] It has been used in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2006.[2][3]

*U.S. Air Force officials have speculated that a technology similar to Suter was used by the Israeli Air Force to thwart Syrian radars and sneak into their airspace undetected in Operation Orchard on September 6, 2007.* The evasion of air defence radar was otherwise unlikely because the F-15s and F-16s used by the IAF were not equipped with stealth technology


----------



## Comet

UFC101 said:


> those pathetic mods will never ban her. only me.



Hey Chill mate.... we are discussing Iran Vs. Israel not U Vs. Mod + thatGirl + forum rules etc. 

Back to Topic. 

What is it that Iran has currently that can make Israel think twice before attacking Iran?
Lets see:
1. Ballistic Missiles
2. Hizbullah
3. Persian Gulf and Oil Trade. 
???

what do you guys think?


----------



## Creder

umairp said:


> Hey Chill mate.... we are discussing Iran Vs. Israel not U Vs. Mod + thatGirl + forum rules etc.
> 
> Back to Topic.
> 
> What is it that Iran has currently that can make Israel think twice before attacking Iran?
> Lets see:
> 1. Ballistic Missiles
> 2. Hizbullah
> 3. Persian Gulf and Oil Trade.
> ???
> 
> what do you guys think?



iran's got nothing interms of matching up to Israeli capabilities. As far as strategically speaking, it has lost favor with every nation. If saudi arabia is letting Israeli airforce use their airspace then chances are you've seriously pi**sd them off.. As for the oil trade, it will get better infact. If there is a regime change chance are it will be pro-american or "pro-world" and iranians wouldnt hold back on oil to get their economy back on track


----------



## Nima

talk is cheap
some of you guys are badmouthing Iran when we have been an independent country doing what ever we want for 31 years
Pakistan today is being attacked by drones left and right and ppl blowing themselves up 
I see how much those F-16s have helped

btw here's an Israeli point of view

*Israel can't launch strike against Iran on its own*
By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent
Tags: Israel Iran, Iran nuclear 


The year 2010 will be the year of Iran. Granted, we have said the same thing every year since 2005. But stopping the Iranian nuclear program will continue to top Israel's priorities during the year that begins in two days' time. The major powers are expected to announce soon that diplomacy has failed to persuade Tehran to freeze its nuclear project.* And Western intelligence services believe the Iranians have already accumulated enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb or two.*

In the meantime, Israel is striving to develop a military option. Judging by certain leaks and remarks emanating from Jerusalem, the use of force seems to be a real possibility. Such preparations are necessary: The Israel Defense Forces must have a military plan in case other measures fail. The defense establishment needs to improve its protection of the home front, which would be hit by thousands of rockets and missiles even in the event of a limited war with Hezbollah or Hamas.

Military preparations are also essential to prod the United States and Europe to exert maximum pressure on the Islamic Republic. This will not happen unless Western states come to believe that Israel Air Force planes are starting to rev up their engines.
Advertisement

This date with destiny has caused some Israeli leaders to adopt a messianic tone. Some even see a tempting opportunity to change the wider strategic reality in the region. Yet opinions are divided: Air force pilots, as they have stated on several occasions, are confident in their own abilities should the order to strike be given, but senior defense officials are describing their primary mission as preventing any foolish acts in the coming year. The IDF General Staff, as it did during the Gaza offensive, is likely to behave as an operational subcontractor, content merely to present the government with various military scenarios and their possible implications.

It must be stated plainly:* Israel does not have independent strike capability against Iran - not in the broad sense of the term. The air force is capable of delivering a certain amount of explosives to a given target and bringing most of its aircraft back home intact. But it is doubtful whether Israel can allow itself to act against the wishes of the United States - to stand alone against an Iranian response and begin an open-ended operation against a nation of 70 million people.*

An attack must be the last resort, not just another option placed on the table. It is best to disabuse ourselves of illusions about our ability to dictate a new Mideast order. That is the lesson learned, in blood, by Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon in Lebanon in 1982 and by George W. Bush in Iraq in 2003.


This week, new protests erupted against the Iranian regime. It is difficult to predict whether the demonstrations will ultimately topple the government or simply strengthen it, along with the Revolutionary Guards. Maj. Gen. (Res.) Aharon Ze'evi-Farkash, formerly the head of Military Intelligence, recently compared the two most significant developments in Iran - the demonstrations and the nuclear program - to two trucks: "Both of them moved up a gear in the past six months, but it is unclear which will reach its destination first. The regime is losing its legitimacy with so much blood spilled on the streets. Israel must now show caution and patience."

Over the past year, the Obama administration has provided the world with ample reason to criticize it for its naivete, its overblown confidence in the power of the spoken word to tear down walls and its impotence on North Korea. On the Iranian front, however, it has acted exactly as it should. Its pursuit of dialogue has pushed Tehran into an uncomfortable corner, created unanticipated common ground between the United States and Russia and could even lead to harsh sanctions against Iran.

What Israel needs now is a responsible adult, one who knows how to pull the emergency lever should the need arise. If such an adult cannot be found in Jerusalem, we must hope there is one sitting in the White House


----------



## Nima

"Israel does not have independent strike capability against Iran - not in the broad sense of the term. The air force is capable of delivering *a certain amount of explosives to a given target* and bringing most of its aircraft back home intact. But it is doubtful whether Israel can allow itself to act against the wishes of the United States - to stand alone against an Iranian response and begin an open-ended operation against a nation of 70 million people."

Isreal will need 1000 Planes to hit all these sites
remember, they will need planes for refueling etc...
Iran doesn't need jets, what we have is good enough


----------



## Nima

31 years and counting
Iran will never in a billion years be attacked by Israel
Pakistan attacking Iran is a bigger possibility at this point lol


----------



## Creder

Nima said:


> talk is cheap
> some of you guys are badmouthing Iran when we have been an independent country doing what ever we want for 31 years
> Pakistan today is being attacked by drones left and right and ppl blowing themselves up
> I see how much those F-16s have helped
> 
> btw here's an Israeli point of view
> 
> *Israel can't launch strike against Iran on its own*
> By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent
> Tags: Israel Iran, Iran nuclear
> 
> 
> The year 2010 will be the year of Iran. Granted, we have said the same thing every year since 2005. But stopping the Iranian nuclear program will continue to top Israel's priorities during the year that begins in two days' time. The major powers are expected to announce soon that diplomacy has failed to persuade Tehran to freeze its nuclear project.* And Western intelligence services believe the Iranians have already accumulated enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb or two.*
> 
> In the meantime, Israel is striving to develop a military option. Judging by certain leaks and remarks emanating from Jerusalem, the use of force seems to be a real possibility. Such preparations are necessary: The Israel Defense Forces must have a military plan in case other measures fail. The defense establishment needs to improve its protection of the home front, which would be hit by thousands of rockets and missiles even in the event of a limited war with Hezbollah or Hamas.
> 
> Military preparations are also essential to prod the United States and Europe to exert maximum pressure on the Islamic Republic. This will not happen unless Western states come to believe that Israel Air Force planes are starting to rev up their engines.
> Advertisement
> 
> This date with destiny has caused some Israeli leaders to adopt a messianic tone. Some even see a tempting opportunity to change the wider strategic reality in the region. Yet opinions are divided:* Air force pilots, as they have stated on several occasions, are confident in their own abilities should the order to strike be given, but senior defense officials are describing their primary mission as preventing any foolish acts in the coming year.* The IDF General Staff, as it did during the Gaza offensive, is likely to behave as an operational subcontractor, content merely to present the government with various military scenarios and their possible implications.
> 
> It must be stated plainly:* Israel does not have independent strike capability against Iran - not in the broad sense of the term. The air force is capable of delivering a certain amount of explosives to a given target and bringing most of its aircraft back home intact. But it is doubtful whether Israel can allow itself to act against the wishes of the United States - to stand alone against an Iranian response and begin an open-ended operation against a nation of 70 million people.*
> 
> An attack must be the last resort, not just another option placed on the table. It is best to disabuse ourselves of illusions about our ability to dictate a new Mideast order. That is the lesson learned, in blood, by Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon in Lebanon in 1982 and by George W. Bush in Iraq in 2003.
> 
> *
> This week, new protests erupted against the Iranian regime. It is difficult to predict whether the demonstrations will ultimately topple the government or simply strengthen it,* along with the Revolutionary Guards. Maj. Gen. (Res.) Aharon Ze'evi-Farkash, formerly the head of Military Intelligence, recently compared the two most significant developments in Iran - the demonstrations and the nuclear program - to two trucks: "Both of them moved up a gear in the past six months, but it is unclear which will reach its destination first. The regime is losing its legitimacy with so much blood spilled on the streets. Israel must now show caution and patience."
> 
> Over the past year, the Obama administration has provided the world with ample reason to criticize it for its naivete, its overblown confidence in the power of the spoken word to tear down walls and its impotence on North Korea. On the Iranian front, however, it has acted exactly as it should. Its pursuit of dialogue has pushed Tehran into an uncomfortable corner, created unanticipated common ground between the United States and Russia and could even lead to harsh sanctions against Iran.
> 
> What Israel needs now is a responsible adult, one who knows how to pull the emergency lever should the need arise. If such an adult cannot be found in Jerusalem, we must hope there is one sitting in the White House



now read the article again, i bolded some stuff to help you see better...we aren't bad-mouthing iran..we're just bringing facts to the table.. i did an airforce ineventory comparison and presented my own analysis of the situation your welcome to rebuke it.



Nima said:


> 31 years and counting
> Iran will never in a billion years be attacked by Israel
> Pakistan attacking Iran is a bigger possibility at this point lol



hey mate excuse us if we dont fall for the stealth fighter stories, incidentally Pakistan is the only country that might come to Iran's aid


----------



## Nima

Creder said:


> now read the article again, i bolded some stuff to help you see better...we aren't bad-mouthing iran..we're just bringing facts to the table.. i did an airforce ineventory comparison and presented my own analysis of the situation your welcome to rebuke it.



IRAN'S AIRFORCE IS IRRELEVANT!!!
The Israelis can't even attack so what does it matter what we have? 

and you're bringing up facts to the table alright, 
earlier you said Iran is worse then what Iraq was in the 2000's before the American attack, shows hoe much you know.


----------



## Creder

Nima said:


> *IRAN'S AIRFORCE IS IRRELEVANT!!!*
> The Israelis can't even attack so what does it matter what we have?
> 
> and you're bringing up facts to the table alright,
> earlier you said Iran is worse then what Iraq was in the 2000's before the American attack, shows hoe much you know.



Thankyou for saying that, now anyone who reads your argument will know better than to argue


----------



## Nima

btw, no matter how much I say our airforce is **** in every thread, it won't matter to you cause you want to create a weak image of Iran.

The Israelis themselves say they don't have enough planes to take out Iran's facilities


----------



## UFC101

umairp said:


> Hey Chill mate.... we are discussing Iran Vs. Israel not U Vs. Mod + thatGirl + forum rules etc.
> 
> Back to Topic.
> 
> What is it that Iran has currently that can make Israel think twice before attacking Iran?
> Lets see:
> 1. Ballistic Missiles
> 2. Hizbullah
> 3. Persian Gulf and Oil Trade.
> ???
> 
> what do you guys think?



Sorry man, we are not going to have this problem anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nima

btw,care to explain why Pakistan is being attacked by drones while having a billion shiny f-16s? Iran has a lot of deterrents that will keep Israel in check
lol 2 pages of irreverent discussions about Iran's airforce when Israel isn't even able to launch an attack


----------



## Creder

Nima said:


> btw, no matter how much I say our airforce is **** in every thread, it won't matter to you cause you want to create a weak image of Iran.
> 
> The Israelis themselves say they don't have enough planes to take out Iran's facilities



i dont have to create an image, ahmedinajad is doing that job quite well. But airforce is "irrelevant" according to you lol so why do you care ?



Nima said:


> btw,care to explain why Pakistan is being attacked by drones while having a billion shiny f-16s?
> lol 2 pages of irreverent discussions about Iran's airforce when Israel isn't even able to launch an attack



The drones are being used under permission from the GoP, though it is a shame but nonetheless they have dealt heavy blows to the talibans and the strikes have come to a halt. Morever these drones were targetting most of the lawless tribal belt where the taliban had taken refuge, do you see them doing strikes elsewhere ? As for our shiny F16's if you had them you wouldnt have to call your airforce "irrelevant"


----------



## Nima

Creder said:


> i dont have to create an image, ahmedinajad is doing that job quite well. But airforce is "irrelevant" according to you lol so *why do you care* ?



yeah you're right, i'm going to bed lol
bt think about this! 
lets say Iran had F-22s, what good is it when Israel doesn't even have the capability to launch an attack on Iran alone? 
90&#37; of Iran's military expending is on the navy, nukes and missiles
think about that for a minute


----------



## Nima

Creder said:


> i dont have to create an image, ahmedinajad is doing that job quite well. But airforce is "irrelevant" according to you lol so why do you care ?
> 
> 
> 
> *The drones are being used under permission from the GoP,* though it is a shame but nonetheless they have dealt heavy blows to the talibans and the strikes have come to a halt. Morever these drones were targetting most of the lawless tribal belt where the taliban had taken refuge, do you see them doing strikes elsewhere ? As for our shiny F16's if you had them you wouldnt have to call your airforce "irrelevant"



lmao
think of it how ever you want

the point is that you don't need to have nukes and foreign made weapons to be independent, you need balls and 2500 years of Persian dominance in the region is proof that we have balls of steel.
good night


----------



## Creder

Nima said:


> lmao
> think of it how ever you want
> 
> the point is that you don't need to have nukes and foreign made weapons to be independent, you need balls and 2500 years of Persian dominance in the region is proof that we have balls of steel.
> good night



yeh...its definitely past ur bedtime goto sleep


----------



## Forrest Griffin

Nima said:


> btw, no matter how much I say our airforce is **** in every thread, it won't matter to you cause you want to create a weak image of Iran.
> 
> The Israelis themselves say they don't have enough planes to take out Iran's facilities



Doesn't matter Iran is no match for Israel. 

U.S. equipment (Israel) vs. outdated Russian, U.S. and homemade equipment (Iran). 

Even with limited advanced arsenal Israel will take out Iran.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Realistic View : 

hard to predict


----------



## Marxist

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Realistic View :
> 
> Israel attacks iran , iran launches 50 Missiles per 10 minute , in 2 hours they can launch 600 Missiles at Israel and *we* are not talking firecracker qassam missiles we are talking real PAYLOADS
> 
> Now if they launch 100-200 missiles strictly at Israeli Airfields that should knock out the return flights to Iran
> 
> Together with Palestinians upraisin locally the Israeli forces would be pretty touch sport -
> 
> Add to that some unknown groups from Lebnoon , and *we* got our selves Israel kaboobs
> 
> Add to that Surgical strikes by Syrian forces and Army and *we* got Israel under occupation with in 2-3 days
> 
> Iran moves its forces into Iraq - iran links up with Syrian forces -
> 
> US invades Iran from Afghanistan - and backed up by support from France from UAE
> Air strikes on Iran
> 
> Iran & Syria finish off Israel - end of story - US nukes Iran in retaliation not before Iranians take out 1-2 carriers



Wildest Imagination bro,to defeat Israel in 2-3 days.but what this *we* represents, Pakistan?


----------



## Arik

Nima said:


> IRAN'S AIRFORCE IS IRRELEVANT!!!
> The Israelis can't even attack so what does it matter what we have?
> 
> and you're bringing up facts to the table alright,
> earlier you said Iran is worse then what Iraq was in the 2000's before the American attack, shows hoe much you know.



Overconfidence is the key to disaster.


----------



## Forrest Griffin

Seriously, If Israel attacks Iran we are going to see World War 3. Its going to be no good. Iran will also attack the nations that allow use of their airspace to get to Israel. And it is speculated that Iran will attack Saudi Arabia oil refineries.


----------



## Arik

Forrest Griffin said:


> Seriously, If Israel attacks Iran we are going to see World War 3. Its going to be no good. Iran will also attack the nations that allow use of their airspace to get to Israel. And it is speculated that Iran will attack Saudi Arabia oil refineries.



Iran is ruled by a bunch of retards headed by ahmedanijad who has promised to remove Isreal from the face of earth.In that case Iran will solely be responsible for starting the third world war.


----------



## Creder

Arik said:


> Overconfidence is the key to disaster.



Dont bother with him mate, read his argument he said airforce is irrelevant to this conflict lol



Forrest Griffin said:


> Seriously, If Israel attacks Iran we are going to see World War 3. Its going to be no good. Iran will also attack the nations that allow use of their airspace to get to Israel. And it is speculated that Iran will attack Saudi Arabia oil refineries.



World war ??? you have a world war when the world is at war with each other, in this case the entire world be at war with iran lol..Also Iran aint that dumb to attack Saudia, it knows what saudia will do, moreover it knows what Pakistan will do if it went after saudis

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arsalan shafique

i dont think Israel has balls to attack Iran......& i also think that it will lead to world war 3....between Israel & many other Arab countries as they will find it as a chance to get Israel.....!!!!!


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Frankly speaking 

If we looks the map 






It brings the whole situation into shape 

Iran has 1 Million + Armed men and women in Military that is alot 

Lets juts look at the scenario 

They have Good Air defence capabilities 
a) They got long range Surface to Surface Missiles
b) They got Mid range Missiles 
c) They got Short range missiles 

So the normal planes like F16 , F15S, Canarry birds , all all dead ducks

They use systems (missile systems that are still main part of British air defences so there you go) 

Plus they can launch 600 missiles at Israel in matter of 2 hours , we (here I mean me and you as reader including Indian) can imagine what the situation will be on ground , as these missiles are not going to be silly old qassam rockets. 

Now we look at the other element - 

One of the decisive factors for Iran would be , if it can link up with Syrian forces by Land so obviously the push will be made thru Iraq and also US will retaliate from Afghanistan. 

Iran stated that it would block the oil supplies which it will and can 
so logically if we view the map , Iran would drop 10,000-20,000 troops into UAE , and possible UAE has no military just planes which could become Iranian planes in matter of days. If Iran preemtive strikes UAE. *Instant access to F16E/F*

*Iran could move its 200+ Heliocpter fleet into UAE, and capture the base or knock out major allied forces in Afghanistan *

They S200 , or possibly S300 systems can carry almost 150 missiles meaning they can get 150 kills in air !!! 

Then again Iran also has Tor missile systems and other locally produced systems!!! 

*This is why their research and development comes into factor*

They also have ample supply of shoulder based missiles 

Now comes the interesting part 

So what will the Iranian Airforce do ? or could do 

Well simple patrol and spot Stealth fighters *dog fight it *
400-500 planes to watch out for stealth is pretty good plan


So what are Iranian chances ... are they done yet ? No 

3000 KM range , nuclear capable missiles 





I would think twice before trying something that should be tried 

I mean really Iran could take over UAE, knock out US out of Iraq/Afghanistan (once supplies are cut off for Afghanistan)

And Syria can move into Iraq as well instead of going into Israel , and all the fire power is launched at Israel ..  

Yeah 

300+ C130 Hercules would drop in supplied of shoulder fired stingers and drop it off in Lebonoon , and you got your self , ample force to take out the F16 rightinside israel tunnel it thru ... into Israel 

If I was Iran I would make sure , that there are enough shoulder fired missiles , that are dropped off in syria and lebnoon - 

Iran could knock out all airfields for allies and israel in matter of few days 


*Plus they also have 400-500 planes as well enough to engage stealth fighters in air-air battles dogfights - *

Do they have BVR ? or Air-Air - ? You tell me - 
Do they also have S300 systems ? You tell me- 

Will you dare fly 1200 km to Iran only to find S300 and scramble back only to find your old airport fields uncapable of landind and you end up ditching your F16 into dead seas?

Can, anyone risk war in Afghanistan again ?? they can't contain 100-2000 rouge taliban how can they fight 1,000,000 armed men to teeth !!!! 

*Did I mentioned Syria will also use its 400,000 men in military to crowd out iraq ? *


Who do you think the typical Iraqi solider will work with arab speaking syrians 
or ajnabi occupation soliders ? 

100+ cobras to support from air

Also not forgeting *Syrian 200 Fighters planes * just in case they happen to engage the returning F16 Low on fuel in a dog fight - who happened to get just caught mid way







Iran is generally not interested in war but what can you do when someone attacks you or put sanctins on your country , just like in ww2 sanctions and embargoes lead to world wars

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arsalan shafique

Arik said:


> Iran is ruled by a bunch of retards headed by ahmedanijad who has promised to remove Isreal from the face of earth.In that case Iran will solely be responsible for starting the third world war.



whats the matter with u man ....i think in other thread...some one mentioned that may be u watch BBC too much...& i think he was correct!!

& Iran is ruled by a very sensible person.....i think only one in the Muslim ummah to have enough balls to challenge America & Israel both at the same time..........

& please arik try to watch the world from brought view....not through BBC


----------



## Arik

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Frankly speaking
> 
> If we looks the map
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It brings the whole situation into shape
> 
> Iran has 1 Million + Armed men and women in Military that is alot
> 
> Lets juts look at the scenario
> 
> They have Good Air defence capabilities
> a) They got long range Surface to Surface Missiles
> b) They got Mid range Missiles
> c) They got Short range missiles
> 
> So the normal planes like F16 , F15S, Canarry birds , all all dead ducks
> 
> They use systems (missile systems that are still main part of British air defences so there you go)
> 
> Plus they can launch 600 missiles at Israel in matter of 2 hours , we (here I mean me and you as reader including Indian) can imagine what the situation will be on ground , as these missiles are not going to be silly old qassam rockets.
> 
> Now we look at the other element -
> 
> One of the decisive factors for Iran would be , if it can link up with Syrian forces by Land so obviously the push will be made thru Iraq and also US will retaliate from Afghanistan.
> 
> Iran stated that it would block the oil supplies which it will and can
> so logically if we view the map , Iran wodrop 10,000-20,000 uld troops into UAE , and possible UAE has no military just planes which could become Iranian planes in matter of days. If Iran preemtive strikes UAE.
> 
> Iran could move its 200+ Heliocpter fleet into UAE, and capture the base or knock out major allied forces in Afghanistan
> 
> They S200 , or possibly S300 systems can carry almost 150 missiles meaning they can get 150 kills in air !!!
> 
> Then again Iran also has Tor missile systems and other locally produced systems!!!
> 
> *This is why their research and development comes into factor*
> 
> They also have ample supply of shoulder based missiles
> 
> Now comes the interesting part
> 
> So what will the Iranian Airforce do ? or could do
> 
> Well simple patrol and spot Stealth fighters *dog fight it *
> 400-500 planes to watch out for stealth is pretty good plan
> 
> 
> So what are Iranian chances ... are they done yet ? No
> 
> 3000 KM range , nuclear capable missiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would think twice before trying something that should be tried
> 
> I mean really Iran could take over UAE, knock out US out of Iraq/Afghanistan (once supplies are cut off for Afghanistan)
> 
> And Syria can move into Iraq as well instead of going into Israel , and all the fire power is launched at Israel ..
> 
> Yeah
> 
> 300+ C130 Hercules would drop in supplied of shoulder fired stingers and drop it off in Lebonoon , and you got your self , ample force to take out the F16 rightinside israel tunnel it thru ... into Israel



which hollywood war movie did u watch lately???
trust me brother Iran has nothing and will surrender within few days if Isreal attacks Iran.


----------



## Arik

arsalan shafique said:


> whats the matter with u man ....i think in other thread...some one mentioned that may be u watch BBC too much...& i think he was correct!!
> 
> & Iran is ruled by a very sensible person.....i think only one in the Muslim ummah to have enough balls to challenge America & Israel both at the same time..........
> 
> & please arik try to watch the world from brought view....not through BBC



U call ahmedanijad sensible!!!U call a person who has decided to destroy a country sensible.U call the person who oppresses people of his own country sensible(didn't u see the massive protests against him in Iran,didn't u see how they were beaten up by thugs from the basij militias????)


----------



## jinxeD_girl

Forrest Griffin said:


> Seriously, If Israel attacks Iran we are going to see World War 3. Its going to be no good. Iran will also attack the nations that allow use of their airspace to get to Israel. And it is speculated that Iran will attack Saudi Arabia oil refineries.



Yeah that is a remote possibility ADT. but I don't want World War 3 at any costs..


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Arik said:


> which hollywood war movie did u watch lately???
> trust me brother Iran has nothing and will surrender within few days if Isreal attacks Iran.




That bollywood movie title was 

"AKHRI GHALTI"



Iran Military 1,000,000+ soliders (Add 200,000 civilians picking up arms) 
*400 planes*
Air defences to take out 150 + planes (High Altitude , Mid , Short range)
*100+ Cobra helicopters *

*
Population of Iran 71,000,000 Million people can you image .... 10&#37; of that 
joining armed froces !!! *

2 Days is I can say Iran will flood out Iraq with Syria 2 days

Syria Military 500,000 Solideiers (add 100,000 civilians pickin up arms) 
*200 planes*
Air defences to take out 60-80 planes

You add to that AK-47 and Shoulder fired launchers in C130 80 planes off to Lebnoon and you got yourself additional force of *100,000 *soliders 

A force that can't control 1,000 taliban can't match Trained military

What is gona happen in Iraq? Arabs will not favour Syria ? Or will they 
side with good old occupation forces? Moonh ki khani pare gi 

Oh wait , lets build bases in UAE to launch attacks well guess what that will be the first casualty of war UAE for opening bases on its soil, all those fancy F16E/F will be in Iranian army's control in 1-2 days 

Israel is nothing special you knock out their airfields they are sitting ducks all mojo gone if the airfields are taken out

As for the AWACs when air field hi na rahi to awacs ka kiya faida?

*71,000,000 Million ppl*


----------



## Creder

Azad do you ever, like EVER argue with an ounce of logic ?

Israel isn't gonna invade iran, they're mission will be to take out the nuclear sites thats it...and what world war ?? as if said before you have a world war "if the world nations are at war with eachother", you cannot have a worldwar when one nation is going up against the world. Iran has not a single country that will aid it, and believe me when time comes for a strike israel wont go at it alone, uncle sam will tag along for sure as will UAE and saudia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Creder said:


> Azad do you ever, like EVER argue with an ounce of logic ?
> 
> Israel isn't gonna invade iran, they're mission will be to take out the nuclear sites thats it...and what world war ?? as if said before you have a world war "if the world nations are at war with eachother", you cannot have a worldwar when one nation is going up against the world. Iran has not a single country that will aid it, and believe me when time comes for a strike israel wont go at it alone, uncle sam will tag along for sure as will UAE and saudia



Lets wait on UN sanctions lets see what china says 
I am sure they are happy with the 5 billion dollar package for Tiwan

lol what 1 nation is at war - Iran is closing business deals china
and russia ... only nation I hear about war is Innocent Israel

Uncle ho ya Bhabhi ..when "Akhri ghalti" will hit the movie theatres there will be fireworks
my friend phir na to iraq , hoga na Afghanistan ... aur na hi UAE

Iran has already broken its shackles by being self sufficient in missile technology , UAE is size of 10 football fields lol

1000 sal ki ghulami se behtar hai 1 din ki azadi

Population of UAE 4 Million ppl , we all know 50&#37; is South Asians living in UAE , 10% Iranians - there you go ... 

Best strategy would be to get UAE airfields captured , get the F16E/F fly em into Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Creder

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Lets wait on UN sanctions lets see what china says
> I am sure they are happy with the 5 billion dollar package for Tiwan
> 
> lol what 1 nation is at war - Iran is closing business deals with china , and pakistan
> and russia ... only nation I hear about war is Innocent Israel
> 
> Uncle ho ya Bhabhi ..when Akhri ghalti will hit the movie theatres there will be fireworks



tera Allah he hafiz hai bhai


----------



## SEAL

Main weapons of Iran is Hizbollah.
and Iran may attack US-NATO soldiers in Afghanistan.


----------



## Creder

fox said:


> Main weapons of Iran is Hizbollah.
> and *Iran may attack US-NATO soldiers in Afghanistan*.



That is probably the only reason why Iran hasn't been bombed yet. The ongoing ops would be severely compromised if Iran started to throw down with their mullah's, any eventuality by iran would lead to a full-fledged war and US will therefore be forced to go after Tehran. Thats iran trump card, atleast for now


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

fox said:


> Main weapons of Iran is Hizbollah.
> and Iran may attack US-NATO soldiers in Afghanistan.



Its just a neumerical suicide for Israel - 

Forget US , its cash strapped and its army is stretched soliders tired ... no gas in tank ...

So they are preparing UAE as sacrificial goal to engage Iran , then it will be a pretext to go help UAE the idea would be to recreate the Kuwait style war to convince ppl its a war to help oppressed nation form some evil froce.... 

I was looking at the map and that passage between UAE/Iran is so narrow like iran said if they mined it with sea mines you can forget about oil and gas trade ... 

Mean while Iran can paratroop into UAE and capture all airfields in 1-2 days what is 20,000 army do vs 1,000,000 soliders might as well gift the F16 E/F to iran how convinent to give it to UAE Answe is right there move your military into UAE and you get 60 F16 E/F and Mirage 2000 supplies , add them into your airforce 

And the irony is that these birds have extra fuel capacity to fly to Israel and back to Iran

71,000,000 Million Irannis vs 20,000 UAE military is going to be a short struggle 
71,000,000 Million iranis vs a weak iraq forces would be a cake walk for iran
71,000,000 million iranis vs 1,000-2,000 karzai soldiers would be you get the picture

What is Israel going to do fly its 500 F16 to iran , where will they land ?? 
In Israel , no cus the airfields will be already destroyed by the time they will reach home to refuel , no to mention only 100 odd will return back after encountering Iran air defences

*And who will be protecting Israel ? when Syrian planes are flying over Israel while the F16 Fleet is making the 4 hour trip to iran ? *

Or what if they want to land in Iraq or Afghanistan ?? Guess where the Iranain forces will go next ?


----------



## Creder

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Its just a neumerical suicide for Israel -
> 
> Forget US , its cash strapped and its army is stretched soliders tired ... no gas in tank ...
> 
> So they are preparing UAE as sacrificial goal to engage Iran , then it will be a pretext to go help UAE the idea would be to recreate the Kuwait style war to convince ppl its a war to help oppressed nation form some evil froce....
> 
> I was looking at the map and that passage between UAE/Iran is so narrow like iran said if they mined it with sea mines you can forget about oil and gas trade ...
> 
> Mean while Iran can paratroop into UAE and capture all airfields in 1-2 days what is 20,000 army do vs 1,000,000 soliders might as well gift the F16 E/F to iran how convinent to give it to UAE
> 
> And the irony is that these birds have extra fuel capacity to fly to Israel and back to Iran



your war scenarios are enough to give a guy brain tumour

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arsalan shafique

Arik said:


> U call ahmedanijad sensible!!!U call a person who has decided to destroy a country sensible.U call the person who oppresses people of his own country sensible(didn't u see the massive protests against him in Iran,didn't u see how they were beaten up by thugs from the basij militias????)



yup!!
i feel him sensible....by making his country a NUCLEAR POWER.....& those massive protests were by American agencies to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power & to get rid of Ahmed bin nijad & to replace him with there man......the brave man of righteousness fighting for his country & Muslim Ummah!!
please open ur EYES!!!!


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Army of UAE

50,500 Soliders ??? 

Why do you think UAE was offered nuclear deal ? 
Why did UAE recently opened fire on Saudi Navy 

Why do you think UAE , has been acting up against some island disputes with Iran ? 

UAE is the new kuwait a sacrificial goat , if war happens it will be started by UAE , and then Israel will play its cards from behind the scenes  I know they were british but same strategy ....  

Ever questioned why the french are there with their new shiny base ? East India company Act 2 I think ?

The strategy is simple you find a country that has weak leadership , and army you move your own armed men into that country , and when it gets attacked your own army , starts defending it and you end up controling the country , this is why French wanted to get a foot hold on Arabian land ....

Same approach which East India Company used to colonize Sub continent 100 of years ago ... 

Why did Israeli's went and killed some Hammas leader and then blamed it on European ppl with fake passport , trying to get UAE and Iran diplomatically angry at each other ?

Colonization begins with bases in other countries


----------



## Bingo!

wrong time to be in middle east i guess if something like war happens. 

well guys will there be any country joining Iran in the event of a War??/


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Bingo! said:


> wrong time to be in middle east i guess if something like war happens.
> 
> well guys will there be any country joining Iran in the event of a War??/




Secret  sometimes suprises are nice  for all we know 
Iran might have no problem with no middle eastern nation

A war with iran would signal expansion agenda of G8 on global resources and I am sure Russia and China will have their say ..

Russia may have had a false flag to go after chechnian rebels , with agreement from US(no interference), so it would not support iran , but it remains to be seen what will China say ? China was angry with the tiwan deal so its their turn to veto


----------



## Bingo!

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Secret  sometimes suprises are nice  for all we know
> Iran might have no problem with no middle eastern nation
> 
> A war with iran would signal expansion agenda of G8 on global resources and I am sure Russia and China will have their say ..
> 
> Russia may have had a false flag to go after chechnian rebels , with agreement from US(no interference), so it would not support iran , but it remains to be seen what will China say ? China was angry with the tiwan deal so its their turn to veto





Secret?? eyy.. please share that secret you only know..


So you think Isreal cares about a UN veto before attacking poor Iranians??/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

umairp said:


> Hey Chill mate.... we are discussing Iran Vs. Israel not U Vs. Mod + thatGirl + forum rules etc.
> 
> Back to Topic.
> 
> What is it that Iran has currently that can make Israel think twice before attacking Iran?
> Lets see:
> 1. Ballistic Missiles
> 2. Hizbullah
> 3. Persian Gulf and Oil Trade.
> ???
> 
> what do you guys think?



Iran has one edge over Israel which is its vast spread terrain.

Iran can sustain multiple strikes but if Til aviv is hit , its over for Israel .

This is what Israeli generals say!


----------



## Kompromat

Bingo! said:


> Secret?? eyy.. please share that secret you only know..
> 
> 
> So you think Isreal cares about a UN veto before attacking poor Iranians??/



Agree with you , Israel is the only Country in the world which has rejected over 90 UN resolutions.


----------



## Kompromat

Nima said:


> 31 years and counting
> Iran will never in a billion years be attacked by Israel
> *Pakistan attacking Iran is a bigger possibility at this point lol*



Just STFU man dont talk nonsense !

Stop ruining my thread put up or shut up !


----------



## Kompromat

Nima said:


> btw, no matter how much I say our airforce is **** in every thread, it won't matter to you cause you want to create a weak image of Iran.
> 
> The Israelis themselves say they don't have enough planes to take out Iran's facilities



First of all you are not an Iranian & having a Iranian flag won't make you one.

2nd creader and me already have done a counter anylasis of Iranian and israeli air forces on first and second page of the thread go read it if you haven't.

3rd: Founded 1948 
*Country Israel 
Size ~750 aircraft *
Part of Israel Defense Forces 

Israel has over 750 Fighter bombers & most of them are F-15 Strike Eagle F-15 Eagle , F-16A/B , F-16C/D , and highly upgraded F-16I Sufa.

Israel can shoot down whole fleet of 330 Iranian fighters if they bring in their whole fleet to iran or most of it.

But if they bring 100 Jets for strike than Iran can repell the Attacks.


----------



## Kompromat

Nima said:


> btw,care to explain why Pakistan is being attacked by drones while having a billion shiny f-16s?



Its not the topic , go the relevant thread and we will reply you .



> Iran has a lot of deterrents that will keep Israel in check



Like what ??



> lol 2 pages of irreverent discussions about Iran's airforce when Israel isn't even able to launch an attack



You can prove otherwise to us , can you ??


----------



## Kompromat

FreekiN said:


> Iran is doomed.



Not That simple , but in the end of the day it is their own fault of not modernising their Air Fleet .

It may cost Iran its nuclear program now , lets say even if iran hits Israel after the attack , The iranian Nuclear program is already gone !


----------



## Kompromat

ptldM3 said:


> This is bad for both sides, if Israel wants they can decimate the entire Iranian airforce.



Russki , Iran is your long time Ally wont you help them when they would be being doomed ?

If Russia can sale Iran.

10 batteries of S-300 SAMs
100 Su-27 & Su-30Mkm and two IL-78 Refulers

Israel will think a million times before attacking iran.

But its up to Russians if they decide to Save Iran as an ally or produce another enemy in the region.


----------



## Bingo!

Black Blood said:


> First of all you are not an Iranian & having a Iranian flag won't make you one.
> 
> 2nd creader and me already have done a counter anylasis of Iranian and israeli air forces on first and second page of the thread go read it if you haven't.
> 
> 3rd: Founded 1948
> *Country Israel
> Size ~750 aircraft *
> Part of Israel Defense Forces
> 
> Israel has over 750 Fighter bombers & most of them are F-15 Strike Eagle F-15 Eagle , F-16A/B , F-16C/D , and highly upgraded F-16I Sufa.
> 
> Israel can shoot down whole fleet of 330 Iranian fighters if they bring in their whole fleet to iran or most of it.
> 
> But if they bring 100 Jets for strike than Iran can repell the Attacks.



I smell American hand also in these. They will definitely provide Israel with more than anything if it happens against Iran. And the people supporting Iran is too much dependent on US nowadays like Saudi, Pakistan , India etc that they will be seen only making protests and dialogues like "we condemn " in International forums as we have seen in Iraq invasion.


----------



## Bingo!

Black Blood said:


> Russki , Iran is your long time Ally wont you help them when they would be being doomed ?
> 
> If Russia can sale Iran.
> 
> 10 batteries of S-300 SAMs
> 100 Su-27 & Su-30Mkm and two IL-78 Refulers
> 
> Israel will think a million times before attacking iran.
> 
> But its up to Russians if they decide to Save Iran as an ally or produce another enemy in the region.



Russia and China will have to think 100 times before thinking selling something to Iran now at this juncture.

Any move by them and the war happens will take away all their oil deals with Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Practically, Iran will suffer heavy loses against Israel but if Iran's Missile is an effective one than Israel will also be doomed. 

Lets see what happens!


----------



## Kompromat

saad445566 said:


> Practically, Iran will suffer heavy loses against Israel but if Iran's Missile is an effective one than Israel will also be doomed.
> 
> Lets see what happens!



Remember Iran does not need to destroy whole Israel , they Just need to Hit Til Aviv with Shahab III and few Thousand Rockets from Hizbullah.

But there would be a reaction to every action of each party and humanity will again suffer.


----------



## Kompromat

Bingo! said:


> Russia and China will have to think 100 times before thinking selling something to Iran now at this juncture.
> 
> Any move by them and the war happens will take away all their oil deals with Iran.



So true but this is a test time for Russkis as iran is their ally and this is where you help your allies.

I wish we could do anything for Iran but

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Comet

saad445566 said:


> Practically, Iran will suffer heavy loses against Israel but if Iran's Missile is an effective one than Israel will also be doomed.
> 
> *Lets see what happens*!



I don't want to see what will happen. It will be a catastrophe. Not just for Iran, not just for Israel, but for the whole region. Hizbollah will start a war in the region and Lebanon and Palestine will suffer.
What if Iran, in retaliation, destroys Oil refineries of ME, as revenge of allowing Israel to use airspace? Oil prices will shoot and more burden will come on small countries such as Pakistan. Only, a slight hint of war in Gulf region can trigger Oil Prices to rise.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Black Blood said:


> Remember Iran does not need to destroy whole Israel , they Just need to Hit Til Aviv with Shahab III and few Thousand Rockets from Hizbullah.
> 
> But there would be a reaction to every action of each party and humanity will again suffer.




Humanity is already suffering. 
Is it better to suffer for thousand years? OR
Is it better to suffer for couple of days?

I think that Iran should hit every single street of Israel. 

"Yaar roz roz ki baysti/insult say aik hi baar maar kay marna acha hai"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arik

arsalan shafique said:


> yup!!
> i feel him sensible....by making his country a NUCLEAR POWER.....& those massive protests were by American agencies to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power & to get rid of Ahmed bin nijad & to replace him with there man......the brave man of righteousness fighting for his country & Muslim Ummah!!
> please open ur EYES!!!!



My eyes are wide open but urs ar certainly closed.Irans condition is pathetic.Despite having huge oil reserves the country is not progressing at all.
Irans decline began when religious fanatics took over the country from the shah.The shah was no good but altleast he was better than the present regime.


----------



## Arik

saad445566 said:


> Practically, Iran will suffer heavy loses against Israel but if Iran's Missile is an effective one than Israel will also be doomed.
> 
> Lets see what happens!



Wether Irans missiles work is a big question mark.Even if these work remember that Isreal is well protected by anti missile systems.(Hawk and i think they have patriot too).


----------



## Arik

Black Blood said:


> Remember Iran does not need to destroy whole Israel , they Just need to Hit Til Aviv with Shahab III and few Thousand Rockets from Hizbullah.
> 
> But there would be a reaction to every action of each party and humanity will again suffer.




U think hezbollahs shitty rockets are going to destroy tel aviv.The best rocket in their arsenal is the katyusha which has a range of 13 kms max.It can't even reach Tel Aviv.In the 2006 conflict thay fired a barrage of 4000 katyushas which resulted in the deaths of 44 civilians.


----------



## Bingo!

saad445566 said:


> Humanity is already suffering.
> Is it better to suffer for thousand years? OR
> Is it better to suffer for couple of days?
> 
> I think that Iran should hit every single street of Israel.
> 
> "Yaar roz roz ki baysti/insult say aik hi baar maar kay marna acha hai"



Will Iraq, syria, Saudi, jordan or turkey allow missiles to fly over their heads???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Bingo! said:


> Will Iraq, syria, Saudi, jordan or turkey allow missiles to fly over their heads???




They have no choice. It is not like an aeroplane which can be forced down to land. It is a missile and if KSA becomes a hurdle than the fight will spread in Middle East.

KSA should not become a hurdle because if missile goes on than it will hit Israel not KSA.
Arabs should start to think in a broader way. They have sold their dignity to Americans i.e. oil, land, active troops of the U.S. and so on.
So, if Arabs are not strong enough to retaliate than they should not become a hurdle either.
If Arabs lost the war with Israel than they should not support Israel this time or if they are too scared than they should declare neutrality but I don't expect anything from them. They are "chamcha giris" of the U.S.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

umairp said:


> I don't want to see what will happen. It will be a catastrophe. Not just for Iran, not just for Israel, but for the whole region. Hizbollah will start a war in the region and Lebanon and Palestine will suffer.
> What if Iran, in retaliation, destroys Oil refineries of ME, as revenge of allowing Israel to use airspace? Oil prices will shoot and more burden will come on small countries such as Pakistan. Only, a slight hint of war in Gulf region can trigger Oil Prices to rise.




So the conflicts will move on. Afghanistan, Iraq, destabilizing Pakistan, Iran, Syria you name it. 
Why have not we learned that the monster never stops?
They will come in the morning and will kill more animals (countries)..hide and seek will go on..

Freedom and dignity is better than Oil. We have showed that Oil did not increase our respect instead it made us slaves so why not try the other side this time?

If Iran is under attack and it retaliates with missiles than this war will take a different turn. Fire will enter our country also "ONLY" if Tel Aviv is bombed successfully.


----------



## Bingo!

saad445566 said:


> They have no choice. It is not like an aeroplane which can be forced down to land. It is a missile and if KSA becomes a hurdle than the fight will spread in Middle East.
> 
> KSA should not become a hurdle because if missile goes on than it will hit Israel not KSA.
> Arabs should start to think in a broader way. They have sold their dignity to Americans i.e. oil, land, active troops of the U.S. and so on.
> So, if Arabs are not strong enough to retaliate than they should not become a hurdle either.
> If Arabs lost the war with Israel than they should not support Israel this time or if they are too scared than they should declare neutrality but I don't expect anything from them. They are "chamcha giris" of the U.S.



Just one more question.


How much influence do you see the US will have in the event of a war ???

I googled searching for US military presence and i am amazed with the number of US army bases In Iraq, Saudi and Kuwait.. not to forget the bases in Afghanistan to the east.







Also geographically it has to be noted that Iranian missiles have to be pin point accurate to hit Israel. any small failure could lead to escalation as Israel is a narrow piece of land .


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Bingo! said:


> Just one more question.
> 
> 
> How much influence do you see the US will have in the event of a war ???
> 
> I googled searching for US military presence and i am amazed with the number of US army bases In Iraq, Saudi and Kuwait.. not to forget the bases in Afghanistan to the east.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also geographically it has to be noted that Iranian missiles have to be pin point accurate to hit Israel. any small failure could lead to escalation as Israel is a narrow piece of land .




Yes you are right. Saudi Arabia is mini America.
I do not expect anything from KSA.
Sunni and Shia...OMG
They are waging the same war which they have suffered in Europe from 1400s. Protestants vs Catholics 
Calvinists vs Catholics 
and so on

So, Sunni vs Shia is not a new thing...
We should get together regardless of our sect.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bingo!

saad445566 said:


> Yes you are right. Saudi Arabia is mini America.
> I do not expect anything from KSA.
> Sunni and Shia...OMG
> They are waging the same war which they have suffered in Europe from 1400s. Protestants vs Catholics
> Calvinists vs Catholics
> and so on
> 
> So, Sunni vs Shia is not a new thing...
> We should get together regardless of our sect.






Sir .. i asked about US influence...

The role US might play in the region...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Bingo! said:


> Sir .. i asked about US influence...
> 
> The role US might play in the region...




Israel cannot eat breakfast without the U.S. help!
That answers your question in detail...


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Bingo! said:


> Sir .. i asked about US influence...
> 
> The role US might play in the region...




US has already warned Israel to stop making things harder for US an forcing it to go to war that it cannot afford , saw the Russan breakup due to financial crisis ? 

Exactly the stunt Israel pulled with fake passport could have also resulted in Iranain diplomats dieing in UAE... 

Israel has to learn to live in peace and stop violating resolutions 

Otherwise it looks pretty bad if all the airfields get knocked out


----------



## SekrutYakhni

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> US has already warned Israel to stop making things harder for US an forcing it to go to war that it cannot afford , saw the Russan breakup due to financial crisis ?
> 
> Exactly the stunt Israel pulled with fake passport could have also resulted in Iranain diplomats dieing in UAE...
> 
> Israel has to learn to live in peace and stop violating resolutions
> 
> Otherwise it looks pretty bad if all the airfields get knocked out



I am sure that if the war goes on than the U.S. will support Israel. Sanctions is the first step but not the last one. Iran is not stopping which means that the things will go bad..
United States supported Israel everywhere. 

Defence industry is the best example.

States asked Israel to freeze the settlements but they only "ask" Israel.
*I wonder the reaction of the U.S. if Palestine started to expand the construction zone like Israel is doing.*

The settlements by Palestine are against humanity, Israel is at risk, Palestine is declared a terrorist state.
UN forces should go to Palestine.
Security Council has imposed sanctions on Palestine. 

^^ This would have happened if Palestine was a lot stronger..


----------



## Bingo!

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> US has already warned Israel to stop making things harder for US an forcing it to go to war that it cannot afford , saw the Russan breakup due to financial crisis ?
> 
> Exactly the stunt Israel pulled with fake passport could have also resulted in Iranain diplomats dieing in UAE...
> 
> Israel has to learn to live in peace and stop violating resolutions
> 
> Otherwise it looks pretty bad if all the airfields get knocked out



US warning Isreal is just a joke by US to put dust in other peoples eyes, to show that they are not biased.


----------



## mijanur

at the end of the day, israel wouldn't do it.
if they do i just wish iran shoots the hell out of each one of them...
israel thing their hard now...
dont u guys think 2 or more proper good strike on tel aviv will finish of israel


----------



## Bingo!

mijanur said:


> at the end of the day, israel wouldn't do it.
> if they do i just wish iran shoots the hell out of each one of them...
> israel thing their hard now...
> dont u guys think 2 or more proper good strike on tel aviv will finish of israel



Iraq which is much closer to it tried in 1991 with scuds!!!!!!

infact 40 of them were fired to Isreal..

was successful in killing "2" Israeli civilians..

but i guess now they have :

Air-defense systems
Machbet self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon
Barak naval surface-to-air missile
SPYDER air-defense system
Arrow anti-ballistic missile
Tactical High Energy Laser
Iron Dome short-range rocket defense system
David's Sling medium-range rocket defense system.


Radars
EL/M-2032 fire-control radar
EL/M-2052 AESA radar
EL/M-2075 Phalcon AEW&C radar
EL/M-2080 Green Pine target tracking radar
EL/M-2083 AEW&C radar


----------



## Peregrine

HI,
i am sure Pakistan would be keeping a close eye on all this, as there is no way that Pakistan would want Israel invading its neighboring country.


----------



## pak-yes

^^Yar Pakistan nay sari Dunya ka Tekha to nahi Uthaya hua.

Agar Israel Iran par Hamla karta ha to hum kia kar saktay ha.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bingo!

pak-yes said:


> ^^Yar Pakistan nay sari Dunya ka Tekha to nahi Uthaya hua.
> 
> Agar Israel Iran par Hamla karta ha to hum kia kar saktay ha.



Join the coalition just like the 1991 war???


----------



## SekrutYakhni

I do not support that Pakistan should help Iran actively because Iran is also interfering in our country's internal issues. By saying that, we should be ready in any case. However, as a Muslim country and the neighbour; we should think about some help.


----------



## pak-marine

Iranian airforce cant touch Israelis ... Greatest threat to Israel is next door Hezbollah in summer 06 war HB fired a lot of those funny rockets into Israel only one hit tel aviv and that killed few people i dont know if it was pure luck or a message ? but the missle was sure guided. Yes may be Israel might attack but how successfull wil they b in hitting nuclear sites ? and more importantly all Iranians will do is pass on hezbollah some of the missles they have and that will do a lot of damage to Israel. Iranians have fought against sadam for 8 years who had all the support in the world eventually sadam lost.


----------



## Nima

Black Blood said:


> First of all you are not an Iranian & having a Iranian flag won't make you one.
> 
> 2nd creader and me already have done a counter anylasis of Iranian and israeli air forces on first and second page of the thread go read it if you haven't.
> 
> 3rd: Founded 1948
> *Country Israel
> Size ~750 aircraft *
> Part of Israel Defense Forces
> 
> Israel has over 750 Fighter bombers & most of them are F-15 Strike Eagle F-15 Eagle , F-16A/B , F-16C/D , and highly upgraded F-16I Sufa.
> 
> Israel can shoot down whole fleet of 330 Iranian fighters if they bring in their whole fleet to iran or most of it.
> 
> But if they bring 100 Jets for strike than Iran can repell the Attacks.



man you think too much of yourself
I think this guy knows more than you

" Israel not able to attack Iran, ex-IDF chief says


Former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Dan Halutz says Tel Aviv is not able to launch a preemptive strike against Irans nuclear facilities.

We are taking upon ourselves a task that is bigger than us. I think that Israel should not take it upon itself to be the flag-bearer of the entire Western world in the face of the Iranian threat, Halutz told Channel 2 news on Saturday.

Im not some passer-by Ive filled a few positions that give me a different level of information to the average person, he said without elaborating.

However, Tehran has made it clear that Israel will pay dearly for any adventurism targeting the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In recent years, Iran has made great progress in missile technology.

Israel not able to attack Iran, ex IDF chief says 190110banner4

Iran successfully tested the second generation of Sejjil missiles and brought it into mass production in December. The solid-fuel, two-stage Sejjil-2 missile has a longer range than the Shahab-3 missile, which Iranian officials have said can reach targets 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles) away.

The United States, Israel and some of their allies have accused Iran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear program.

Yet, as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology meant for peaceful purposes.

In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Irans nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence showing that Irans civilian nuclear program has been diverted to nuclear weapons production.

But Israel possesses a nuclear arsenal of at least 250 warheads and has never allowed IAEA inspections of all its nuclear facilities."


----------



## Nima

I honestly find it hilarious that you guys think a war is simply 2 sides lining up in front of each other and whoever has the best gun wins!!!!
There are so many factors that you guys aren't taking into consideration. Also neither Iranian nor Israeli people think their countries are going to war in the near future but here you guys are discussing this **** for 5 pages!
What have you concluded? That the Iranian airforce is ****?
BRAVO
lmao I didn't know that was a secret!!!

Just the fact that we're DISCUSSING it shows that Israel will never attack. I mean did Israel take 30 years to attack Iraq's and Syria's (lonely) nuke installations??
How many of these threads have their been in the past decade alone? 
There is a lot of things going on in the back ground that normal ppl like me and you don't know. 

Yeah Iran's airforce is ****, but IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ****
Why didn't Israel attack when Iran's ballistic missiles weren't developed yet for example?


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Nima said:


> I honestly find it hilarious that you guys think a war is simply 2 sides lining up in front of each other and whoever has the best gun wins!!!!
> There are so many factors that you guys aren't taking into consideration. Also neither Iranian nor Israeli people think their countries are going to war in the near future but here you guys are discussing this **** for 5 pages!
> What have you concluded? That the Iranian airforce is ****?
> BRAVO
> lmao I didn't know that was a secret!!!
> 
> Just the fact that we're DISCUSSING it shows that Israel will never attack. I mean did Israel take 30 years to attack Iraq's and Syria's (lonely) nuke installations??
> How many of these threads have their been in the past decade alone?
> There is a lot of things going on in the back ground that normal ppl like me and you don't know.
> 
> Yeah Iran's airforce is ****, but IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ****
> Why didn't Israel attack when Iran's ballistic missiles weren't developed yet for example?




We are all here to support Iran and you as being Persian has a hatred against Pakistan. Your earlier posts suggest that when you said Iran is concerned about Pakistan than Israel. 
See how many people are supporting you over here and what are you doing to us. 
If you cannot appreciate our support that kindly don't post BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

Arik said:


> U think hezbollahs shitty rockets are going to destroy tel aviv.The best rocket in their arsenal is the katyusha which has a range of 13 kms max.It can't even reach Tel Aviv.In the 2006 conflict thay fired a barrage of 4000 katyushas which resulted in the deaths of 44 civilians.



How are you aware of Hizbullah's capabilities to Strike Israel ?

Any sources or Just BSing us ?


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Nima said:


> I honestly find it hilarious that you guys think a war is simply 2 sides lining up in front of each other and whoever has the best gun wins!!!!
> There are so many factors that you guys aren't taking into consideration. Also neither Iranian nor Israeli people think their countries are going to war in the near future but here you guys are discussing this **** for 5 pages!
> What have you concluded? That the Iranian airforce is ****?
> BRAVO
> lmao I didn't know that was a secret!!!
> 
> Just the fact that we're DISCUSSING it shows that Israel will never attack. I mean did Israel take 30 years to attack Iraq's and Syria's (lonely) nuke installations??
> How many of these threads have their been in the past decade alone?
> There is a lot of things going on in the back ground that normal ppl like me and you don't know.
> 
> Yeah Iran's airforce is ****, but IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ****
> Why didn't Israel attack when Iran's ballistic missiles weren't developed yet for example?




Nima , 

I think Iranian Air Force is not .... but they are handicaped do we have an agreement on that ?


----------



## Kompromat

Nima said:


> man you think too much of yourself
> I think this guy knows more than you
> 
> " Israel not able to attack Iran, ex-IDF chief says
> 
> 
> Former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Dan Halutz says Tel Aviv is not able to launch a preemptive strike against Irans nuclear facilities.
> 
> We are taking upon ourselves a task that is bigger than us. I think that Israel should not take it upon itself to be the flag-bearer of the entire Western world in the face of the Iranian threat, Halutz told Channel 2 news on Saturday.
> 
> Im not some passer-by Ive filled a few positions that give me a different level of information to the average person, he said without elaborating.
> 
> However, Tehran has made it clear that Israel will pay dearly for any adventurism targeting the Islamic Republic of Iran.
> 
> In recent years, Iran has made great progress in missile technology.
> 
> Israel not able to attack Iran, ex IDF chief says 190110banner4
> 
> Iran successfully tested the second generation of Sejjil missiles and brought it into mass production in December. The solid-fuel, two-stage Sejjil-2 missile has a longer range than the Shahab-3 missile, which Iranian officials have said can reach targets 2,000 kilometers (1,250 miles) away.
> 
> The United States, Israel and some of their allies have accused Iran of pursuing military objectives in its nuclear program.
> 
> Yet, as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology meant for peaceful purposes.
> 
> In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Irans nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence showing that Irans civilian nuclear program has been diverted to nuclear weapons production.
> 
> But Israel possesses a nuclear arsenal of at least 250 warheads and has never allowed IAEA inspections of all its nuclear facilities."



I wonder where were you when God was distributing Brains.

The Article no1 is a Fresh news of Israel Practicing mock attack on Iran and it is true.

We DONT need to ask anyone prior to start any topic this is how we run this forum.

Watch this:






We do NOT want Israel to Attack iran & what we are doing here is just having a discussion of what may happen.

If you do not Like it .. Leave !


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

The outcomes are simple 

Iran has 71,000,000 Million people , and 1,000,000 (1 million)
armed men to teeth.

Vs 50,000 soliders in UAE.
Vs tired soliders in Afghanistan
Vs tired soliders in Iraq

If Iran pre-emptive strikes the airfields in Israel with 600 missiles 
80&#37; of F16 in Israel's airforce would be unflyable.

Together with Iran moving 100,000 soliders into Iraq
Together with Syria moving 100,000 soliders into Iraq

Iraq will be taken over - and which will create flow of troops between iran and syria 

Mean while if Israel retaliates via airstrikes , lets say it launches 100% of its fleet towards iran , it will face

a) S200, S300
b) Tor
c) Soviet 80's long range missiles 
d) Chinese air defences
e) Iranian defences
f) Normal Anti Air weapons 

Not to forget 800 planes iran has in its inventory also armed with missiles

Also not forgeting Syrian Airforce would be factor as they have 
200 planes 

Iran's 100-160 cobras , could destroy the military artiliry that Israel has and it would create havoc 

Iran could also use its 80+ C130 transport lift units to move its Tanks into Israel borders for seige meanwhile the syrian forces would move in 100,000 soliders into Israel. 

Iran could also arm up malitia in Israel with shoulder missiles and heavy machine guns and anti tank so that would be added 120,000
regional soliders - people into combat.

So by this time 100,000 soliders (Syrian in Israel)
200,000 soliders in Iraq( Syria + Iran) 
90,000 soliders in UAE
120,000 Palestinians (armed with anti tank)

And additional 90,000 troops would be moving from iraq to Israel in military convoys, while the missiles would continue to rain in

Iran would mine the heck out of the Gulf sea , and no large vessel could go thru, and its 10-15 subs would ensure that no large ship comes close to its borders.

Its 10 subs would be enough to keep large ship out of close range 

The Airforce 500-800 planes would be hoping for dog fight to visually spot any stealth plane intrusions

So from a technical point of view - its not in Israel's favour to attack 

It will suffer heavy defeats

Iranains have man power and element of suprise , no one knows exactly what they have or don't have

Distance from Iran - Syria is about 500km , roughly 5-6 hours main forces would be in syria to support a joint effort to launch a joint offensive on Israel

UAE at the closes point is about 40-50 km away from iran may be 20 min plane ride

Did the russians supplied Iranians with Sukhoi or not we don't know


----------



## Nima

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Nima ,
> 
> I think Iranian Air Force is not .... but they are handicaped do we have an agreement on that ?



no we don't, I actually think it's PURE **** 

I find it funny how everyone here except you is only taking one thing into consideration!
You guys wanna know our detterents, I'll list a few

1) say Israel attacks Iran w/out US support!!
Which is impossible since they don't have enough planes but w/ever, lets say somehow they attack, do you think they will manage to hit more than 200 sites?
There are more than 50 nuke related sites scattered all over Iran alone!! Iran saw what happened to Iraq and Syria and instread of putting all installations at one site, it scattered them all over the country! Not only that, they're deep under ground, smtg the syrians and Iraqis couldn't do. The distance between bushehr and the most northern part of Iran is just as much as Israel to Bushehr and the distance between bushehr to the most North Eastern part of Iran is MORE than the distance between Israel to Bushehr!!! 
But when they attack they won't just hit nuke sites, they will have to hit ALL MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS WELL so that Iran won't be able to mount a response. Those are scattered all over the country as well. Finally, as you know unlike Iraq where they were able to finish the job w/ a few planes, here they will need HUNDREDS (refuilling etc...). All these planes will show on radars, they won't be able to hide themselves like they did in Iraq.

2) Now LETS SAY THEY DESTROY ALL THESE NUKE SITES
Are we gonna sit on our ***** and scratch our heads? **** NO!!
The least we will do is send our Armed forces into AFG, IRAQ and Azerbaijan and then there is the hezbollah factor as well. 
Tell me, what are the Americans gonna do in Iraq with 300 000 trained forces and AT LEAST ANOTHER few hundred thousand basiji volunteers??
Even if we attack them with forks and sppons we can take them out!!!!

3) @ the same time we can attack US's navy in the Persian Gulf. The shallow and narrow waters of the PG are no Indian ocean! 
Even from the shore we can bombard them with missiles.

4) possible danger to the world's oil supplies, that alone is a major deterrent

5) our ballistics
Sejil, shahabs etc.. etc...

6) possible danger that Israel will be unable to destroy all the hidden sites and with the available enriched uranium Iran will make a Nuke in 6 to 12 months by pulling out of the NPT.

ETC...

In the end Israel is safer to deal with Iran in another way and THEY KNOW IT AND THE AMERICANS KNOW IT.

yeah, our airforce is ****, but we are neither an expansionist country like Israel or the US nor do we have an enemy on our border like Pakistan. Our situation is completely diff than you guys so don't compare Iran w/ Pakistan. These crappy jets are good enough to keep the likes of Azerbaijan and AFG @ bay. Until we decide to attack someone we simply don't need gen 4 or 5 jets.

btw just for arguements sake I ignored the fact that Iran will be able to hit at least some of the Israeli jets with the available air defences that we. That alone is another detterent. Hundreds of planes showing on radar isn't the same as what happened in Iraq.


----------



## Creder

It wont just be US and Israel attacking Iran, if you look at all the previous conflicts within the region all arab nations were opposed to them. However, in this particular case the issue of Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb or having a mature enough program is percieved as a vital threat by the arabs. Saudis are willing to let Israel use their airspace, so is UAE.

Also Iran's government couldnt have managed this whole thing more horribly, two of the countries that had Iran's back till now were Russia and China but Irans failed diplomacy has resulted in Iran loosing favor with both of them. As i meantioned befored, this wont be a full-scale attack but mere surgical strikes aimed at destroying the nuclear sites within Iran.

That being said, Iran still has one trump card. US is tied down fighting insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan, The ongoing ops in Afghanistan will deem success or failure of US in Afghanistan, if these strikes are carried out against Iran, it will surely start a guerilla war alongside the taliban.

Why do you think there is a sense of urgency in "reconciliating" with the taliban, this is the reason for that. If the US is able to reconcile with the talibs, Iran will have no leverage left. So basically right now all the efforts to reconciliate with the taliban are deemed at minimizing Iran's influence or any future eventualities. If the US is able to overcome that barrier then its bye-bye nuclear program, and that is exactly the reason why Iran is trying to aid talibans so they can keep the marines tied down. But with the current developments in Afghanistan its only a matter of time before Iran loses the taliban card too. Also Iran's nuclear program hasn't matured enough yet, it will have to cross a certain threshold to deem it strike worthy


----------



## Luftwaffe

dream about war it won't happen soon..sometimes think positive..If iranians or Jews say"india attack pakistan and do this and that" i'll like to read your comments by that time..
lastly clarify your stance..


----------



## ptldM3

Let me address some of the people here that beleive Iran has a chance. Firstly, the Israeli airforce is large, obviosly, and very well trained, obviosly. Now, Iran has some air defences but Israel has drones, why is this important? Because Israeli drones that can identify air defences. moreover, if Israel has armed drones they can soften eneny positions before Israeli figters move in, the Israelis may also choose to fly around air defences or hit them with cruise missles (the Israelis train for these scenarios). Looking at past Israeli wars we know that Israel has a very effective spy network, in past wars the Israelis knew key enemy possitions and important targets, one of the main reasons the Israeli airforce was so effective in past wars was because of their spys, the Israelis knew the best time to attack Egyptian airfields in other words they knew when the Egyptians were most volnerable. Some people seem to think that the Israeli will just fly over Iran and start a bombing campaign, but they are wrong, alot of planing goes into these attacks. If Israel will go to war they will gather intelligence on Iran, they will utilize drones, they will take out Iranians airfields before most of Iran's aircraft will be able to takeoff, and if need be they will engage and shoot down inferior Iranian aircraft and pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Nima

Creder said:


> It wont just be US and Israel attacking Iran, if you look at all the previous conflicts within the region all arab nations were opposed to them. However, in this particular case the issue of Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb or having a mature enough program is percieved as a vital threat by the arabs. Saudis are willing to let Israel use their airspace, so is UAE.
> 
> Also Iran's government couldnt have managed this whole thing more horribly, two of the countries that had Iran's back till now were Russia and China but Irans failed diplomacy has resulted in Iran loosing favor with both of them. As i meantioned befored, this wont be a full-scale attack but mere surgical strikes aimed at destroying the nuclear sites within Iran.
> 
> That being said, Iran still has one trump card. US is tied down fighting insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan, The ongoing ops in Afghanistan will deem success or failure of US in Afghanistan, if these strikes are carried out against Iran, it will surely start a guerilla war alongside the taliban.
> 
> Why do you think there is a sense of urgency in "reconciliating" with the taliban, this is the reason for that. If the US is able to reconcile with the talibs, Iran will have no leverage left. So basically right now all the efforts to reconciliate with the taliban are deemed at minimizing Iran's influence or any future eventualities. If the US is able to overcome that barrier then its bye-bye nuclear program, and that is exactly the reason why Iran is trying to aid talibans so they can keep the marines tied down. But with the current developments in Afghanistan its only a matter of time before Iran loses the taliban card too. Also Iran's nuclear program hasn't matured enough yet, it will have to cross a certain threshold to deem it strike worthy



nothing you say makes ANY SENSE WHAT SO EVER

"It wont just be US and Israel attacking Iran, if you look at all the previous conflicts within the region all arab nations were opposed to them. However, in this particular case the issue of Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb or having a mature enough program is percieved as a vital threat by the arabs. Saudis are willing to let Israel use their airspace, so is UAE.
"
This doesn't change the scenario I gave you earlier, in fact I took this into consideration even though Saudi Arabia is officially saying that they will not allow the US to use their air space.

"Also Iran's government couldnt have managed this whole thing more horribly, two of the countries that had Iran's back till now were Russia and China but Irans failed diplomacy has resulted in Iran loosing favor with both of them. As i meantioned befored, this wont be a full-scale attack but mere surgical strikes aimed at destroying the nuclear sites within Iran."

AGAIN this doesn't change the scenario I gave you earlier, I said nothing about Russia and China and we Iranians don't expect their help AT ALL. Our relationship is merely a buyer seller relationship, nothing more. We don't have allies. 

"That being said, Iran still has one trump card. US is tied down fighting insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan, The ongoing ops in Afghanistan will deem success or failure of US in Afghanistan, if these strikes are carried out against Iran, it will surely start a guerilla war alongside the taliban."

One second you're talking about NOW and one second you jump to the future. When I was talking about the S300 you said Iran is in deep **** RIGHT NOW and we need the s300 immidiately. So make up your mind. For the next couple of years at least the US will still be in AFG but that's not actually the impt front, IRAQ IS.
As I said, even if we attack the American bases in Iraq with forks, we have so many people that we will eventually run the country over. Who knows, maybe we can take over the oil fields as well. REmeber that their oil fields are only a few km away from the Iranian border. 

"Why do you think there is a sense of urgency in "reconciliating" with the taliban, this is the reason for that. If the US is able to reconcile with the talibs, Iran will have no leverage left. So basically right now all the efforts to reconciliate with the taliban are deemed at minimizing Iran's influence or any future eventualities. If the US is able to overcome that barrier then its bye-bye nuclear program, and that is exactly the reason why Iran is trying to aid talibans so they can keep the marines tied down. But with the current developments in Afghanistan its only a matter of time before Iran loses the taliban card too. Also Iran's nuclear program hasn't matured enough yet, it will have to cross a certain threshold to deem it strike worthy"

SO MUCH BULL CRAP
First of all who gives a **** about AFG?
American bases in Arab countries and Iraq are more impt. 
Second, WE'RE NOT ARMING THE TALIBAN.
Arming means giving them man pads. It means giving them missiles etc...
If we were as desperate to arm these rag heads as you make us out to be then we would be re routing the **** that goes to hezb and be sending them to these ragheads. 
And what do you know about Iran's nuke program? 
actually scrap that
how do you explain the fact that Iraq and specially syria were hit when they were light years behind even Iran??!?!


You have your mind set up on two things
1) Iran will be attacked
2) Iran is weak


----------



## Nima

ptldM3 said:


> Let me address some of the people here that beleive Iran has a chance. Firstly, the Israeli airforce is large, obviosly, and very well trained, obviosly. Now, Iran has some air defences but Israel has drones, why is this important? Because Israeli drones that can identify air defences. moreover, if Israel has armed drones they can soften eneny positions before Israeli figters move in, the Israelis may also choose to fly around air defences or hit them with cruise missles (the Israelis train for these scenarios). Looking at past Israeli wars we know that Israel has a very effective spy network, in past wars the Israelis knew key enemy possitions and important targets, one of the main reasons the Israeli airforce was so effective in past wars was because of their spys, the Israelis knew the best time to attack Egyptian airfields in other words they knew when the Egyptians were most volnerable. Some people seem to think that the Israeli will just fly over Iran and start a bombing campaign, but they are wrong, alot of planing goes into these attacks. If Israel will go to war they will gather intelligence on Iran, they will utilize drones, *they will take out Iranians airfields before most of Iran's aircraft will be able to takeoff, and if need be they will engage and shoot down inferior Iranian aircraft and pilots*.




AGAIN
you're concerning yourself with things that are obvious yet irrilivant
If attacking Iran was only dependent on ours and their airforce than we would have been DELETED from this blue planet long ago.

Obviously there are a million other things to take into consideration and that's why Israel will never attack.
how hard is that to understand?


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

ptldM3 said:


> Let me address some of the people here that beleive Iran has a chance. Firstly, the Israeli airforce is large, obviosly, and very well trained, obviosly. Now, Iran has some air defences but Israel has drones, why is this important? Because Israeli drones that can identify air defences. moreover, if Israel has armed drones they can soften eneny positions before Israeli figters move in, the Israelis may also choose to fly around air defences or hit them with cruise missles (the Israelis train for these scenarios). Looking at past Israeli wars we know that Israel has a very effective spy network, in past wars the Israelis knew key enemy possitions and important targets, one of the main reasons the Israeli airforce was so effective in past wars was because of their spys, the Israelis knew the best time to attack Egyptian airfields in other words they knew when the Egyptians were most volnerable. Some people seem to think that the Israeli will just fly over Iran and start a bombing campaign, but they are wrong, alot of planing goes into these attacks. If Israel will go to war they will gather intelligence on Iran, they will utilize drones, they will take out Iranians airfields before most of Iran's aircraft will be able to takeoff, and if need be they will engage and shoot down inferior Iranian aircraft and pilots.



Basically in old war in 67 , Israel has intelligence from settelites , now the playing field is pretty much even ... ground 

Iran also has its own spy drones and its own network of intelligence 

The drones are great but these drones are sitting ducks for anti air weapons , infact the fact that even if 1-2 drons are caught anywhere near will trigger an international incident of great magniture

Iran already has plans to send in 1-2 reconisance settelites up in space to level the field plus they also get ample intelligence from China and Russia who do not want interference in Iran due to billion dollar energy projects by China and Russia

They have 12-14 submarines just for the naval warfare
They got good 24 missile boats
They got 8 frigates/Destroyer 

Which is ample units for defensive posture

_Israel denies Saudis gave IDF airspace clearance for Iran strike 
05/07/2009 
Saudi Arabia has indicated to Israel that it would not protest use of its airspace by Israeli fighter jets in the event the government resolves to launch a military assault against Iran, according to a report which appeared in the British newspaper The Sunday Times_.

The only other passage is right over Jordan , and thru , Iraq into Iran 

The second option is of course if UAE fighters make the strike

But the main point is who is building the iranian nuclear plant 
RUSSIA !!!!

Reference:
FOXNews.com - Putin: Iran&#39;s new nuclear plant to start up soon

_VOLGODONSK, Russia (AP)  Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Thursday that Iran's new Russian-built nuclear power plant will begin operating this summer, even as the United States called for Russia to delay the startup._


Do anyone risk , enraging Russia , they just finsihed the nuclear plant


----------



## gen x

just wait and watch 

who will be the next well my sources said it may be Pakistan


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

gen x said:


> just wait and watch
> 
> who will be the next well my sources said it may be Pakistan



lol ....what has Pakistan got to do with it ... this is just iran and israel mano a mano 
We actually prefer peace 2 nation solution just like US we are "Strategic allies" 

But we routinely hear these stories in media so we just have to analyse things the way they are ... iran is not some odd 1,000-2,000 rougue soliders running on camels with rifles and some shoulder weapons

And the bottom line is they got russia on their side nurturing them ? Normally US is very ...scared when it comes to Russia , now France selling Ships to Russia hmm...what is happening and france has a base in UAE... 

Its really very confusing its hard to see just exactly whose side France is on .. .Russia / US


----------



## recond1te

Let's spice things up with a map. 







Which route and Why ?


----------



## birdofprey2

Iran Rattles Saber At Israel Over Gaza






Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad responded Saturday with typical bluster to an Israeli statement regarding a possible military operation against Gaza. "They are looking for an excuse to attack Gaza,&#8221; he said. &#8220;I want to tell the Zionists and their supporters that they have committed enough crimes already. The new adventure will not save you, but will bring you closer to certain death.&#8221;

Gaza is ruled by the radical Islamist movement Hamas, and is effectively a proxy of Teheran, which arms, trains and directs Hamas.

'No more frightened children'
Israel's Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom had warned Friday of a new offensive by the IDF if rocket fire from Gaza against Israeli civilians continues. &#8220;If this rocket fire against Israel does not stop, it seems we will have to raise the level of our activity and step up our actions against Hamas,&#8221; Shalom told government-run Voice of Israel radio.

Ahmadinejad also said that world pressure on Iran, including talk of new sanctions, makes the Islamic theocracy more determined than ever to pursue its nuclear program. "You should know that the more hostile you are, the stronger an incentive our people will have, it will double," he said. "They said 'we want sanctions on petroleum'. Why don't you do it? The sooner the better."

In full and another source is reporting..

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cautioned on Saturday against attacking the Gaza Strip, saying that such an attack would &#8220;cost&#8221; the Jewish state &#8220;too much.&#8221;

On Friday, IAF jets struck a number of targets in the Strip in retaliation for rocket attacks against southern .

&#8220;I say to the Zionists and their supporters that they have already committed enough crimes,&#8221; Ahmadinejad told an Iranian crown. &#8220;A new adventure in will not save you, but hasten your demise.&#8221;

On Saturday, the Iranian president said new international sanctions over his country's nuclear program would only strengthen the country by helping make it more self-sufficient.

In his speech, Ahmadinejad also said US pressure on Iran had backfired and made Washington more isolated in the eyes of the world.

Faced with the prospect of new sanctions because of Iran's nuclear defiance, Ahmadinejad said that new penalties would only strengthen the country's technological advancement.

"Don't imagine that you can stop Iran's progress," Ahmadinejad said in remarks broadcast live on state television. "The more you reveal your animosity, the more it will increase our people's motivation to double efforts for construction and progress of Iran."

US President Barack Obama said Thursday that six world powers dealing with Iran's nuclear program will develop a package of serious new punitive measures over its refusal to halt uranium enrichment in coming weeks.

China has not confirmed US reports that it has dropped its opposition to possible new UN sanctions against Iran. China has veto power in the UN Security Council and its support would be key to passing a resolution against Iran.

Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, is in China in the hopes of winning assurances from Beijing that it will oppose sanctions.

Iran Rattles Saber at Israel Over Gaza | Before It's News


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> lol ....what has Pakistan got to do with it ... this is just iran and israel mano a mano
> We actually prefer peace 2 nation solution just like US we are "Strategic allies"
> 
> But we routinely hear these stories in media so we just have to analyse things the way they are ... iran is not some odd 1,000-2,000 rougue soliders running on camels with rifles and some shoulder weapons
> 
> And the bottom line is they got russia on their side nurturing them ? that is the main issue otherwise ... the strike would have already been made...



gen x is quite correct. The Zionists won't go out declaring all their targets at once (or else these 'targets' will unify and be unstoppable). They sow distrust and hatred between these Muslim nations, and take out one by one. We've already seen Iraq vs Iran (Saddam was coerced by Uncle Ben Gurion and Uncle Sam), then Iraq was invaded under false pretenses of WMD.

Then came the Jewish False Flag of 9/11, which the patsy Bin Laden (who has long passed away, most likely due to internal health failure). The victim was Afghanistan. We also saw how this morphed into the infamous WOT in which Pakistan was lumped in with Afghan, aka ******. It was only under immense international pressure of casualties of innocents was this gravely hampered.

Iran is now the easier of the two target since it lacks 100+ nukes that Pakistan poses. 

Now does anyone believe that Pakistan which is the ONLY muslim nation with nukes, is not a *prime target of the zionists?!* Don't fall asleep at the wheel  or else


----------



## Nima

recond1te said:


> Let's spice things up with a map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which route and Why ?



lol turks will be turks 
j/k


----------



## gen x

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> gen x is quite correct. The Zionists won't go out declaring all their targets at once (or else these 'targets' will unify and be unstoppable). They sow distrust and hatred between these Muslim nations, and take out one by one. We've already seen Iraq vs Iran (Saddam was coerced by Uncle Ben Gurion and Uncle Sam), then Iraq was invaded under false pretenses of WMD.
> 
> Then came the Jewish False Flag of 9/11, which the patsy Bin Laden (who has long passed away, most likely due to internal health failure). The victim was Afghanistan. We also saw how this morphed into the infamous WOT in which Pakistan was lumped in with Afghan, aka ******. It was only under immense international pressure of casualties of innocents was this gravely hampered.
> 
> Iran is now the easier of the two target since it lacks 100+ nukes that Pakistan poses.
> 
> Now does anyone believe that Pakistan which is the ONLY muslim nation with nukes, is not a *prime target of the zionists?!* Don't fall asleep at the wheel  or else




confidence is good but overconfidence 

after Afghanistan there will be no use of Pakistan and then cant say what will be happen 


pak nuke capability is on radar let see what happen in future


----------



## Arik

Black Blood said:


> How are you aware of Hizbullah's capabilities to Strike Israel ?
> 
> Any sources or Just BSing us ?



Start watching BBC.
Till date no hezbollah rocket has hit Tel Aviv .Th only way they can strike Tel Aviv by carrying out suicide explosions.The only major isreali city that can be targeted by these rockets is haifa.


----------



## Arik

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> The outcomes are simple
> 
> Iran has 71,000,000 Million people , and 1,000,000 (1 million)
> armed men to teeth.


Iran has a million armed men .Armed with what??30 year old weapons which were bought at the time of Shah.
Just remember that if there is a war it is going to be an air war.The armies are not going to be involved.


----------



## yuvabharat

iran will go down no doubt about that and uncle sam with israel will create another iraq


----------



## recond1te

Arik said:


> Start watching BBC.
> Till date no hezbollah rocket has hit Tel Aviv .Th only way they can strike Tel Aviv by carrying out suicide explosions.The only major isreali city that can be targeted by these rockets is haifa.



Actually thats not the only way.As you know hezbollah also use katyusha rockets which has 20-40 km range.If they manage to smuggle these rockets inside West-Bank.Tel-Aviv will be in the range.Can they really harm Tel-Aviv ? I doubt it because capatults have higher accuracy than these rockets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> gen x is quite correct. The Zionists won't go out declaring all their targets at once (or else these 'targets' will unify and be unstoppable). They sow distrust and hatred between these Muslim nations, and take out one by one. We've already seen Iraq vs Iran (Saddam was coerced by Uncle Ben Gurion and Uncle Sam), then Iraq was invaded under false pretenses of WMD.
> 
> Then came the Jewish False Flag of 9/11, which the patsy Bin Laden (who has long passed away, most likely due to internal health failure). The victim was Afghanistan. We also saw how this morphed into the infamous WOT in which Pakistan was lumped in with Afghan, aka ******. It was only under immense international pressure of casualties of innocents was this gravely hampered.
> 
> Iran is now the easier of the two target since it lacks 100+ nukes that Pakistan poses.
> 
> Now does anyone believe that Pakistan which is the ONLY muslim nation with nukes, is not a *prime target of the zionists?!* Don't fall asleep at the wheel  or else



Suprises are alwasy good I always say ...  :: ::

We just wish before any sanctions are put forth existing Un resolutions are implemente frist 

But its interesting to see that IRAN Is big as Saudia !!! I never knew how BIG iran was in map ...


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Arik said:


> Iran has a million armed men .Armed with what??30 year old weapons which were bought at the time of Shah.
> Just remember that if there is a war it is going to be an air war.The armies are not going to be involved.



All airports will be neutralized in 1-2 hours with missiles hitting runways ... and it will be followed by paratroopers landing in middile of UAE abudabhi in case UAE does not changes its attitude

Iranians are armed with every thing from AK47 to sniper rifles to nuclear war head capable missiles , they got 10 nuclear carrying capable missiles already just for your general knowledge from old soviet days

They got subs for countering big bulky ships


----------



## gambit

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> The outcomes are simple
> 
> Iran has 71,000,000 Million people , and 1,000,000 (1 million)
> armed men to teeth.
> 
> Vs 50,000 soliders in UAE.
> Vs tired soliders in Afghanistan
> Vs tired soliders in Iraq
> 
> If Iran pre-emptive strikes the airfields in Israel with 600 missiles
> 80% of F16 in Israel's airforce would be unflyable.
> 
> Together with Iran moving 100,000 soliders into Iraq
> Together with Syria moving 100,000 soliders into Iraq
> 
> Iraq will be taken over - and which will create flow of troops between iran and syria


You are living in la-la land.

You are assuming that moving through Iraq that the Iranian army will suffer no casualties. Remember the joy so many here that Iraqi insurgents gave the US Army and Marines a hard time? Now double or even triple that hard time for Iranian troops. Syria helping Iran? Are you high on something? If the Iranian ground forces begin to move into Iraq, other MEastern countries will have flashbacks on the Iraq-Iran war and give Iraq support, just like how they did back then. Then when the US get involved with our superior military technology and perhaps even combat experienced ground troops, Iran will be fighting two fronts on the ground, one in the air and one from the sea.


----------



## Arik

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> All airports will be neutralized in 1-2 hours with missiles hitting runways ... and it will be followed by paratroopers landing in middile of UAE abudabhi in case UAE does not changes its attitude
> 
> Iranians are armed with every thing from AK47 to sniper rifles to nuclear war head capable missiles , they got 10 nuclear carrying capable missiles already just for your general knowledge from old soviet days
> 
> They got subs for countering big bulky ships



Azad just grow up man .Irans military is in a very poor state.Iran just has a big mouth thats it.when actual war breaks out she will go running to the UN with her back burning. U just dont comprehend the power of Isreal.
Also another inportant thing is the economy.Irans economy cannot sustain war even for a day or two.


----------



## Kompromat

Arik said:


> *Start watching BBC.*Till date no hezbollah rocket has hit Tel Aviv .Th only way they can strike Tel Aviv by carrying out suicide explosions.The only major isreali city that can be targeted by these rockets is haifa.




Is BBC a Credible source of information ?

They are the most Baised Channel i have ever seen that is why i call it .

BBC= Best British Comedy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

Nima said:


> lol turks will be turks
> j/k



"Cross our airspace to attack Iran and we will respond like an earthquake : Turkish PM"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

gen x said:


> just wait and watch
> 
> who will be the next well my sources said it may be Pakistan



Yes , tell your source that we will soon be able to hit any Ba$terd within 7000kms ---

Just chill and get back to topic .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AliFarooq

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Suprises are alwasy good I always say ...  :: ::
> 
> We just wish before any sanctions are put forth existing Un resolutions are implemente frist
> 
> But its interesting to see that IRAN Is big as Saudia !!! I never knew how BIG iran was in map ...



enough with your U.A.E affair, those are reserved for pakistan lol:


----------



## qaisar52

Arik said:


> Azad just grow up man .Irans military is in a very poor state.Iran just has a big mouth thats it.when actual war breaks out she will go running to the UN with her back burning. U just dont comprehend the power of Isreal.
> Also another inportant thing is the economy.Irans economy cannot sustain war even for a day or two.



Sorry My dear, Yes Iran army is in bad shape as we all just know from wiki Expedia, But i would like to highlight some thing. A country who fought 8 years with mostly 20 countries of the world sporting Iraq on that time is not a easy thing. War for few days or month is ok but 8 years you should understand. Secondly We all think that Iran is not doing any thing to make him stronger i think we are on the wrong side. 

One thing i like to say Iran can make a mess if he would like in Iraq but they are not doing as their hands are tied because of Holy Shrine's of Prophet Mohammed (Ala hum Aslam) Family there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

B.S thread.
And look at the indians who call themselves friends of iran?making fooling war scenerios how iran will become next iraq and Pakistans nukes on the radar.
LOL Come start a war with us.....We are already fed up with the bucking non sense comming from ****** minds...........We wont care if we survive or not but we will certainly bring them b@sterds down with us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IceCold

The only thing that can prevent Iran from getting bombed is if it can get its hand on a nuclear device, make an announcement that it has one and in case of an attack either by israel or the US or even both, Iran will reply with a nuclear, will keep the adversary at bay specially israel because it comes directly into Irans missile range and US because of this fact will avoid such a strike. 
Without a nuclear bomb, i am afraid Iran will be bombed back to stone age, i dont see anything in Irans arsenal that can prevent such a catastrophe.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Simple as anything.
It takes one Nuclear Weapon dear.
Only one..nothing less and nothing more.
Tel Aviv will be Afghanistan. 

This will be a start of a bigger war and we should be ready.




I firmly believe that there will be *some sort of *misadventure between Iran and Israel.


----------



## Icarus

I don't think Israel will dare attack, if they do not only will they have to face a volley of Iranian ballistic missiles, armed possibly with nuclear warheads, but Arab countries will also jump into the fight, since Palestine is also dis-satisfied with Israel's oppressive attitude we can expect that they will also cause problems through rebellion and sabotage. 
That spells trouble for Israel with a capital *T*.
I don't think they can pull off a Yom Kippur once again............


----------



## Abi

They have been saying this for years, if they're going to do it, then hurry up already. They are only barking so that countries sanction Iran to prevent war. By the way, although the IDF air force is better than the IRIAF, the IRIAF is still capable of defending Iran's skies, all we have to do is knock out the IDFs air tankers with are F-14s and the F-16s and F-15s will run out of fuel and drop out of the skies.


----------



## Abi

intellect said:


> Once war breaks out , the internal problems will explode .
> The dissidents will go all out for regime change . In the long run the people will
> be freed from the rule of clergy. Iran will become a normal country.




Iran is not some backwater country like India. Iranian's are patriotic and any small attack on Iran will get the entire nation to back the government.


----------



## Abi

recond1te said:


> Actually thats not the only way.As you know hezbollah also use katyusha rockets which has 20-40 km range.If they manage to smuggle these rockets inside West-Bank.Tel-Aviv will be in the range.Can they really harm Tel-Aviv ? I doubt it because capatults have higher accuracy than these rockets.




The katyusha rockets are more accurate and more advanced than anything Turkey produces. 

Hezbollah has Zelzal-3s and Fateh-110s to use in case of such a strike.


----------



## Abi

umairp said:


> Oh... this is not looking good. I see geopolitical situation changing. I see proxy wars in Lebanon, Pakistan, Syria etc.




What's different about this announcement? It's just one of the millions of articles that talks about a strike.


----------



## imran iqbal

Abi said:


> Iran is not some backwater country like India. Iranian's are patriotic and any small attack on Iran will get the entire nation to back the government.



Backward Country like India, Excuse me sir, but if your country can not produce good enough politicians nonetheless entrepreneurs and scientists then i wouldn't call Iran a developed country. Chest thumping and threatening to take out Israel from world map. Crazy mullahs are taking you for a ride and yes you patriotic yet gullible audience conveniently sitting outside Iran wants to shed blood of his fellow countrymen and enjoy the show with popcorn.

China *WILL* backoff from Iran support. PAPA Russia is all you got and if this backward country asks soviet bear to cut all ties with Iran, you will be all alone home boy.

You have pissed off whole west,* don't add another 1 billion of mankind to it. *


----------



## imran iqbal

Abi, right from commie mouthpiece, look at this sugarcoated and diplomatic rejection of Chinese member to Iran's aid. Its a bit long so don't fall to sleep 

http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/53098-israel-pressures-china-back-iran-sanctions.html



> Brother,
> 
> Please try to understand that China's leadership is under tremendous pressure.
> 
> Yes, China is a powerful country. But China is still not as powerful as the USA in terms of global military dominance. Even Russia is not militarily equal to America. This is reality.
> 
> China does not support sanctions. Because anyone with a minimum IQ can understand if Iran is determined to build a nuclear bomb, sanctions will not stop Iran. Did sanctions stop North Korea?
> 
> Even the Saudi Arabia is backing sanctions.
> 
> See. Thats why I always say don't go by religion all the time. The Uighur separatists are trying to build a Turanian empire splitting Xinjiang from China and they are using Islam as a tool to mislead the international community. The Uighur separatists even killed the Hui Muslims who are the largest Muslim community in China. The Huis came to China also from central Asia, but they don't have any problem with the Chinese identity. But the Uighur separatists have problem...!!! Other Muslim communities like Uzbek, Kazakh, Mongol, Kyrghiz, Tajiks etc etc don't have problem with having the Chinese identity, they don't want separation. And the Uighurs who try to identify themselves with the Turks in a hilarious way, don't look like the Turks of Turkey, I am telling you, if you don't believe me, visit Xinjiang to verify my claims. Look I am an atheist, but if I am given options, I would chose Islam because I have a strong respect for Islamic values. In fact, no religion preaches separation, all religions preach unification of human beings.
> 
> Anyway, sorry for being a bit off topic.
> 
> Coming to the topic, I would say, is Russia backs the sanction, China will be isolated if China still remains against sanctions. I know China has a veto power. Yes, China can stand against the sanction and use the veto power to block the sanction. But what will happen then?
> 
> You know, the US already has prepared its military to bomb Iran round the clock. The B2s will start carpet bombing Iran. Tell me, what will China do then without helplessly watching the destruction of Iran. Be practical, China still does not have any Air craft Carrier, China still has no sophisticated long range bomber like B2, China has a very limited number of submarines. All in all, China military is sufficient for the national protection, but for a long range military projection China is nowhere near the US army. Iran is not a direct neighbor of China, how can China protect Iran from military invasion? Had Iran shared a border with China, of course, I can confidently say, the PLA would have protected you.
> 
> *We have to accept the realities, brother. *



So if you are finished reading this long boring excuse ( dard bhari kahani that we call in hindi movies ( a story of sorrow in bollywood)), best bet for Iran is to cultivate friendship on all fronts(If you still don't believe it, Pakistan still possesses same copy from China given in 1971). Concept of Ummah doesn't apply here, as long as Iran fights Iraq or saudi arabia gives its airspace to strike Iran.


----------



## AVADI

Abi said:


> *Iran is not some backwater country like India*


. 




Abi said:


> Iranian's are patriotic and any small attack on Iran will get the entire nation to back the government.



Best of luck.


----------



## Arik

Abi said:


> Iran is not some backwater country like India. Iranian's are patriotic and any small attack on Iran will get the entire nation to back the government.



Remember that if Isreal attacks Iran, Iran will solely be responsible for the war.No one asked Irans president to open his big mouth and make stupid statements.


----------



## imran iqbal

Lets leave him bro's . If he is smart enough, he will get it.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Arik said:


> Remember that if Isreal attacks Iran, Iran will solely be responsible for the war.No one asked Irans president to open his big mouth and make stupid statements.




No one asked Israel to f up in Iran's matter..

If *Israel sees Iran as a threa*t than *Iran also sees Israel as a threat.*

Tit for tat..

Israel has weapons
Iran should have weapons.

Simple is that..


KSA praising their American lord is good.
Whereas, Iran standing against them is bad..

What kind of f up world we live in?


----------



## pak-yes

Personally i feel Iran has been let down by it's government

First their Diplomacy is not good even worse than ours.Iran has huge Oil Reserves.And if played cleverly they could had used this to their advantage.

The Other Fatal Mistake that has been committed by Iranian Government is it's loud mouth.I mean WTH is with when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says that he will wipe of Israel off the map.I mean this kind of talk won't take Iran anywhere.

Look at the example of Pakistan.Before testing nukes have your ever listened our leaders saying that we are gonna Rain Nukes on India.But Instead we kept a low Profile on our nukes.and quietly developed them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arik

Black Blood said:


> Is BBC a Credible source of information ?
> 
> They are the most Baised Channel i have ever seen that is why i call it .
> 
> BBC= Best British Comedy



Well i guess the BBC is way ahead of some Pakistani news channels who bring "experts" like Zaid Hamid who do nothing but spread hatred.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

pak-yes said:


> Personally i feel Iran has been let down by it's government
> 
> First their Diplomacy is not good even worse than ours.Iran has huge Oil Reserves.And if played cleverly they could had used this to their advantage.
> 
> The Other Fatal Mistake that has been committed by Iranian Government is it's loud mouth.I mean WTH is with when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says that he will wipe of Israel off the map.I mean this kind of talk won't take Iran anywhere.
> 
> Look at the example of Pakistan.Before testing nukes have your ever listened our leaders saying that we are gonna Rain Nukes on India.But Instead we kept a low Profile on our nukes.and quietly developed them.




Yeah, Israel launching strikes on Iraq and Syria was right. 
Israel killing innocents was right.
Israel "thinking" to launch strikes against Iran is right.
Israel "tried" to attack Pakistan during Nuclear Test was right.

Iran trying to develop nuclear weapon is "wrong"
Iran trying to defend themselves is "wrong"
Iran sending Israel to stone age is "wrong"

I condemn the remarks of Iran's President against Israel i.e. remove from the face of map...
BUT this statement came way after the statements of Israel.
It was Israel who said that Iran's Nuclear Program is unacceptable. 
It was the U.S. who talked about sanctions.
It was the Arabs who were living in lala land of Sunni vs Shia

So, if so many events took place than Iran has the right to say anything..

I am against Arab leadership and I am proud of it.

Pakistan got aids from them and I do not respect it.
Those aids made us slaves and now we are getting to know couple of things about Arabs.
We had so much influence of Arabs...
It is better to stand by yourself than asking for help.
Pakistan's major problem is "aid"..
Once we get out of this "aid" dream..we will start to move forward..

*God Bless Arabs!*


----------



## Arik

saad445566 said:


> No one asked Israel to f up in Iran's matter..
> 
> If *Israel sees Iran as a threa*t than *Iran also sees Israel as a threat.*
> 
> Tit for tat..
> 
> Israel has weapons
> Iran should have weapons.
> 
> Simple is that..
> .




Isreal never saw Iran as a threat before ahmedanijad became the president.
Isreals immediate neighbours syria ,jordan don't consider Isreal a threat then what is the problem with Iran which is far away


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Arik said:


> Isreal never saw Iran as a threat before ahmedanijad became the president.
> Isreals immediate neighbours syria ,jordan don't consider Isreal a threat then what is the problem with Iran which is far away




Yes, because Israel sees Iran's President as a threat to their lala dreams. 
Israel has the right to develop weapons against humanity than why not Iran?

Israel has an influence over the U.S. so Syria and Jordan is a piece of cake for Israel.


----------



## pak-yes

saad445566 said:


> Yeah, Israel launching strikes on Iraq and Syria was right.
> Israel killing innocents was right.
> Israel "thinking" to launch strikes against Iran is right.
> Israel "tried" to attack Pakistan during Nuclear Test was right.
> 
> Iran trying to develop nuclear weapon is "wrong"
> Iran trying to defend themselves is "wrong"
> Iran sending Israel is stone age is "wrong"
> 
> I condemn the remarks of Iran's President against Israel i.e. remove from the face of map...
> BUT this statement came way after the statements of Israel.
> It was Israel who said that Iran's Nuclear Program is unacceptable.
> It was the U.S. who talked about sanctions.
> It was the Arabs who were living in lala land of Sunni vs Shia
> 
> So, if so many events took place than Iran has the right to say anything..
> 
> I am against Arab leadership and I am proud of it.
> 
> Pakistan got aids from them and I do not respect it.
> Those aids made us slaves and now we are getting to know couple of things about Arabs.
> We had so much influence of Arabs...
> 
> *God Bless Arabs!*



First of All Chill up.When did i say that Israel is right.

All i am saying is that Iranian President has a loud Mouth.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

pak-yes said:


> First of All Chill up.When did i say that Israel is right.
> 
> All i am saying is that Iranian President has a loud Mouth.




I a not blaming you for anything. You are from my country and I respect it..

Iran's President has a loud mouth but less than Israel's Establishment.


----------



## pak-yes

saad445566 said:


> I a not blaming you for anything. You are from my country and I respect it..
> 
> Iran's President has a loud mouth but less than Israel's Establishment.



Yar Israel can say what it wants because of it's strong Position.

But Iran can't afford the luxury.It would only make their life much more harder.All i am saying is that Iranians need to keep a low Profile.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

pak-yes said:


> Yar Israel can say what it wants because of it's strong Position.
> 
> But Iran can't afford the luxury.It would only make their life much more harder.All i am saying is that Iranians need to keep a low Profile.



"Low profiling" is a good strategy.

BUT

For GOD's sake we are also humans. We also have the feelings like Jews have..we also have things in common..When they can say whatever they want than Iran can also say whatever they want...

Iran WILL suffer at the end...no doubt...

"Roz roz ki baisti say aik hi dafa maar kay marna acha hai."

I know military people will say that exposing your ideas is the worst strategy and what not..

BUT what have we (Pakistan) achieved by keeping a low profile?
Making a bomb but still under pressure and our leadership instead of getting proud is a slave.

India's Cold War Strategy is aggressive and I second that.
Muslims countries should come out of the shell and get aggressive.
Use what you have i.e. Oil, location, education and so on..

Iran should get aggressive and should act the way Israel does. F up international western world and concentrate on what you want and what is "the" best option to defend your land.


----------



## pak-yes

saad445566 said:


> "Low profiling" is a good strategy.
> 
> BUT
> 
> For GOD's sake we are also humans. We also have the feelings like Jews have..we also have things in common..When they can say whatever they want than Iran can also say whatever they want...
> 
> Iran WILL suffer at the end...no doubt...
> 
> "Roz roz ki baisti say aik hi dafa maar kay marna acha hai."



Well Iran wants to develop nukes.Developing Nukes is no Joke.When we Pakistanis can say that we will eat grass but develop Nukes then can't Iran give away it's right to speak.


----------



## pak-yes

> I know military people will say that exposing your ideas is the worst strategy and what not..
> 
> BUT what have we (Pakistan) achieved by keeping a low profile?
> Making a bomb but still under pressure from countries.''
> 
> India's Cold War Strategy is aggressive and I second that.
> Muslims countries should come out of the shell and get aggressive.
> Use what you have i.e. Oil, location, education and so on..



Sir,Ji i am only saying that Iran must keep a low Profile.It's not such a hard thing.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

pak-yes said:


> Well Iran wants to develop nukes.Developing Nukes is no Joke.When we Pakistanis can say that we will eat grass but develop Nukes then can't Iran give away it's right to speak.



If they will give up their right to speak, their leadership will become a Pakistani leadership type thing.

Pakistan had low profile of its nukes and whatnot but instead of being proud we got doomed. 

Iran should be proud and speak!
Speak whatever you want.

Israel gives a shi* about International Law so Iran should give a shi* about International law.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

pak-yes said:


> Sir,Ji i am only saying that Iran must keep a low Profile.It's not such a hard thing.




In simple words I disagree when you say that Iran should keep a low profile. 

Their leadership will be doomed like Pakistani one.
Take the example of Zardari..
Nukes in our hands, educated people with us, patriotism at its best and so on
We still got doomed..
Did not we?

Iran should speak whatever she wants.


----------



## Kompromat

Arik said:


> Well i guess the BBC is way ahead of some Pakistani news channels who bring "experts" like Zaid Hamid who do nothing but spread hatred.



backing off the topic ?

we were talking about international media weren't we?

why you indians hate zh so much ..man he is not THAT bad


----------



## Abi

imran iqbal said:


> Backward Country like India, Excuse me sir, but if your country can not produce good enough politicians nonetheless entrepreneurs and scientists then i wouldn't call Iran a developed country. Chest thumping and threatening to take out Israel from world map. Crazy mullahs are taking you for a ride and yes you patriotic yet gullible audience conveniently sitting outside Iran wants to shed blood of his fellow countrymen and enjoy the show with popcorn.
> 
> China *WILL* backoff from Iran support. PAPA Russia is all you got and if this backward country asks soviet bear to cut all ties with Iran, you will be all alone home boy.
> 
> You have pissed off whole west,* don't add another 1 billion of mankind to it. *



What are 1 billion impoverished people going to do? The fact is, India has always been dominated by foreign countries and 400 million Indians cannot read or right.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

Abi said:


> They have been saying this for years, if they're going to do it, then hurry up already. They are only barking so that countries sanction Iran to prevent war. By the way, although the IDF air force is better than the IRIAF, the IRIAF is still capable of defending Iran's skies, all we have to do is knock out the IDFs air tankers with are F-14s and the F-16s and F-15s will run out of fuel and drop out of the skies.



Please Eleborate a bit more if IRIAF is preparing for something, BTW i have been expecting you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

saad445566 said:


> In simple words I disagree when you say that Iran should keep a low profile.
> 
> Their leadership will be doomed like Pakistani one.
> Take the example of Zardari..
> Nukes in our hands, educated people with us, patriotism at its best and so on
> We still got doomed..
> Did not we?
> 
> Iran should speak whatever she wants.



Iran is nothing like Pakistan. The only similarities between the two countries is that they both have the letter "i" in their names.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Abi said:


> Iran is nothing like Pakistan. The only similarities between the two countries is that they both have the letter "i" in their names.



This post was based on facts or your opinion?

How can you say that "nothing" is similar.
Show your research to us.


----------



## Thomas

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> All airports will be neutralized in 1-2 hours with missiles hitting runways ... *and it will be followed by paratroopers landing in middile of UAE abudabhi in case UAE does not changes its attitude*
> 
> Iranians are armed with every thing from AK47 to sniper rifles to nuclear war head capable missiles , they got 10 nuclear carrying capable missiles already just for your general knowledge from old soviet days
> 
> They got subs for countering big bulky ships



lol, your to funny......

You evidently have no idea how many transport planes Iran has in working condition. and to then get them past all the fighter and air defense umbrellas. Simply put they lack the capability to put a credible number of para troops on the ground.

As far as the subs there is a HUGE amount of anti submarine capability in the Gulf. Including Sub hunter killers. And they really do not have that many subs in current active service. Maybe 17 or so and not all of those are operational at this time. However to be fair they could inflict some serious casualties. but in the end they would all be destroyed along with their bases.


----------



## Kompromat

Arik said:


> Remember that if Isreal attacks Iran, Iran will solely be responsible for the war.No one asked Irans president to open his big mouth and make stupid statements.



Dont know about the War but Iran would be responsible for sending Til Aviv back to stone age and that is for sure .

BIG mouth is found in India ie Mr wajpai had a big mouth back in 1998 when he tried to tell Pakistanis that "Kalay badal aa rahay hain" or Dark Clouds are coming to Pakistan.

On may 28 1998 he was presented a c0ck meat sandwitch with BBQ sauce by Pakistan which was enough to shut his and Hindu Extremist party's Mouth forever .

Iran also needs to present something similar to Zionists !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

Black Blood said:


> Please Eleborate a bit more if IRIAF is preparing for something, BTW i have been expecting you.



It gets boring posting on topics like this after a while. It is filled by people who have no knowledge on this issue and they're Indians who love Israel, or Wahhabi Pakistanis who dislike Iran. 

Anyway, the nuclear facilities are scattered throughout Iran, for the IDF to be able to get to them, they have to use air to air refueling at least twice. They don't have enough tankers and so they can only send 120 fighters maximum, this is not enough. The 120 fighters will have to be flying fuel tanks, they won't have enough space to carry air to ground bombs and air to air bombs. Their air to air capabilities will be limited and they will not be able to engage the IRIAF, for the simple fact that they won't have enough air to air missiles. The IRIAF has F-14s that were designed in the cold war to take out Bombers like the Russian bear, they can easily take out Israeli fuel tankers with their Phoenix or sedjil missiles. The IDF planes will not have enough bombs to take out the nuclear facilities, they will not have enough air to air missiles to take out the IRIAF and they will not have enough fuel to get back to Israel, and thanks to Fateh-100 missiles stationed in Syria and Lebanon, they will not have air fields to return home to. 

There is no way the IDF can attack Iran, the only country that would have the capability is America and they will not do it because they have too many open bases in the region that are vulnerable to Iranian missiles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kompromat

Abi said:


> Iran is nothing like Pakistan. The only similarities between the two countries is that they both have the letter "i" in their names.



Yes i Agree with that


----------



## Abi

Thomas said:


> lol, your to funny......
> 
> You evidently have no idea how many transport planes Iran has in working condition. and to then get them past all the fighter and air defense umbrellas. Simply put they lack the capability to put a credible number of para troops on the ground.
> 
> As far as the subs there is a HUGE amount of anti submarine capability in the Gulf. Including Sub hunter killers. And they really do not have that many subs in current active service. Maybe 17 or so and not all of those are operational at this time. However to be fair they could inflict some serious casualties. but in the end they would all be destroyed along with their bases.




Do you know how many Iranians live in the UAE? And do you know how many missiles Iran has that can reach the UAE?


----------



## Abi

Black Blood said:


> Yes i Agree with that



I didn't mean it in a bad way it's just that the comparison he was making was false.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Abi said:


> I didn't mean it in a bad way it's just that the comparison he was making was false.



What kind of comparison I was making?
Care to tell


----------



## Kompromat

Abi said:


> I didn't mean it in a bad way it's just that the comparison he was making was false.



ABI there is a misunderstanding between you and Saad please both clarify it now!

BTW i meant that if Iran would have been like Pakistan they would have kept their Air force at leat to latest standards and also would have had tested Nuclear devices if needed.

All Pakistanis would Support a Nuclear Iran as its in our favour


----------



## indian_warrior

Abi said:


> It gets boring posting on topics like this after a while. It is filled by people who have no knowledge on this issue and they're Indians who love Israel, or Wahhabi Pakistanis who dislike Iran.
> 
> Anyway, the nuclear facilities are scattered throughout Iran, for the IDF to be able to get to them, they have to use air to air refueling at least twice. They don't have enough tankers and so they can only send 120 fighters maximum, this is not enough. The 120 fighters will have to be flying fuel tanks, they won't have enough space to carry air to ground bombs and air to air bombs. Their air to air capabilities will be limited and they will not be able to engage the IRIAF, for the simple fact that they won't have enough air to air missiles. The IRIAF has F-14s that were designed in the cold war to take out Bombers like the Russian bear, they can easily take out Israeli fuel tankers with their Phoenix or sedjil missiles. The IDF planes will not have enough bombs to take out the nuclear facilities, they will not have enough air to air missiles to take out the IRIAF and they will not have enough fuel to get back to Israel, and thanks to Fateh-100 missiles stationed in Syria and Lebanon, they will not have air fields to return home to.
> 
> There is no way the IDF can attack Iran, the only country that would have the capability is America and they will not do it because they have too many open bases in the region that are vulnerable to Iranian missiles.



You are missing USA from equation. Please add USA and recalculate it. You will be surprised.


----------



## Kompromat

US can Provide 250 Warheads to Israel & is able to Keep IAEA out of Israel .
Iran which has no indication of Nuclear ambitions is being treated like an orphan kid.

Its an example of Yankee discrimination & double standards .


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Black Blood said:


> ABI there is a misunderstanding between you and Saad please both clarify it now!
> 
> BTW i meant that if Iran would have been like Pakistan they would have kept their Air force at leat to latest standards and also would have had tested Nuclear devices if needed.
> 
> All Pakistanis would Support a Nuclear Iran as its in our favour




Thanks black blood!



I also want a Nuclear Iran!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

indian_warrior said:


> You are missing USA from equation. Please add USA and recalculate it. You will be surprised.



Post your source of you being 100% sure of US Involvement in this possible strike first !


----------



## pak-yes

Black Blood said:


> US can Provide 250 Warheads to Israel & is able to Keep IAEA out of Israel .
> Iran which has no indication of Nuclear ambitions is being treated like an orphan kid.
> 
> Its an example of Yankee discrimination & double standards .



So the best way to Counter it is Playing clever Diplomacy.Not talking Big.


----------



## Arik

Black Blood said:


> Dont know about the War but Iran would be responsible for sending Til Aviv back to stone age and that is for sure .
> 
> BIG mouth is found in India ie Mr wajpai had a big mouth back in 1998 when he tried to tell Pakistanis that "Kalay badal aa rahay hain" or Dark Clouds are coming to Pakistan.
> 
> On may 28 1998 he was presented a c0ck meat sandwitch with BBQ sauce by Pakistan which was enough to shut his and Hindu Extremist party's Mouth forever .
> 
> Iran also needs to present something similar to Zionists !!



Vajpayee never said that he will wipe off Lahore or Islamabad from the face of earth.
Iran does not have a nuclear weapon yet but isreal has nuclear,chemical,and biological weapons.I suggest u watch the documentary "Isreals secret weapons" if it is there on you tube.
Maybe u will reconsider ur statement of Iran bombing Tel Aviv to stone age.


----------



## Thomas

Abi said:


> Do you know how many Iranians live in the UAE? And do you know how many missiles Iran has that can reach the UAE?



all the gulf countries have been dramatically upgrading their anti missile capabilities for awhile now. It will not be like the first Gulf war. Anti missile tech has improved by a huge margin. 

As far as Iranians living there. Do you really think those Iranians are going to rise up? and from where are they going to get weapons? Please give me an example in recent history for this to happen. 

Your grasping at straws to try and justify your feelings for Iran.


----------



## Kompromat

pak-yes said:


> So the best way to Counter it is Playing clever Diplomacy.Not talking Big.



Kind of and also you need back ups as Pakistan would never had tested its devices if India didn't Thanks to India 

Also when the fears were there that indian supported Terrorists would attack Kahuta and cause a Drama the "Counter meassures " were done a long time ago.

Iran should have a nuclear bomb but they need to keep their Arab neibours in Trust and not Let Zionists play around with their already malfunctioned brains.


----------



## Abi

saad445566 said:


> What kind of comparison I was making?
> Care to tell





> Their leadership will be doomed like Pakistani one.



This comparison.


----------



## imran iqbal

Abi said:


> What are 1 billion impoverished people going to do? The fact is, India has always been dominated by foreign countries and 400 million Indians cannot read or right.



If that's the way educated Iranian's are running their country, then we are better off with 1 billion impoverished people. A saying goes

*"You have got a million dollar body but 2 cent brains "* 

India is simply following hundred year old tactics *" If you can't beat them, Join them". So far Indian diplomacy has achieved all around success. 

US is going to remove crazy Ahmed and install its version of democracy and you can't do jack about it ,doesn't matter how much you bash India with your preconceived brainwashed 2 cent brain.*


----------



## Kompromat

Thomas said:


> all the gulf countries have been *dramatically upgrading their anti missile capabilities for awhile now.* It will not be like the first Gulf war. Anti missile tech has improved by a huge margin.
> 
> As far as Iranians living there. Do you really think those Iranians are going to rise up? and from where are they going to get weapons? Please give me an example in recent history for this to happen.
> 
> Your grasping at straws to try and justify your feelings for Iran.



Like what ?

is it just me who is unaware of such developments ?


----------



## Abi

Thomas said:


> all the gulf countries have been dramatically upgrading their anti missile capabilities for awhile now. It will not be like the first Gulf war. Anti missile tech has improved by a huge margin.
> 
> As far as Iranians living there. Do you really think those Iranians are going to rise up? and from where are they going to get weapons? Please give me an example in recent history for this to happen.
> 
> Your grasping at straws to try and justify your feelings for Iran.



America's Anti-ballistic missile tests failed two months ago. No country in the world has anti ballistic missile defences.


----------



## Abi

imran iqbal said:


> If that's the way educated Iranian's are running their country, then we are better off with 1 billion impoverished people. A saying goes
> 
> *"You have got a million dollar body but 2 cent brains "*
> 
> India is simply following hundred year old tactics *" If you can't beat them, Join them". So far Indian diplomacy has achieved all around success.
> 
> US is going to remove crazy Ahmed and install its version of democracy and you can't do jack about it ,doesn't matter how much you bash India with your preconceived brainwashed 2 cent brain.*


*


How is America going to remove Ahmadinejad? India is just a slave country, first under Persians, then Moghols, then Persians again, then the British and now America. Indian diplomacy is worth ****, how long have you been asking for nuclear reactors from America?*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## imran iqbal

Thomas said:


> all the gulf countries have been dramatically upgrading their anti missile capabilities for awhile now. It will not be like the first Gulf war. Anti missile tech has improved by a huge margin.
> 
> As far as Iranians living there. Do you really think those Iranians are going to rise up? and from where are they going to get weapons? Please give me an example in recent history for this to happen.
> 
> Your grasping at straws to try and justify your feelings for Iran.




This is their weapon. Mind you, its better than F-18 super hornet


----------



## Arik

Abi said:


> What are 1 billion impoverished people going to do? The fact is, India has always been dominated by foreign countries and 400 million Indians cannot read or right.



Have u just landed from mars ??


----------



## Arik

Abi said:


> How is America going to remove Ahmadinejad? India is just a slave country, first under Persians, then Moghols, then Persians again, then the British and now America. Indian diplomacy is worth ****, how long have you been asking for nuclear reactors from America?



Well i guess Alexander made millions of persians his slave after defeating Darius in the battle of Gaugamela.

*ISREAL AND IRAN,SO STICK TO IT.IF U CAN'T CONTRIBUTE POSITIVELY DO NOT DERAIL THE THREAD.*.


----------



## indian_warrior

Black Blood said:


> Post your source of you being 100% sure of US Involvement in this possible strike first !



In a war you should not leave any possibility or surprises. It is known fact that USA is going to support whatever Israel needs. Be it weapons or diplomatic support.

USA army has large presence in Gulf region.


----------



## Kompromat

Arik said:


> Vajpayee never said that he will wipe off Lahore or Islamabad from the face of earth..



Source ??

A recent Book disclosed that Vajpai talked about wiping Pakistan out of the Map and in retaliation he was ready to sustain 0.5 Billion Indian life loss -- we had a thread about it a while ago.



> Iran does not have a nuclear weapon yet



How do you know they dont ? (Did you knew that Pakistan had its First Nuke in 1985 ?)



> but isreal has nuclear,chemical,and biological weapons.I suggest u watch the documentary "Isreals secret weapons" if it is there on you tube..



Its an open secret and i know about it. BTW why IAEA is not Concerned about Israeli nukes which has oveturned 60 UN resolutions ?

Its just Iran just because they are Muslims ???



> Maybe u will reconsider ur statement of Iran bombing Tel Aviv to stone age.



This statement has been quoted from an Israeli General !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## imran iqbal

Abi said:


> How is America going to remove Ahmadinejad? India is just a slave country, first under Persians, then Moghols, then Persians again, then the British and now America. Indian diplomacy is worth ****, how long have you been asking for nuclear reactors from America?



63 years, got succeeded in 2009. In 1971 Americans dispatched carrier group to nuke Indian slave. In 1998, America placed sanctions on Indian slave. In 2009 Indian slave force landed American plane and strip searched the Americans. In another instance, Indian slave force landed American place from diego garcia to afghanistan.

Don't get Jealous, China has or will shown/show its buttocks (read my earlier post). America was also under british occupation and so was china under Japan. Don't live in past brother and stop spewing your frustrations at me or India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

indian_warrior said:


> In a war you should not leave any possibility or surprises. It is known fact that USA is going to support whatever Israel needs. Be it weapons or diplomatic support.
> 
> USA army has large presence in Gulf region.



I think i can agree with that , but how can you be so sure that USA will Sustain another War just because of Israel ??

Provided the current situation between US and Israel it is already a question Mark .

Israeli PM was given the Most "Coldest" welcome in history by Americans just some days back.

BTW Israel has a capability to Strike Iran alone but Iran also has a capability to do same amount of damage by Destroying Dimona and Til Aviv.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## imran iqbal

Arik said:


> Well i guess Alexander made millions of persians his slave after defeating Darius in the battle of Gaugamela.
> 
> *ISREAL AND IRAN,SO STICK TO IT.IF U CAN'T CONTRIBUTE POSITIVELY DO NOT DERAIL THE THREAD.*.



Pls bro, let me answer him. Thanks


----------



## Abi

I am going to stop posting on this thread, i have had enough of fan boys with a slave mentality getting a boner every time their masters say something about Iran.


----------



## Arik

Black Blood said:


> Source ??
> 
> A recent Book disclosed that Vajpai talked about wiping Pakistan out of the Map and in retaliation he was ready to sustain 0.5 Billion Indian life loss -- we had a thread about it a while ago.
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know they dont ? (Did you knew that Pakistan had its First Nuke in 1985 ?)




Did vajpayee make such statements in public??I guess musharaf too had similar plans for India.

What r u implying by saying that pakistan got its nukes in 85.By the way both India and Isreal got their nukes in the 70s.


----------



## nwmalik

My God, how many more enemies they want?
If this happens then it is going to be a very long war. Initial battles will be won by israel and Co.
But also i dont understand Ahmad nigad , he has a very big mouth. He behaving just like saddam who caused the distruction of his country.
Present world depends on media. His speeches are making headlines everywhere. Western media covers this and results in the public opinion against Iran.


----------



## imran iqbal

Abi said:


> I am going to stop posting on this thread, i have had enough of fan boys with a slave mentality getting a boner every time their masters say something about Iran.



Good for you, better try harder next time you come up with India as American slave argument. 

You getting desperate over carpet bombing, * we had american carrier parked in our ocean TO NUKE INDIA*.

Show your balls of steel to someone else. Your naive arguments and empty rhetoric is not going to be paddled here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Abi said:


> This comparison.



You did not read all the post.

I said *if* Iranian Leadership acts like Pakistani one *THAN *your leadership will be doomed.


----------



## Kompromat

Abi said:


> *I am going to stop posting on this thread*, i have had enough of fan boys with a slave mentality getting a boner every time their masters say something about Iran.



That would be an idiotic deed , Indians have been living in fantacy for a long time just do not worry about them .

Indians still believe that they could have strike Pakistan after Staging Mumbai Drama  Thanks to Bollywood.

If you do not Like a particular "Fanboy" feel free to PM me

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

imran iqbal said:


> Good for you, better try harder next time you come up with India as American slave argument.
> 
> *You getting desperate over carpet bombing,  we had american carrier parked in our ocean TO NUKE INDIA.*
> 
> Show your balls of steel to someone else. Your naive arguments and empty rhetoric is not going to be paddled here.



Which Carrier on Earth carries Bombers for Carpet bombing role 

Is it a defeat of my Aviation Knowledge or this guy is talking None sense 

What do you think guys ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Abi you should read all of my posts first.

I said that Iran should be proud of their bomb rather than hiding in a shell. Iran should publicize their strength not like Pakistani leadership sitting in a shell..

Pakistan has the bomb but political leadership is very reluctant to accept their strength.

I like Iranian President when he talks with courage.


----------



## imran iqbal

Black Blood said:


> Which Carrier on Earth carries Bombers for Carpet bombing role
> 
> *Is it a defeat of my Aviation Knowledge or this guy is talking None sense *
> 
> What do you think guys ?



No, it defeats your English comprehension skills. Read post again, in slow this time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

Can you guys stop derailing this thread please, this is about Iran and pro-western allies. It has nothing to do with India or Pakistan, im sick of people ruining good threads with their own national pride b/s theres millions of thread about Pakistan and India rivalry kindly take those issues there. If you want to discuss your grievances about Iran then make a separate thread somewhere else instead of ruining this thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kompromat

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Can you guys stop derailing this thread please, this is about Iran and pro-western allies. It has nothing to do with India or Pakistan, im sick of people ruining good threads with their own national pride b/s theres millions of thread about Pakistan and India rivalry kindly take those issues there. If you want to discuss your grievances about Iran then make a separate thread somewhere else instead of ruining this thread.



Relax dude , its a training session for Bharat rakhshak fanboys.

They need to get their brains straight first to be able to understand things that even a donkey can.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

Arik said:


> Did vajpayee make such statements in public??I guess musharaf too had similar plans for India.



Yes in a recent Book ! i will try to find the thread for you.



> What r u implying by saying that pakistan got its nukes in 85.By the way both India and Isreal got their nukes in the 70s.



your intelligence knowledge .

Back to topic now !


----------



## Arik

Black Blood said:


> OK you can show your Pathetic Indian Dum Brain , moreover i must admit your superior english skills as you might have begotton it from your British sperms !
> 
> Just answer My question , "Which Air Craft carrier on earth carries Bombers ie B-2 Spirit , B1b Lancer or B-52 which are capable of carpet bombing "
> 
> Answer it or this would become another war trophy on your stinking indian nose



U didn't understand what he is saying.He is saying that Iranians are getting desperate thinking abt carpet bombings which Isreal may carry out from its bases .Where as Indians faced the threat of a nuke attack by the US from its carrier at sea.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

Arik said:


> U didn't understand what he is saying.He is saying that Iranians are getting desperate thinking abt carpet bombings which Isreal may carry out from its bases .Where as Indians faced the threat of a nuke attack by the US from its carrier at sea.



Thanks for explanation dear sir.

But he was talking about a US carrier Parked in Indian sea carrying Bombers

Anyway Back to topic now !


----------



## imran iqbal

Abi said:


> I am going to stop posting on this thread, i have had enough of fan boys with a slave mentality getting a boner every time their masters say something about Iran.



Abi read this when you get back. It explains US India relationship as master slave fairly well.

*US president said 'the goddamn Indians' were preparing for another war, Kissinger retorted 'they are the most aggressive goddamn people around.'

During the second week of July, Kissinger went to Beijing where he was told by then Chinese prime minister Zhou Enlai: 'In our opinion, if India continues on its present course in disregard of world opinion, it will continue to go on recklessly. We, however, support the stand of Pakistan. This is known to the world. If they (the Indians) are bent on provoking such a situation, then we cannot sit idly by.' Kissinger answered that Zhou should know that the US sympathies also lay with Pakistan.

On his return, during a meeting of the National Security Council, Nixon continued his India bashing. The Indians, he noted, are 'a slippery, treacherous people.' 

Nixon and Kissinger assessed the situation. Kissinger told Nixon: 'The Indians are bastards anyway. They are plotting a war.' 

The CIA reported to the US President: 'She (Indira Gandhi) hopes the Chinese (will) not intervene physically in the North; however, the Soviets have warned her that the Chinese are still able to "rattle the sword" in Ladakh and Chumbi areas.' *

During the course of the presentation, the Indian admiral intervened and said: 'Madam(Indian prime minister), the US 8th Fleet is sailing into the Bay of Bengal.' Nothing happened; the briefing continued. After sometime, the admiral repeated, 'Madam, I have to inform you that the 8th Fleet is sailing into the Bay of Bengal.' She cut him off immediately: 'Admiral, I heard you the first time, let us go on with the briefing.'

***Source: Declassified US documents.

Now *A SHOCKER, NEVER DISCLOSED BEFORE*

India had a kamikaze action in mind in worst case scenario to take the USS Enterprise down in 1971.

Now moan or groan, India is a Lion. It has faced worse situations 40 years ago that you are facing now.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kompromat

ok enough about mighty Indians -- get back to thread now !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## imran iqbal

Black Blood said:


> Thanks for explanation dear sir.
> 
> But he was talking about a US carrier Parked in Indian sea carrying Bombers
> 
> Anyway Back to topic now !



You clearly jumped the gun kid. I know you are semi literate, uncivilized scavenger waiting eagerly to show his class. Take this slap on your high moral face 



Arik said:


> U didn't understand what he is saying.He is saying that Iranians are getting desperate thinking abt carpet bombings which Isreal may carry out from its bases .Where as Indians faced the threat of a nuke attack by the US from its carrier at sea.



And PM me for sperm discussion. I am half Iranian and Jordan mix pure blood and not a .........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

imran iqbal said:


> You clearly jumped the gun kid. I know you are semi literate, uncivilized scavenger waiting eagerly to show his class. Take this slap on your high moral face  .



OK whatever --!! Shut up now (!)

Talk about the god damn topic


----------



## gowthamraj

iran should allow un to inspect it's nuclear reactors. thus reduce all tensions


----------



## Kompromat

gowthamraj said:


> iran should allow un to inspect it's nuclear reactors. thus reduce all tensions



I second that .

Iran is holding a summit to defuse tentions , hope it works for iranian Brothers !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gowthamraj

@black blood . . . surley hope that only happen . . . . btw abi depressed himself and make some indian and chinese members (another thread) disappointed . . personaly i see nothing wrong for his anger, it come to all when some one hard command our country


----------



## Kompromat

gowthamraj said:


> @black blood . . . surley hope that only happen . . . . btw abi depressed himself and make some indian and chinese members (another thread) disappointed . . personaly i see nothing wrong for his anger, it come to all when some one hard command our country



Yes , The war is not a solution to anything & Abi and Iran has our Full support , he is becoming Emotional which is Natural.

Everyone must come to table and sort their Issues out and do not let zionists play their Game again.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Abi did not read all of my posts. 
Thats why there was a confusion. 

The "talk" thing only means one straight demand.

Iran should *bow down* and should stop the Nuclear Weapons Program.
Maybe international community *"allows"* them to have a Nuclear Generation Program.

I support Nuclear weaponed Iran because other countries also have it.
The biggest Nuclear Terror State is the United States who bombed Japan.

*There should be sanctions against the country who committed those crimes.*

*Instead of saying "sorry" to the world, the U.S. is teaching us how to use our weapons.* 

The U.S. should be brought to International Court. United States as a nation should say sorry to Japan and should give up Nuclear Weapons because they have committed that crime before. 

No one can guarantee that the U.S. will not use Nuclear Weapons again.
If they call Japan attacks as self defence than Iran is making bombs for their self defence.


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

gowthamraj said:


> @black blood . . . surley hope that only happen . . . . btw abi depressed himself and make some indian and chinese members (another thread) disappointed . . personaly i see nothing wrong for his anger, it come to all when some one hard command our country



Can you honestly blame the guy?! Pakistani, Indians and other nationalities have been ridiculing Iran and even me as a Pakistani feel offended and ashamed by the way some of my own people from my country of origin speak about our Iranian brothers and their country without any knowledge whatsoever.


----------



## pak-yes

Gosh yar first i had different opinion but seeing what the world is doing with Iran kinda reminds me of the 90s.I wish we could do something to help Iranians.


----------



## Kompromat

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Can you honestly blame the guy?! Pakistani, Indians and other nationalities have been ridiculing Iran and even me as a Pakistani feel offended and ashamed by the way some of my own people from my country of origin speak about our Iranian brothers and their country *without any knowledge *whatsoever.



You already have told the reason why do they do so!

Just Ignore these Dum heads , we must show support for Iran .


----------



## SekrutYakhni

pak-yes said:


> Gosh yar first i had different opinion but seeing what the world is doing with Iran kinda reminds me of the 90s.I wish we could do something to help Iranians.



You should pray that Pakistan stays safe.
If Tel Aviv becomes Afghanistan than the war will have a severe affect on Pakistan.

Innocent Jews and Muslims will die just because the policies of Israel are not accepted by "normal" human beings. 
Israeli Government should understand that the world was not made for them. 
Israel, save precious lives!

*Israel should back off. *


----------



## pak-yes

saad445566 said:


> You should pray that Pakistan stays safe.
> If Tel Aviv becomes Afghanistan than the war will have a severe affect on Pakistan.
> 
> Innocent Jews and Muslims will die just because the policies of Israel are not accepted by "normal" human beings.
> Israeli Government should understand that the world was not made for them.
> Israel, save precious lives!



Well Pakistan's troubles are internal instead of External.

And Yes any War in the Middle east will have a severe impact on Pakistan.Despite our attention always being towards east we also can not remain detached to the events on the west.


----------



## waraich66

Monday, February 8, 2010
Iran to make Air-Defence Missile System Better than Russian S-300: Iran Air Force (IRIAF)
Iran boasted on Monday it is manufacturing a home-built air defence missile system which would be better than the Russian S-300, which has been ordered by Tehran but yet to be delivered by Moscow."Today, we are building all our air defence weapons by ourselves ... the only thing we wanted to import was the Russian S-300 which so far they have not delivered for some unacceptable reasons," senior airforce commander Heshmatollah Kasiri was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.

"But our air defence experts and scientists found a way and in very near future we will produce an air defence system which has the capabilities of the Russian S-300 or even more."Kasiri's comments come after Iran in late November threatened to take legal action against Russia if it fails to honour a deal to supply Tehran with the S-300, an advanced air defence missile system.Russia, Tehran's sole ally among world powers, has so far not delivered the system, in a delay which Iranian officials blame on growing pressure on Moscow from Washington and Iran's arch-foe Israel.

In October, Russia's Interfax news agency reported that Iran had not yet paid for the missile system because Moscow has not given its final approval for the deal, which had set alarm bells ringing in the West.Under the contract, Russia would sell Iran five batteries of S-300PMU1 missiles for around 800 million dollars (530 million euros), Interfax reported.The S-300PMU1 -- codenamed the SA-20 Gargoyle by Nato -- is a mobile land-based system designed to shoot down aircraft and cruise missiles.Western governments fear Iran could use the system to boost defences around its nuclear sites against any Israeli or US air strike.Neither country has excluded the possibility of a military strike on Tehran's nuclear sites to prevent the Islamic republic acquiring an atomic bomb.Iran insists its nuclear enrichment programme is for peaceful purposes only.

Iranian nuke missile and Missile defence program is on fast trak , Israeli know very well that Iran is not Syria


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

pak-yes said:


> Gosh yar first i had different opinion but seeing what the world is doing with Iran kinda reminds me of the 90s.I wish we could do something to help Iranians.



Brother Iran doesn&#8217;t need any help from us its well equipped to defend itself from any situation. The two things we as Pakistanis should guarantee is that firstly a complete crackdown on stopping any CIA orchestrated Baloch attacks on Iran and that our land isn't turned into a US base where pro-western forces can launch attacks on Iran.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

I hope that Iran makes the bomb on time and * Israel "bows down"* 

and 

*Hails Iran for their success. *


----------



## SekrutYakhni

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Brother Iran doesn&#8217;t need any help from us its well equipped to defend itself from any situation. The two things we as Pakistanis should guarantee is that firstly a complete crackdown on stopping any CIA orchestrated Baloch attacks on Iran and that our land isn't turned into a US base where pro-western forces can launch attacks on Iran.




Any Pakistani politician or general supporting West over Iran should be sentenced life imprisonment and if the costs are too high than hang them. 

Simple is that.

NO to the bases of the west in Pakistan.
Pakistan should have a dignity and should have equal rights like the U.S. does.

*I am not saying to fight everyone instead I am saying to live with dignity which we don't have for now. *

West can be our good friend "only" if they can respect us. We can be friends with Israel if she stops horrendous acts against people and after that strong action should be taken against any Muslim Organization who tries to do any misadventure..

*Israel learns to respect Muslims.
We will assure Israel that she is our true friend.*


----------



## pak-yes

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Brother Iran doesnt need any help from us its well equipped to defend itself from any situation. The two things we as Pakistanis should guarantee is that firstly a complete crackdown on stopping any CIA orchestrated Baloch attacks on Iran and that our land isn't turned into a US base where pro-western forces can launch attacks on Iran.



Yes.Would Should absolutely make sure that no one uses our land to spy on Iran.But with the present state of Pakistan it's kinda difficult.

I wish we could help Iran with Fighters or other Weapons deals.But International Pressure would very much.


----------



## waraich66

pak-yes said:


> Yes.Would Should absolutely make sure that no one uses our land to spy on Iran.But with the present state of Pakistan it's kinda difficult.
> 
> I wish we could help Iran with Fighters or other Weapons deals.But International Pressure would very much.



Israel may use US basis of Afghanistan,Iraq,Bahrain,Qatar for attack on Iran.Pakistan is not in position to help Iran .


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

Alot of people here underestimate Iran's capabilities although the American and Israeli government do not, otherwise we would have definitely seen a strike of some sort already like Israel did with Syria. 

Attacking Iran will lead to a massive all out war in the already fragile region and cause war on many different fronts. 

-	Middle east &#8211; Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq
-	Afghanistan

As Abi stated Iran&#8217;s not afraid to hit US bases throughout the region whether they are in the UAE, Qatar, Saudi etc. US has more than 100,000 troops stationed in Iraq, where the population is 60&#37; Shia and with around 100,000 troops there and around 5,000 in the majority Shia country of Bahrain. If a war does occur im sure with the help of Iran, Iraqis loyal to Iran and other Shia Arabs will cause massive problems wherever the US troops are stationed. 

America also jeopardises its 60,000 troops based in Afghanistan with a war between Iran. Hazara shias who are reportedly around 6 million and extremely loyal to Iran as seen in the Iran-Iraq war where many Hazara volunteered freely of their own will to defend the Islamic Republic will most likely take up arms again to help the Islamic Republic.

Iran & Iraq war - Lasted for nine years longer than both the world wars without any rest bite, showing that Iran has the stamina, will and capabilities to not only defend itself but also be able to launch a big offensive as it did in Iraq via Basra. Armed by billions of dollars US and pro western forces aid as well as military training, Iran was still able to defend every inch of its lands and this is an extremely remarkable feat considering the fact that they just had undergone a massive revolution less than two years earlier. Now due to sanctions imposed on them they are self-reliant and hardly rely on anyone but themselves for parts or any equipments.

Israel &#8211; Although for all its state of the arts weaponry that it contains in its Arsenal it had problems even capturing a small village called Bint Jbeil in S.Lebanon situated right next to the Israeli border, this also against a so-called bunch of &#8216;sheep-herders&#8217; known as Hezbollah what chance will it have against an advanced, well drilled and vast army like Iran.

Petroleum &#8211; During the first Iran-Iraq war US deemed it critically necessary the &#8216;Straight Of Hormuz&#8217; remained open with Iran navy drastically improved since the Shah Days, they are able to defend their water effectively as seen with the hostage of British Sailors.

Iran could stop the flow of petroleum out of the Persian Gulf which will cause a world wide economic free-for-all as seen with the 1973 Saudi oil embargo on the U.S. This will definitely cause energy hungry nations like China to intervene.

War can only be won especially in Iran by boots on the ground, from my extremely vague understanding of Iran ground forces if the actual army has been wiped out they have hundreds of thousands of well trained reservist to rely upon who are experts in asymmetrical warfare and with there successful philosophy having been tried and tested out in Lebanon, get ready for a war that the US would have to be able spend considerable amount of time in and spend an enormous amount wealth to be able to sustain the war over an extremely long period. Lets hope for all of us sane and peaceful people, war is avoided although any war in Iran will have disastrous consequences for us in Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hussein

saad445566 said:


> I hope that Iran makes the bomb on time and * Israel "bows down"*
> 
> and
> 
> *Hails Iran for their success. *



why so much hatred?


----------



## Kompromat

Hussein said:


> why so much hatred?



Eleborate please !


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Hussein said:


> why so much hatred?




Yes, I second Black Blood. 

Kindly elaborate.

*Israel learns to respect Muslims.
We will assure Israel that she is our true friend.*


----------



## waraich66

Black Blood said:


> Eleborate please !



He is right , Iranian Parliment have Jewish member, i am doubtfull about their media war 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Motamed


----------



## Hussein

saad445566 said:


> Yes, I second Black Blood.
> 
> Kindly elaborate.
> 
> *Israel learns to respect Muslims.
> We will assure Israel that she is our true friend.*


Clearly do you have problem with the existence of Israël?

I didn't like my country be attacked by them
but i have no right to insult them and wish hell to them

Why , as pakistani, you are so much anti Israël?
it's something i don't understand. why?
we can criticize a governement, a policy, a guy attitude, but wishing down to Israël is as stupid as a war against Iraq, the bombing of Gaza , the attack on Lebanon, or the rockets sent on Israël

Maybe i am stupid but i just don't understand hatred


----------



## Hussein

Fundamentalist said:


> He is right , Iranian Parliment have Jewish member, i am doubtfull about their media war
> 
> Maurice Motamed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


He was Khomeini who wanted this.
In the parliament you have few deputies who are representing the religions of Iran. It was always like this.

Jews of Iran never said anything against Iran or concerning israël


----------



## gambit

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Alot of people here underestimate Iran's capabilities although the American and Israeli government do not, otherwise we would have definitely seen a strike of some sort already like Israel did with Syria.


True. Just like Desert Storm, we want as much information as possible before we strike.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Attacking Iran will lead to a massive all out war in the already fragile region and cause war on many different fronts.
> 
> -	Middle east  Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq
> -	Afghanistan
> 
> As Abi stated *Irans not afraid to hit US bases throughout the region whether they are in the UAE, Qatar, Saudi etc.* US has more than 100,000 troops stationed in Iraq, where the population is 60% Shia and with around 100,000 troops there and around 5,000 in the majority Shia country of Bahrain. If a war does occur im sure with the help of Iran, Iraqis loyal to Iran and other Shia Arabs will cause massive problems wherever the US troops are stationed.


In doing so, Iran would be declaring war against these countries.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Petroleum  During the first Iran-Iraq war US deemed it critically necessary the Straight Of Hormuz remained open with Iran navy drastically improved since the Shah Days, they are able to defend their water effectively as seen with the hostage of British Sailors.


What was there to 'defend' in that abduction?



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Iran could stop the flow of petroleum out of the Persian Gulf which will cause a world wide economic free-for-all as seen with the 1973 Saudi oil embargo on the U.S. This will definitely cause energy hungry nations like China to intervene.


Any blockade of the Strait and any any stoppage of the oil tanker fleet will be temporary. The people most immediately affected by this will be the speculators in the financial sectors, not the refineries worldwide as they all must process their current inventories. As for the Saudi reduction in output back in the '70s, it was short lived and the long lines for gasoline in the US had more to do with irrational response by wholesalers and retailers than by refineries and their suppliers. In later analysis, the Saudis admitted that the output reduction and the embargo against the US hurt them more than US.

Militarily speaking, Iran does have the capability to seize control of the Strait but not hold it for long. Countries that relied upon the oil tanker fleet for their own purposes will do nothing but sit out the brief conflict. They could also raise the bounty for daring captains, a repeat from the old 'Tanker War'.


----------



## waraich66

Hussein said:


> Clearly do you have problem with the existence of Isra&#235;l?
> 
> I didn't like my country be attacked by them
> but i have no right to insult them and wish hell to them
> 
> Why , as pakistani, you are so much anti Isra&#235;l?
> it's something i don't understand. why?
> we can criticize a governement, a policy, a guy attitude, but wishing down to Isra&#235;l is as stupid as a war against Iraq, the bombing of Gaza , the attack on Lebanon, or the rockets sent on Isra&#235;l
> 
> Maybe i am stupid but i just don't understand hatred



It is not racial hatred , it is matter of principles , Israel occupied Palestine land, 15 Million Palestinian are still living as rafugees , Israel is continously building Jewish settlement on occupied land and Palestinain in Gaza are under continues siege .

In this condition what shall muslim ummah do ?


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

gambit said:


> In doing so, Iran would be declaring war against these countries.



By allowing their land to be used as a base by pro-western forces to launch attacks on Iran they themselves are declaring all out war on Iran.



gambit said:


> What was there to 'defend' in that abduction?



Nothing in my opinion, it was just a publicity stunt for Iran to show how hospitable they were aswell as telling western forces that trespassing in their water will have consequences.



gambit said:


> Any blockade of the Strait and any any stoppage of the oil tanker fleet will be temporary.
> 
> Militarily speaking, Iran does have the capability to seize control of the Strait but not hold it for long. Countries that relied upon the oil tanker fleet for their own purposes will do nothing but sit out the brief conflict. They could also raise the bounty for daring captains, a repeat from the old 'Tanker War'.



Don't know much about Irans naval capabilities and how they'll be able to control the Strait but their General(Jafari) has explicitly stated during an interview that if US attacks Iran then the Iranian army will take control of 'Straight of Hormuz'.


----------



## Nima

gowthamraj said:


> iran should allow un to inspect it's nuclear reactors. thus reduce all tensions



lmao
this is why India has ALWAYS been a slave to another country. Simple minded people. 

any ways as much as I hate that guy abi he absolutely destroyed all your arguments but nobody quoted him and instead they quoted his India comments. 
here it is again

"It gets boring posting on topics like this after a while. It is filled by people who have no knowledge on this issue and they're Indians who love Israel, or Wahhabi Pakistanis who dislike Iran.

*Anyway, the nuclear facilities are scattered throughout Iran, for the IDF to be able to get to them, they have to use air to air refueling at least twice. They don't have enough tankers and so they can only send 120 fighters maximum, this is not enough. The 120 fighters will have to be flying fuel tanks, they won't have enough space to carry air to ground bombs and air to air bombs. Their air to air capabilities will be limited and they will not be able to engage the IRIAF, for the simple fact that they won't have enough air to air missiles. The IRIAF has F-14s that were designed in the cold war to take out Bombers like the Russian bear, they can easily take out Israeli fuel tankers with their Phoenix or sedjil missiles. The IDF planes will not have enough bombs to take out the nuclear facilities, they will not have enough air to air missiles to take out the IRIAF and they will not have enough fuel to get back to Israel, and thanks to Fateh-100 missiles stationed in Syria and Lebanon, they will not have air fields to return home to.*

There is no way the IDF can attack Iran, the only country that would have the capability is America and they will not do it because they have too many open bases in the region that are vulnerable to Iranian missiles."


Are you people bored or something?
Americans and Israelis have been threatening Iran for 3 DECADES but suddenly this becomes important?
lmao


----------



## Nima

pak-yes said:


> Gosh yar first i had different opinion but seeing what the world is doing with Iran kinda reminds me of the 90s.I wish we could do something to help Iranians.



yeah you can help
start doing smtg about the flow of drugs cuz right now your borders are more loose than Paris Hilton


----------



## pak-yes

Nima said:


> yeah you can help
> start doing smtg about the flow of drugs cuz right now your borders are more loose than Paris Hilton



Buddy if we could secure our Borders we wouldn't be facing daily Bombings.So in this matter we can't do anything.

Other than that we should Provide any other type of help to Iran.


----------



## indian_warrior

Black Blood said:


> That would be an idiotic deed , Indians have been living in fantacy for a long time just do not worry about them .
> 
> *Indians still believe that they could have strike Pakistan after Staging Mumbai Drama*  Thanks to Bollywood.
> 
> If you do not Like a particular "Fanboy" feel free to PM me



No need of india bombing. Pakistan is in self destruction mode. We just need to watch the show. If there is any diversion than we will effort to correct the path.


----------



## gambit

PakistaniPacifist said:


> By allowing their land to be used as a base by pro-western forces to launch attacks on Iran they themselves are declaring all out war on Iran.


That is a line of reasoning that has not escaped the attention of US war planners. That mean in order to place Iran in the most negative light, it will be US and the strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities will come from CONUS and off the Iranian coast. Iran cannot retaliate against US on US soil. Any naval response against a US aircraft carrier fleet will most likely be a suicide mission by the Iranian Navy. That leave the neighboring countries that have not done anything but hosts US forces as baits for Iran.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Nothing in my opinion, it was just a publicity stunt for Iran to show how hospitable they were aswell as telling western forces that trespassing in their water will have consequences.


The consequences for Iran in that 'publicity stunt' are negative. The next naval incursion into Iranian territorial waters will not be so weak.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Don't know much about Irans naval capabilities and how they'll be able to control the Strait but their General(Jafari) has explicitly stated during an interview that if US attacks Iran then the Iranian army will take control of 'Straight of Hormuz'.


You need to understand the context of the word 'army' in usage. The word 'army' can often mean the armed forces in general. No matter what words were used, it will be the Iranian Navy, not the Iranian Army, who will be tasked for seizing control of that body of water.


----------



## Evil Flare

indian_warrior said:


> No need of india bombing. Pakistan is in self destruction mode. We just need to watch the show. If there is any diversion than we will effort to correct the path.





Go Away Troll .. 

No one need you here ....


----------



## Thomas

Abi said:


> America's Anti-ballistic missile tests failed two months ago. No country in the world has anti ballistic missile defences.



Please link the failure


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Hussein said:


> Clearly do you have problem with the existence of Isra&#235;l?
> 
> I didn't like my country be attacked by them
> but i have no right to insult them and wish hell to them
> 
> Why , as pakistani, you are so much anti Isra&#235;l?
> it's something i don't understand. why?
> we can criticize a governement, a policy, a guy attitude, but wishing down to Isra&#235;l is as stupid as a war against Iraq, the bombing of Gaza , the attack on Lebanon, or the rockets sent on Isra&#235;l
> 
> Maybe i am stupid but i just don't understand hatred



I have Jewish Friends also.
I have nothing against Israel..
I have problem with their government. 

I am not anti Israel at all but when they think to attack a Muslim country than I'd like to support the Muslim nation. 

I am against Israeli bombing and so on.

Some Jews are good and some are bad but *Israeli Government *is the worst example. 

*I have nothing against Israel or Jews.*

_I said in previous posts that it is *"self defence"* and it is *Iran's right *to bomb anything if *Israel attacks her.*
*So, it is not a hatred but it is a reaction of Israeli action.*_

I am not stereotyping against any religion or country. 
Israel has the right to live *"peacefully" *and should not *"terrorize" *other countries. 

*World without weapons would be a nice place. *


----------



## Thomas

Thomas said:


> all the gulf countries have been dramatically upgrading their anti missile capabilities for awhile now. It will not be like the first Gulf war. Anti missile tech has improved by a huge margin.
> 
> As far as Iranians living there. Do you really think those Iranians are going to rise up? and from where are they going to get weapons? Please give me an example in recent history for this to happen.
> 
> Your grasping at straws to try and justify your feelings for Iran.





Black Blood said:


> Like what ?
> 
> is it just me who is unaware of such developments ?



http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2010/02/02/99104.html

"The news that the U.S. is supplying Patriot anti-missile systems along with state-of-the-art weapons to Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar and is deploying warships in the Arabian Gulf signifies one of two options. Either this provocative move is meant as an anti-Iranian deterrent or Washington is aware that something is afoot and wants to protect its allies."

U.S. Speeding Up Missile Defenses in Persian Gulf - NYTimes.com

"The Obama administration is accelerating the deployment of new defenses against possible Iranian missile attacks in the Persian Gulf, placing special ships off the Iranian coast and antimissile systems in at least four Arab countries, according to administration and military officials. "

AUDIO NEWS REPORT ON GULF MISSILE SHIELD

The U.S. and Israel are also beefing up anti missile defenses. An X-band radar has been installed in Israel that can see missiles launched from about 80&#37; of Iran.


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

What will be the economic cost of the attack
1. Oil 300$ per barrel or even more if Iran take outs lines and water supplies 
2. War cost in billions if Iran makes it regional war. 

With high oil price another world recession

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thomas

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Iran & Iraq war - Lasted for nine years longer than both the world wars without any rest bite, showing that Iran has the stamina, will and capabilities to not only defend itself but also be able to launch a big offensive as it did in Iraq via Basra.



bad comparison, Iran was at a stalemate with Iraq and could not win the war. yet the enemy they could not defeat was defeated within days during the Gulf war. by a smaller army (about 900,000) compared to the millions the Iranians had during the Iran/Iraq war.


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

gambit said:


> That is a line of reasoning that has not escaped the attention of US war planners. That mean in order to place Iran in the most negative light, it will be US and the strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities will come from CONUS and off the Iranian coast. Iran cannot retaliate against US on US soil. Any naval response against a US aircraft carrier fleet will most likely be a suicide mission by the Iranian Navy. That leave the neighboring countries that have not done anything but hosts US forces as baits for Iran.



Should war break out, im sure the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan who have seen their homes destroyed, people massacred and their country in total ruins by US forces will be more than happy to get the full backing and support of Iran in order to remove the hundred of thousand US troops stationed in their land. Iran has made its perfectly clear many times to those neighbouring countries that should they allow their land to be used by the US to launch attack on Iran, then Iran has every right to strike those areas. Its up to those countries' government and royal families who are allowing their land to be used as a base by the US to grow a backbone and heed Irans message if they don't want to be attacked.



gambit said:


> The consequences for Iran in that 'publicity stunt' are negative. The next naval incursion into Iranian territorial waters will not be so weak.



Dude you sound as if youre itching for another naval incursion to happen. Lets hope that this isn't the case, if there so happens to be another incursion, which is likely. Im sure once again the Iranians will be prepared and more than happy to showcase their famous hospitality to the wider world by their kind treatment of their hostages whom will be sampling the delights that the Persian cuisine has to offer while being televised to all news channels across the globe.



gambit said:


> You need to understand the context of the word 'army' in usage. The word 'army' can often mean the armed forces in general. No matter what words were used, it will be the Iranian Navy, not the Iranian Army, who will be tasked for seizing control of that body of water.



Just being lazy and not checking what I had written but nonetheless point taken. Anyways im sure the Iranian posters here will be more than happy to continue the discussion with you as my knowledge on Iran and their military capabilities is extremely limited. I personally hope that war doesn't break out for both the American and the Iranian people because having been too both countries let me just say I think both sets of people are extremely warm, open and polite. Its a shame that the war propaganda going on in the US has made many Americans ignorant of their Iranian counterparts. Peace out


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Israel should not attack Iran or if she does than she should be ready for the worst scenario. 

Israel should accept Palestine as an independent nation, should stop further settlements and should pull up their agents from Muslim nations.

Muslim countries should accept Israel, no more terror or rocket firing towards Israel, should help Palestine financially. 

Have a better atmosphere guys. Wars are not the solution nor talks on inferiority.
*Talks on equal bases is the right solution.*

Humans are fighting against each other since 1000s of years and still we think to fight with each other. 

*Why are we fighting with each other?*

We are killing each other just for the land and resources or sometimes religion. 
*Occupying a land is more important than a human life?*


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Thomas said:


> Middle East Views | Gulf anti-missile shield
> 
> "The news that the U.S. is supplying Patriot anti-missile systems along with state-of-the-art weapons to Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar and is deploying warships in the Arabian Gulf signifies one of two options. Either this provocative move is meant as an anti-Iranian deterrent or Washington is aware that something is afoot and wants to protect its allies."
> 
> U.S. Speeding Up Missile Defenses in Persian Gulf - NYTimes.com
> 
> "The Obama administration is accelerating the deployment of new defenses against possible Iranian missile attacks in the Persian Gulf, placing special ships off the Iranian coast and antimissile systems in at least four Arab countries, according to administration and military officials. "
> 
> AUDIO NEWS REPORT ON GULF MISSILE SHIELD





*Thomas you use a very civilized language sometimes and I really appreciate that.* 

but are you also in favour of people being killed?

How can you stop someone from acquiring weapons when you also have it. Now don't tell me that you are a civilized nation because it was the U.S. who used it not the Iranians and not the Pakistanis. 

Do you care about human life?
or its fine if another hundred thousand people die?

Is it fair to stop Iran or is it fair to stop every country/weapon free world?

I know you belong to a military profession but c'mon you are also a human being like me or any other. 
Skin colour does not change people nor the professions.

Israel should not attack Iran.

*I bet if the U.S. says to the world.
OKAY thats it no more Nuclear Weapons.
Billions of people will support it. Every one will be under the umbrella of the U.S. initiative. People will praise the U.S.
I will praise the U.S. at least.*

America will be a true leader of peaceful world. 
Everyone wants to live a peaceful life.
You, me , people over here and people around the world.

No more wars on ideology, religion, land and resources.
Nice idea to wish for.
Isn't it?

*Maybe you can't teach monkeys to talk..
Similarly, you can't teach generals to live in peace. *


----------



## indian_warrior

Aamir Zia said:


> Go Away Troll ..
> 
> No one need you here ....



Who is trolling. 
People in pakistan are sad because india did not attack after mumbai terrorism. Don't worry time will come.

Stick to topic. Don't flame people here.


----------



## gambit

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Should war break out, im sure the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan who have seen their homes destroyed, people massacred and their country in total ruins by US forces will be more than happy to get the full backing and support of Iran in order to remove the hundred of thousand US troops stationed in their land. Iran has made its perfectly clear many times to those neighbouring countries that should they allow their land to be used by the US to launch attack on Iran, then Iran has every right to strike those areas. Its up to those countries' government and royal families who are allowing their land to be used as a base by the US to grow a backbone and heed Irans message if they don't want to be attacked.


No...I am saying that if the US attack Iran via the sea, then Iran will be hard press to find 'just cause' to attack neighbors who hosted US forces but does nothing and that those US forces have done nothing.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Dude you sound as if youre itching for another naval incursion to happen. Lets hope that this isn't the case, if there so happens to be another incursion, which is likely. Im sure once again the Iranians will be prepared and more than happy to showcase their famous hospitality to the wider world by their kind treatment of their hostages whom will be sampling the delights that the Persian cuisine has to offer while being televised to all news channels across the globe.


The next incursion will be air strikes.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Just being lazy and not checking what I had written but nonetheless point taken. Anyways im sure the Iranian posters here will be more than happy to continue the discussion with you as my knowledge on Iran and their military capabilities is extremely limited. I personally hope that war doesn't break out for both the American and the Iranian people because having been too both countries let me just say I think both sets of people are extremely warm, open and polite. Its a shame that the war propaganda going on in the US has made many Americans ignorant of their Iranian counterparts. Peace out


And you think Iranians are more knowledgeable about Americans? When was the last time Americans gathered in the streets chanting 'Death to Iran'?


----------



## Kompromat

indian_warrior said:


> Who is trolling.
> People in pakistan are sad because india did not attack after mumbai terrorism. * Don't worry time will come.*
> 
> Stick to topic. Don't flame people here.



Ok we would be watching 

No more BS !


----------



## DesiGuy

The Israeli regime plans to send its top military strategist to China this week to convince Beijing to back sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear program.

Head of Tel Aviv army's planning directorate Major General Amir Eshel intends to serve Beijing with 'renewed' threats of military strikes against Iran, wishing to persuade China to follow along with the US-led push at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to impose a fourth round of sanctions against Iran, British weekly newspaper The Sunday Times reported today.

According to the weekly, a subsidiary of the multi-national press conglomerate The News Corporation owned by Jewish media mogul Rupert Murdoch, Eshel will warn officials in Beijing that an Israeli military attack on Iran could disrupt oil supplies to China and its rapidly growing economy.

Tehran has repeatedly dismissed Israeli threats of military strikes against Iran as psychological warfare aimed at pressuring the Islamic Republic to abandon its peaceful nuclear work while insisting that any efforts to materialize such threats will encounter a 'painful' response.

The Israeli regime and its Western backers have repeatedly accused Iran of pursuing a nuclear weapon capability under the guise of a civilian nuclear program.

Iran, however, has fiercely dismissed such claims as mere attempts by Western nuclear powers to prevent Iran's rapid advances in the field of nuclear technology.

Aggressive Israeli efforts against Iran's nuclear program come despite widespread reports of its possession of over 200 nuclear warheads that was acquired with blessings from Tel Aviv's Western sponsors. Israel has refused to sign or commit to any international atomic regulatory treaties.

Meanwhile, as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has opened its nuclear facilities to intrusive inspections and round-the-clock supervision by the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Moreover, Iran has also called for an international abandonment of all nuclear weapon arsenals and development efforts, which has been ignored by all countries possessing nuclear weapons.

IAEA has repeatedly reported that it has found no evidence of any diversion of nuclear materials from civilian to military applications in Iran.

That, however, has not stopped Washington from seeking to impose a fourth round of sanctions against Tehran through the UNSC.

Tehran insists that the sanctions are illegal as they aim to deny the Islamic Republic the legitimate right to full nuclear fuel cycle for civilian use, in contradiction to NPT regulations.

China, a veto-wielding member of the UNSC, has so far resisted US pressure to toughen embargoes against Tehran, insisting on continued dialogue as the appropriate channel to resolve nuclear concerns about Iran.

However, Israeli and its American sponsor have recently stepped up efforts to pressure China to fall in line with the sanctions drive.

The US and Israel have been collaborating closely in recent months to intensify efforts to muster support for new sanctions against the Islamic Republic. These efforts have included using press reports and allied countries to generate a high level of urgency on the issue.

For instance, US tried to get Saudi Arabia to intervene on the matter by enticing China with attractive oil deals in order to drive a wedge between Beijing and Tehran, prompting Chinese consent to the US-led sanctions efforts.

Meanwhile, press reports spread rumors last month that the Saudis have given the Israeli regime the permission to use their air space for any attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, a claim denied by Riyadh.

Iranian officials have scorned US claims that their sanctions drive enjoys international backing, arguing that Europe and the Israeli regime do not constitute a global representation.


----------



## Bang Galore

Nima said:


> lmao
> this is why India has ALWAYS been a slave to another country. Simple minded people.



Yup ! Very simple minded ! what would you have us do? If Iran has a problem with the U.S. and Israel, why should India get involved? We happen to like the Americans and the Israelis. We also think highly of Iran and her people, it's just your government that makes us uncomfortable. We elect our leaders to look after our interests, not Iran's.

I think Iran missed a trick with the Obama administration. Here was a guy openly offering a hand of friendship to Iran in the face of overwhelming cynicism of his countrymen & women. Whatever be the devil that lay in the details, Iran should have taken that chance and sat down for negotiations without trying to undermine Obama as they have tried to do. We might have been discussing something else altogether in this thread had Iran taken that route. No other American leader is going to be in a hurry to offer a hand of friendship to Iran after Obama.

Sometimes simple minded may be the way to go! look at how it helps India!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Thomas

Black Blood said:


> I think i can agree with that , but how can you be so sure that USA will Sustain another War just because of Israel ??
> 
> Provided the current situation between US and Israel it is already a question Mark .
> 
> Israeli PM was given the Most "Coldest" welcome in history by Americans just some days back.
> 
> BTW Israel has a capability to Strike Iran alone but Iran also has a capability to do same amount of damage by Destroying Dimona and Til Aviv.



blowing up Dimona would spread radiation not just over Israel. But back towards Syria, Iraq, and Iran. not to mention make Iran the pariah of the Muslim world by irradiating Jerusalem (Al Aqsa) and the Palestinians. And heaven forbid that radiation cloud hit Mecca.

It would also open the door for Israel to retaliate with large scale nuke attacks across Iran.


----------



## Kompromat

Thomas said:


> blowing up Dimona would spread radiation not just over Israel. But back towards Syria, Iraq, and Iran. not to mention make Iran the pariah of the Muslim world by irradiating Jerusalem (Al Aqsa) and the Palestinians. And heaven forbid that radiation cloud hit Mecca.
> 
> It would also open the door for Israel to retaliate with large scale nuke attacks across Iran.



And Attacking Iran's Nuclear facilities won't Spread Radiation right ?

That is called "Doubble Standards".


----------



## indian_warrior

Black Blood said:


> And Attacking Iran's Nuclear facilities won't Spread Radiation right ?
> 
> That is called "Doubble Standards".



Double standard is everywhere. There is old saying "if you can't beat them and join them".

Take an example:

Taliban applying Islamic rule in afghanistan is ok for pakistan.

Taliban applying Islamic rule in NWFP is not good and are terrorists.


----------



## Thomas

Black Blood said:


> And Attacking Iran's Nuclear facilities won't Spread Radiation right ?
> 
> That is called "Doubble Standards".



actually I doubt they will hit Bushehr now that it is operational. the time for getting it is now past. They would go more for the research labs and centrifuges. And you wont get a China syndrome from those.


----------



## ameer219

indian_warrior said:


> Double standard is everywhere. There is old saying "if you can't beat them and join them".
> 
> Take an example:
> 
> Taliban applying Islamic rule in afghanistan is ok for pakistan.
> 
> Taliban applying Islamic rule in NWFP is not good and are terrorists.



I can give you another example of double standards!

Supplying weapons to Pakistan is not ok by Indians

Supplying weapons to India is ok by Indians.


Get out of this retarded mentality of being anti-Pakistan all the time and stop discussing about Pakistan on an "Iran and Israel thread."I have been watching your behavior from other threads Sardar-jii, and one more time you going to deviate form the topic and I am going to report you.


----------



## gambit

It would be nice if you give the source.

Anyway...


DesiGuy said:


> Meanwhile, as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has opened its nuclear facilities to intrusive inspections and round-the-clock supervision by the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
> 
> IAEA has repeatedly reported that it has found no evidence of any diversion of nuclear materials from civilian to military applications in Iran.


That is not entirely false but is not entirely true either. It is deceptive. The IAEA repeatedly found Iran to either deny even when faced with technical evidences or simply omit to divulge information when a signatory is obligated to do so. Why? The UNSC do not need the IAEA to explicitly use the word 'military' in its report. Omission to report a certain facility or equipment can only mean one alternative user -- military.

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2006/gov2006-15.pdf

ISIS summed up the above IAEA reports and others in their own report.

http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/irannptviolations.pdf


>  Uranium Imports: Iran failed to report that it had purchased natural uranium (1,000 kg of UF6, 400 kg of UF4, and 400 kg of UO2) from China in 1991, and its subsequent transfer for further processing. Iran acknowledged the imports in February 2003.
> 
>  Uranium conversion: Iran did not inform the IAEA of its use of the imported uranium in tests of its uranium conversion processes, including uranium dissolution, purification using pulse columns, and the production of uranium metal, and the associated production and loss of nuclear material. Iran acknowledged this failure in February 2003.
> 
>  Uranium enrichment: Iran failed to report that it had used 1.9 kg of the imported UF6 to test P1 centrifuges at the Kalaye Electric Company centrifuge workshop in 1999 and 2002. In its October 2003 declaration to the IAEA, Iran first admitted to introducing UF6 into a centrifuge in 1999, and into as many as 19 centrifuges in 2002. Iran also failed to declare the associated production of enriched and depleted uranium.
> 
>  Hidden Sites: Iran did not declare to the IAEA the existence of a pilot enrichment facility at the Kalaye Electric Company Workshop, and laser enrichment plants at the Tehran Nuclear Research center and at Lashkar Abad. Because experiments at these sites involved the use of nuclear material in equipment, Iran was obligated to report them to the IAEA.
> 
>  Laser Isotope Enrichment Experiments: Iran failed to report that in 1993 it imported 50 kg of natural uranium metal, and that it used 8 kg of this for atomic vapor laser isotope separation (AVLIS) experiments at Tehran Nuclear Research Center between 1999 to 2000, and 22 kg of the metal for AVLIS experiments at Lashkar Abad between 2002 to 2003.3 These activities were ultimately acknowledged in an October 2003 declaration.
> 
>  Plutonium Experiments: Iran did not report to the IAEA that it had produced uranium dioxide (UO2) targets, irradiated them in the Tehran Research Reactor, and then separated the plutonium from the irradiated targets. Iran also failed to report the production and transfer of waste associated with these activities and that it had stored unprocessed irradiated targets at the Tehran Nuclear Research Center. In later meetings with the IAEA, Iran said that it conducted the plutonium separation experiments between 1988 and 1993 using shielded glove boxes at the Tehran Nuclear Research Center.


Since Israel is not an NPT signatory and no one forced Iran to become an NPT signatory, Iran's protests about Israel is legally and under NPT principles -- irrelevant.

The Iranian military does not have to be in legal possession of what have been hidden or undeclared in order for the IAEA to be suspicious. This was how Saddam's Iraq behaved and all the documents on how a country could hide and deceive inspectors in Iraq was carried over to Iran for the next generation of inspectors. So yes...perhaps the Iranian military does not have its hooks into those hidden facilities and equipments, but who is going to take that seriously?


----------



## Nima

Bang Galore said:


> Yup ! Very simple minded ! what would you have us do? If Iran has a problem with the U.S. and Israel, why should India get involved? We happen to like the Americans and the Israelis. We also think highly of Iran and her people, it's just your government that makes us uncomfortable. We elect our leaders to look after our interests, not Iran's.
> 
> I think Iran missed a trick with the Obama administration. Here was a guy openly offering a hand of friendship to Iran in the face of overwhelming cynicism of his countrymen & women. Whatever be the devil that lay in the details, Iran should have taken that chance and sat down for negotiations without trying to undermine Obama as they have tried to do. We might have been discussing something else altogether in this thread had Iran taken that route. No other American leader is going to be in a hurry to offer a hand of friendship to Iran after Obama.
> 
> Sometimes simple minded may be the way to go! look at how it helps India!



lol
America is America, there is no difference between bush and obama
it's like saying that Khatami and Nejad are diff, yeah one of them is more civilized and good looking but they're both part of the same system. 

The point is we in Iranians aren't worried about an American attack, we've never been!!!!
This is the difference between Iran and other unpatriotic countries with no history. We are a nation of fighters and martyrs. I'm not even muslim but I wouldn't hesitate to give my life for Iran. Shia Iranians are even worse, the whole sect is based on martyrdom!!
In the Iran Iraq war they would line up and walk over mine fields until a path had been cleared for the rest!!!!! Before the war people might have been saying the same **** as you guys are saying now, "oh they don't have mine sweepers, they will be crushed."
This is why we've been constantly on top for thousands of years.

Plus, all facts ARE POINTING TOWARDS PEACE!!
How is America going to attack now?
The Israelis aren't even able to attack so forget them.


----------



## indian_warrior

Nima said:


> lol
> America is America, there is no difference between bush and obama
> it's like saying that Khatami and Nejad are diff, yeah one of them is more civilized and good looking but they're both part of the same system.
> 
> The point is we in Iranians aren't worried about an American attack, we've never been!!!!
> This is the difference between Iran and other unpatriotic countries with no history. We are a nation of fighters and martyrs. I'm not even muslim but I wouldn't hesitate to give my life for Iran. Shia Iranians are even worse, the whole sect is based on martyrdom!!
> In the Iran Iraq war they would line up and walk over mine fields until a path had been cleared for the rest!!!!! Before the war people might have been saying the same **** as you guys are saying now, "oh they don't have mine sweepers, they will be crushed."
> This is why we've been constantly on top for thousands of years.
> 
> Plus, all facts ARE POINTING TOWARDS PEACE!!
> How is America going to attack now?
> The Israelis aren't even able to attack so forget them.



Exactly same thing Saddam Hussain also said before US attacked Iraq. Look what happened to Iraq.

USA/Israel don't want to occupy Iran. They just bomb out and go.


----------



## IceCold

gen x said:


> just wait and watch
> 
> who will be the next well my sources said it may be Pakistan



What the hell are you babbling about troll, your sources, i bet they are surely as ignorant as you are. Leave Pakistan out of it and stick to the topic.


----------



## Nima

indian_warrior said:


> Exactly same thing Saddam Hussain also said before US attacked Iraq. Look what happened to Iraq.
> 
> USA/Israel don't want to occupy Iran. They just bomb out and go.



well lets compare shall we

1) Iraq had the crippling sanctions that America wants to put Iran under right now for a decade

2) they were importing medicine from Iran, their arch enemy

3) oil for food program

4) no ballistics

5) no capable air defenses

6) no navy

7) no ability to touch America's navy in the Persian Gulf

8) no proxies

9) NO DETERRENTS WHAT SO EVER

10) The back bone of their army was already destroyed in the 1st Persian Gulf war

11) No indigenous manufacturing capability

12) destroyed infrastructure. **** and Piss was running trough cities.

13) HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF KIDS were dying in the streets
videos are on the net, you can check em out. It looked like sub Saharan Africa. 

14) NO NATIONALISM
Iraq was a FAKE COUNTRY carved out of the Ottoman empire. 
It consisted of people who hated each other, kurds, sunnis and shias.

15) Iran compared to them in general looked like a super power during the 90's and early 2000's.

And I'm beginning to think that some of you guys are complete RETARDS

WE JUST PROVED THAT THEY CAN NOT BOMB IRAN and you go ahead repeating the same bs all over again


----------



## indian_warrior

Nima said:


> well lets compare shall we
> 
> 1) Iraq had the crippling sanctions that America wants to put Iran under right now for a decade
> 
> 2) they were importing medicine from Iran, their arch enemy
> 
> 3) oil for food program
> 
> 4) no ballistics
> 
> 5) no capable air defenses
> 
> 6) no navy
> 
> 7) no ability to touch America's navy in the Persian Gulf
> 
> 8) no proxies
> 
> 9) NO DETERRENTS WHAT SO EVER
> 
> 10) The back bone of their army was already destroyed in the 1st Persian Gulf war
> 
> 11) No indigenous manufacturing capability
> 
> 12) destroyed infrastructure. **** and Piss was running trough cities.
> 
> 13) HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF KIDS were dying in the streets
> videos are on the net, you can check em out. It looked like sub Saharan Africa.
> 
> 14) NO NATIONALISM
> Iraq was a FAKE COUNTRY carved out of the Ottoman empire.
> It consisted of people who hated each other, kurds, sunnis and shias.
> 
> 15) Iran compared to them in general looked like a super power during the 90's and early 2000's.
> 
> And I'm beginning to think that some of you guys are complete RETARDS
> 
> WE JUST PROVED THAT THEY CAN NOT BOMB IRAN and you go ahead repeating the same bs all over again



Nima, I agree most of your points.
Iran is much bigger and developed than Iraq. The thing is they have little interest in occupying iran. What iran going to do if they just bomb it and go. 

Bottom line: If iran has the capability it would have done to israel long back.


----------



## Nima

indian_warrior said:


> Nima, I agree most of your points.
> Iran is much bigger and developed than Iraq. The thing is they have little interest in occupying iran. What iran going to do if they just bomb it and go.
> 
> Bottom line: If iran has the capability it would have done to israel long back.



nope you aint getting it

HOW IS ISRAEL GOING TO BOMB IRAN? They don't have the capability, only America does. 

And if Iran is attacked, which it won't be, then the least we will do is go and run over Iraq. We're a 70 + million country where every male has to go through a 2 year mandatory military service. Plus, Israel can kiss its tiny country good by. How are they going to stop the ballistic missiles? 

AND IRAN HAS NEVER SAID IT WILL ATTACK ISRAEL
It has always maintained that it will only act if she is attacked first

Also that fag ahmadinejad is NOT THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF
he doesn't control the military!!!!


----------



## indian_warrior

Nima said:


> nope you aint getting it
> 
> HOW IS ISRAEL GOING TO BOMB IRAN? They don't have the capability, only America does.
> 
> And if Iran is attacked, which it won't be, then the least we will do is go and run over Iraq. We're a 70 + million country where every male has to go through a 2 year mandatory military service. Plus, Israel can kiss its tiny country good by. How are they going to stop the ballistic missiles?
> 
> AND IRAN HAS NEVER SAID IT WILL ATTACK ISRAEL
> It has always maintained that it will only act if she is attacked first
> 
> *Also that fag ahmadinejad is NOT THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF
> he doesn't control the military!!!!*



This is news to me. that makes sense. 

Who has real power in Iran?


----------



## below_freezing

Nima said:


> lol
> America is America, there is no difference between bush and obama
> it's like saying that Khatami and Nejad are diff, yeah one of them is more civilized and good looking but they're both part of the same system.
> 
> The point is we in Iranians aren't worried about an American attack, we've never been!!!!
> This is the difference between Iran and other unpatriotic countries with no history. We are a nation of fighters and martyrs. I'm not even muslim but I wouldn't hesitate to give my life for Iran. Shia Iranians are even worse, the whole sect is based on martyrdom!!
> In the Iran Iraq war they would line up and walk over mine fields until a path had been cleared for the rest!!!!! Before the war people might have been saying the same **** as you guys are saying now, "oh they don't have mine sweepers, they will be crushed."
> This is why we've been constantly on top for thousands of years.
> 
> Plus, all facts ARE POINTING TOWARDS PEACE!!
> How is America going to attack now?
> The Israelis aren't even able to attack so forget them.



just remember - the most hardcore martyrs, also have the most disgusting traitors among their midst. the green guys last june, they were only the tip of the iceberg. our country has suffered tremendously to internal traitors in the past, they are often more disgusting than the enemy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Nima said:


> HOW IS ISRAEL GOING TO BOMB IRAN? They don't have the capability, only America does.


Israel does have the capability and the reach to hit Iran.



Nima said:


> And if Iran is attacked, which it won't be, then the least we will do is go and run over Iraq. We're a 70 + million country where every male has to go through a 2 year mandatory military service.


You will suffer so much casualties in Iraq that you will withdraw.



Nima said:


> Plus, Israel can kiss its tiny country good by. How are they going to stop the ballistic missiles?


Iran does not have enough ballistic missiles to wipe Israel off the map.



Nima said:


> AND IRAN HAS NEVER SAID IT WILL ATTACK ISRAEL


Who said Iran must make such a pronouncement? Who said any country must? Did Imperial Japan made such a statement prior to Dec 7, 1941?



Nima said:


> It has always maintained that it will only act if she is attacked first


Everyone does. Big deal.



Nima said:


> Also that fag ahmadinejad is NOT THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF
> he doesn't control the military!!!!


So a bunch of religious nutjobs does. Nice.


----------



## soul-eater

gambit 

my question to you how will be USA relation with isreal in future 

dont you think now there is no special thing beteen them and us


----------



## Forrest Griffin

gambit said:


> Israel does have the capability and the reach to hit Iran.



With what? Israel doesn't have strategic bombers, it it were to attack Iran it would need U.S.A. help.


----------



## Nima

gambit said:


> Israel does have the capability and the reach to hit Iran.
> 
> 
> You will suffer so much casualties in Iraq that you will withdraw.
> 
> 
> Iran does not have enough ballistic missiles to wipe Israel off the map.
> 
> 
> Who said Iran must make such a pronouncement? Who said any country must? Did Imperial Japan made such a statement prior to Dec 7, 1941?
> 
> 
> Everyone does. Big deal.
> 
> 
> So a bunch of religious nutjobs does. Nice.



1) Israel DOES NOT have the capability to attack Iran, only the US does

2) Iran suffered 1 million casualties in Iraq, back then we were a country of 30 million, you do the math. 
We were walking over mines b/c we didn't have mine sweepers, think about it. And martyrdom is @ the center of shia Islam and when you couple that with ultra nationalism you get Iran.

3) wipe it off the map?
why should we wipe it off the map when we can make it bleed to death? We have enough ballistics to do that and Hezbollah and hamas can finish the job.

4) Iran hasn't attacked a country in 300 years.
We have had much more impt enemies than Israel in this period and yet we still didn't attack.

---------- Post added at 01:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:09 AM ----------




Forrest Griffin said:


> With what? Israel doesn't have strategic bombers, it it were to attack Iran it would need U.S.A. help.



Israel simply doesn't have the refueling capacity


----------



## Nima

below_freezing said:


> just remember - the most hardcore martyrs, also have the most disgusting traitors among their midst. the green guys last june, they were only the tip of the iceberg. our country has suffered tremendously to internal traitors in the past, they are often more disgusting than the enemy.



wtf are you talking about?
I'm pro reform, am I a traitor to Iran?

we want social reforms but we still love our country!

btw, I don't run my mouth off about China when I don't know anything abt China's internal problems so plz don't talk about Iran when you have no idea what's going on there.
these "green guys" are normal men and women that are tired of living under an Islamic theocracy, that's it.


----------



## Forrest Griffin

These are the scenarios if Israel attacks Iran:

1.) Iran would do nothing

2.) Iran would impelment proxy retaliation by backing intensified attacks by Hamas from the Palestinian territories and by Hezbollah from Lebanon

3.) Iran will strike Israel with missiles

4.) Iran will block Straits of Hormuz to traffic (possibly by sinking ships in the Straits of Hormuz) but this would invite swift retaliation by U.S.A. as they already have navy ships in the vicinity.

5.) Iran will spark a wider regional conflict - depending on duration and severity of this conflict this will exacerbate differences further between U.S. EU, China, and Russia

Also it is speculated that the nuclear sites of Iran are decoys and Iran is imitating what North Korea did - creating a site where no useful nuclear production taking place to divert attention of the actual site (which is unknown at this point)


----------



## gambit

Nima said:


> 1) Israel DOES NOT have the capability to attack Iran, only the US does


Israel's fighter-bombers can reach Iran. Yes...They would need US air refuel assist but essentially Israel can attack Iran by itself.



Nima said:


> 2) Iran suffered 1 million casualties in Iraq, back then we were a country of 30 million, you do the math.
> We were walking over mines b/c we didn't have mine sweepers, think about it. And martyrdom is @ the center of shia Islam and when you couple that with ultra nationalism you get Iran.
> 
> 3) wipe it off the map?
> why should we wipe it off the map when we can make it bleed to death? We have enough ballistics to do that and Hezbollah and hamas can finish the job.


The willingness to toss away lives is nothing to boast about. The average Iranian knows that Israel has no territorial ambitions regarding Iran. This understanding will go towards blunting any talk of a war march through Iraq to get at Israel. But even if said march does occur, the US will get involved alongside the Iraqis.

Here is what you failed to understand...

The reason why the US can support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, pretty much concurrently, is because we have the ability and capacity to inflict far more death and destruction to the enemy than receiving casualties. When necessary, individual units and soldiers will fight hand-to-hand if necessary, but if possible, they will call for far greater firepower than whatever the enemy can bring to the fight. This level of firepower the Iranian army will face, not just inside Iraq but from above and from the sea. The Iranian army inside Iraq will be severed from the mother country. Do you really believe that the US have not considered this possibility?



Nima said:


> 4) Iran hasn't attacked a country in 300 years.


Of course you have -- Israel.


----------



## Hussein

Nima said:


> lol
> America is America, there is no difference between bush and obama
> it's like saying that Khatami and Nejad are diff, yeah one of them is more civilized and good looking but they're both part of the same system.


Khatami dialogue of civilizations, reforms, good relations with saudis, lebanon, europe
Ahmadinejad antisemitism, non respect for people votes, lies, bad relations with most countries in the world (when it is it is because economic energy reason: gas, oil, gifts to venezuela and same hatred towards usa), economy is getting very much down 

but america: same worry 



Nima said:


> Shia Iranians are even worse, the whole sect is based on martyrdom!!
> In the Iran Iraq war they would line up and walk over mine fields until a path had been cleared for the rest!!!!! Before the war people might have been saying the same **** as you guys are saying now, "oh they don't have mine sweepers, they will be crushed."
> This is why we've been constantly on top for thousands of years.


You're somewhat right but i htink with new generations it changed
martyrdom is more for the fight for democracy now
But of course if USA , even if we respect USA, invades the country there would be hell for them.


Nima said:


> Plus, all facts ARE POINTING TOWARDS PEACE!!
> How is America going to attack now?
> The Israelis aren't even able to attack so forget them.


I am not sure Israel not able to bomb Iran but seems that they won't do it until it would be 99% sure there would be a nuclear weapon in Iran 
Israelis have many good technology that in this forum many spoke about.

Our country is suffering a lot inside. Hope it can change and show its real face: Iran as a light not as a hatred. I think the same of Islam: I always followed GA Montazeri for this


----------



## majidk

Not very clever. Why has Israel been allowed to destroy UN schools in GAZA and kill over 1500 women and children in Palestine and still not paid for its inhuman attacks. Why are people so blind and think Israel is innocent, where in fact Israel Zionist have robbed palatine lands. WHY? its this Peace process.

Iran is next to be invaded just like Iraq and Afghan was. Because Israel has WMD backed by USA. 

Who created this Nuclear weapon? USA did, why to destroy people lifes. Today everyone wants one. Just like everyone wants a gun to play. 

We should have stuck with horses and sowrds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hussein

gambit said:


> Of course you have -- Israel.


USA are fighting Lebanon , Palestine then (financial and weapon supply)


----------



## Crypto

majidk said:


> Not very clever. Why has Israel been allowed to destroy UN schools in GAZA and kill over 1500 women and children in Palestine and still not paid for its inhuman attacks. Why are people so blind and think Israel is innocent, where in fact Israel Zionist have robbed palatine lands. WHY? its this Peace process.
> 
> Iran is next to be invaded just like Iraq and Afghan was. Because Israel has WMD backed by USA.
> 
> Who created this Nuclear weapon? USA did, why to destroy people lifes. Today everyone wants one. Just like everyone wants a gun to play.
> 
> We should have stuck with horses and sowrds.





couldn't agree more


----------



## below_freezing

Nima said:


> wtf are you talking about?
> I'm pro reform, am I a traitor to Iran?
> 
> we want social reforms but we still love our country!
> 
> btw, I don't run my mouth off about China when I don't know anything abt China's internal problems so plz don't talk about Iran when you have no idea what's going on there.
> these "green guys" are normal men and women that are tired of living under an Islamic theocracy, that's it.



sorry i do not understand iranian internal problems very well, it was my understanding that they were CIA sponsored agents to topple the government to create a power vacuum so the US/israel can invade iran. 

this is not the time for "reform" when iran has a credible threat of being invaded by the US. 

without a strong military with the ability to completely destroy 1 US client state and at least make the US civilians feel some pain, your country is not safe. iran needs to reach at least north korea's military level before it can be safe. best of luck with that.


----------



## Hussein

below_freezing said:


> sorry i do not understand iranian internal problems very well, it was my understanding that they were CIA sponsored agents to topple the government to create a power vacuum so the US/israel can invade iran.
> 
> this is not the time for "reform" when iran has a credible threat of being invaded by the US.
> 
> without a strong military with the ability to completely destroy 1 US client state and at least make the US civilians feel some pain, your country is not safe. iran needs to reach at least north korea's military level before it can be safe. best of luck with that.


North Corea is not a model to follow LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nima

gambit said:


> Israel's fighter-bombers can reach Iran. Yes...They would need US air refuel assist but essentially Israel can attack Iran by itself.
> 
> 
> The willingness to toss away lives is nothing to boast about. The average Iranian knows that Israel has no territorial ambitions regarding Iran. This understanding will go towards blunting any talk of a war march through Iraq to get at Israel. But even if said march does occur, the US will get involved alongside the Iraqis.
> 
> Here is what you failed to understand...
> 
> The reason why the US can support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, pretty much concurrently, is because we have the ability and capacity to inflict far more death and destruction to the enemy than receiving casualties. When necessary, individual units and soldiers will fight hand-to-hand if necessary, but if possible, they will call for far greater firepower than whatever the enemy can bring to the fight. This level of firepower the Iranian army will face, not just inside Iraq but from above and from the sea. The Iranian army inside Iraq will be severed from the mother country. Do you really believe that the US have not considered this possibility?
> 
> 
> Of course you have -- Israel.



The US can theoretically make Iran into a parking lot, will it do it? no

It doesn't matter how much fire power you have. The US doesn't need another war right now. Economy is ****, you have NO MONEY, the debt is out of control, public opinion is against it, your president isn't a redneck anymore and our capabilities are enough to make enough damage so that we won't be worth your time and effort. 

Israel can not attack alone and if they attack then it will get you involved, therefore you will do everything to stop them and you are.
very simple really


----------



## below_freezing

what i am saying is, in terms of military strength iran has yet to even become as strong as north korea, though undoubtably economically iran is better. this has many factors, but a primary one is that iran has no really strong allies, while north korea has alliances with 2 large neighboring countries that donated it money, weapons and fuel since independence.

iranian equipment is also varied with origin, making logistics management exceptionally difficult especially with iran's inexperience and previous track record in this field.

don't count on US domestic pressure to end a war. the puppet president is easily changed, the policies will not.


----------



## Nima

Hussein said:


> Khatami dialogue of civilizations, reforms, good relations with saudis, lebanon, europe
> Ahmadinejad antisemitism, non respect for people votes, lies, bad relations with most countries in the world (when it is it is because economic energy reason: gas, oil, gifts to venezuela and same hatred towards usa), economy is getting very much down
> 
> but america: same worry
> 
> 
> You're somewhat right but i htink with new generations it changed
> martyrdom is more for the fight for democracy now
> But of course if USA , even if we respect USA, invades the country there would be hell for them.
> 
> I am not sure Israel not able to bomb Iran but seems that they won't do it until it would be 99% sure there would be a nuclear weapon in Iran
> Israelis have many good technology that in this forum many spoke about.
> 
> Our country is suffering a lot inside. Hope it can change and show its real face: Iran as a light not as a hatred. I think the same of Islam: I always followed GA Montazeri for this



khatami is a mullah
same **** different smell

And you're right about the new generation, but remember back then the population was much smaller. Even though today a lot of people are less religious, because of our much larger population we can still find the same number of shia fanatics as back then, take abi and his crew for example.

Israel has a good military but it can't attack Iran for a few reasons. First they don't have enough jets to take out all the facilities and also military installations and second, there is a possibility that they won't be able to do the job and Iran also attacks them as well. If that happens then Iran will pull out of the NPT and just use one of the secret facilities to make a nuke and this could be deadly for Israel. It's easier for them to just live with a nuclear Iran cuz they can't do anything about it.


----------



## Nima

below_freezing said:


> sorry i do not understand iranian internal problems very well, it was my understanding that they were CIA sponsored agents to topple the government to create a power vacuum so the US/israel can invade iran.
> 
> this is not the time for "reform" when iran has a credible threat of being invaded by the US.
> 
> without a strong military with the ability to completely destroy 1 US client state and at least make the US civilians feel some pain, your country is not safe. iran needs to reach at least north korea's military level before it can be safe. best of luck with that.



okay you seem like a reasonable person, sorry for being rude

usually the people who say the CIA is creating trouble in Iran are either muslim fanatics or have a certain agenda.

and you'd be surprised how hard life is with this govt. It's border line North Korea. Yes we're not hungry and have a great infrastructure but socially Iran is hell. Absolutely no freedom, after a while you just can't take it anymore.


----------



## gambit

Nima said:


> The US can theoretically make Iran into a parking lot, will it do it? no


That is not our intent. Retarding Iranian nuclear weapons program is.



Nima said:


> It doesn't matter how much fire power you have. The US doesn't need another war right now. Economy is ****, you have NO MONEY, the debt is out of control, public opinion is against it, *your president isn't a redneck anymore*...


The thing with functional democracies is that we have regular regime changes. Eight years of the US under Bill Clinton and the world believed the US was weak. Eight years under George W. Bush and two MEastern countries felled with no one came to their aid. Do not pretend you know anything about US politics or economics.



Nima said:


> ...and our capabilities are enough to make enough damage so that we won't be worth your time and effort.


No...Iran will be militarily defeated the same as Iraq's Desert Storm.


----------



## Hussein

gambit said:


> Eight years of the US under Bill Clinton and the world believed the US was weak. Eight years under George W. Bush and two MEastern countries felled with no one came to their aid.


USA never be so unpopular than during Bush leadership. This is weakening your country.

USA spent too much for war in Iraq. This is weakening your country.
Now you see how your favorite president weakened economically your country.

In Europe USA became unpopular because of this policy of war and no dialogue.

Maybe you are american but you are blind not see all problems it was to have Bush as president


----------



## pak-yes

Interesting Discussion Going on Between Gambit and Nima.

So it's seems only Nukes can guarantee the safety of countries from America.


----------



## gambit

pak-yes said:


> So it's seems only Nukes can guarantee the safety of countries from America.


No...Not even nuclear weapons offers such 'guarantee'. What nuclear weapons offer is deterrence. Not the same as a guarantee. Deterrence mean delay. Even if a country is a nuclear weapons state, it must have nuclear parity in order to present a credible deterrence. If we attack Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran respond with an unknown nuclear weapon, the US will respond in kind a hundred fold. The Iranian religious nutjobs do not know what kind of power, political or otherwise, they are messing with.


----------



## IceCold

gambit said:


> No...Not even nuclear weapons offers such 'guarantee'. What nuclear weapons offer is deterrence. Not the same as a guarantee. Deterrence mean delay. Even if a country is a nuclear weapons state, it must have nuclear parity in order to present a credible deterrence. If we attack Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran respond with an unknown nuclear weapon, the US will respond in kind a hundred fold. The Iranian religious nutjobs do not know what kind of power, political or otherwise, they are messing with.



I disagree the reason why cold war remained cold war was because both countries knew they can destroy each other many times over. Incase of Iran they do not need to maintain nuclear parity with the US, all they need is a couple of nuclear warheads and to make sure that those handfull of nuclear warheads can reach the american main land in case of a strike irrespective of how many the US has because american public knowning they are not safe will never let america go to war the best thing about functional democracy.


----------



## fsoul

Nima said:


> 14) NO NATIONALISM
> Iraq was a FAKE COUNTRY carved out of the Ottoman empire.
> It consisted of people who hated each other, kurds, sunnis and shias.



you fought with them for 8 long years just for NOTHING, you think they don't have nationalism.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

gambit said:


> Israel's fighter-bombers can reach Iran. Yes...They would need US air refuel assist but essentially Israel can attack Iran by itself.
> 
> 
> The willingness to toss away lives is nothing to boast about. The average Iranian knows that Israel has no territorial ambitions regarding Iran. This understanding will go towards blunting any talk of a war march through Iraq to get at Israel. But even if said march does occur, the US will get involved alongside the Iraqis.
> 
> Here is what you failed to understand...
> 
> The reason why the US can support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, pretty much concurrently, is because we have the ability and capacity to inflict far more death and destruction to the enemy than receiving casualties. *When necessary, individual units and soldiers will fight hand-to-hand if necessary, but if possible, they will call for far greater firepower than whatever the enemy can bring to the fight. This level of firepower the Iranian army will face, not just inside Iraq but from above and from the sea. The Iranian army inside Iraq will be severed from the mother country. Do you really believe that the US have not considered this possibility?*_
> _
> 
> Of course you have -- Israel.




Cowards create war hysteria. If you are so much indulged with the war than send your family, you and and your friends to the war to help Israel. If you can't do that than kindly stop posting BS.


----------



## pak-yes

gambit said:


> No...Not even nuclear weapons offers such 'guarantee'. What nuclear weapons offer is deterrence. Not the same as a guarantee. Deterrence mean delay. Even if a country is a nuclear weapons state, it must have nuclear parity in order to present a credible deterrence. If we attack Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran respond with an unknown nuclear weapon, the US will respond in kind a hundred fold. The Iranian religious nutjobs do not know what kind of power, political or otherwise, they are messing with.



Wooo That a Big Statement.Well in my opinion Nuclear Parity with US is neither Possible nor Required.If i am not wrong your Public Opinion is already against War.Iranians can easily exploit that situation.All those Mullahs need to do is declare they have nukes on Iranian TV and threaten to use them Against US if attacked.That will create enough fear that will stop US to attack on Iran.

And Of Course if Iran doesn't have launch Vehicles that doesn't mean that they can't deliver the Nukes to US Soil.But then you will say that America will retaliate with such force that they will wipe out everything of Iran.But that would become an End of the World Scenario.Don't you think it's tooo much that just to make sure that a Nation doesn't have Nukes you are risking WW3.


----------



## Thomas

saad445566 said:


> *Thomas you use a very civilized language sometimes and I really appreciate that.*
> 
> but are you also in favour of people being killed?
> 
> How can you stop someone from acquiring weapons when you also have it. Now don't tell me that you are a civilized nation because it was the U.S. who used it not the Iranians and not the Pakistanis.
> 
> Do you care about human life?
> or its fine if another hundred thousand people die?
> 
> Is it fair to stop Iran or is it fair to stop every country/weapon free world?
> 
> I know you belong to a military profession but c'mon you are also a human being like me or any other.
> Skin colour does not change people nor the professions.
> 
> Israel should not attack Iran.
> 
> *I bet if the U.S. says to the world.
> OKAY thats it no more Nuclear Weapons.
> Billions of people will support it. Every one will be under the umbrella of the U.S. initiative. People will praise the U.S.
> I will praise the U.S. at least.*
> 
> America will be a true leader of peaceful world.
> Everyone wants to live a peaceful life.
> You, me , people over here and people around the world.
> 
> No more wars on ideology, religion, land and resources.
> Nice idea to wish for.
> Isn't it?
> 
> *Maybe you can't teach monkeys to talk..
> Similarly, you can't teach generals to live in peace. *



War is a horrible thing and nuclear weapons make it more so. A world without war would be great. I do not however believe that it is realistic. Or to be 100% nuclear weapons free in the world.

Because of the nature of man there will always be people and countries that feel they are essential in order to project power. Or for their last line of defense. You can however try to limit more countries acquiring them. Especially those that are unstable or belligerent.

As far as Israel is concerned they have constantly fought for their national survival since they became a country once again. Iran has made it's views clear over the years. the mullah's and the president of Iran have stated they want Israel destroyed. With Iran trying to get a nuke how would you expect Israel or the U.S. to act?

I have very little doubt that if Iran had a nuke they would eventually use it on Israel. Most of the western nations feel the same way. And to that end Iran needs to be stopped from acquiring them. If that means going to war if Iran refuses to back down then so be it. 

Iran's leaders know what they are gambling. and they are willing it seems to pay the price no matter what. Though they are making the same mistake Saddam made in thinking they can manage the situation. 

Do you not agree it is better for less countries to have nukes rather then more?


----------



## r3alist

> As far as Israel is concerned they have constantly fought for their national survival since they became a country once again.



rubbish, pure rubbish, its too much of a big topic to get into and i dont feel that strongly about it but to call it rubbish for now will suffice.



> I have very little doubt that if Iran had a nuke they would eventually use it on Israel.



based on what?

are you really saying the iranians would risk their own nation just to get it israel?

because thats what you are saying - just for a second consider what that means - that the iranians have no brains and are blood thirsty to the point that they would risk their own deaths - that is what you are saying about them


----------



## pak-yes

Thomas said:


> War is a horrible thing and nuclear weapons make it more so. A world without war would be great. I do not however believe that it is realistic. Or to be 100% nuclear weapons free in the world.
> 
> Because of the nature of man there will always be people and countries that feel they are essential in order to project power. Or for their last line of defense. You can however try to limit more countries acquiring them. Especially those that are unstable or belligerent.
> 
> As far as Israel is concerned they have constantly fought for their national survival since they became a country once again. Iran has made it's views clear over the years. the mullah's and the president of Iran have stated they want Israel destroyed. With Iran trying to get a nuke how would you expect Israel or the U.S. to act?
> 
> I have very little doubt that if Iran had a nuke they would eventually use it on Israel. Most of the western nations feel the same way. And to that end Iran needs to be stopped from acquiring them. If that means going to war if Iran refuses to back down then so be it.
> 
> Iran's leaders know what they are gambling. and they are willing it seems to pay the price no matter what. Though they are making the same mistake Saddam made in thinking they can manage the situation.
> 
> Do you not agree it is better for less countries to have nukes rather then more?



Well Sir,Talk is Cheap and Iran knows it.If Iran says it will wipe Israel off the map that doesn't mean they would really do it.After all every one knows that Israel also does have Nukes.So in a war both will be destroyed.I don't think Iranians would risk their own destruction just for the destruction of another Country.


----------



## r3alist

in all decency thomas needs to justify why he thinks iran will nuke israel....lets hear it?


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

gambit said:


> No...I am saying that if the US attack Iran via the sea, then Iran will be hard press to find 'just cause' to attack neighbors who hosted US forces but does nothing and that those US forces have done nothing.



Well America will need to have troops stationed on the ground somewhere in the middle east and those that countries do station American troops will be a viable target for Iran to attack. In desert storm Saudi was used as a base to house US troops and equipment, I&#8217;m sure against Iran, Saudi again will be used. Iranian General feels that they are more than well equipped to handle the US navy. 



gambit said:


> The next incursion will be air strikes.



Any US/Israeli air strikes violating Iranian sovereignty will cause an all out war, Iran is not like any other country in the region, where it will sit idly by while its land is bombarded in the air by US fighter jet, their reaction I&#8217;m sure will be swift and devastating. Iranian generals themselves have admitted that America is superior in the air and I&#8217;m sure they will be doing everything in their power to bolster up their defensive capabilities in the event of a war. I&#8217;ve read that they are trying to acquire the s-300 missile defence system from Russian along with improving their SAM capabilities.





gambit said:


> And you think Iranians are more knowledgeable about Americans? When was the last time Americans gathered in the streets chanting 'Death to Iran'?



Yes from my personal perception, they most certainly are, I been fortunate to speak to fair amount of Americans in America, U.K as well as American expats living in Prague and Hungary. They ranged from African-American/White American of Irish and Italian descent/Hispanic Americans and mainly all have said our people back home live in a complete bubble and are ignorant of the world outside America. Some even said its only on coming to Europe that they changed there perception off different countries and witnessed the unfavourably heavy handed approach taken by the US on countries in the Middle East.

I only talked to a few Iranian during my stay in Iran as unlike in America I was their mainly for religious reasons but all were extremely eager to convey their thoughts on America and all spoke extremely favourably about them, their frustration was directed towards the American media for vilifying them and the American government. Those Iranian who chant &#8216;Death to American&#8217; are talking about the government and not the people of America.

If you watch the video on the link below, the 2nd guy being interviewed was similar to the responses I got from Iranians in Iran.

FRONTLINE/World: Election 2008 - The World is Watching: Views from the Streets of Tehran | PBS

Lets make it clear, Iran isn&#8217;t the one threatening the US and implying it will bomb the country into the stone age if it doesn&#8217;t comply with its wills. 



Thomas said:


> bad comparison, Iran was at a stalemate with Iraq and could not win the war. yet the enemy they could not defeat was defeated within days during the Gulf war. by a smaller army (about 900,000) compared to the millions the Iranians had during the Iran/Iraq war.



Victory means different things to different people, for me its an outstanding achievement that the Iranians where able to defend their land when they had just chucked out an Iranian leader backed by America with absolutely no outside help. They relied on no-one but themselves throughout the war, with hardly any foreign assistance, were able to defend their land effectively against an Iraq backed heavily in modern technology and weaponry from the US with the help of Arab funding. 

At the start of the war, Iran&#8217;s main objective was to defend every inch of its territory while Saddams was to occupy Iran and gain control of Iranian oil fields while making Iraq the most dominant power in the Persian Gulf. He also wanted to put a stop to Ayatollah Khomeini (r.a) Islamic revolution, judging by both their aims and with beauty of hindsight we can clearly see who achieved what they set out to do.

Saddam and his Iraq incurred massive debts and its economy was absolutely crippled as a result of the war, which then later caused him to invade Kuwait to gain access and control of their oil fields. It was the Iranians who totally decimated Saddams&#8217; Iraq, his reputation and their economy never recovered, even to this day the Iraqi government is asking for those debt to be annulled.


----------



## Nima

I got one thing to show you Thomas
If you think Iran cares more about the Muslim and esp the arab world watch this

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ASQ-1918

How more dumb can one get.


----------



## imran iqbal

Nima said:


> I got one thing to show you Thomas
> If you think Iran cares more about the Muslim and esp the arab world watch this
> 
> YouTube - iran and armenia



You sure you are Iranian ? Putting that anti-Iran video on the thread....


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Thomas said:


> War is a horrible thing and nuclear weapons make it more so. A world without war would be great. I do not however believe that it is realistic. Or to be 100&#37; nuclear weapons free in the world.
> 
> Because of the nature of man there will always be people and countries that feel they are essential in order to project power. Or for their last line of defense. You can however try to limit more countries acquiring them. Especially those that are unstable or belligerent.
> 
> As far as Israel is concerned they have constantly fought for their national survival since they became a country once again. Iran has made it's views clear over the years. the mullah's and the president of Iran have stated they want Israel destroyed. With Iran trying to get a nuke how would you expect Israel or the U.S. to act?
> 
> I have very little doubt that if Iran had a nuke they would eventually use it on Israel. Most of the western nations feel the same way. And to that end Iran needs to be stopped from acquiring them. If that means going to war if Iran refuses to back down then so be it.
> 
> Iran's leaders know what they are gambling. and they are willing it seems to pay the price no matter what. Though they are making the same mistake Saddam made in thinking they can manage the situation.
> 
> Do you not agree it is better for less countries to have nukes rather then more?




Sir you have to understand the fact that Iran's Mullah team wants to destroy Israel as the reaction of Israeli actions over the period of time. Iranian Mullahs did not come from "no man's land" and gave that statement. It is not Iran who is fighting and killing people..It is Israel who is fighting and killing innocents.

One rocket from Hamas does not mean bombs from Israeli F16s.
If it does mean than Israeli Surgical Strike should be taken seriously and in response Tel Aviv should be bombed to stone age.
It is Israel who wants to strike not Iran.
It is Israel who is killing innocents not Iran.

Thomas, if I came to your house and said that according to Quran (1400 years ago) the house you live in is my ancestors house...
Will you leave your house for me?
Israel demanded the same thing from Palestinians. 

Israel occupied territories by the help of the U.S. but still we can accept Israel on the condition of no blood shed.

_*"Do you not agree it is better for less countries to have nukes rather then more?"*_

It is the U.S. who bombed Japan first time. Iran, Pakistan or any country did not use Nuclear Weapons.
It is the U.S. who committed those terrorist acts in the name of "self defence". Now when Iran wants to defend itself, you have a problem.
There should be sanctions on the U.S. not Iran.

I do not support sanctions on Iran because they are exercising their right as you are doing. If all the world becomes Nuclear free than Iranian Dream to acquire weapons could not be justified. You cannot say that I will slap you but you cant slap me back. You cannot stop a nation who wants to acquire same stuff which other nations have.

*"As far as Israel is concerned they have constantly fought for their national survival since they became a country once again."*
Is it "national survival" to have further settlements in West Bank and so on? Is it national survival to attack Lebanon or to kill innocent Palestinians? Is it national survival to "try" to attack Pakistani Nuclear sites? Is it national survival to have a surgical strike on Iraq and Syria? 

If it is national survival to commit those crimes than it is Iran's national survival to bomb anything including the U.S. troops in Middle East.


----------



## Hussein

imran iqbal said:


> You sure you are Iranian ? Putting that anti-Iran video on the thread....


I think Nima means our excellent relation with the Armenians
It is our history that we are excellent friends
This video is not the best video to say it but he is right: we have non muslim friends

My advice is that Azerbaidjan of course is not an ennemy
and should play an important rule in our international relations in the future, when Turkey is a key country for us too.

@Nima >
i understand some people are upset towards "mullahs"
i am from religious family so it makes always pain to hear this
don't misunderstand the ennemy of freedom: they are some people taking benefits , they are some cheaters among the mullahs or even ayatollahs (some of them being fake ayatollahs like Mesbah Yazdi or Khamenei)

Our country was always very nationalistic but it should not forget that the best for us and for our neighbour is mutual respect. All together we can protect ourselves and make our countries great. Now you can see how weak we are and how a country can invade us with so much ease.

By the way what is your religion? zoroastrian?


----------



## DesiGuy

Why Israel wants to attack now, when USA i think does not want to be part of all this. 

i don't think Obama wants to invade any nation now. he wants peace.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Well America will need to have troops stationed on the ground somewhere in the middle east and those that countries do station American troops will be a viable target for Iran to attack. In desert storm Saudi was used as a base to house US troops and equipment, Im sure against Iran, Saudi again will be used.


The hosting countries can say that US forces are in their countries at invitations. Hosting a foreign armed force is not a justifiable cause for war, else there would be wars all over the world. If US forces in those countries are not participants in any US strikes, Iran have no justifiable cause to attach those countries. You can repeat what you just said in many different ways all you want but it will do no good.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Iranian General feels that they are more than well equipped to handle the US navy.


His opinion is irrelevant. Am not being insulting. Am being realistic. The world have seen US military might expressed in different environments and scales many times over. In a shooting fight, the Iranian Navy will exist at our leisure.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Any US/Israeli air strikes violating Iranian sovereignty will cause an all out war, Iran is not like any other country in the region, where it will sit idly by while its land is bombarded in the air by US fighter jet, *their reaction Im sure will be swift and devastating.* Iranian generals themselves have admitted that America is superior in the air and Im sure they will be doing everything in their power to bolster up their defensive capabilities in the event of a war.


No...Iranian response will not be so 'swift and devastating'. Behind closed doors, am positive that the Iranian military leadership, like all others in the world, have studied the *MECHANICS* of Desert Storm and found Iranian defenses wanting.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Ive read that they are trying to acquire the s-300 missile defence system from Russian along with improving their SAM capabilities.


Fine.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Those Iranian who chant Death to American are talking about the government and not the people of America.


Am not some American who never left his country. I spent 10 yrs in the USAF with many temporary assignments, called TDYs, from Europe to Asia to the ME and was in post-Saddam Kuwait. Am old enough to have been in East Berlin when there were two Germanys. In Kuwait, I know what oil laden air tastes like. I know what it feels like to go for days with no sunshine and when it is possible to see the sun, one can look at it with bare eyes with no problem. After several days with no chance of personal hygiene, the shower floor runs dark brown for about a minute -- per person. So please spare me the stale line about how 'Death to America' really mean the US government and not the US, meaning its people, land and everything that make up a country. In the ME, including Iran, 'Death to America' really mean exactly that -- America. Not the US government. Be glad that we Americans do not harbor the same but reciprocal sentiment.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Lets make it clear, Iran isnt the one threatening the US and implying it will bomb the country into the stone age if it doesnt comply with its wills.


And let us be clear...If noncompliance to US demands deserve a military response from US, the mullahs would have never succeeded in the first place. This is about Iranian intent on being a nuclear weapons state. A nuclear weapons armed Iran is something no one in the ME, which is pretty much %99 muslims, want in their part of the world. For all the noise about Israel's uncertain nuclear weapons, the despots in the ME are more *TERRIFIED* of each other than of the Jews.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> Victory means different things to different people, for me its an outstanding achievement that the Iranians where able to defend their land when they had just chucked out an Iranian leader backed by America with absolutely no outside help. They relied on no-one but themselves throughout the war, with hardly any foreign assistance, were able to defend their land effectively *against an Iraq backed heavily in modern technology and weaponry from the US* with the help of Arab funding.


Please do your homework. The Iraqi military, like the Iranian military, is overly equipped with Soviet weaponry. This *LIE* is often trotted out in trying to portray Iran as the underdog.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nima

Hussein said:


> I think Nima means our excellent relation with the Armenians
> It is our history that we are excellent friends
> This video is not the best video to say it but he is right: we have non muslim friends
> 
> My advice is that Azerbaidjan of course is not an ennemy
> and should play an important rule in our international relations in the future, when Turkey is a key country for us too.
> 
> @Nima >
> i understand some people are upset towards "mullahs"
> i am from religious family so it makes always pain to hear this
> don't misunderstand the ennemy of freedom: they are some people taking benefits , they are some cheaters among the mullahs or even ayatollahs (some of them being fake ayatollahs like Mesbah Yazdi or Khamenei)
> 
> Our country was always very nationalistic but it should not forget that the best for us and for our neighbour is mutual respect. All together we can protect ourselves and make our countries great. Now you can see how weak we are and how a country can invade us with so much ease.
> 
> By the way what is your religion? zoroastrian?



that video is a bull **** propaganda video made by a Russian Azeri but It proved smtg.
And yeah although I am very anti mullah and Islamic Republic, I will die defending them if a foreign country steps into Iran. 
As for my religion, I'm a muslim on paper but trying to convert to Zoroastrianism. I want to make it official and with this govt it's impossible for now. 

@ ASQ
how many times did you edit that?


----------



## gambit

saad445566 said:


> Sir you have to understand the fact that *Iran's Mullah team wants to destroy Israel as the reaction of Israeli actions over the period of time.* Iranian Mullahs did not come from "no man's land" and gave that statement. It is not Iran who is fighting and killing people..*It is Israel who is fighting and killing innocents.*


Against Iranians?


----------



## dabong1

Who supplied iran with nuke tech in the first place.......?


----------



## Thomas

r3alist said:


> are you really saying the iranians would risk their own nation just to get it israel?



The average Iranian would not. The radical 72 virgin/12th Imam believers who are in control of Iran would.


----------



## Vassnti

IceCold said:


> I disagree the reason why cold war remained cold war was because both countries knew they can destroy each other many times over. Incase of Iran they do not need to maintain nuclear parity with the US, all they need is a couple of nuclear warheads and to make sure that those handfull of nuclear warheads can reach the american main land in case of a strike irrespective of how many the US has because american public knowning they are not safe will never let america go to war the best thing about functional democracy.



Strange but i think just the opposite. While Iran is some where over there, that most Americans cant find and feel is not a threat, most of the population do not want military action. 

You show Americans tv footage of a ranting mullah saying he has nukes pointed at california saying he will blow the nest of the great satan into the sea then you will find opinion very rapidly swinging the other way. The biggest mistake you can make with the US is a serious threat Yanks dont respond teribly well to being told what to do.


----------



## gambit

dabong1 said:


> Who supplied iran with nuke tech in the first place.......?


You sure it was US?

FT.com / Iran - Putin vexes US over Iran nuclear power


> However, she added: We have consistently said that Iran is entitled to civil nuclear power. It is a nuclear weapons programme that it is not entitled to.
> 
> Russian experts have been helping to build a light water reactor at Bushehr since the 1990s. Officials have previously said it would be finished this year.


Try to educate yourself on why there is a line between being a nuclear state and a nuclear *WEAPONS* state.


----------



## Nima

Thomas said:


> The average Iranian would not. The radical 72 virgin/12th Imam believers who are in control of Iran would.



you're very thick headed


----------



## IceCold

Vassnti said:


> Strange but i think just the opposite. While Iran is some where over there, that most Americans cant find and feel is not a threat, most of the population do not want military action.
> 
> You show Americans tv footage of a ranting mullah saying he has nukes pointed at california saying he will blow the nest of the great satan into the sea then you will find opinion very rapidly swinging the other way. The biggest mistake you can make with the US is a serious threat Yanks dont respond teribly well to being told what to do.



The point that i am trying to make here is that US main land has never really being threaten and while US was at war, the main land has always been safe and even then we saw a massive public opinion forming against the war, a reason why Bush lost so much popularity and one of the objectives of obama government is to withdraw troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan, Infact it was one of the key promises that made him get to the white house. You really believe that once the public knows they are not safe anymore they will allow the government to attack Iran and that too over Israel, i for one have serious doubts over it. 
IMO US then will try everything in its power to make sure Israel remains well within its limits and does not try misadventure because the cost of that would be devastating.


----------



## dabong1

gambit said:


> You sure it was US?
> 
> FT.com / Iran - Putin vexes US over Iran nuclear power



The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program. The support, encouragement and participation of the United States and Western European governments in Iran's nuclear program continued until the 1979 .
A civil nuclear co-operation program was established under the U.S. Atoms for Peace program. In 1967, the Tehran Nuclear Research Center (TNRC) was established, run by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI). The TNRC was equipped with a U.S.-supplied, 5-megawatt nuclear research reactor, which became operational in 1967 and was fueled by highly enriched uranium.

President Gerald Ford signed a directive in 1976 offering Tehran the chance to buy and operate a U.S.-built reprocessing facility for extracting plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel. The deal was for a complete 'nuclear fuel cycle'."At the time, Richard Cheney was the White House Chief of Staff, and Donald Rumsfeld was the Secretary of Defense. The Ford strategy paper said the "introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran's economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals."

Then-United States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger recalled in 2005, "I don't think the issue of proliferation came up." However, a 1974 CIA proliferation assessment stated "If [the Shah] is alive in the mid-1980s ... and if other countries [particularly India] have proceeded with weapons development we have no doubt Iran will follow suit."
Nuclear program of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## gambit

dabong1 said:


> The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program. The support, encouragement and participation of the United States and Western European governments in Iran's nuclear program continued until the 1979 .
> A civil nuclear co-operation program was established under the U.S. Atoms for Peace program. In 1967, the Tehran Nuclear Research Center (TNRC) was established, run by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI). The TNRC was equipped with a U.S.-supplied, 5-megawatt nuclear research reactor, which became operational in 1967 and was fueled by highly enriched uranium.
> 
> President Gerald Ford signed a directive in 1976 offering Tehran the chance to buy and operate a U.S.-built reprocessing facility for extracting plutonium from nuclear reactor fuel. The deal was for a complete 'nuclear fuel cycle'."At the time, Richard Cheney was the White House Chief of Staff, and Donald Rumsfeld was the Secretary of Defense. The Ford strategy paper said the "introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran's economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals."
> 
> Then-United States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger recalled in 2005, "I don't think the issue of proliferation came up." However, a 1974 CIA proliferation assessment stated "If [the Shah] is alive in the mid-1980s ... and if other countries [particularly India] have proceeded with weapons development we have no doubt Iran will follow suit."
> Nuclear program of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Atoms for Peace program? Old news...And you missed the point at that, which is Iranian nuclear technology came from diverse sources, from the American's Atoms for Peace program to the current Russian and Chinese sales. What you seek was to place any blame or negative connotations regarding the Iranian nuclear technology program squarely on US. When confronted with the more recent Russian and Chinese enhancements, you dug up the 1950s? Give me a break.


----------



## xenia

it seems awful when even sane ppl talk about striking iran...by this time US should learn that war is not the answer of every problem..if it strikes (or backs israel in such an action) it would b yet another menifestation of the bushs "preventive war" strategy..i think rather than inhibiting the spread of nuclear weapons it would rather induce other nations to gain them
and even if US feels it is justified the rest of the world is going to consider it yet another act of aggression..(a few months back THE ECONOMIST had a debate about attacking iran n most of the public voted against it)
n insted of striking, if US takes pains in resolving palestine issue iran will lose the reason to attack israel as some allege it would do so..n the world will definitely hail such a step


----------



## gambit

xenia said:


> it seems awful when even sane ppl talk about striking iran...by this time US should learn that war is not the answer of every problem..if it strikes (or backs israel in such an action) it would b yet another menifestation of the bushs "preventive war" strategy..i think rather than inhibiting the spread of nuclear weapons it would rather induce other nations to gain them
> and even if US feels it is justified the rest of the world is going to consider it yet another act of aggression..(a few months back THE ECONOMIST had a debate about attacking iran n most of the public voted against it)
> n insted of striking, *if US takes pains in resolving palestine issue iran will lose the reason to attack israel* as some allege it would do so..n the world will definitely hail such a step


So...In your opinion...Iran really does not view Israel as a threat but that Iran identifies with the Palestinians and therefore to correct the injustice Iran would wipe Israel of the map.

Say that the Palestinians and Israel come to an agreement that *DOES NOT* conform to an Iranian opinion of what a peace settlement should be, in another words the Palestinians reject Hezbollah who is the Iranian mouthpiece and enforcer of Iranian opinion in the conflict, and come to a peaceful resolution like Israel did with Egypt, do you believe that Iran would accept said independence from the Palestinians?


----------



## IndianNuke

Israelis are most brilliant and resourceful race in middle east (no offence). They have and they can take all the muslim world air force at a time. History tells if it was not the case then they would have been history long back. IAF got the finest and hard trained pilots in current era. They can't be overdone. I really admire Israel's will power and very pleased we are allies ..



Live long and prosper \\//


----------



## PakistaniPhysco

It will be well deserved.Let's hope Pakistan remains the only Muslim Nuclear Power.


----------



## Kompromat

IndianNuke said:


> Israelis are most brilliant and resourceful race in middle east (no offence)



How exactly ?




> They have and they can take all the muslim world air force at a time.



Can you prove it ? or is just you writting this BS while yawning after just coming out of your bed ?

Are you in your senses !!

Saudis "Alone" can Turn their Airforce to Ashes !



> History tells if it was not the case then they would have been history long back.



They were History if you keen to know it was PUMS who Stolen the palestenian Lands and Installed these Zionists in Palestenian lands .

The Palestine does not Belong to Zionists in the first place , they were installed here and they wont last long !



> IAF got the finest and hard trained pilots in current era.



What are your sorces ?? & how can you prove that they are whatever you are saying they are .



> They can't be overdone.



Google "Flt LT: saif ul Azam" , Flt: Lt Sattar Alvi , Flt Lt: Muhammad Hatif .

Post the results to us !




> I really admire Israel's will power and very pleased we are allies ..



Cocktails of two Criminals of the HUMANITY ! & Emenies of Islam.

Its Natural for you to be allies becaue the Dogs of a similar kind hang out together .



> Live long and prosper \\//



Not TOO sure if they Attacked Iran.


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

If if if the attack happens , let see who's are space will be used and one thing for sure there will be heavy radar jamming including on Pakistan western border, not good for PAF.


----------



## IceCold

Gin ka Pakistan said:


> If if if the attack happens , let see who's are space will be used and one thing for sure there will be heavy radar jamming including on Pakistan western border, not good for PAF.



They cant jam PAF specially when PAF will under the umbrella of an AWAC.


----------



## All-Green

imran iqbal said:


> Good for you, better try harder next time you come up with India as American slave argument.
> 
> You getting desperate over carpet bombing, * we had american carrier parked in our ocean TO NUKE INDIA*.
> 
> Show your balls of steel to someone else. Your naive arguments and empty rhetoric is not going to be paddled here.



Fabulous retake on history.

The Americans were afraid of India?
The Americans based a carrier group to Nuke India?

I think you need to get your facts straight regarding 71.

1) Complicated civil war making it difficult for USA to justify a military intervention

2) USA was Pakistan's Ally and could have helped Pakistan but Nuking India was out of the question...when did it nuke the North Vietnamese or North Koreans?

3) USSR was also ready to jump in if USA was going to intervene militarily...in light of civil war scenario (making things murky) this was something USA was not willing to do.

It was not due to any balls of steel shown by India but other overriding factors which made the USA decide against assisting Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Creder said:


> your highly overestimating iranian capability to respond to an attack and highly underestimating Israelis, remember this is the nation that whipped arabs back into stoneage
> 
> Iran has NO AWACS or early warning system in place, and as for the sams and those old birds that you think are gonna be engaging Isareli F16I and F-15's ..they're dead meat. Iranians arent exactly known for having the best pilots ya know, israel on the other hand is one of the most professional airforces in the world.. There isn't even anything to compare and not to mention if Israel goes after Iran, for sure uncle sam's gonna be there providing cover from all over and throw UAE in there too..what say you ?



Iran fight with Iraq for 8 years with all supports from west and arabs for Saddam but finally Iran won, this Israeli you are talking about lost in war 2006 with the Hezbollah just son of Iran.
there is a huge different here between Iranian fighting culture and other armies in region, which is out of weapon.
i remember i was a young boy i talked to General Islam...from ground force of...who i meet in Iran- Iraq border after Iran-Iraq war(when Iraq attacked Kuwait), and asked him about fighting with his countries enemies and he told me based on classical war estimate they can not fight with their enemy more than 3 days . when i asked about their soldiers heart unknown weapon as Iran had in war against Iraq and west and Arabs he did not understand my mean and my points.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Creder said:


> The sooner Israel does this, the sooner Iran can get rid of ahmedinajad and the country can get out of this nightmare



Ahmadinejad or whoever run Iran is Iranian business. did Iranian talk about your militarily contorted country? or your Mr %10? so please step back and only talk about what you have right to talk.
with all respect to Pak brothers


----------



## Cyrus the Great

saad445566 said:


> Whatever the case might be. I don't know that Iran is doomed or it will survive the attacks.
> The fact remains the same i.e. Neighbourhood, cultural similarities, religion and so on.
> If we cannot support them in real time than we can/should pray for them at least.
> 
> I am saying this again.
> 
> Iran will win InshAllah..
> ^^ Not a fantasy but a request sent to my God.



Thanks for your pray for Iran and your warm heart, but i would to say
not only Israeil but US would attack Iran long time ago if they could win, 25 years ago we had three daily clash with US and they could not win. 25 years ago we had nothing but today Iran fly over US aircraft carrier over the Persian Gulf and US army still in sweet sleep.


----------



## Jigs

SAM sites are Iran's only hope. Maybe if they can get some of their longer range missiles launched that could hurt Israel but idk if they would have enough operational to cripple anything. Israel doesn't have the capability for anything large scale but they could hurt Iran's nuclear program. I really hope it doesn't come to this though. This could be resolved easily with diplomatic compromise IMO.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

TOPGUN said:


> Iran will fire what ever airdefence they got like mad men.. anti aircraft guns, sams, missles etc.... plus alot of small arms fire. Iam sorry to say but they will not be able to hold off too long from the IAF .. its reality you are talking about one of the best airforces in the world with one of the best pilots if not the best sorry just being real i dont hate as much as i love for my country and love for our armed forces IAF has high tech fast aircraft with awsome state of the art wepons one can not compare with this power . It will be deadly showdown the sky of Iran will be lit up with wepons from the ground iam sure of it i sure hope this does't happen but again Iran is not Iraq they are crazy and fill fight to the death to save there land.



Iranian are not crazy, they are brave and not afraid of enemy, that is all. some people accept to be a puppet of someone else only they are feared, you will see how Iranian will fight as they fight with all west and arab supported Saddam army


----------



## HAWK73

I have heard that India will support Israel against strike on Iran.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Creder said:


> now read the article again, i bolded some stuff to help you see better...we aren't bad-mouthing iran..we're just bringing facts to the table.. i did an airforce ineventory comparison and presented my own analysis of the situation your welcome to rebuke it.
> 
> 
> 
> hey mate excuse us if we dont fall for the stealth fighter stories, incidentally Pakistan is the only country that might come to Iran's aid



take it easy and thanks for your help. when Iran and Pak were member of Sento and Iran was attacked by Iraq you escaped from sento. Iran does not need any help, just need you close your impolite mouth


----------



## xenia

gambit said:


> So...In your opinion...Iran really does not view Israel as a threat but that Iran identifies with the Palestinians and therefore to correct the injustice Iran would wipe Israel of the map.
> 
> Say that the Palestinians and Israel come to an agreement that *DOES NOT* conform to an Iranian opinion of what a peace settlement should be, in another words the Palestinians reject Hezbollah who is the Iranian mouthpiece and enforcer of Iranian opinion in the conflict, and *come to a peaceful resolution like Israel did with Egypt, do you believe that Iran would accept said independence from the Palestinians*?



i just mean that muslims across the globe r concerned with injustices being done to palestinians..they at times identify with them.(the recent video tape of al-qaeda leaders)..US should give this a chance as it would win many muslim states to their side..
n no one definitely would want a peace settlement on lines of egypt
OK so your opinion is to destry iran n leave palestinians as such...dont u think this will bring peace to middle east


----------



## xenia

Heartland Geopolitical Maps
Obamas big game
map by Laura Canali
This map shows Obama's big game. The regional powers in the Middle East, the countries hosting US bases, those disposing of nuclear power capability, as well as the core of the Pakistan match and the strategic crisis elypse.







The map illustrates the big picture Obama has to deal with; from the situation in Iran, to the friction belt in Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the guerrilla zone and the jihadi infiltrations in Iran.


----------



## su-47

HAWK73 said:


> I have heard that India will support Israel against strike on Iran.



you heard wrong. 

India has excellent ties with both Iran and Israel. India wants both to solve their issue peacefully. But if that doesn't happen, India will remain neutral.

But no way will India support military action against Iran. Israel was thinking of using Arab airspace to attack Iran. The Arabs might support it, but India won't.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

saad445566 said:


> We are all here to support Iran and you as being Persian has a hatred against Pakistan. Your earlier posts suggest that when you said Iran is concerned about Pakistan than Israel.
> See how many people are supporting you over here and what are you doing to us.
> If you cannot appreciate our support that kindly don't post BS.



yes i counted, most read some of you wish Iran get wipe of map, some of you wish regime change in Iran and most of you are worry about your own benefit in possible war not Iran problems, only one guy asked for some moral help to Iran.
i think Iranian are not expecting any help, but please do not sell what you are not offering,asking appreciation for the help you dont offer is..., but as brother i would appreciate some of yours concern about Iran


----------



## Jigs

xenia said:


> Heartland Geopolitical Maps
> Obama&#8217;s big game
> map by Laura Canali
> This map shows Obama's big game. The regional powers in the Middle East, the countries hosting US bases, those disposing of nuclear power capability, as well as the core of the Pakistan match and the strategic crisis elypse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The map illustrates the big picture Obama has to deal with; from the situation in Iran, to the friction belt in Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the guerrilla zone and the jihadi infiltrations in Iran.



I see Turkey in a interesting role here. The current administration has good ties with Iran and the U.S. but currently is at a all time low when it comes to Israel. We will most likely remain completely neutral action wise and keep condemning Israel. I guarantee the base in Incirlik will not be in use for any military action against Iran.


Also i wonder if Israeli planes will even have enough fuel to get to Iran they would have to refuel over Iraq most likely. Remember when they hit Iraq's nuclear facility they almost ran out of fuel when heading back.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> The average Iranian would not. The radical 72 virgin/12th Imam believers who are in control of Iran would.



you shown, how brainless you are


----------



## Cyrus the Great

"The news that the U.S. is supplying Patriot anti-missile systems along with state-of-the-art weapons to Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar and is deploying warships in the Arabian Gulf signifies one of two options. Either this provocative move is meant as an anti-Iranian deterrent or Washington is aware that something is afoot and wants to protect its allies."

you stupid American even do not know the region but talking about our home.there is no arabiab gulf in world. go back to school and learn some more. the place you are talking about is" Persian Gulf".Persian Gulf will be American grave yard if any strike against Iran then you never wont forget the name. do remember you shot down Iranian passenger plane and kiiled innocent people there but Iran killed American soldiers in 3 clashes there 20 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thomas

Cyrus the Great said:


> Iran fight with Iraq for 8 years with all supports from west and arabs for Saddam *but finally Iran won*



Your nationalism blinds you to the truth. The facts are Iran and Iraq fought to a stalemate. The war ended with a U.N. brokered ceasefire. Not some imaginary Iranian victory. Neither Iran or Iraq won!

Actually I take that back. the winners were the Iranian young people that no longer had to march out into minefields to clear them.


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

gambit said:


> The hosting countries can say that US forces are in their countries at invitations. Hosting a foreign armed force is not a justifiable cause for war, else there would be wars all over the world. If US forces in those countries are not participants in any US strikes, Iran have no justifiable cause to attach those countries. You can repeat what you just said in many different ways all you want but it will do no good.



Our opinion of whether it's right or wrong doesn't matter as Iran has clearly said it will attack countries aiding and housing US troops in the region.



gambit said:


> His opinion is irrelevant. Am not being insulting. Am being realistic. The world have seen US military might expressed in different environments and scales many times over. In a shooting fight, the Iranian Navy will exist at our leisure.



That's your opinion, personally in my opinion Shia leader/generals are known not to lie or exaggerate, just ask Israel about Syed Hassan Nasrullah and his ability to back up what he says with actions.



gambit said:


> No...Iranian response will not be so 'swift and devastating'. Behind closed doors, am positive that the Iranian military leadership, like all others in the world, have studied the *MECHANICS* of Desert Storm and found Iranian defenses wanting.



If war is inevitable, which i highly doubt, time will tell.



gambit said:


> So please spare me the stale line about how 'Death to America' really mean the US government and not the US, meaning its people, land and everything that make up a country. In the ME, including Iran, 'Death to America' really mean exactly that -- America. Not the US government. Be glad that we Americans do not harbor the same but reciprocal sentiment.



Iranians are just like any other ordinary people around the world, more worried about earning a living, paying their bills and providing for their families rather than plotting ways in which to attack Israel/US. Why don't you visit their beautiful country, it surely would clear any misconceptions you have about them.



gambit said:


> And let us be clear...If noncompliance to US demands deserve a military response from US, the mullahs would have never succeeded in the first place. This is about Iranian intent on being a nuclear weapons state. A nuclear weapons armed Iran is something no one in the ME, which is pretty much &#37;99 muslims, want in their part of the world. For all the noise about Israel's uncertain nuclear weapons, the despots in the ME are more *TERRIFIED* of each other than of the Jews.



Those 'Mullahs' have already defeated America by chucking them out of their own country and defeating them through a well known US proxy in Saddam. Ayatullah Khamanei(r.a) has clearly stated that Iran has no intention whatsoever to build weapons of mass destruction, as a well respected holy figure in many countries, he has alot to lose if he's found to be lying.

That's the vast amount of Arabs for you but 99% is definitely an exaggeration on your part. I'm sure the 60% of Iraq along with most citizens in Bahrain, East of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Syria and Southern Lebanon would be delighted with a nuclear Iran.



gambit said:


> Please do your homework. The Iraqi military, like the Iranian military, is overly equipped with Soviet weaponry. This *LIE* is often trotted out in trying to portray Iran as the underdog.



I have never stated the Iraqi military never had soviet weaponry. Seriously please, everyone knows very well how America armed Saddam to the teeth with weapons albeit by diverting them through other Arab puppet regimes that would go onto transfer them to Iraq. Weapons including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, Aircraft ships chemical and biological weapon you gave to Saddam to stop the Iranian onslaught that killed hundreds of thousands of Iranian troops as well as ordinary Iraqi civilians.

I doubt a war will ever break out between American and Iran but honestly if it did although many would ridicule and laugh, I believe wholeheartedly Iran would come out the better of the two.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nima

Thomas said:


> Your nationalism blinds you to the truth. The facts are Iran and Iraq fought to a stalemate. The war ended with a U.N. brokered ceasefire. Not some imaginary Iranian victory. Neither Iran or Iraq won!
> 
> Actually I take that back. the winners were the Iranian young people that no longer had to march out into minefields to clear them.



hey grandpa, it's time for bed

We fought the entire planet to defend our country

We fought Iraq, the entire arab world, Europe, and your navy ALONE but Saddam still didn't manage to achieve a single one of his objectives.
France and USA gave that fag chemical weapons which killed 100K IRanians (kurds and soldiers).
Iran had just come out of a revolution and our entire military was dismantled. Our whole world was shaken but we stood strong.
Today saddam is ******* in the ground, Iraq is destroyed, our proxies are raking havoc there, the kurdish part is about to separate, the shias are in power and most of the politicians today are our puppets.
that's called winning

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Airboss

zagahaga said:


> this is how iam going to break it up for you guys..... its my little eposide for isreal vs. iran..... isreal comes in with 100 f-15 strike eagles and 60 f-16 ....iran is alerted ..... 10 minutes later IRAF and IAF come face to face isreal takes out half of irans air force by amramms what left is mig 29 and f 14 ... IRAF takes immedeate action and with the help of sams take out SOME air planes but there still more left the skilled IAF pilots take out the rest of the IRAF agressors and sam sites..... iran hit the red button BOOOOOOM ..... all over isreal alarms go off blastic missel incoeming!!!!!!!! and boom isreal go for full conventional warfare with iran which america dosent support beaucse america has nothing to do with it ...... form the war isreal cant do nothing why? iran army is too big for isreal to handel soo it gives up and boath go for a stale mate ... iran gose back to the stone age for nuclear power and isreal is left to rubbel beacuse of iran balastic missels. lol that went throught my head in 10 seconds.....



WoW You Truly are a Battle Field Commander!!!!
In those 10 seconds, when those thoughts were going through your head, a thought of using a 'Spell Check' never occurred?


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> Your nationalism blinds you to the truth. The facts are Iran and Iraq fought to a stalemate. The war ended with a U.N. brokered ceasefire. Not some imaginary Iranian victory. Neither Iran or Iraq won!
> 
> Actually I take that back. the winners were the Iranian young people that no longer had to march out into minefields to clear them.



the more comments from you the more disclose how narrow minded are you media contorted American.
the purpose of was against Iran was breaking down the revelation and break part west side of country. if Iran defense itself against Saddam,US, and US puppet arabs , and result was not break part of Iran or breaking down the revelation for sure is victory.
by the way being nationalism is much better than colonial or Aggressor


----------



## Cyrus the Great

imran iqbal said:


> Backward Country like India, Excuse me sir, but if your country can not produce good enough politicians nonetheless entrepreneurs and scientists then i wouldn't call Iran a developed country. Chest thumping and threatening to take out Israel from world map. Crazy mullahs are taking you for a ride and yes you patriotic yet gullible audience conveniently sitting outside Iran wants to shed blood of his fellow countrymen and enjoy the show with popcorn.
> 
> China *WILL* backoff from Iran support. PAPA Russia is all you got and if this backward country asks soviet bear to cut all ties with Iran, you will be all alone home boy.
> 
> You have pissed off whole west,* don't add another 1 billion of mankind to it. *



oh... thanks for teaching something to Iranian. this Mullah you are talking about never failed in history even when they were not in power the reason of most of Iran victories were them.
thanks to you for your trying to teach but without honor in your pass you have nothing to teach Iran, you just think Iran rely to someone as you used too.at least from 700 years ago Iran had no ally and used to stand on itself. the last expamle is Iraq and Iran war. Iran was alone and Iraq with all support from US, Soviet ,EU, and all arabs.
teach Iranian if you have honorable 

regards


----------



## Cyrus the Great

it does not matter Iranian like Ahmadinejad or not, but no doubt they will fight with their enemies. you are slave of western media, because nobody talk in west how Israeil leader park against Iran, only you caste Iran responds to Israeil, and you guy repeatedly are talking about Ahmadibejad big month, may Iranian dont like this big but is good to responds to another bigger mouth

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Arik said:


> Remember that if Isreal attacks Iran, Iran will solely be responsible for the war.No one asked Irans president to open his big mouth and make stupid statements.



it does not matter Iranian like Ahmadinejad or not, but no doubt they will fight with their enemies. you are slave of western media, because nobody talk in west how Israeil leader park against Iran, only you caste Iran responds to Israeil, and you guy repeatedly are talking about Ahmadibejad big month, may Iranian dont like this big but is good to responds to another bigger mouth


----------



## gambit

PakistaniPacifist said:


> Our opinion of whether it's right or wrong doesn't matter as Iran has clearly said it will attack countries aiding and housing US troops in the region.


Why would Iran attacked those countries that hosted US forces? Because the Iranian leadership believe that it is 'wrong' for any muslims to side with us infidels. Osama bin Laden believe it is 'wrong' for any infidel to have any stay anywhere in the ME. So our opinion on if whatever is 'right' or 'wrong' matter very much. It give us compelling reasons to act and to justify those actions.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> That's your opinion, personally in my opinion Shia leader/generals are known not to lie or exaggerate, just ask Israel about Syed Hassan Nasrullah and his ability to back up what he says with actions.


Iranian generals could be in error in their assessments of forces but that does not mean they are liars. Delusional may be, but perhaps not willing liars. The belief that Iran can seize and control the Strait of Hormuz for the duration of any conflict is delusional. The belief that Iran can 'handle' the US Navy is delusional. But they are not lies.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> That's the vast amount of Arabs for you but 99% is definitely an exaggeration on your part. I'm sure the 60% of Iraq along with most citizens in Bahrain, East of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Syria and Southern Lebanon would be delighted with a nuclear Iran.


And what of those no less significant amount who do not? Despots do not like competition. A nuclear Iran will create a nuclear arms race in the ME.



PakistaniPacifist said:


> I have never stated the Iraqi military never had soviet weaponry. Seriously please, *everyone knows* very well how America armed Saddam to the teeth with weapons albeit by diverting them through other Arab puppet regimes that would go onto transfer them to Iraq. Weapons including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, Aircraft ships chemical and biological weapon you gave to Saddam to stop the Iranian onslaught that killed hundreds of thousands of Iranian troops as well as ordinary Iraqi civilians.


Whenever I see the phrase 'everyone knows' I know the argument has no evidence. Please...Do not confuse a few pieces with deployed regiments and/or squadrons. The phrase 'everyone knows' is an appeal to vanity. Most people do not want to be perceived as ignorant so whenever they hear or read someone posit 'everyone knows' they would prefer to keep their ignorance to themselves. They want to appear knowledgeable and wise. I have no problems admitting my ignorance in any subject. So if you sincerely believe that the US armed Iraq then by all means show the readership Iraqi units that are wholly US arms equipped.


----------



## Nima

Cyrus the Great said:


> *it does not matter Iranian like Ahmadinejad or not, but no doubt they will fight with their enemies. *you are slave of western media, because nobody talk in west how Israeil leader park against Iran, only you caste Iran responds to Israeil, and you guy repeatedly are talking about Ahmadibejad big month, may Iranian dont like this big but is good to responds to another bigger mouth



true
I fuckin hate the Islamic republic but I will die defending them on the front lines against an aggressor
This is Iran not some newly made country or some arab American colony
bring it on


----------



## gambit

Nima said:


> true
> I fuckin hate the Islamic republic but *I will die defending them on the front lines against an aggressor*
> This is Iran not some newly made country or some arab American colony
> bring it on


Even against internal ones?


----------



## Nima

gambit said:


> Even against internal ones?



wow you're dumb
I am their enemy so I would die defending them against myself?
or are you suggesting that there are internal guerrilla groups against the govt? which there is none. The PKK, Jundollah, MEK etc... are all American/Israeli backed, trained and funded. They also operate outside Iran's borders. And if you're talking about them then yes, I wouldn't hesitate putting a bullet in the back of a terrorists brain. 

All these pro reform people you see in the street will drop their green flags and take an AK to defend their country when the day comes.


----------



## gambit

Nima said:


> wow you're dumb
> I am their enemy so I would die defending them against myself?
> or are you suggesting that there are internal guerrilla groups against the govt? which there is none. The PKK, Jundollah, MEK etc... are all American/Israeli backed, trained and funded. They also operate outside Iran's borders. And if you're talking about them then yes, I wouldn't hesitate putting a bullet in the back of a terrorists brain.
> 
> All these pro reform people you see in the street will drop their green flags and take an AK to defend their country when the day comes.


There are so many examples in history, modern or not, when a government is no longer representative of the people it rule over and that line is when that government violently turned against the people when the people demanded change from what they see and believe as incompatible with their current attitudes. Is the antagonism against Israel the general sentiment of the Iranian populace or is it of the mullahs'? That antagonism contributed to the animosity between Iran and Israel. Is it yours?


----------



## zagahaga

Airboss said:


> WoW You Truly are a Battle Field Commander!!!!
> In those 10 seconds, when those thoughts were going through your head, a thought of using a 'Spell Check' never occurred?



 was very high when i did that


----------



## Nima

gambit said:


> There are so many examples in history, modern or not, when a government is no longer representative of the people it rule over and that line is when that government violently turned against the people when the people demanded change from what they see and believe as incompatible with their current attitudes. Is the antagonism against Israel the general sentiment of the Iranian populace or is it of the mullahs'? That antagonism contributed to the animosity between Iran and Israel. Is it yours?



"when a government is no longer representative of the people"

true, this govt no longer represents the Iranian ppl

"Is the antagonism against Israel the general sentiment of the Iranian populace or is it of the mullahs'?"

ppl generally love Americans and Western culture but Israel the reaction is mixed. In general people will tell you "Iran before Israel and Palestine."
lets just say people hate arabs more than jews.

" That antagonism contributed to the animosity between Iran and Israel. Is it yours?"
no it is not




*you said nothing that changed my previous comment.
Iranians will die defending the very govt they hate against invaders.
*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

Gambit:

What would be the effects of destroyed (If Israel does) Atomic Reactors , talking specificly about Radiation.


----------



## gambit

Black Blood said:


> Gambit:
> 
> What would be the effects of destroyed (If Israel does) Atomic Reactors , talking specificly about Radiation.


Focusing on the radiation is misleading. There are many crucial stages of uranium refinement that if destroyed, will retard the progress of nuclear weapons development for many years.

Maraging steel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> *Maraging steel* production, import, and export by certain states, such as the United States,[2] is closely monitored by international authorities because it *is particularly suited for use in gas centrifuges for uranium enrichment*; lack of maraging steel significantly hampers this process. Older centrifuges used aluminum tubes; modern ones, carbon fiber composite.


The centrifuges for mass refinement look like these...












Since Iran is using the centrifuge method, destroying or even damaging the chamber housing the rows of centrifuge can set Iran back for years. Iran probably have a very good stock of these alloys by now after all these years but still will have to be like Iraq and go deeper underground black market to buy more as this is the only kind that can withstand the rotational stresses produced by 50k+ rpm.

The centrifuges in these stages, aka cascades, must not be disturbed by tectonics once installed, meaning they must be on a vibration free installation, just like my semiconductor equipments. This is why having these chambers underground is no guarantee as 'bunkerbuster' bombs can create sufficient tremblors to knock a considerable number of them out of alignment. Any activities to repair them would undoubtedly trigger satellite surveillance, making them still at risk for more attacks. Bunkerbuster bombs can also make the chambers impassable for a long time and the longer these centrifuges stayed damaged or out of alignment, the greater the difficulty and time for repairs, for individual units and per cascade. Purchases for materials and equipments for repairs would also be noticed and pressures applied to suppliers to stop them from selling to Iran, another type of set back.

This is far from comprehensive that what airstrikes can do to retard Iranian nuclear weapons development.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thomas

Black Blood said:


> Gambit:
> 
> What would be the effects of destroyed (If Israel does) Atomic Reactors , talking specificly about Radiation.



you have only to look at Chernobyl to see an example. If it wasn't for the heroics of Russian soldiers and firemen. The disaster would have been far worse. They were able to put a seal on the reactor fairly fast. Which by the way is still an ongoing process today.


----------



## Hussein

Nima said:


> France and USA gave that fag chemical weapons which killed 100K IRanians (kurds and soldiers).



Nima jan,
See your dedicated to our country 
About France and USA they didn'"t sell chemical weapons to Sadam on that time
Germany was doing it.

If you check the weapons selt to Sadam at this time you'll see that USA sell far far less than Russia !
USA and France were selling some but it is nothing compared to some other countries.

About war, i have an uncle who created sepah unit and well known in Iran (not saying his name for you know safe reasons). He died during war . War was terrible. We don't want that anymore. The people like us who lived it they didn't want this horror.
Furthermore the people who created the sepah warriors , included basiji, are not at all the same minded people who are now leading them.

See Ahmadinejad was never on the field.

Remember after war (saying it for non iranian people here)
remember that they were trying to take out the weapons froml the basiji to safe the country (many rubery and violence) . remember some of thme hardely convinced.
my uncle's wife didn't wear even scarf at home and our family never accepted this obligation .
remember how they changed after war. remember khomeini himself said he didn't want political activity from basiji and sepah. now you see how it is respected. thanks to khamenei and especially hashemi.
remember how they entered business now.

don't know if situation can be solved in Iran.
sepah was hero. sepah is becoming a problem sadly.

you know what? our young people will leave the countr when they can. and guess it would never change Iran. 
sorry for pessimistic day

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cyrus the Great

gambit said:


> There are so many examples in history, modern or not, when a government is no longer representative of the people it rule over and that line is when that government violently turned against the people when the people demanded change from what they see and believe as incompatible with their current attitudes. Is the antagonism against Israel the general sentiment of the Iranian populace or is it of the mullahs'? That antagonism contributed to the animosity between Iran and Israel. Is it yours?



are you trying to say that you know Iranian better than they know themselves?


----------



## Nima

Cyrus the Great said:


> are you trying to say that you know Iranian better than they know themselves?



dadash, it's only a few hezbollahis like you and abi who support these fags


----------



## Vassnti

Nima said:


> *you said nothing that changed my previous comment.
> Iranians will die defending the very govt they hate against invaders.
> *



The crazy dichotomy of the situation, the irony that the US that wants change and the Iranian people that want change could end up fighting each other while the Mullah's and Basiji stay in control.


----------



## Thomas

Cyrus the Great said:


> the more comments from you the more disclose how narrow minded are you media contorted American.
> the purpose of was against Iran was breaking down the revelation and break part west side of country. if Iran defense itself against Saddam,US, and *US puppet arabs* , and result was not break part of Iran or breaking down the revelation for sure is victory.
> by the way being nationalism is much better than colonial or Aggressor



Interesting you accuse the Arabs of being U.S. puppets. When it appears that Iran wishes others in the region to be it's puppets. (Iraq, Lebanon, the Palestinians)

Kind of Ironic to your name sake "Cyrus the Great" is the one that allowed Israel to become a nation once again after the Babylonian exile. He was a friend of the Jews and recognized Palestine as their homeland.


----------



## Nima

Vassnti said:


> The crazy dichotomy of the situation, the irony that the US that wants change and the Iranian people that want change could *end up fighting each other* while the Mullah's and Basiji stay in control.


shows how much you know about Iran
There isn't two groups to fight each other in the first place. It's the govt and its beneficiaries (the basijis) vs the people.

@ Thomas
Cyrus didn't free the Jews b/c he loved them, he did it b/c he didn't hate them and hadn't any use for them! When the Persian and Media tribes united to create Iran, the first hurdle was defeating the Babylonians and guess what? The babylonians were enslaving the Jews, and when he defeated them he let the Jews go.
Plus, his policy was to allow freedom of religion etc... among the conquered lands. 
One more thing, why do you equate Israel with the Jews?

About the arabs; when did he say he is against "puppets"? He said he is against "US puppets"


----------



## gambit

Cyrus the Great said:


> are you trying to say that you know Iranian better than they know themselves?


Not at all. What I said is applicable to all nations.


----------



## gambit

Vassnti said:


> The crazy dichotomy of the situation, *the irony* that the US that wants change and the Iranian people that want change could end up fighting each other while the Mullah's and Basiji stay in control.


I know. The long term goal is to rid the Iranians of the mullahs but short term goal demands that Iran not become a nuclear weapons state.


----------



## Nima

gambit said:


> I know. The long term goal is to rid the Iranians of the mullahs but short term goal demands that Iran not become a nuclear weapons state.



when I read **** like this I feel confident that Iran will ride out this storm with ease. 
Who the **** do you think you are to make us do anything?
We're not India nor are we some shame less arabs, we will do what we want, when we want.
America as a power has been around for less then ten decades LMAO
With Asia rising you'll soon fall on your ***, never to be heard of again.


----------



## Thomas

Nima said:


> when I read **** like this I feel confident that *Iran will ride out this storm with ease.*
> Who the **** do you think you are to make us do anything?
> We're not India nor are we some shame less arabs, *we will do what we want, when we want.*
> America as a power has been around for less then ten decades LMAO
> With Asia rising you'll soon fall on your ***, never to be heard of again.



Saddam thought the same thing. Now look where he is........... and concerning your other post. You seem to be saying puppets are ok if they are Iranian puppets?


----------



## Jigs

Saddam was also delusional and never really recovered his country because of bombings and sanctions.


----------



## Thomas

Jigs said:


> *Saddam was also delusional* and never really recovered his country because of bombings and sanctions.



And Ahmadinejad isn't?


----------



## Jigs

He is a very religious man no doubt and has extremist views on certain subjects. I think he knows how to play his cards though politically and make sure not to be too open or closed on his administrations nuclear ambitions. I think he is a logical person when it comes to alot of things.

Saddam on the other hand was the "tough guy" that thought what happened in Black Hawk Down would be what happens when the U.S. invades.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nima

Thomas, at first I thought you were a moron, now I am convinced

1) Ahmadi doesn't control the military

2) As we saw with Armenia and Azerbaijan, all that shia, sunni, hidden Imam **** is ABSOLUTE BULL **** 

3) We also saw the same thing in Chechnya and China where Iran doesn't even condemn China and Russia about their behavior towards its muslims.

4) are you a neocon?

and if you can't see the difference between Iran in 2010 and Saddam's already destroyed desert in the 90's then I can't help you.

Instead of enjoying your last few years and living your life you're sitting in front of computer talking **** about Iran. Sorry dude, it won't happen, go find another hobby.


----------



## Jigs

Nima said:


> Thomas, at first I thought you were a moron, now I am convinced
> 
> *1) Ahmadi doesn't control the military*
> 
> 2) As we saw with Armenia and Azerbaijan, all that shia, sunni, hidden Imam **** is ABSOLUTE BULL ****
> 
> 3) We also saw the same thing in Chechnya and China where Iran doesn't even condemn China and Russia about their behavior towards its muslims.
> 
> 4) are you a neocon?
> 
> and if you can't see the difference between Iran in 2010 and Saddam's already destroyed desert in the 90's then I can't help you.
> 
> Instead of enjoying your last few years and living your life you're sitting in front of computer talking **** about Iran. Sorry dude, it won't happen, go find another hobby.



Saddam made the mistake of sticking his nose where it didn't belong. He was never a military man to begin with. 

Iran on the other hand i am sure has Generals and various other Officers in charge of the military like most countries.


----------



## Thomas

Nima said:


> Thomas, at first I thought you were a moron, now I am convinced
> 
> 1) Ahmadi doesn't control the military
> 
> 2) As we saw with Armenia and Azerbaijan, all that shia, sunni, hidden Imam **** is ABSOLUTE BULL ****
> 
> 3) We also saw the same thing in Chechnya and China where Iran doesn't even condemn China and Russia about their behavior towards its muslims.
> 
> 4) are you a neocon?
> 
> and if you can't see the difference between Iran in 2010 and Saddam's already destroyed desert in the 90's then I can't help you.
> 
> Instead of enjoying your last few years and living your life you're sitting in front of computer talking **** about Iran. Sorry dude, it won't happen, go find another hobby.



Nima, Nima........your constant berating in your posts reveals how insecure you are on the inside. 

Of course Ahmadinejad does not control the military. In the end it is Khamenei that has the control. Ahmadinejad is simply an extension of him and mouth piece. He influences every aspect of the Government and it's policies. That is why he can not allow the current opposition to be voted into office. Hence the election fraud and ongoing unrest.


----------



## razgriz19

iran is fire! if israel dare to attack them then they r gonna get burn really bad!
and if US join the war with israel(which im pretty sure) then their worst economic nightmares will surely become reality!!


----------



## Creder

Thomas said:


> Nima, Nima........your constant berating in your posts reveals how insecure you are on the inside.
> 
> Of course Ahmadinejad does not control the military. In the end it is Khamenei that has the control. Ahmadinejad is simply an extension of him and mouth piece. He influences every aspect of the Government and it's policies. That is why he can not allow the current opposition to be voted into office. Hence the election fraud and ongoing unrest.



dude your still arguing with him ? you must have some stamina 

i couldnt get past his first post


----------



## Jigs

razgriz19 said:


> iran is fire! if israel dare to attack them then they r gonna get burn really bad!
> and if US join the war with israel(which im pretty sure) then their worst economic nightmares will surely become reality!!



This will factor greatly with how the U.S. decides to proceed. I believe they currently don't have the economic standing to launch an invasion of any sort. However heavy bombings of Iran's installations is a possibility.


----------



## Nima

Creder said:


> dude your still arguing with him ? you must have some stamina
> 
> i couldnt get past his first post



well according to you we should have been bombed by now


----------



## Hussein

Creder said:


> dude your still arguing with him ? you must have some stamina
> 
> i couldnt get past his first post



the problem is Nima is upset because some people believe that by using google search is making them specialists of Iran
being Iranian it is hard to read so simple views on our country

you would be happy if an american guy saying simple view on your country like "all army was supporting ttp"?


----------



## Nima

you guys are the definition of the arm chair warrior phrase!

First of all, tell me what will the US get out of attacking Iran?
Then compare that to the risks.


Now tell me, is Iran really worth the $, energy, risks and the possible mission failure for the US?
Yeah Iran isn't a super power lol but we can do just enough damage to make the US think twice. Yeah the US will obviously be able to beat Iran but @ what cost?

@ grandpa

thank you for acknowledging that you have a hole in your argument. 
Nejad doesn't control the military so why do you keep bringing the whole hidden Imam bull crap?
Khamenei himself has a PROVEN RECORD of NOT CARING about muslims worldwide if there is nothing in it for Iran!

1) where was he when the Soviet Union broke up? Saudi Arabia gave all these former soviet republics Billions to make mosques and religious schools after years of commie rule.

2) He gave MILITARY AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO CHRISTIAN ARMENIA AGAINST SHIA AZERBAIJAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That support continues to this day

3) Where was he when China was killing the muslims?

4) WHY DOESN'T HE TALK AGAINST RUSSIA IN SUPPORT OF CHECHNYA??? 


You also love to use Saddam as a counter argument. 
Sorry grandpa, saddam's desert under a million rounds of sanctions in the 90's, and Iran are two completely different planets.


----------



## oceanx

Hussein said:


> the problem is Nima is upset because some people believe that by using google search is making them specialists of Iran
> being Iranian it is hard to read so simple views on our country
> 
> you would be happy if an american guy saying simple view on your country like "all army was supporting ttp"?



Iran is downright inscrutable alright ...

Let's hear your opinion, Hussein - to what extent do you think class struggles play or not play a role underneath all this visible tempest?

Do you think Najad the feisty young man represents the "disadvantaged class" in Iran the same way Sarah "Mama" Palin represents "real" Americans?


----------



## Nima

oceanx said:


> Iran is downright inscrutable alright ...
> 
> Let's hear your opinion, Hussein - to what extent do you think class struggles play or not play a role underneath all this visible turbulence on the surface?
> 
> Do you think Najad the feisty young man represents the "disadvantaged class" in Iran the same way Sarah "Mama" Palin represents "real" Americans?



I know you asked Hussain but I'm just gonna say one thing

The disadvantaged brought him into office the first time b/c he promised X and Y
However, during his 4 years in power he NOT ONLY DIDN'T FIX the economy, HE MADE IT WORSE!!! If that wasn't enough his OUTRAGEOUS foreign policy further angered everyone.
During his time we saw the economy get even worse!
WHY WOULD THE DISADVANTAGED VOTE FOR HIM A SECOND TIME??? After all, that was the SOLE REASON HE GOT TO POWER THE FIRST TIME.

P.S. Sorry for using caps, can't help myself


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Nima said:


> you guys are the definition of the arm chair warrior phrase!
> 
> First of all, tell me what will the US get out of attacking Iran?
> Then compare that to the risks.
> 
> 
> Now tell me, is Iran really worth the $, energy, risks and the possible mission failure for the US?
> Yeah Iran isn't a super power lol but we can do just enough damage to make the US think twice. Yeah the US will obviously be able to beat Iran but @ what cost?
> 
> @ grandpa
> 
> thank you for acknowledging that you have a hole in your argument.
> Nejad doesn't control the military so why do you keep bringing the whole hidden Imam bull crap?
> Khamenei himself has a PROVEN RECORD of NOT CARING about muslims worldwide if there is nothing in it for Iran!
> 
> 1) where was he when the Soviet Union broke up? Saudi Arabia gave all these former soviet republics Billions to make mosques and religious schools after years of commie rule.
> 
> 2) He gave MILITARY AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO CHRISTIAN ARMENIA AGAINST SHIA AZERBAIJAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> That support continues to this day
> 
> 3) Where was he when China was killing the muslims?
> 
> 4) WHY DOESN'T HE TALK AGAINST RUSSIA IN SUPPORT OF CHECHNYA???
> 
> 
> You also love to use Saddam as a counter argument.
> Sorry grandpa, saddam's desert under a million rounds of sanctions in the 90's, and Iran are two completely different planets.



You are a fvking retard! When was China "killing Muslims"??? It was the stupid wahabi-zionist-shia sh1theads that was wrecking havoc and killing ASIANS. All over Asia, from India, to Thailand, to Malaysia, to Philipines, to Indonesia, to China ---> it is these retards that are killing not only non-muslims but also muslims. 

Do you realize these wahabi-zionist-shia backed retards were also killing other ethnic muslims in China??? 

Wake up retard. Wake up.


----------



## Thomas

@Nima

you do know that people here can see through your B.S. right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## oceanx

Nima said:


> I know you asked Hussain but I'm just gonna say one thing
> 
> The disadvantaged brought him into office the first time b/c he promised X and Y
> However, during his 4 years in power he NOT ONLY DIDN'T FIX the economy, HE MADE IT WORSE!!! If that wasn't enough his OUTRAGEOUS foreign policy further angered everyone.
> During his time we saw the economy get even worse!
> WHY WOULD THE DISADVANTAGED VOTE FOR HIM A SECOND TIME??? After all, that was the SOLE REASON HE GOT TO POWER THE FIRST TIME.
> 
> P.S. Sorry for using caps, can't help myself




Okay Nima - your vehemence is entirely inline with my expectations, based on what an Iranian colleague/fellow trainnee told me back in 2007 - without me even asking.

But I wouldn't mind hearing from Hussein still ...


----------



## oceanx

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> You are a fvking retard! When was China "killing Muslims"??? It was the stupid wahabi-zionist-shia sh1theads that was wrecking havoc and killing ASIANS. All over Asia, from India, to Thailand, to Malaysia, to Philipines, to Indonesia, to China ---> it is these retards that are killing not only non-muslims but also muslims.
> 
> Do you realize these wahabi-zionist-shia backed retards were also killing other ethnic muslims in China???
> 
> Wake up retard. Wake up.



Let's not derail this thread please. This Nima kid isn't exactly known for an appreciation of nuance, moderation, nor for a supreme grasp of facts (although neighter are you and I).

His emotions, however, are IMO _valid _to an extent ...

Let it go and people return to topic.

Thanks.


----------



## Nima

Thomas said:


> @Nima
> 
> you do know that people here can see through your B.S. right?




you have repeated that "72 virgins", "hidden Imam" bull **** for so long that you don't have anything to say when somebody shuts you up.


----------



## Thomas

Nima said:


> you have repeated that "72 virgins", "hidden Imam" bull **** for so long that you don't have anything to say when somebody shuts you up.



lol, you thinking that you shut me up is as hilarious. Ahmadinejad and Khamenei's views are well known and have been discussed in detail before here. Your denial of their extreme views doesn't change that.


----------



## Nima

Thomas said:


> lol, you thinking that you shut me up is as hilarious. Ahmadinejad and Khamenei's views are well known and have been discussed in detail before here. Your denial of their extreme views doesn't change that.



obviously I have when you keep dodging my examples
You're clearly a neocon

here I will post them again
This the 4th time in the past few pages

"Khamenei himself has a PROVEN RECORD of NOT CARING about muslims worldwide if there is nothing in it for Iran!

1) where was he when the Soviet Union broke up? Saudi Arabia gave all these former soviet republics Billions to make mosques and religious schools after years of commie rule.

2) He gave MILITARY AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO CHRISTIAN ARMENIA AGAINST SHIA AZERBAIJAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That support continues to this day

3) Where was he when China was killing the muslims?

4) WHY DOESN'T HE TALK AGAINST RUSSIA IN SUPPORT OF CHECHNYA??? "


----------



## blain2

*Folks,

Clean up your posts or this thread gets locked down. Please refrain from personal insults.*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## below_freezing

Nima said:


> obviously I have when you keep dodging my examples
> You're clearly a neocon
> 
> here I will post them again
> This the 4th time in the past few pages
> 
> "Khamenei himself has a PROVEN RECORD of NOT CARING about muslims worldwide if there is nothing in it for Iran!
> 
> 1) where was he when the Soviet Union broke up? Saudi Arabia gave all these former soviet republics Billions to make mosques and religious schools after years of commie rule.
> 
> 2) He gave MILITARY AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO CHRISTIAN ARMENIA AGAINST SHIA AZERBAIJAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> That support continues to this day
> 
> 3) Where was he when China was killing the muslims?
> 
> 4) WHY DOESN'T HE TALK AGAINST RUSSIA IN SUPPORT OF CHECHNYA??? "



China does not kill muslims, only Turkish terrorists. Uighurs make up less than 10% of all muslims in china. The biggest source of support for these terrorists is actually the United States. I thank Iran for showing support for the real muslims in China and not the terrorists. Iran itself also suffers from terrorist attacks sponsored by the United States.


----------



## wali87

News came out a few days ago that Russia has once again decided to fulfill their promise to supply the Islamic Republic of Iran with S-300s. The deal includes 8 complete systems. This news came after the US plans to go ahead with the missile defense shield over some european countries.

Well, I think the Iran should put this deal on fast track and obtain these systems as early as possible. This I believe, will provide Iran with the fire power needed to repel a possible air strike against its nuclear and and other key installations from Israel. S-300 PMU1 can track and intercept up to 100 targets including missiles on high altitudes.

We support our Iranian brothers. May god give them the strength to put off any aggression by the enemies of Islam.


----------



## Nima

below_freezing said:


> China does not kill muslims, only Turkish terrorists. Uighurs make up less than 10% of all muslims in china. The biggest source of support for these terrorists is actually the United States. I thank Iran for showing support for the real muslims in China and not the terrorists. Iran itself also suffers from terrorist attacks sponsored by the United States.



again that wasn't the point 
Many leaders in the Islamic world tried to show how much "they care" about their Chinese brothers by condemning what was going on. Iran acted like nothing was going on at all! I remember they weren't even talking about the troubles until a week after and that was just a few minutes in the news!


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Nima said:


> again that wasn't the point
> Many leaders in the Islamic world tried to show how much "they care" about their Chinese brothers by condemning what was going on. Iran acted like nothing was going on at all! I remember they weren't even talking about the troubles until a week after and that was just a few minutes in the news!



FALSE -- At least in the English version of PressTV. They FALSELY stated that China was doing the killing, when it was in reality a few selected TERRORISTS that went around slashing and killing BABIES, WOMEN, MEN, and ELDERLY. Over 1,300 people were injured, not included the 210+ slaughtered. Did PressTV focus on this important fact? NO. They barely gave any screen time or lip-service.

Furthermore PressTV had a discriminative bias against Asians-Orientals. Granted, they have a negative bias against all non-Persians --> but that doesn't excuse their unprofessional conduct. Journalism should be FAIR and REPRESENTATIVE.

And that's the problem with Iranians. You guys dream of a "Greater Iran" so much that you make enemies out of ALL your neighbors.... be it Azerbajan, Turkey, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Turkenistan. 

Look here kiddo, only Israel wants to see you guys exterminated. 

Azerbajan, Turkey, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Turkenistan are your friends not enemies. You are fortunate to have decent neighbors, who genuinely don't want anything bad to happen to you.  If you refuse to recognize friends then you are sealing your own casket. If that is your decision: REST-IN-PEACE.


----------



## sensenreason

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> FALSE -- At least in the English version of PressTV. They FALSELY stated that China was doing the killing, when it was in reality a few selected TERRORISTS that went around slashing and killing BABIES, WOMEN, MEN, and ELDERLY. Over 1,300 people were injured, not included the 210+ slaughtered. Did PressTV focus on this important fact? NO. They barely gave any screen time or lip-service.
> 
> Furthermore PressTV had a discriminative bias against Asians-Orientals. Granted, they have a negative bias against all non-Persians --> but that doesn't excuse their unprofessional conduct. Journalism should be FAIR and REPRESENTATIVE.
> 
> And that's the problem with Iranians. You guys dream of a "Greater Iran" so much that you make enemies out of ALL your neighbors.... be it Azerbajan, Turkey, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Turkenistan.
> 
> Look here kiddo, only Israel wants to see you guys exterminated.
> 
> Azerbajan, Turkey, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Turkenistan are your friends not enemies. You are fortunate to have decent neighbors, who genuinely don't want anything bad to happen to you.  If you refuse to recognize friends then you are sealing your own casket. If that is your decision: REST-IN-PEACE.



If Russia and China are Iran's neighbours then so is India...please add in your list.


----------



## Kompromat

blain2 said:


> *Folks,
> 
> Clean up your posts or this thread gets locked down. Please refrain from personal insults.*



Just came in Handy Balin2 --Cheers


----------



## oceanx

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Azerbajan, Turkey, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Turkenistan are your friends not enemies. You are fortunate to have decent neighbors, who genuinely don't want anything bad to happen to you.  If you refuse to recognize friends then you are sealing your own casket. If that is your decision: REST-IN-PEACE.



Must say sister SIF's statement above is not far off from many people's perceptions ... getting feisty with _all _your neighbours seems to be a fast-track to extinction based on the Prussian experience, no matter how "martial" you are or think you are.

Staying _para_nuclear is one way not to ruffle any serious feathers. Chances are the Ayatollahs see the picture from a higher vantage point than we do.


----------



## Hussein

oceanx said:


> Iran is downright inscrutable alright ...
> 
> Let's hear your opinion, Hussein - to what extent do you think class struggles play or not play a role underneath all this visible tempest?
> 
> Do you think Najad the feisty young man represents the "disadvantaged class" in Iran the same way Sarah "Mama" Palin represents "real" Americans?


Hi oceanx
Not far from what said Nima

Class struggles now are not favorable to Ahmadinejad but he did everything to get the poor people in his pocket: during the elections he gave gifts to people who came to see him, he promised so much and he insulted the people like Hashemi who is known to be a thief in Iran
It was working for a time but when people could see the bad results (even tv always saying "everything is fine . we are one of the best country of the world and blabla") they changed step by step their opinion. that's explaining the massive participation to elections
They wanted a change
I could see with my religious family. when 6 months and 3 months before the elections they go to villages near esfahan and they see people are upset more and more with government.
but still they are some people who take benefits from governement. basij is like the communist card in east europe which let you have access to lot of things people without cannot: priority to jobs, university special examination and so on: so these people at least mostly support Ahmadinejad or did it. Part of them as well are brain washed especially in police : some of them hate rich people (they would not be upset towards some very rich friends of Ahmadinejad or sepah members, or khamenei himself) and because they hate rich people and tv was saying some rich people were paid by us to make hell in street they were very hard after elections protests

There is a real big problem of difference of class in Iran
they are really very poor people. population under poverty line is more than 30% at least.
the poor (without taking part of the system) are more upset towards governement.
bus drivers, many companies workers for many many months (and the teachers as well) were not paid ! you can imagine after six months you get nothing. the anger is so much. but they are not well organized . some strikes occur but as said mousavi strikes should be united and with all people of Iran . movment should be massive.
right now poor people (and more and more middle class) suffer terribly in Iran. Having potentially a rich country but with bad economy makes upset people..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Solomon2

Suppose war is coming between Israel and Iran. How many of you Pakistanis have the balls to openly side with Israel and argue its case in the faces of your countrymen?


----------



## Kompromat

Solomon2 said:


> Suppose war is coming between Israel and Iran. How many of you Pakistanis have the balls to *openly side with Israel* and argue its case in the faces of your countrymen?



Do you Smoke something Solomon ?

Pakistanis do not Side "MORONS" get it !!

Iranians Enjoy the whole Hearted Support of Pakistanis , Israel is just out of question.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TechLahore

Solomon2 said:


> Suppose war is coming between Israel and Iran. How many of you Pakistanis have the balls to openly side with Israel and argue its case in the faces of your countrymen?



Pakistanis will support Iran wholeheartedly against Israel. Israel will have to seek "balls" for itself elsewhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

^ Its a cheap way of getting support


----------



## Parashuram1

TechLahore said:


> Pakistanis will support Iran wholeheartedly against Israel. Israel will have to seek "balls" for itself elsewhere.


On the contrary, I believe that Pakistan would like to remain a neutral country incase there is a threat or even a conflict actually happening between the two countries. Most likely, the UN will intervene within a few days so as to reduce the potential tensions (not that it would be very effective considering both countries' governments are on a collision course).

Your country in its current state of a conflict against the militants and Taliban within your territory is not really in a condition to strain your economy further. Please consider the tax money you pay your government in this case.

On the whole, this war (_IF_ at all, I doubt it looking at world economic condition) would be a bilateral conflict and if even one country volunteers on either side, a lot more countries would be sucked into combat, a death blow to world peace initiative.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## waraich66

Parashuram1 said:


> On the contrary, I believe that Pakistan would like to remain a neutral country incase there is a threat or even a conflict actually happening between the two countries. Most likely, the UN will intervene within a few days so as to reduce the potential tensions (not that it would be very effective considering both countries' governments are on a collision course).
> 
> Your country in its current state of a conflict against the militants and Taliban within your territory is not really in a condition to strain your economy further. Please consider the tax money you pay your government in this case.
> 
> On the whole, this war (_IF_ at all, I doubt it looking at world economic condition) would be a bilateral conflict and if even one country volunteers on either side, a lot more countries would be sucked into combat, a death blow to world peace initiative.



Attack on any muslim country should be considered attack on all muslim nation , attack on Iran will be start of third world war


----------



## below_freezing

pakistan support israel... best joke of the day got me laughing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

below_freezing said:


> pakistan support israel... best joke of the day got me laughing


And here is an equally good laugh...



Fundamentalist said:


> Attack on any muslim country should be considered attack on all muslim nation , attack on Iran will be start of third world war



I spewed my Scotch all over...


----------



## gambit

TechLahore said:


> Pakistanis will support Iran wholeheartedly against Israel. Israel will have to seek "balls" for itself elsewhere.


Pakistanis -- Yes. Pakistani state -- No.


----------



## Novice09

Fundamentalist said:


> Attack on any muslim country should be considered attack on all muslim nation , attack on Iran will be start of third world war









To attack Iran, It's mandatory for Israel to cross the aerospace of at least one muslim country. Dont't you think so.... 

refer the map


----------



## chisty_chowdhury

Then how Israel attacked Iraq then by crossing these countries??


----------



## chisty_chowdhury

Black Blood said:


> Do you Smoke something Solomon ?
> 
> Pakistanis do not Side "MORONS" get it !!
> 
> Iranians Enjoy the whole Hearted Support of Pakistanis , Israel is just out of question.



And if required *The Only Muslim Country* will be ready to supply the.......


----------



## Kompromat

gambit said:


> Pakistanis -- Yes. Pakistani state -- No.



100% true unless a donkey is sitting in the office but things can turn around too.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Black Blood said:


> 100% true unless a donkey is sitting in the office but things can turn around too.



Yep..

Evil will haunt us someday and than we'd realize....
Afghanistan was a friendly country >>> gone.
Iran was not a major threat >> Israel attack (if any) >> gone...
India is a MAJOR threat..
So, basically we don't have any friendly boundary left..


----------



## TrMhMt

Israel will attack and Iran doesn't have any chance...


----------



## TechLahore

gambit said:


> Pakistanis -- Yes. Pakistani state -- No.



Thank you for being the official spokesperson for the Pakistani state.


----------



## Solomon2

Black Blood said:


> Iranians Enjoy the whole Hearted Support of Pakistanis , Israel is just out of question.



You don't think that's a problem? That some things are just "out of question"? That some issues simply can't be addressed?


----------



## Solomon2

TechLahore said:


> Israel will have to seek "balls" for itself elsewhere.


You could just say, "No, not I."


----------



## Marxist

Fundamentalist said:


> Attack on any muslim country should be considered attack on all muslim nation , attack on Iran will be start of third world war



so where was this Islamic unity when Iraq was attacked,Iraq was also an Islamic nation at that time.So attack on Iran wont trigger a third world war.


----------



## PakistaniPacifist

People forget to mention that the second largest Shia (Ja'fari Fiqh) population in the world after Iran is found in Pakistan(around 40-50 million) and although they are extremely quiet against sectarian attacks that happen within the country. An attack on Iran will most definitely rile up their emotions and most likely lead to a civil disturbance, mass protests throughout the country and willing volunteers hoping to help Iran. 

I agree with those that have said our Pakistani government won't help Iran, they can't even help ourselves, the best we can do is make sure our land isn't used in anyway by Western Forces as a supply route or for housing their troops. 

It's a shame we don't have a government with the testicular fortitude to support Iran wholeheartedly. Strong relations with Iran are absolutely key for our future development and stability it's also essential especially since we already have a poor relationship with Afghanistan and India.


----------



## ARSENAL6

PakistaniPacifist said:


> .
> 
> I agree with those that have said our Pakistani government won't help Iran, they can't even help ourselves, the best we can do is make sure our land isn't used in anyway by Western Forces as a supply route or for housing their troops.
> 
> .



Unless the govt of Pakistan doesn't sell itself shamlessly.


----------



## Solomon2

ARSENAL6 said:


> Unless the govt of Pakistan doesn't sell itself shamlessly.


Like the way the govt of Pakistan sold out to the Gulf Arabs, yielding control of education and leading to the creation and popular support of the Taliban?


----------



## SekrutYakhni

We cannot support Iran openly. People who think that we can are emotional (very emotional)..You know, we have to support our dad because we are afraid of the evil.

I, for one, will stand against evil. Let alone, my darpook country's leadership.


----------



## xMustiiej70

I dont know why is israel higher rank then iran?
if iran recruits theirpopulation into army..
they just overrun that small ccountry israel..
Alsoo.. How is it hard to destroy a couple f16's? or f18 or whatever israel has?


----------



## SekrutYakhni

xMustiiej70 said:


> I dont know why is israel higher rank then iran?
> if iran recruits theirpopulation into army..
> they just overrun that small ccountry israel..
> Alsoo.. How is it hard to destroy a couple f16's? or f18 or whatever israel has?




It takes *COURAGE* to do anything. Iran, if destroyed will be the symbol for us. 

Let me tell you something here.
If, Iran attacks Israel without any reason than I will stand against Iran.

The aggressor is the evil regardless of Iran, the U.S., Israel etc

*I am supporting Iran because they are the victims.*


----------



## frodo

mshoaib61 said:


> IF they dare to attack iran. Oil prices are going to shoot up .
> and paf have to stay alert also so no one enters into our territory.



 US is already in your territory and strikes at will at whatever place they want.


----------



## frodo

saad445566 said:


> It takes *COURAGE* to do anything. Iran, if destroyed will be the symbol for us.
> 
> Let me tell you something here.
> If, Iran attacks Israel without any reason than I will stand against Iran.
> 
> The aggressor is the evil regardless of Iran, the U.S., Israel etc
> 
> *I am supporting Iran because they are the victims.*



Victims of what? For not allowing them to make nuclear weapons?


----------



## Hussein

frodo said:


> Victims of what? For not allowing them to make nuclear weapons?



he means the Iranian people of Iran are the victims of the government
am i wrong?


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Hussein said:


> he means the Iranian people of Iran are the victims of the government
> am i wrong?



Yes, you are absolutely wrong. When India or Israel can have nuclear weapons than why not Iran?


----------



## xMustiiej70

because they are afraid they are going to use on israel..
Which the only country that used nukes on someone was USA.

in 72hours 2 nukes.
sons of a bitches.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

The biggest terrorist of the world is the U.S. as they used nukes. If they argue about self defence than Iran can also argue about its self defence. 

*Thanks God I am a Canadian!*


----------



## Solomon2

saad445566 said:


> When India or Israel can have nuclear weapons than why not Iran?


Because when Iran gets them its current ruling lot will be hell-bent for domination and conquest, that's why. Israel probably has the capability to destroy its enemies with quick-to-assemble nukes, but chooses not to out of its fine sense of morality and justice; the mullahs exercise no such constraint. Put another way, the same model gun that you use to defend your home will become a murder weapon in the hands of a hardened criminal.


----------



## xMustiiej70

saad445566 said:


> .
> *Thanks God I am a Canadian!*







Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Isn't this a good tactic.

Africa can live in peace.
and asia.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Solomon2 said:


> Because when Iran gets them its current ruling lot will be hell-bent for domination and conquest, that's why. *Israel *probably has the capability to destroy its enemies with quick-to-assemble nukes, but chooses not to out of its fine *sense of morality and justice;* the *mullahs exercise no such constraint. * Put another way, the same model gun that you use to defend your home will become a murder weapon in the hands of a hardened criminal.



Were you the part of Mullah team before?


and hands down to Israeli Justice.


So, you mean that the U.S. was cruel enough to use the nukes?
because the U.S. chose to destroy its enemy i.e. Japan.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

xMustiiej70 said:


> Uploaded with ImageShack.us
> 
> Isn't this a good tactic.
> 
> Africa can live in peace.
> and asia.



Yep, Canada also. Canadians are more peaceful than Americans. Have you heard about Ann Coulter?
^^ She is American...She has nothing to offer except to abuse everyone.


----------



## xMustiiej70

no i havent.
tell me:O


----------



## SekrutYakhni

xMustiiej70 said:


> no i havent.
> tell me:O



Okay. I will PM you right now..
She is hilarious!


----------



## xMustiiej70

hmm.. i see a picture of her.
she looks good.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

xMustiiej70 said:


> hmm.. i see a picture of her.
> she looks good.



but she is extremely biased in her views.


*Now we should not go off topic here.*


----------



## Solomon2

saad445566 said:


> Were you the part of Mullah team before?


No. The mullahs subverted a local muslim and had him assassinate one of my neighbors, a former diplomat of the Shah's regime.



> and hands down to Israeli Justice.


Since it seems no one in Pakistan ever considers it seriously (who can boast that the Israeli viewpoint is considered?), what makes you think you should laugh?



> So, you mean that the U.S. was cruel enough to use the nukes? because the U.S. chose to destroy its enemy i.e. Japan.


Look again, the Japanese are still around. The two bombs killed over 100,000 Japanese. An invasion would have killed millions - projections were over 250,000 U.S. dead and over a million Japanese. The two atomic bombings allowed the Emperor to step in and surrender. It was the easiest and most beneficial Occupation in recorded history.


----------



## Parashuram1

You cannot still justify a nuclear attack that too a first one when clearly United States had a conventional edge over imperial Japan. Don't think of me supporting the Japanese of those days, but that nuclear attack is no way justified. The Japanese had not attacked mainland United States with full force and most battle had raged in Pacific and over the skies.

Despite conventional advantage, U.S air force considered wiping out Japanese population as a warning. As for you saying the most beneficial occupation, I believe you are talking from American perspective.

The only thing that came positive out of this bombing was that the future generations realized what a nuclear bomb can do and therefore use it as a deterrent instead of lobbing it all over the world without thinking-- and this goes to all the 8 nuclear armed countries who have trigger-happy intentions.


----------



## Thomas

Parashuram1 said:


> You cannot still justify a nuclear attack that too a first one when clearly United States had a conventional edge over imperial Japan. Don't think of me supporting the Japanese of those days, but that nuclear attack is no way justified. The Japanese had not attacked mainland United States with full force and most battle had raged in Pacific and over the skies.
> 
> Despite conventional advantage, U.S air force considered wiping out Japanese population as a warning. As for you saying the most beneficial occupation, I believe you are talking from American perspective.
> 
> The only thing that came positive out of this bombing was that the future generations realized what a nuclear bomb can do and therefore use it as a deterrent instead of lobbing it all over the world without thinking-- and this goes to all the 8 nuclear armed countries who have trigger-happy intentions.



The bombs actually saved lives. Both American and Japanese. If the U.S. would have invaded millions would have died.


----------



## Kompromat

> The bombs actually saved lives. Both American and Japanese. If the U.S. would have invaded millions would have died.



So by having said that we come to an agreement that Bombs Save lives.

Now lets put this very (Your) formula on Iranian Israeli situation & lets say Iranians may have made some warheads already (Which they might have) and they put those Bombs on Til Aviv , would it save lives ??

Would it compensate the Slow Genoside and expelsion of Palestinians by Zionist Invaders ??

What do you say mr Thomas , ain't you giving Iranians an excuse that you used yourself by killing few Hundered thousand(a small number for you guys though only if its someone else) people to save the rest ?

What do you say mr Thomas ?


----------



## gambit

Black Blood said:


> So by having said that we come to an agreement that Bombs Save lives.
> 
> *Now lets put this very (Your) formula on Iranian Israeli situation & lets say Iranians may have made some warheads already (Which they might have) and they put those Bombs on Til Aviv , would it save lives ??*
> 
> Would it compensate the Slow Genoside and expelsion of Palestinians by Zionist Invaders ??
> 
> What do you say mr Thomas , ain't you giving Iranians an excuse that you used yourself by killing few Hundered thousand(a small number for you guys though only if its someone else) people to save the rest ?
> 
> What do you say mr Thomas ?


No it would not. The reason why Fat Man and Little Boy saved lives was that they ended the war with the total defeat of Imperial Japan. The two A-bombs saved *FUTURE* Japanese and Allied lives...

OPERATION KETSU-GO

What Operation Ketsu-go intended was to conduct total warfare, from Japan's military to militias to citizen guerrilla forces. The Quantung Army, although defeated by the Russians, was still a formidable force, battle hardened and on the march to the home islands. The Quantung Army was the one responsible for the atrocities done to the Chinese, including the infamous 'Unit 731'. Educate yourself with those keywords. All of these factored in would have made the Allied occupation horrifically bloody, for all sides. The war would have lasted longer past 1945 as Japanese outposts throughout Asia would continue to resist and fight, making lives in Asia miserable and delaying many countries their independence from colonial rule, European and Japanese.

Would Iranian nuclear weapons effect a total defeat of Israel? Yours is a foolish speculation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Machoman

Honestly Iran cannot face Israel power. It is may be 2 days game for Israel to take care of Iran. They have the most advance air power and technology in the world. There is no way Iran can face them. Hopefully I am wrong but Israel is at least 100 time more advance then Iran is. So.


----------



## Machoman

Do you guys think if Iran ask Pakistan to loan them some Jf-17 Is Pakistan will do it?


----------



## Machoman

I think for Iran the best deal is to buys all UAE Mirage 2000. Which are some how better then what they already have.


----------



## Kompromat

gambit said:


> No it would not. The reason why Fat Man and Little Boy saved lives was that they ended the war with the total defeat of Imperial Japan. The two A-bombs saved *FUTURE* Japanese and Allied lives...
> 
> OPERATION KETSU-GO
> 
> What Operation Ketsu-go intended was to conduct total warfare, from Japan's military to militias to citizen guerrilla forces. The Quantung Army, although defeated by the Russians, was still a formidable force, battle hardened and on the march to the home islands. The Quantung Army was the one responsible for the atrocities done to the Chinese, including the infamous 'Unit 731'. Educate yourself with those keywords. All of these factored in would have made the Allied occupation horrifically bloody, for all sides. The war would have lasted longer past 1945 as Japanese outposts throughout Asia would continue to resist and fight, making lives in Asia miserable and delaying many countries their independence from colonial rule, European and Japanese.
> 
> *Would Iranian nuclear weapons effect a total defeat of Israel? Yours is a foolish speculation.*




Heard an interview of an Israeli General who thinks that if Til Aviv is Hit , its over of Israel.
Maybe he was Foolish too.


----------



## Thomas

Machoman said:


> Honestly Iran cannot face Israel power. It is may be 2 days game for Israel to take care of Iran. They have the most advance air power and technology in the world. There is no way Iran can face them. Hopefully I am wrong but Israel is at least 100 time more advance then Iran is. So&#8230;.



In a conventional attack even if Israel accomplished all their goals. Iran would claim that they stood up to Israel and survived. Then claim victory becuase they survived Israels attack.

If they attack Gulf countries and shipping as they threaten they will do. that would change and make them the pariah. They would have a harder time taking the high road propaganda wise. At least in my opinion.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Thomas said:


> In a conventional attack even if Israel accomplished all their goals. Iran would claim that they stood up to Israel and survived. Then claim victory becuase they survived Israels attack.
> 
> If they attack Gulf countries and shipping as they threaten they will do. that would change and make them the pariah. They would have a harder time taking the high road propaganda wise. At least in my opinion.



Yes, can you go and help Israel actively because you are posting war type things since very long. So, it is better to take part in it actively.


----------



## xMustiiej70

Isn't Iran able to take some aircraft from israel with anti aircraft sites?
s300? other missiles?
I mean israel wont send all their aircrafts.


----------



## Parashuram1

> No it would not. The reason why Fat Man and Little Boy saved lives was that they ended the war with the total defeat of Imperial Japan. The two A-bombs saved FUTURE Japanese and Allied lives...
> 
> OPERATION KETSU-GO
> 
> What Operation Ketsu-go intended was to conduct total warfare, from Japan's military to militias to citizen guerrilla forces. The Quantung Army, although defeated by the Russians, was still a formidable force, battle hardened and on the march to the home islands. The Quantung Army was the one responsible for the atrocities done to the Chinese, including the infamous 'Unit 731'. Educate yourself with those keywords. All of these factored in would have made the Allied occupation horrifically bloody, for all sides. *The war would have lasted longer past 1945 as Japanese outposts throughout Asia *would continue to resist and fight, making lives in Asia miserable and delaying many countries their independence from colonial rule, European and Japanese.
> 
> Would Iranian nuclear weapons effect a total defeat of Israel? Yours is a foolish speculation.



Don't you think by writing the bolder part, you are making your current military stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan look like fools? 8 years, thousands of deaths, no significant result, covert support from fundamentalist hardliners continues to go to the terrorists hidden there etc. 

Would you prescribe a similar solution as Hiroshima and Nagasaki to these two countries as well? 

Others have a point when they (from their perspective) ask you whether this solution is apt for any two countries in this case Iran and Israel where either of them initiates a nuclear raid on the other to quickly make his enemy surrender. After all, unlike Afghanistan and Iraq where militants are the problem, Israel perceives the Iranian government as the problem and not the people, isn't it?


----------



## Thomas

Parashuram1 said:


> Don't you think by writing the bolder part, you are making your current military stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan look like fools? 8 years, thousands of deaths, no significant result, covert support from fundamentalist hardliners continues to go to the terrorists hidden there etc.
> 
> Would you prescribe a similar solution as Hiroshima and Nagasaki to these two countries as well?
> 
> Others have a point when they (from their perspective) ask you whether this solution is apt for any two countries in this case Iran and Israel where either of them initiates a nuclear raid on the other to quickly make his enemy surrender. After all, unlike Afghanistan and Iraq where militants are the problem, Israel perceives the Iranian government as the problem and not the people, isn't it?



For the amount of troops involved and number of years fought. The U.S. has suffered less deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. Then in any war in history. Heck in past wars more deaths have resulted from single battles. 

And while you may look at Iraq as a U.S. failure. The Shia may disagree with you. Saddam is no longer putting them in mass graves. Most of the country has been pacified. Are there still problems with Terrorists?...yes! And Iraqi forces will deal with them.

So let's see......the Iraqi's are back in control of their country and becoming stronger every day. The U.S. has withdrawn from most cities. And looking to be out of Iraq within the next year or so. All to the consternation of the U.S. critics. Who wanted to be proved right that Iraq would be an American failure. And spared no expense in saying so at the start of the conflict.

They are still saying so about Afghanistan. We will see if they are right in the next year or two.


----------



## Jigs

Thomas said:


> For the amount of troops involved and number of years fought. The U.S. has suffered less deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. Then in any war in history. Heck in past wars more deaths have resulted from single battles.
> 
> And while you may look at Iraq as a U.S. failure. The Shia may disagree with you. Saddam is no longer putting them in mass graves. Most of the country has been pacified. Are there still problems with Terrorists?...yes! And Iraqi forces will deal with them.
> 
> So let's see......the Iraqi's are back in control of their country and becoming stronger every day. The U.S. has withdrawn from most cities. And looking to be out of Iraq within the next year or so. All to the consternation of the U.S. critics. Who wanted to be proved right that Iraq would be an American failure. And spared no expense in saying so at the start of the conflict.
> 
> They are still saying so about Afghanistan. We will see if they are right in the next year or two.



Because this isn't a classic war it is a war against criminal/terrorist groups. It is like the Turkish war against the PKK where at times you might have one or two deaths here and there. 

It will be interesting to see what happens in Iraq after full withdrawal the largest terror group there plans to set up political wings inside that country and that could take after the U.S. withdrawal. As far as Afghanistan i don't think that region can be helped much it is so unstable and the corruption level is insane. I mean wasn't the U.S. paying off some of these guys to just quit fighting ? That seems like a settlement/compromise more then a victory.


----------



## Huda

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm..


----------



## gambit

Parashuram1 said:


> Don't you think by writing the bolder part, you are making your current military stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan look like fools? 8 years, thousands of deaths, no significant result, covert support from fundamentalist hardliners continues to go to the terrorists hidden there etc.
> 
> *Would you prescribe a similar solution as Hiroshima and Nagasaki to these two countries as well? *
> 
> Others have a point when they (from their perspective) ask you whether this solution is apt for any two countries in this case Iran and Israel where either of them initiates a nuclear raid on the other to quickly make his enemy surrender. After all, unlike Afghanistan and Iraq where militants are the problem, Israel perceives the Iranian government as the problem and not the people, isn't it?


If we view either or both in the same category of threat as Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany were...Yes. That is why Iran is alone because none trust the mullahs to be rational. None wanted to be associated with the country that started a nuclear war in the ME.


----------



## Jigs

xMustiiej70 said:


> Isn't Iran able to take some aircraft from israel with anti aircraft sites?
> s300? other missiles?
> I mean israel wont send all their aircrafts.



They have a good SAM defense but it is all older stuff no S-300s. Iran is too big for Israel to do enough damage to cripple anything but they can certainly hit what targets they need and hurt Iran's nuclear sites. It is the retaliation by Iran where the danger is and that could result in other countries getting involved.

What will be interesting to see is how Israel gets the range needed to get to Iran and return home. They will have to refuel at one point because they will have heavily loaded aircraft when heading over there. We will also see just how ready the defenses of Iran are in a surprise attack and something tells me they will be quick to counter once they detect a threat in their airspace.


----------



## Thomas

Jigs said:


> Because this isn't a classic war it is a war against criminal/terrorist groups. It is like the Turkish war against the PKK where at times you might have one or two deaths here and there.



Combat operations in Iraq were on a much larger scale then Turkey's conflict with the PKK. You had an insurgency financed by Bathists. Al Qada in Iraq, and militia groups financed and equipped by Iran. Now it is Al Qada, and factional in fighting(with Iran pulling some of those strings).


----------



## xMustiiej70

Jigs said:


> They have a good SAM defense but it is all older stuff no S-300s. Iran is too big for Israel to do enough damage to cripple anything but they can certainly hit what targets they need and hurt Iran's nuclear sites. It is the retaliation by Iran where the danger is and that could result in other countries getting involved.
> 
> What will be interesting to see is how Israel gets the range needed to get to Iran and return home. They will have to refuel at one point because they will have heavily loaded aircraft when heading over there. We will also see just how ready the defenses of Iran are in a surprise attack and something tells me they will be quick to counter once they detect a threat in their airspace.




Yes i know.. but lets say israel send I dont know 10 f16's? or f18's?
That shouldn't be hard to take out right?


----------



## Jigs

xMustiiej70 said:


> Yes i know.. but lets say israel send I dont know 10 f16's? or f18's?
> That shouldn't be hard to take out right?



If they decide to launch an attack it is going to be alot more then 10 and they will be escorted most likely by F-15s like the case was when they attacked the Iraqi site. This operation will be on a much larger scale Israel would plan on hitting a number of sites all over the place. 

All this is going to be highly unlikely anyway though without U.S. involvement because of the counter attack Iran will most likely launch so i am sure it will be a joint attack of sorts. There is a reason Bunker busting bombs were shipped to Diego Garcia where the B-2s are stationed at. Which i predicted in a much early post that the U.S. would use B-2s if it would come to a armed conflict. Iran won't have much to offer in that case if it happens. Not against B-2s at least.


----------



## T-Rex

gambit said:


> If we view either or both in the same category of threat as Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany were...Yes. That is why Iran is alone because none trust the mullahs to be rational. None wanted to be associated with the country that started a nuclear war in the ME.



Is it very rational to expect that certain countries should accept Americans telling them what they should think, what kind of governments they should have or what weapons they should have for their armed forces? Is there a country more irrational than a state that builds settlements inside the territory of its neighbour and expects peace? Is there a regime more vile and hypocritical than the so called champions of democracy and human rights who regularly bomb innocent civillians(collateral damage) in the name of fighting terror?


----------



## Machoman

The only way Iran can may be survive if any arab country let them know that they are coming. Which probably not the case, but it is hard to say. Israel is preety tough country to fight against. If Egypt and Turkey get together they might take care of them other wise non of the other muslim country can do that.


----------



## Solomon2

T-Rex said:


> Is it very rational to expect that certain countries should accept Americans telling them what they should think, what kind of governments they should have or what weapons they should have for their armed forces?


When it's an alliance or security arrangement with the U.S., then why not, if it's part of that arrangement? After all, wrong weapons, deployment, training, or command may make such arrangements impossible to fulfill.



> Is there a regime more vile and hypocritical than the so called champions of democracy and human rights who regularly bomb innocent civillians(collateral damage) in the name of fighting terror?


Precisely why you live in Bangladesh, not East Pakistan.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

I am totally surprised that people are even considering of such a scenario..!!!

such a scenario would be catastrophic and might triger a third world war with the possible Iranian retaliation against the Oil Producing Arab counteries.The Masses in Arab counteries would rebel against their puppet Governments and then all would attack Israel. Plus the Russians and Chinese would not sit idle and let West go away with all that, they would deffinately take advantage of it , PRC might attack Thailand and Japan and Russia might strike Poland and Ukrain , In short a possible world war will break off which could be fatal for mankind.

However as long as the US forces remain engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan the possible Israili Air Strike against Iran is highly unlikely.


----------



## nwmalik

If israel attacks iran , it will last for maybe couple of days. But the result will be very far reaching. 
Remember u can start a fight but to stop u need the agreemnt of both.


----------



## Thomas

nwmalik said:


> If israel attacks iran , it will last for maybe couple of days. But the result will be very far reaching.
> Remember u can start a fight but to stop u need the agreemnt of both.



I would give it 2 - 4 weeks myself. I doubt Iran will throw in the towel to quickly even if they are hurt bad. It would make them look weak.


----------



## su-47

Fundamentalist said:


> Attack on any muslim country should be considered attack on all muslim nation , attack on Iran will be start of third world war



look, i dont want to turn this into a trolling thread, but I find your comment highly illogical and impractical. No one came to the aid of Afghanistan or Iraq when USA attacked. No one came to aid Lebanon or Palestine (some supported them covertly, but no country actually went to war on their behalf). 

My friend, please understand one thing. Dont mix politics with religion. Like every other place, Middle East is also ruled by politics. It is an open secret that Saudi Arabia and a few other Arab nations want Iran's nuclear program stopped. There were even rumors Saudi might allow Israel access to its air space to allow a strike on Iran. 

If Israel does carry out a successful strike, some Muslim nations might express condolences, others will condemn Israel. But I doubt anyone is going to stick their neck out for Iran.


----------



## T-Rex

Solomon2 said:


> When it's an alliance or security arrangement with the U.S., then why not, if it's part of that arrangement? After all, wrong weapons, deployment, training, or command may make such arrangements impossible to fulfill.
> 
> Precisely why you live in Bangladesh, not East Pakistan.



i)Striking a deal with a puppet after invading is not a treaty at all.
ii) I live in Bangladesh because the champions of democracy bomb innocent civillians in Afghanistan- *nice argument!*


----------



## Thomas

T-Rex said:


> i)Striking a deal with a puppet after invading is not a treaty at all.
> ii) I live in Bangladesh because the champions of democracy bomb innocent civillians in Afghanistan- *nice argument!*



Innocent civilians get killed in war period. No matter which country is fighting. That is one of the horrible aspects of it. So you can stop using that as an excuse.


----------



## Solomon2

T-Rex said:


> I live in Bangladesh because the champions of democracy bomb innocent civillians in Afghanistan- *nice argument!*


No, because of what the Pakistani Army did in 1971. Nobody teaches that any more? Interesting.


----------



## Kompromat

Solomon2 said:


> No, because of what the Pakistani Army did in 1971. Nobody teaches that any more? Interesting.



Maybe Because there is no Zionist Lobby out there to spread lies.

Solomon Pakistan army has done NOTHING in East Pakistan if you have any Nuteral Proof bring it on.

But if i proved you wrong you would have to shut your Mouth & stop Trolling in my Thread !


----------



## Parashuram1

Solomon2 said:


> No, because of what the Pakistani Army did in 1971. Nobody teaches that any more? Interesting.


Unfortunately, its all a matter of present day convenience to some people of anti-Western attitude here. They choose to forget that which reflects their past realities and try to create an alternate reality which lacks any base at all.

It is quite common on many threads in this forum really; be it American affairs, Indo-Pakistani affairs, Indo-Bangladeshi Affairs or even international SOCIAL affairs.


----------



## Parashuram1

Black Blood said:


> Maybe Because there is no Zionist Lobby out there to spread lies.
> 
> Solomon Pakistan army has done NOTHING in East Pakistan if you have any Nuteral Proof bring it on.
> 
> But if i proved you wrong you would have to shut your Mouth & stop Trolling in my Thread !


Please check the Bangladesh defense section on this forum. It has Bangladeshi newspaper sources demanding an apology for past atrocities on governmental levels. 

It won't take long. Certainly you won't term Bangladeshi sources about their own countries as a "Zionist propaganda" isn't it? Having selected amnesia is regrettable and this is what causes most extreme-thinking members here to term all the ills of Pakistan as a result of "Western-Zionist" conspiracy, an axis that doesn't exist in reality as a concrete alliance due to various geo-political reasons.

Really.. it is about time members stop abusing the word Zionist propaganda.


----------



## Kompromat

Parashuram1 said:


> Please check the Bangladesh defense section on this forum. It has Bangladeshi newspaper sources demanding an apology for past atrocities on governmental levels. .



Remember the Bangladesh is still being Ruled by those who were against Pakistan in the First Place so those Newspaers are Unvalid.

I need a UNO report or an investigation in this matter no matter they do it on their own or Bangladeshi Govt asks them to do it.

If it is true than i and many others will accept it but if it is wrong (which it is) then people must shut their Mouths .

Read a book "Blood and tears" by an eye witness of 71 Civil war you will see an opposite side of the story btw the Writter is a Bangali.




> It won't take long. Certainly you won't term Bangladeshi sources about their own countries as a "Zionist propaganda" isn't it? Having selected amnesia is regrettable and this is what causes most extreme-thinking members here to term all the ills of Pakistan as a result of "Western-Zionist-Indian" conspiracy, an axis that doesn't exist in reality as a concrete alliance due to various geo-political reasons.



That was a Respose to solomon who wants to stick his nose everywhere.




> Really.. it is about time members stop abusing the word Zionist propaganda.



They should stop their Propegenda first .


----------



## Kompromat

> Unfortunately, its all a matter of present day convenience to some people of anti-Western attitude here. They choose to forget that which reflects their past realities and try to create an alternate reality which lacks any base at all.



What realities ????

Care to prove your argument before you point any fingure !



> It is quite common on many threads in this forum really; be it American affairs, Indo-Pakistani affairs, Indo-Bangladeshi Affairs or even international SOCIAL affairs.



Because most of the people here are One eyed Baised idiots who think that their POV is Always right !


----------



## Solomon2

Black Blood said:


> Maybe Because there is no Zionist Lobby out there to spread lies.


You're not the only Pakistani out there who makes the connection between Zionism and the issue of truth vs. falsehood.


----------



## Parashuram1

Black Blood said:


> Remember the Bangladesh is still being Ruled by those who were against Pakistan in the First Place so those Newspaers are Unvalid.
> 
> I need a UNO report or an investigation in this matter no matter they do it on their own or Bangladeshi Govt asks them to do it.
> 
> If it is true than i and many others will accept it but if it is wrong (which it is) then people must shut their Mouths .
> 
> Read a book "Blood and tears" by an eye witness of 71 Civil war you will see an opposite side of the story btw the Writter is a Bangali.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was a Respose to solomon who wants to stick his nose everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They should stop their Propegenda first .


You have to stop being paranoid first. The truth here is that no matter whether an American (please remember USA was your closest ally in 1971), a Swiss, or an Indian shows you even the original UN documents, you won't accept it. Your denial is making you needlessly hostile in admitting your own follies.

I barely know about what is happening in your part of the world but in the past few years as your region became the hotbed for all attention and coverage, I learnt a lot from international members who have conducted researches on various issues plaguing south Asia. 

Friend, every country makes mistakes and there is no harm in accepting it. This will not lower your country instead it will lighten the negative image any past mistake had given you. It was your government's blunder isn't it instead of common people?

So it is not your entire country's fault and even you can question your government as a citizen of a democratic country on this.


----------



## Kompromat

^^^^^^^I have spoken to those who Fought the the war in 1971 , spoken to those who were in west Pakistan Air force at that time.

They all are credible sources of Information or Eye witnesses , they all said that its all propegenda that any genoside tool place or any mass killings were done in 1971.

They say it was a civil war where we confronted Rabels , Traitors and Indian Forces on top of that thus we lost the war because of isolation and outnumbered Millitary force.

People got killed from Both sides and what is the Proof of that Bangali and Indian newspapers or BBC ?????

Any UNO Report on this matter???? No one has denied that Killings didn't happened but it was not Civilians but Rables fighting against the state of Pakistan so we had to deal with them who doesn't ?

Most of the Killings were done by Mukti bani and Indian forces where there were not enough Pakistani Soldiers to Fight on Both fronts neither there were any Air power in the Eastern pakisan at that time.

We lost that war and this is why our View wont carry any weight on top of that people with idiotic brains and a single eye would come up and believe what is being said in Bangladeshi media or Indian media who both have been and still are Anti Paksitan.

Apology offered to BD was not for Geneoside but for any civilian damage which may have occured during the war.


----------



## Kompromat

Solomon2 said:


> You're not the only Pakistani out there who makes the connection between Zionism and the issue of truth vs. falsehood.



Well that was your Pathetic attempt to drag Pakistan Army in this Thread wasn't it ?

You always try to derail threads solomon & most of the times your comments are baseless and baised , do you have any Nuteral proof of what happened in 71 ?

Have you spoken to any PA generals PAF pilots or PA POW's who were eye witnesses of the war ?


*Read this:* MOST of the People killed were True Pakistanis and were massacared by Mukti Bani.

http://www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net/blood_tears.php


----------



## Solomon2

Black Blood said:


> They all are credible sources of Information or Eye witnesses , they all said that its all propegenda that any genoside tool place or any mass killings were done in 1971.


And in 1971 I had a Pakistani diplomat in my living room, struggling with tears, as he described the torment his country was going through and the conflict of loyalties he was experiencing between the government he served and his people who were suffering at its hands.

The participants in the ugly events of 1971 - how many do you think would admit their role in such events? You know your countrymen, yes? Are you confident they would stick to the truth in preference to a self-serving falsehood?


----------



## Kompromat

*Back to Topic now !*


----------



## Kompromat

Solomon2 said:


> And in 1971 I had a Pakistani diplomat in my living room, struggling with tears, as he described the torment his country was going through and the conflict of loyalties he was experiencing between the government he served and his people who were suffering at its hands.
> 
> The participants in the ugly events of 1971 - how many do you think would admit their role in such events? You know your countrymen, yes? Are you confident they would stick to the truth in preference to a self-serving falsehood?



you have made up a Nice story.
Solomon we are not out there doing mass murders of our own people .

That was a civil war and nothing can be proven from the either side so what is the fuss in your brain about 71 ??

If you have any Proofs why dont you bring them on ?


----------



## Parashuram1

Black Blood said:


> you have made up a Nice story.
> Solomon we are not out there doing mass murders of our own people .
> 
> That was a civil war and nothing can be proven from the either side so what is the fuss in your brain about 71 ??
> 
> If you have any Proofs why dont you bring them on ?


Oh my friend, but no one can ever prove what actually happened in that conflict. The eye witnesses there who support your country would speak in your favour, the soldiers who fought are no more... it ultimately boils down to relying on Bangladeshi newspapers. 

Why drag Indians in between? The discussion here is about Pakistan's situation and that of this rebel force you speak of. Speaking of Blood Tears, there is also a very famous document called the Blood Telegram. Before declaring it as an Indian propaganda, why not take a look at that too? One can only take fair decisions if he/she sees both sides of the coin.

The apologies demanded were in respect to what incidents of violence against civilians happened and not collateral damage. Otherwise, the apologies won't have been an issue to Pakistani government for so long. I mean what guilt could your government have in apologizing for collateral damage if that was indeed the case? This is similar to the situation between China and Japan on World War till date.


----------



## Solomon2

OK, back to the topic. It seems very few Pakistanis are willing to openly side with Israel. But do you see the problem with remaining silent? 

You've seen it here, that leaving the realm of discussion to those distorting or ignoring Israel and its case also means yielding the agenda to those who hold a wider distortion of history in general. Ultimately, your own history is affected and you know longer know who and what you are.

As much as I support Israel, I live in, revel, and treasure America. Those of us who care to know - for most people are busy living their lives - know how great America is. But you Pakistanis, have you considered that perhaps you need to support Israel, even more than I do?


----------



## Comet

Pakistanis should side with Israel? why?


----------



## Solomon2

umairp said:


> Pakistanis should side with Israel? why?


Think of all the things you think your country needs to improve itself. Such consideration begins by being truthful about what has happened in the past. Yet how often have such discussions been squashed by accusations - or fears of accusations - that such things are "Zionist" in nature? After all, we've seen it right here in this thread.

On the other hand, if you embrace Zionism, if you embrace Israel, then you've accepted the burden of the ire of your political enemies. You've accepted living with that fear. Accusations of "Zionist" won't stop you. And you can proceed from that point to uncover, with the aid of like-minded countrymen the messes and fix the problems that truly plague the nation.


----------



## shining eyes

slomon2 seems like an agent of satan!

joke of the year isn't it?
PAKISTAN SIDES ISRAEL lol


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

> OK, back to the topic.* It seems very few Pakistanis are willing to openly side with Israel.* But do you see the problem with remaining silent?
> 
> *You've seen it here, that leaving the realm of discussion to those distorting or ignoring Israel and its case ??* also means yielding the *agenda ??* to those who hold a wider distortion of history in general. Ultimately, *your own history is affected and you know longer know who and what you are.*
> 
> As much as I support Israel, I live in, revel, and treasure America. Those of us who care to know - for most people are busy living their lives - know how great America is. But you Pakistanis, have you considered that perhaps you need to support Israel, even more than I do?



No ones going to support israel if massacres like Gaza and the illegal occupation of palestinian land continues. Israel has Nukes and the most advanced military in middleEast. But that dosent means it has the right to dictate what is right and whats wrong. Under a possible Israeli attack the Iranians have the right to prepare themselves for their defence. However i still fail to understand on what grounds you ask for our support for Israeli cause of attacking Iran. Iran is country which helped us during our wars of 1965 and 1971 with India. And Israel has always sided with our staunch rival India. How can anyone here support Israel with all the barbarism it comitted over the last five decades ..??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Solomon2

shining eyes said:


> joke of the year isn't it?
> PAKISTAN SIDES ISRAEL lol


A just people must embrace both the process of prosecution _and_ defense, yes? When was the last time Israel's case was weighed by Pakistanis? When was it _ever?_ 

If you suppress Israel's case you must also suppress the process of justice in general. People's very minds are bent, and this becomes a huge cultural distortion. No wonder Pakistani politicians proudly boast, "Corruption is our right!", or that last year, before they tasted it, the people of Swat dreamed the Taliban might be an improvement!


----------



## Comet

Solomon2 said:


> Think of all the things you think your country needs to improve itself. Such consideration begins by being truthful about what has happened in the past. Yet how often have such discussions been squashed by accusations - or fears of accusations - that such things are "Zionist" in nature? After all, we've seen it right here in this thread.
> 
> On the other hand, if you embrace Zionism, if you embrace Israel, then you've accepted the burden of the ire of your political enemies. You've accepted living with that fear. Accusations of "Zionist" won't stop you. And you can proceed from that point to uncover, with the aid of like-minded countrymen the messes and fix the problems that truly plague the nation.



Interesting...

The truth is, Solomom2, that every country and every region and every place is different than every other country, region, and place. 'Zionism' may have worked for some but not for us. Israel may be a friend or yours but not our, and can never be. 

Why should we forget about out geopolitical situation (with Iran as our neighbor) and be friends with Israel?


----------



## Solomon2

H2O3C4Nitrogen said:


> No ones going to support israel if massacres like Gaza and the illegal occupation of palestinian land continues. Israel has Nukes and the most advanced military in middleEast...How can anyone here support Israel with all the barbarism it comitted over the last five decades ..??...And Israel has always sided with our staunch rival India.


These are things you've been told all your lives. They are, to say the least, not the whole story, and certainly not a balanced representation.




> Under a possible Israeli attack the Iranians have the right to prepare themselves for their defence...However i still fail to understand on what grounds you ask for our support for Israeli cause of attacking Iran. ...Iran is country which helped us during our wars of 1965 and 1971 with India.


It was the Shah's regime that helped you then, both as part of CENTO and as a friend. The Shah not only wanted to stay in power but wanted to advance his nation and keep out the communists. Today, Iran's mullahs seek nothing less than to create a new Persian Empire. If they meet their goals to the west they will surely turn their attentions eastward. I suppose you could wait a few years, but doesn't it make more sense to address the Iranian threat now?



> But that dosent means it has the right to dictate what is right and whats wrong.


No sir. Yet Pakistanis are ignorant of many facts and their context when it comes to Israel. So does it really make sense to you that Pakistanis have a firm grasp of right or wrong? Or that Pakistanis should blindly follow the desires of others on this matter? Look what it's costing your society!


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

> A just people must embrace both the process of prosecution and defense, yes? When was the last time Israel's case was weighed by Pakistanis? When was it ever?
> 
> If you suppress Israel's case you must also suppress the process of justice in general. People's very minds are bent, and this becomes a huge cultural distortion. No wonder Pakistani politicians proudly boast, "Corruption is our right!", or that last year, before they tasted it, the people of Swat dreamed the Taliban might be an improvement!



When was the last time Pakistani cause over Kashmir has been weighted out by the Israelis ..All we see is the Israeli Top Millitery Bras visiting kashmir's forward lines as they could in some way help India achieve its goals in Kashmir.

Israel has always supresed Pakistani cause. Remeber the Time when Israeli jets were flying in Indian airspace to attack Pakistani Nuclear Installations. 
What is the process of Justice ??..! . 
The people of swat never acknowledged the Irhabists as improvement its BS crap..get over it.


----------



## Solomon2

umairp said:


> 'Zionism' may have worked for some but not for us. Israel may be a friend or yours but not our, and can never be.


"Never" is such a strong word, it implies either complete knowledge of the situation or that the facts and their context don't matter. Balanced knowledge of Israel is something Pakistanis clearly lack. That can be mended. But an attitude that, when all is said and done, the facts don't matter - that means one has committed to living a lie, doesn't it? And one lie leads to another, then more and bigger ones...

It probably doesn't surprise you that Germany paid reparations to the state of Israel after WWII. What may surprise you is that they did this in the mid-1960s, long after the allied military administration ceased. Germany didn't do this just for the sake of the Jews; they did this to rid their society of the damage to its collective psyche caused by the lies and crimes of Nazism which were committed in the name of the whole German nation. Then they could be a "normal" country. 

While Pakistan owes Israel nothing comparable to the Jews, that psychic distortion is still there. Do you think you can really solve your country's problems without dealing with it?


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

> These are things you've been told all your lives. They are, to say the least, not the whole story, and certainly not a balanced representation.



pls tell me 1 solid reason to believe the case that Israel has never comitted masacre of innocent palestinias . I tell you the same , The point which you are making has been embeded in you mind throughout your life. Israel's hands are covered with the blood of armless & innocent children and women and men of Palestine and some day in future the Israeli Nation will pay for its bloodshed, might it be the case of Iran acquiring nukes...!!!



> I suppose you could wait a few years, but doesn't it make more sense to address the Iranian threat now?



Though there exist some bumps in our relations with the current regieme of Iran but this in noway can be brought to a level that Pakistan should support the Israli cause of bombing Iran. I dont see any future prick btw Iran and Pakistan which might result in an enemity and a possible support of Israel against Iran.



> No sir. Yet Pakistanis are ignorant of many facts and their context when it comes to Israel. So does it really make sense to you that Pakistanis have a firm grasp of right or wrong?



Yes i agree that we might not have the full context and understanding of Israeli history but neither Israel is sweet heart of Pakistan nor it has any friendly ties with Pakistan but it has always supported our rival India and has never hesitated to display hostile ideas towards Pakistan. No Pakistani is ignorant of this fact.


----------



## Solomon2

H2O3C4Nitrogen said:


> When was the last time Pakistani cause over Kashmir has been weighted out by the Israelis -


No matter how much we criticize others, it doesn't help us improve ourselves, does it? Now multiply that by a hundred million and you get a Pakistan-wide psychic distortion.



> All we see is...


All you see, yes. Distortion.




> The people of swat never acknowledged the Irhabists as improvement its BS crap..get over it.


But they thought they might be and looked forward to the swifter justice the Taliban had to offer - until they experienced it.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

*All you see, yes. Distortion.*


*Israeli Army chief in Kashmir*

*Israeli Army Delegation to Visit Kashmir in October*


*Deepening Indo-Israeli Military Cooperation: Israeli Army General visited Jammu and Kashmir*

pls take time to go through the links or else they will go to waste..!!!
Even still you deem Pakistani support in Israeli designs against Iran.


----------



## Solomon2

You've missed it. Your viewpoint - and that of too many of your countrymen - is _unbalanced_. Lots of facts just aren't evaluated. You can't make just judgments that way.

As for visits, training, etc. - everyone does this. Furthermore, India is a customer of Israel's arms manufacturers. I can imagine that this sort of thing is easy to distort into something else. Yet you don't talk about going to war with Russia because it sells India weapons, do you?

And yet...maybe Israel _should_ be paying more attention to Pakistan. Because its decision-makers may be in danger of believing and acting upon false propaganda, so maybe Pakistan is developing into a real threat? In that case, the solution is clear, for if you don't make Israel into your enemy, Israel won't become yours.


----------



## TaimiKhan

For those who have dragged in PA and Bangladesh issue should keep it out. As there are other threads about that on the forum. Keep the discussion about the topic on hand. 

And for those who are here for Pakistan bashing trip with respect to Bangladesh, would be better if you guys can go, check what the sources have to say, when the official Bangladesh govt in that time announced a monetary compensation plan for those who were killed. Research what was the figure which came up of the applications for monetary claim and then why the govt quietly shut the claim scheme. May be it can give an idea to those bashers what in reality had happened. 

So for now enough, now talk about the topic on hand. 

Anymore replies, will get deleted.


----------



## pak-yes

Hooo interesting debate going on in the thread.Solomon i have a clear cut question for you?and i am sure you will not be able to answer it.Should i ask?


----------



## pak-yes

Ok.Solomon the million dollar question is?

what will Pakistan get from having ties with Israel?

Suppose for a moment we forget what Israel has done with us in the past and present and we also forget the Palestinian's etc etc etc.

The question is what will Pakistan get.Because first we would have to face huge domestic pressure and after that Diplomatic Isolation.Also threatening the jobs of million of Pakistanis in the gulf,which send billions of dollars in remittances.

I mean why should we risk losing all of this?


----------



## Solomon2

pak-yes said:


> what will Pakistan get from having ties with Israel?


Wrong thread. Go *here*.


----------



## pak-yes

Solomon2 said:


> Wrong thread. Go *here*.



Oh yar.You do keep a record of all Zionists threads.

Come on who has the time to go through all those pages and besides i just want a precise answer so just answer it here.


----------



## Parashuram1

pak-yes said:


> Ok.Solomon the million dollar question is?
> 
> what will Pakistan get from having ties with Israel?
> 
> Suppose for a moment we forget what Israel has done with us in the past and present and we also forget the Palestinian's etc etc etc.
> 
> The question is what will Pakistan get.Because first we would have to face huge domestic pressure and after that Diplomatic Isolation.Also threatening the jobs of million of Pakistanis in the gulf,which send billions of dollars in remittances.
> 
> I mean why should we risk losing all of this?


You have asked this question to Solomon. But if I could contribute something positive here I'd be really happy to. Please consider the other way around: What would Pakistan not gain by keeping its own national interests rather than supporting a reason that is exclusively bilateral dispute?

From diplomacy perspective, Pakistan will reduce one hostile enemy meaning one less chance of war. If you are expecting military tech to fall into your lands the moment you establish ties, that might not happen since it will take sometime to reduce the decades old animosity.

But one lesser enemy could also have a positive advantage to your economy isn't it? You can focus on one political rival alone and redirect the funds you direct against a potential Israeli aggression towards developing your country's infrastructure. 

How do you risk the employment of expatriate Pakistanis in Middle East? Your rival and neighbour has excellent ties with Israel and there are more Indians than Arabs seen in Middle East. They don't get expelled for the actions of their government. The same would be with you. 

You could gain so much diplomatic appreciation that could call more international help for Pakistan's economic situation. But of course, it won't be easy task.


----------



## pak-yes

> What would Pakistan not gain by keeping its own national interests rather than supporting a reason that is exclusively bilateral dispute?



Well relations with Israel will actually hurt our interests due to the reasons above i described.



> From diplomacy perspective, Pakistan will reduce one hostile enemy meaning one less chance of war. If you are expecting military tech to fall into your lands the moment you establish ties, that might not happen since it will take sometime to reduce the decades old animosity.



It is good to have one less enemy but the question is at what cost?
Besides Zionists can not be trusted what if they decided to put a few bugs in weapons supplied to us or gave the source codes or weakness to India.And this is just not speculation any military planner will keep this thing in mind.



> But one lesser enemy could also have a positive advantage to your economy isn't it? You can focus on one political rival alone and redirect the funds you direct against a potential Israeli aggression towards developing your country's infrastructure.



Last time i checked we were never spending on protection from Israel.



> How do you risk the employment of expatriate Pakistanis in Middle East? Your rival and neighbour has excellent ties with Israel and there are more Indians than Arabs seen in Middle East. They don't get expelled for the actions of their government. The same would be with you.



Our Rivals are Hindu but we are Muslims i have spent many years in the gulf and i know that once we accept Zionists.Arabs conduct with us will never remain the same. 



> You could gain so much diplomatic appreciation that could call more international help for Pakistan's economic situation. But of course, it won't be easy task.



Speculation.........................

You did tried to explain but all i asked were *PRACTICAL *advantages worth the risk.

Solomon i am waiting for your answer.


----------



## Solomon2

(Pardon me, pak-yes, I forgot that all my posts in the thread I linked to had been deleted.)

I don't think recognition is enough. Egypt "recognized" Israel but after Sadat was assassinated resumed suppressing debate, allowing only Islamic extremism as an outlet for those who despise the regime. 

No, Pakistan and its people actually have to become - or accept being accused of being - Israel _advocates_ to reap the benefits I've listed in this thread. The "huge domestic pressure" is part of a democracy's internal debate and thus something to look forward to. 

As for diplomatic isolation: Egypt was "isolated" for years until, as Sadat predicted, the other Arabs decided they needed Egypt more than Egypt needed them. 

Like Parashuram1 wrote, I don't think jobs will be an issue. Except perhaps in Iran. Saudi Arabia did expel hundreds of thousands of Arabs, mostly Palestinians and Yemenis, when their governments sided with Saddam after he invaded Kuwait and his troops stood on Saudi Arabia's borders. Doubtless they were feared as a fifth column. After the war, Kuwait expelled the resident Palestinians who sided with Saddam as punishment. 



> once we accept Zionists.Arabs conduct with us will never remain the same.


Yes. They will no longer expect Pakistanis to help fight their wars with Israel. They will feel less welcome sending recruiters to Pakistan, or exporting their surplus male population to the country. And they will feel betrayed because they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars establishing madrassas that taught Salafist ideology: hatred of Israel and the establishment of Taliban or Al Qaeda rule in South Asia. But the current Saudi king says he wants to change that, and may step in with $$$ to make up the difference.

Yes, it will be different. For a time, the Arabs will be angry. They will also stop turning up their noses at Pakistanis and regarding them as inferiors or pets whose obedience can be taken for granted. (Perhaps Pakistanis working as domestics would be fired?)

Your call.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Destructlord

What makes you think any of their pilots will return home?


----------



## thebrownguy

Destructlord said:


> What makes you think any of their pilots will return home?



They have always returned! lol.. And what makes you think they won't?


----------



## Destructlord

thebrownguy said:


> They have always returned! lol.. And what makes you think they won't?



Of course they do when they're fighting with Hamas who still fighting with AK-47! But as matter of fact fighting with a country will be much more difficult.

I'm not at liberty to share you any information about my country defence capabilities unless they officially announce it.

I have hinted several times about Iran long range air defence system even before they announce it officially but each time I only saw trolls!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## below_freezing

when can we see the news "Iranian Air Force gears up to strike Israel"...


----------



## gambit

below_freezing said:


> when can we see the news "Iranian Air Force gears up to strike Israel"...


There should be some Iranian Photochop specialists readied for that.


----------



## Destructlord

But only know that we have gained access to the cold launch technology in 99! Lack of investment keep it from mass-production and the project was only a prototype until 2003, they realized with the sanctions around our neck we better invest more in the home project until 2006 they waited for the Russian but since they didnt deliver the orders Iranian DOD recived order from the supreme leader to think about the aging Iranian air defence system...


----------



## Destructlord

gambit said:


> There should be some Iranian Photochop specialists readied for that.



Ah and thats coming out from an American mouth! You guys been planing an invasion for 31 years now I wonder when your government gonna stop being a pussy and attack Iran! Embrace your end with dignity my friend!


----------



## Destructlord

below_freezing said:


> when can we see the news "Iranian Air Force gears up to strike Israel"...



When we get 800 million dollar budget in R&D


----------



## gambit

Destructlord said:


> You guys been planing an invasion for 31 years now...


We have...??? But seriously, we even have plans for alien invasions. We do not need to invade Iran to cripple Iran. In fact, we do not even need to cripple Iran at all. We just need to hit the mullahs where it hurts the most: Iranian nuclear facilities.



Destructlord said:


> I wonder when your government gonna stop being a pussy and attack Iran! Embrace your end with dignity my friend!


I admit that Iran does have an advantage there. With functional democracies, we do have regular regime changes, something Iranians want but the mullahs denied. But then again, no one thought someone like Bush would come in and eventually take out two MEastern countries. So I would caution you from adopting that attitude, that the US is a 'pussy'. The current occupant in the White House is not doing too good. The next occupant may give the mullahs in Iran the @$$-whooping they need.


----------



## Destructlord

gambit said:


> We have...??? But seriously, we even have plans for alien invasions. We do not need to invade Iran to cripple Iran. In fact, we do not even need to cripple Iran at all. We just need to hit the mullahs where it hurts the most: Iranian nuclear facilities.



Awwz I'm afraid thats beyond your reach, you're not the only one with plan my friend!  Do you really think Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons at the moment? Do you think 80&#37; of Ukraine nuclear arsenal just simply vanished?! What makes you think even if you can reach your targets you can take them out? You're either overestimating yourselves or underestimating us! Let me remind you something, people who are currently run Iran are maybe retards which I really think they are! But don't forget this, we are a country with 7500 years of military experince and we are proud of our history and even the defeats we had in the history! Let me make this a bit more simply we are ready to die but we take out enemies along with us!



> I admit that Iran does have an advantage there. With functional democracies, we do have regular regime changes, something Iranians want but the mullahs denied. But then again, no one thought someone like Bush would come in and eventually take out two MEastern countries. So I would caution you from adopting that attitude, that the US is a 'pussy'. The current occupant in the White House is not doing too good. The next occupant may give the mullahs in Iran the @$$-whooping they need.



That maybe true but only because Iranian dont like mullahs doesnt mean they like their country to be lapdog of U.S.A! 
No my friend your government only goal is Balkanization of Iran, unlike what you think Iranians are not retards like their leaders are, we have studied you, we know if you had the ability to take us down you wouldnt hesitate for a second, Iran is the last bastion of defence against U.S interest in the region, even with the limited influence, don't you think if you had the resource it would be better for you just to take us down? As you can see new superpowers are emerging and having energy assets will guarantee you of being a superpower at least for a century! Thats until when alternative sources of energy are fully developed! 

However I think it was constructive talk, I apologize if I insult you.


----------



## gambit

Destructlord said:


> Do you really think Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons at the moment?


If Iran does have functional nuclear weapons Iran would not be working so hard on uranium enrichment facilities.



Destructlord said:


> Do you think 80% of Ukraine nuclear arsenal just simply vanished?!


Yeah...We bought them.



Destructlord said:


> What makes you think even if you can reach your targets you can take them out?


What make you think we cannot? Do you really think that burying them underground make them invulnerable? Centrifuges spinning at 50,000+ rpm on magnetic bearings cannot afford to be affected by tectonics movements induced by bomb explosions nor should the voltages required have spikes due to power switchings when a power supply station is destroyed. The list of vulnerabilities are considerable.



Destructlord said:


> You're either overestimating yourselves or underestimating us! Let me remind you something, people who are currently run Iran are maybe retards which I really think they are! But don't forget this, we are a country with 7500 years of military experince and we are proud of our history and even the defeats we had in the history! Let me make this a bit more simply we are ready to die but we take out enemies along with us!


Sorry...But boasting about historical military victories thousands of years ago does no good against 'stealth' bombers.



Destructlord said:


> That maybe true but only because Iranian dont like mullahs doesnt mean they like their country to be lapdog of U.S.A!


No one asked for it.



Destructlord said:


> No my friend your government only goal is Balkanization of Iran, unlike what you think Iranians are not retards like their leaders are, we have studied you, we know if you had the ability to take us down you wouldnt hesitate for a second, Iran is the last bastion of defence against U.S interest in the region, even with the limited influence, don't you think if you had the resource it would be better for you just to take us down? As you can see new superpowers are emerging and having energy assets will guarantee you of being a superpower at least for a century! Thats until when alternative sources of energy are fully developed!
> 
> However I think it was constructive talk, I apologize if I insult you.


No constructive talk found.


----------



## Destructlord

Uranium enrichment is to secure our supply of fuel not to build bombs, we have 30&#37; of France nuclear enrichment plant but they refused to give us our own fuel!

LOL yeah of course you had the plan to buy them but that happend only in your dreams, Ukraine was not a sovereign state, even tho it was no longer part of soviet union, after that colourful revolution in Ukraine you found out 80% of Ukraine nuclear arsenal are not there!

However, I would like to add your stealth bomber are no longer stealth with the help of gamma technology. They simply as good as a piece of garbage which worth around 1 billion dollar.

And sorry to burst your bubbles but facilities such a Fordo can withstand 60 megaton impact of a nuclear bomb and they also have their power supply inside the facility! 

Constructive part was for me (Knowing how Americans are simple minded.), you are too brainwashed to find anything constructive. 

I have to go now! Have exam tomorrow!


----------



## gambit

Destructlord said:


> Uranium enrichment is to secure our supply of fuel not to build bombs, we have 30% of France nuclear enrichment plant but they refused to give us our own fuel!


Wrong...U-235 has a very low percentage in any amount of natural uranium, hence the enrichment process. Up to about %20 enrichment is adequate for power generation. Any higher and it is possible to have an uncontrolled chain reaction. Possible, not must. Nuclear powered aircraft carriers and submarines have within them %90 enriched uranium.

For example...

Nuclear-Powered Ships | Nuclear Submarines


> Naval reactors (with one exception) have been pressurised water types, which differ from commercial reactors producing electricity in that:
> 
> * they deliver a lot of power from a very small volume and therefore run on highly-enriched uranium (>20% U-235, originally c 97% but apparently now *93% in latest US submarines*, c 20-25% in some western vessels, 20% in the first and second generation Russian reactors (1957-81)*, then 45% in 3rd generation Russian units),
> * the fuel is not UO2 but a uranium-zirconium or uranium-aluminium alloy (c15%U with 93% enrichment, or more U with less - eg 20% - U-235) or a metal-ceramic (Kursk: U-Al zoned 20-45% enriched, clad in zircaloy, with c 200kg U-235 in each 200 MW core),



And here is the enrichment level for a nuclear warhead...

Iran unveils plans to increase uranium enrichment | Mail Online


> While enriching to 20 per cent would take about one year, using up to 2,000 centrifuges at Tehran's underground Natanz facility, any next step - *moving from 20 to 90 per cent* - would take only half a year and between 500-1,000 centrifuges.


We can see that you are somewhat ill informed on the subject.



Destructlord said:


> LOL yeah of course you had the plan to buy them but that happend only in your dreams, Ukraine was not a sovereign state, even tho it was no longer part of soviet union, after that colourful revolution in Ukraine you found out 80% of Ukraine nuclear arsenal are not there!


When the Soviet Union collapsed, Ukraine became an independent state...

Ukraine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> Ukraine became independent again after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.



So on what basis can you say that Ukraine was not a sovereign state? Anyway...The country needed cash, not just the Ukraine but just about all of the former Soviet states, they all needed cash to survive. So they call US up and asked if we wanted to go shopping for some Soviet weaponry. Anything from rifles to fighter aircrafts and even nuclear missiles.

It appears you are ill informed on this subject.



Destructlord said:


> However, I would like to add your stealth bomber are no longer stealth with the help of gamma technology. They simply as good as a piece of garbage which worth around 1 billion dollar.


Source please on this 'gamma' technology. The readers need to see a *DEPLOYED* system on this.



Destructlord said:


> And sorry to burst your bubbles but facilities such a Fordo can withstand 60 megaton impact of a nuclear bomb and they also have their power supply inside the facility!
> 
> Constructive part was for me (Knowing how Americans are simple minded.), you are too brainwashed to find anything constructive.


This show how limited is your thinking. We can also make it inaccessible for a very long time through heavy and sustained bombardment. And if a nuclear weapon was used, Iran can forget about accessibility at all.



Destructlord said:


> I have to go now! Have exam tomorrow!


Be sure to hit the history, logic and nuclear fuel cycle books.


----------



## chinapakistan

Why the other countries can have nuclear weapon but iran cant?  Is it fair?


----------



## Solomon2

chinapakistan said:


> Why the other countries can have nuclear weapon but iran cant?  Is it fair?


Answer *here*.


----------



## Old School

I hope IDF would not go for this unwise option.Is is much better and safer to try a regime change in Iran for the better benefit of the Middle East. Hurting Iran physically will certainly stir up nationalism among Iranians which will backfire at the end. Just turn Iran into a secular democratic country , the Syrian regime will fall almost immediately. Then negotiate the Palestinian issue directly with the Palestinian on bilateral basis without all those Arab patrons and obstacles. Thus peace will be there in the entire Levant at the end. This is not to be solved tactically. It requires strategic planning and execution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vassnti

Old School said:


> I hope IDF would not go for this unwise option.Is is much better and safer to try a regime change in Iran for the better benefit of the Middle East. Hurting Iran physically will certainly stir up nationalism among Iranians which will backfire at the end. Just turn Iran into a secular democratic country , the Syrian regime will fall almost immediately. Then negotiate the Palestinian issue directly with the Palestinian on bilateral basis without all those Arab patrons and obstacles. Thus peace will be there in the entire Levant at the end. This is not to be solved tactically. It requires strategic planning and execution.



A lofty goal but i wonder how? An Israeli air strike i admit would be a desperation measure but what alternative is there?

There seems no chance of peacefull change of goverment in Iran, the last time people tried they were shot raped and murdered with the survivors being put on show trial that would have made Stalin proud.
China has no intention of helping the situation, russia ignore the problem despite the fact that a peacefull and prosporous middle east would solve half its problems. 

Israel feels threatened by a regiem that continues two proxy wars against it and the path of least harm is a conventional attack to try and prevent Iran getting a nuke. 

The safe way of course would be for Isreal to wipe Iran off the map with the nukes but even Bibi is that much of a nutter.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

will Israel strike Iran in twenty twelve No wonder thats the end of the world..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Gear up kerte kerta , kahain ... Gear hi na toot jai


----------



## T-Rex

chinapakistan said:


> Why the other countries can have nuclear weapon but iran cant?  Is it fair?



The champions of demcracy think it is quite fair, it does not matter what the rest of the world thinks. The champions have the right to build all kinds of weapons and then they also have the right to preach peace. It is all clear and fare; anybody who disagrees can go to hell! Uncle sam wants this incorporated into the constitution of all those wicked states that oppose the grand design of uncle sam and its army of crusaders.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

T-Rex said:


> The champions of demcracy think it is quite fair, it does not matter what the rest of the world thinks. The champions have the right to *build all kinds of weapons* and then they also have the right to preach peace. It is all clear and fare; anybody who disagrees can go to hell! Uncle sam wants this incorporated into the constitution of all those wicked states that oppose the grand design of uncle sam and its army of crusaders.


Are you saying only the champions of dictatorships have the right to build weapons?

Cue music...

[Queen]

We are the champions - my friends
And we'll keep on fighting - till the end -
We are the champions -
We are the champions
No time for losers
'Cause we are the champions - of the world - 

[/Queen]


----------



## QWECXZ

Iran builds 3 types of Jet fighters as far as I know, Saeqe which is a reverse engineered version of F-5 that someone in the first posts said wrongly that Iranians claim it's more advanced than the US F-18's, Azarakhsh which its capabilities are uknown and Shafaq which is a copy of the US YF-17 manufactured by northrop and Iranians claim that it has the same capabilities or even more which can't be confirmed yet although the test flights have been performed.

unlike others, I think If Israel goes into war with Iran the consequences of the war would be interesting xD I personally welcome such a strike from Israel and I doubt that the west would like the consequences.


----------



## Comet

Solomon2 said:


> "*Never*" is such a strong word, it implies either complete knowledge of the situation or that the facts and their context don't matter. Balanced knowledge of Israel is something Pakistanis clearly lack. That can be mended. But an attitude that, when all is said and done, the facts don't matter - that means one has committed to living a lie, doesn't it? And one lie leads to another, then more and bigger ones...


Never is also a word that can be taken out of context. The thing I was referring too was the "_emotions_" of people of Pakistan and the "_track record_" of Israel that will "_always_" hinder good relationship between the two countries. 





Solomon2 said:


> While Pakistan owes Israel nothing comparable to the Jews, that psychic distortion is still there. *Do you think you can really solve your country's problems without dealing with it?*


As if all other problems are solved.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

Wow its wrong that Iran can pursue peacefull nuclear technology but its justified that Israel could Nuke Iran just because they are perusing Nuclear Technology which might be used against the Jewish state, Hight of hypocrisy. Now which country on earth displays more will to use Nukes , Its of-course Israel which has indeed become a threat to this whole world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Old School

Vassnti said:


> A lofty goal but i wonder how? An Israeli air strike i admit would be a desperation measure but what alternative is there?
> 
> There seems no chance of peacefull change of goverment in Iran, the last time people tried they were shot raped and murdered with the survivors being put on show trial that would have made Stalin proud.
> China has no intention of helping the situation, russia ignore the problem despite the fact that a peacefull and prosporous middle east would solve half its problems.
> 
> Israel feels threatened by a regiem that continues two proxy wars against it and the path of least harm is a conventional attack to try and prevent Iran getting a nuke.
> 
> The safe way of course would be for Isreal to wipe Iran off the map with the nukes but even Bibi is that much of a nutter.



We need to initially identify the nature and intention of the Iranian theocratic regime. Their ultimate goal is to reincarnate the old Parsian empire under an Islamic template which well extends from the Indus valley to all the way to the Levant including the Fertile Crescent. They are using Isreal only as pretext and to look safe in the eyes of the Muslim world.
The neighbouring countries of Iran are no safer than Israel and therefore they must line up a coalition against the Imperialist ambition of the Iranian regime which remain unchanged even after the fall of secular Shah. Everyone must act before it reaches the point of no return. BiBi is disliked by many because he speaks no non sense. However, The initiative must come from the 'naive' neighbours of Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ARCHON

H2O3C4Nitrogen said:


> Wow its wrong that Iran can pursue peacefull nuclear technology but its justified that Israel could Nuke Iran just because they are perusing Nuclear Technology which might be used against the Jewish state, Hight of hypocrisy. Now which country on earth displays more will to use Nukes , Its of-course Israel which has indeed become a threat to this whole world.



Would you like a nuclear weaponed Iran on your border or not?

Its a simple question and i dont want the talk going anything related to India. Please answer in simple words.


----------



## QWECXZ

@old school: even if we consider what you're saying as real, still a Persian Empire is way better than today's american empire. Cyrus the great, the king of the persian empire, issued the first human rights decleration and he let the occupied lands keep their culture but the US empire has caused nothing but dropping tens of depleted uranium bombs on Iraqis under the name of democratization and human rights and trying to impose its new-born culture with cultural imperialism.


----------



## Old School

QWECXZ said:


> @old school: even if we consider what you're saying as real, still a Persian Empire is way better than today's american empire. *Cyrus the great, the king of the persian empire, issued the first human rights decleration* and he let the occupied lands keep their culture but the US empire has caused nothing but dropping tens of depleted uranium bombs on Iraqis under the name of democratization and human rights and trying to impose its new-born culture with cultural imperialism.



As a Persian you would certainly love to see the reincarnation of the Empire.
American government does not terrorize, persecute, kill and rape it's own citizen. The Iranian migrants in USA travel in first class . Human rights has it's own definition in Iran than the bill of rights or the UDHR . However, you are right to say that Cyrus and Ahmedinejad share a common objective which is none but a Persian Empire which will definitely put the national security of the neighbouring countries in danger.


----------



## QWECXZ

Old School said:


> As a Persian you would certainly love to see the reincarnation of the Empire.
> American government does not terrorize, persecute, kill and rape it's own citizen. The Iranian migrants in USA travel in first class . Human rights has it's own definition in Iran than the bill of rights or the UDHR . However, you are right to say that Cyrus and Ahmedinejad share a common objective which is none but a Persian Empire which will definitely put the national security of the neighbouring countries in danger.



yes, Iranian immigrant in USA live in a good situation but how much have they helped the US economy? they are one of the most well-educated and rich group of immigrants in the US.

how do you know the US doesn't persecute, kill and rape its own citizens? the foreign media can broadcast the reality inside Iran, but is there any powerful media out there to broadcast what the USA does to its own people? They possess the powerful media and they can show selectively whatever you're supposed to see.

what about the news of torture in the CIA? didn't they cover it up and said, if the national interests require, we would even torture? did you know the US is the 5th country of the world in terms of executions? what about the suppresion of the Californian students that they protested against Israel? why did they get attacked by the police?

but let me be exact, what the US does to its own people and what the US does in its own local affairs is not a matter of importance to me. so is Iran's affairs to others. as an Iranian I'm not in favor of our today's regime, but that doesn't mean I have to support the USA. It's not a case of my enemy's enemy is my friend for me.

plus, the current iranian regime doesn't know a word of persian things, they are the ones who want to vanish the persian culture, so they can't be the ones who want to establish a new persian empire.


----------



## Old School

QWECXZ said:


> plus, the current iranian regime doesn't know a word of persian things, they are the ones who want to vanish the persian culture, so they can't be the ones who want to establish a new persian empire.



I already wrote in my initial post that that Ahmedinjad wants a Persian empire in an' Islamic template' like a 'Khilafa'. Original Persian culture would be too 'unIslamic' for him. But for the neighbours, it is still the same imperialist attitude. Syria , Lebanon ( with Hezbollah proxy) are already under their influence. They are very much busy in Iraq and in Afghanistan . I always oppose any military strike on Iran as it would alienate people like you who are also against the mollahs.


----------



## QWECXZ

Old School said:


> I already wrote in my initial post that that Ahmedinjad wants a Persian empire in an' Islamic template' like a 'Khilafa'. Original Persian culture would be too 'unIslamic' for him. But for the neighbours, it is still the same imperialist attitude. Syria , Lebanon ( with Hezbollah proxy) are already under their influence. They are very much busy in Iraq and in Afghanistan . I always oppose any military strike on Iran as it would alienate people like you who are also against the mollahs.



personally am an atheist, but don't you think that the whole middle east region is kinda tied with Islam? Islam has influenced the culture of the middle east in a scale that can't be ignored. so an Islamic empire is in favor of many nations in the ME I guess. plus, they've called other islamic countries to join this new world order many times. despite all the rumors and facts we hear about the middle east, still the problems of the middle east should be solved by the middle eastern nations, not by a foreign military.

and about a possible US military strike on Iran, I should say that's completely impossible at least in the near future. and I shall explain why if you're interested.


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> Iran builds 3 types of Jet fighters as far as I know, Saeqe which is a reverse engineered version of F-5 that someone in the first posts said wrongly that Iranians claim it's more advanced than the US F-18's, Azarakhsh which its capabilities are uknown and Shafaq which is a copy of the US YF-17 manufactured by northrop and Iranians claim that it has the same capabilities or even more which can't be confirmed yet although the test flights have been performed.
> 
> unlike others, I think If Israel goes into war with Iran the consequences of the war would be interesting xD I personally welcome such a strike from Israel and I doubt that the west would like the consequences.



No one is going to like the consequences. But it still needs to be done if Iran doesn't back down and open up ALL it's facilities to the IAEA. And prove it's program is peaceful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Old School

QWECXZ said:


> and about a possible US military strike on Iran, I should say that's completely impossible at least in the near future. and I shall explain why if you're interested.



As a Pakistani , I view everything in our immediate neighbourhood is our business. Let me make that clear to you.
Iran is Pakistan's neighbour and that makes everything in Iran our national security interests. We do not want anyone to rock the boat when the situation is already tense enough. My view is the same view as the view of the government of Pakistan which is not the same as you may find among some Pakistanis who believe in Ummah.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> No one is going to like the consequences. But it still needs to be done if Iran doesn't back down and open up ALL it's facilities to the IAEA. And prove it's program is peaceful.



Iran's facilities are open for the agency experts and ALL Iranian facilities has been equipped with cameras by the agency to observe what's going on in there. you claim Iran is not cooperating with the agency, That's okay, the world has the right to be worrying about the proliferation of atomic weapons, but have you proved anything yet? saying someone is guilty of something isn't enough, you can't go to court with only claims.

if you're referring to the appendix of the NPT that it states Iran should open its weaponry factories which Iran didn't sign it, then I can promise you that Iran will never do that cause It's not reasonable and any country that thinks it has the ability to go into war with Iran is welcomed to do so.


----------



## QWECXZ

Old School said:


> As a Pakistani , I view everything in our immediate neighbourhood is our business. Let me make that clear to you.
> Iran is Pakistan's neighbour and that makes everything in Iran our national security interests. We do not want anyone to rock the boat when the situation is already tense enough. My view is the same view as the view of the government of Pakistan which is not the same as you may find among some Pakistanis who believe in Ummah.



Last time I checked the pakistani government is showing a tendency toward Iran. Iran and pakistan both are growing economics and they share some common interests in the region. at least there's one thing that everyone is aware of it and that's the willingness of the pakistani government to consume Iran's gas as pakistan's need for energy is increasing.


----------



## Old School

QWECXZ said:


> Last time I checked the pakistani government is showing a tendency toward Iran. Iran and pakistan both are growing economics and they share some common interests in the region. at least there's one thing that everyone is aware of it and that's the willingness of the pakistani government to consume Iran's gas as pakistan's need for energy is increasing.



Economic interests can not out weigh the national security. Government of Pakistan has a very clear policy on this issue. Pakistan is open to all foreign economic co-operation as long as it does not interfere with the national security. Pakistan also knows very well which side it will choose should international community decides to go tough on Iran. The Saudis and Pakistani government will have synchronized stance in that case.


----------



## QWECXZ

Old School said:


> Economic interests can not out weigh the national security. Government of Pakistan has a very clear policy on this issue. Pakistan is open to all foreign economic co-operation as long as it does not interfere with the national security. Pakistan also knows very well which side it will choose should international community decides to go tough on Iran. The Saudis and Pakistani government will have synchronized stance in that case.



we're not talking about the saudis, but in case of Pakistan, I doubt that the pakistani government would side any one if It's wise.

national security without economic development is meaningless. you can't have national security when your industry is not doing fine and your industry needs energy to do fine. It's pretty simple to do the math.


----------



## Old School

QWECXZ said:


> we're not talking about the saudis, but in case of Pakistan, I doubt that the pakistani government would side any one if It's wise.



Pakistani foreign policy on Iran will be the same as of the Saudis. Iranian diplomats and government official know this reality too. Just ask any Iranian government official.


----------



## QWECXZ

Old School said:


> Pakistani foreign policy on Iran will be the same as of the Saudis. Iranian diplomats and government official know this reality too. Just ask any Iranian government official.



unfortunately I don't know any Iranian government official around me and I don't believe what they say either if you know pakistani officials you can ask them.

from what we see on the news, I can't agree with you that Pakistan's foreign policy is the same as of the saudi government. and even If It was, I don't think it would be a matter of importance in the issue.


----------



## gambit

QWECXZ said:


> yes, Iranian immigrant in USA live in a good situation but *how much have they helped the US economy?* they are one of the most well-educated and rich group of immigrants in the US.


What does that question imply?



QWECXZ said:


> how do you know the US doesn't persecute, kill and rape its own citizens? the foreign media can broadcast the reality inside Iran, but is there any powerful media out there to broadcast what the USA does to its own people? They possess the powerful media and they can show selectively whatever you're supposed to see.


That is an absurd argument. If Iranians can leak out videos of the shooting of Neda surely those Iranian immigrants living in the US can leak out videos of US citizens who received similar treatments, no? What about CAIR and assorted muslim related organizations? Are you saying that the US media control them as well? Try to have some semblance of logic and common sense.



QWECXZ said:


> what about the news of torture in the CIA? didn't they cover it up and said, if the national interests require, we would even torture?


What about them? I am a SERE graduate and yes, I do know what waterboarding feel like on the receiving end. Show me a source detailing what 'torture' techniques the CIA employ.



QWECXZ said:


> did you know the US is the 5th country of the world in terms of executions?


They were criminals like rapists and murderers, not political protesters like Neda, the Iranian girl who was shot.



QWECXZ said:


> what about the suppresion of the Californian students that they protested against Israel? why did they get attacked by the police?


Source please. Details matter.



QWECXZ said:


> but let me be exact, what the US does to its own people and what the US does in its own local affairs is not a matter of importance to me. so is Iran's affairs to others. as an *Iranian I'm not in favor of our today's regime, but that doesn't mean I have to support the USA.* It's not a case of my enemy's enemy is my friend for me.


No one asked you to.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

gambit said:


> What does that question imply?



It wasn't a question, It was an answer.




gambit said:


> That is an absurd argument. If Iranians can leak out videos of the shooting of Neda surely those Iranian immigrants living in the US can leak out videos of US citizens who received similar treatments, no? What about CAIR and assorted muslim related organizations? Are you saying that the US media control them as well? Try to have some semblance of logic and common sense.



you can search for Ali tabatabaee on youtube, an iranian student who got shocked in the UCLA i guess. but that's not something important. I was talking about american people not iranians living in the US.



gambit said:


> What about them? I am a SERE graduate and yes, I do know what waterboarding feel like on the receiving end. Show me a source detailing what 'torture' techniques the CIA employ.



It doesn't take much time for you to search about the torture techniques the CIA has employed and is still employing. I'm sure you know pretty well what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the CIA tortures during the Bush administration which were revealed later but the Obama administration found it against the national interests to be investigated.



gambit said:


> They were criminals like rapists and murderers, not political protesters like Neda, the Iranian girl who was shot.



what's the difference? execution is execution. who knows that they all were criminals? the Iranian regime says the same thing, they say all people they execute every year are just murderers and rapists.




gambit said:


> Source please. Details matter.



see this link then:
Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition

you can find more sources on the net if you google. I wonder why the american media didn't cover it well enough.



gambit said:


> No one asked you to.



No one asked you either to stick your nose into Iran's local affairs. no one asked you to support the iranian people either. meanwhile, no one asked you to reply to my post. lol


----------



## gambit

QWECXZ said:


> It wasn't a question, It was an answer.


Quite a meaningless one.



QWECXZ said:


> you can search for Ali tabatabaee on youtube, an iranian student who got shocked in the UCLA i guess. but that's not something important. *I was talking about american people not iranians living in the US.*


So am I. If you are going to make the charge that the US government treats its citizens the same way the Iranian government its citizens, provide credible sources.



QWECXZ said:


> It doesn't take much time for you to search about the torture techniques the CIA has employed and is still employing. I'm sure you know pretty well what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the CIA tortures during the Bush administration which were revealed later but the Obama administration found it against the national interests to be investigated.


When people speaks of torture, the context is usually pulling of fingernails, for starter, and escalate up to something horrific like what the sons of Saddam Hussein did to young girls and football players who lost a match. In SERE...

SERE - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We were taught about regimes like Iran, Iraq, China, Russia, even Venezuela, routinely uses torture technique that made what SERE has the equivalent of the TV show 'Man versus Wild'. What we experienced in SERE would qualify as 'torture' only in the most comprehensive context. I heard the UK's version of SERE is even harsher than ours.



QWECXZ said:


> what's the difference? execution is execution. who knows that they all were criminals? the Iranian regime says the same thing, they say all people they execute every year are just murderers and rapists.


Wrong...The reason for the execution is very important. It is amusing and very revealing about *YOU* reading the above. It contradict everything you claimed about yourself regarding how you oppose the current Iranian regime. It also revealed a willful disregard for logical thought processes. Ever wonder why these regimes always classified political prisoners as common criminals charged with civil crimes like rapes or robbery or murders? Because they know that the true charge against them, political dissent, and the subsequent persecution of the dissenters, essentially rendered the regime illegitimate. And here you are trying desperately to associate genuine criminals in the US with persecuted political prisoners in odious regimes like Iran or NKR. Like it or not, you *ARE* defending the mullahs.



QWECXZ said:


> see this link then:
> Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition
> 
> you can find more sources on the net if you google. I wonder why the american media didn't cover it well enough.


If you can find it then it is covered well enough. Still...What you brought on is old news and inappropriate at that. Let us take a brief look...

Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition


> All of this raises the question: Is interrupting a campus speaker ever a legitimate form of free expression?
> 
> Most higher education leaders welcome vocal protests outside a speaking venue and quiet protest (leaflets, for example) inside, but draw the line at interrupting speakers.
> 
> Many other experts on free speech and protest agree  and some are disappointed that national organizations are defending the right to shout repeatedly during a campus talk.


So as we can see...The students were not arrested because of their views but because of their disruptive behavior in a controlled environment. The venue is supposed to encourage an *EQUITABLE* exchange of opinions, not lopsided shouting by one side to shut out the other, which is what happened. But then again, I should not be surprised at how quickly people disregard details and logical thought processes when it come to US.



QWECXZ said:


> No one asked you either to stick your nose into Iran's local affairs. no one asked you to support the iranian people either.


Some Iranians do and did asked.



QWECXZ said:


> meanwhile, no one asked you to reply to my post. lol


This is a publicly accessible forum. If you do not like to be challenged, do not participate and expressed your opinion. Quite a juvenile response.


----------



## Hussein

gambit said:


> Like it or not, you *ARE* defending the mullahs.


 that it is not that simple.

they are some very humanist mullahs
most grand ayatollahs support the green
i know this very much being myself from religious family. i never learned it was good to have a dictatorship, i never learned woman was inferior, i never learned that US is devil, so on...

i understand anyway some Iranians in Europe especially and in US less, they are hating religion. I can see it in France when i am here. But they are not the Iranians of Iran.
Not a long time ago i had a speech with a guy who escaped the country when he was 7 years old and believed he could speak of the country when he didn't know anything about it.
He was hiding being Iranian, he always said Iranians inside were bastards, and now he is kind of proud and says to be for green but anti mousavi, without saying it much publicly.

Of course most Iranians are smart and not violent in speech but some of them in foreign countries are very much full of hatred and exagerate a lot with using bad words.

One of them is "the problem is mullahs" .
How could someone say he has some intelligence and use this kiddish sentence. In the old past of France when church got a lot of power, nobody could say "the power of priests". 

More than this, in Iran people are educated and most religious figures clearly showed (when they can because it is hard to say something in Iran nowadays. it became very hard dictatorship) they don't agree with violence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

gambit said:


> 1)Quite a meaningless one.
> 
> 
> 2)So am I. If you are going to make the charge that the US government treats its citizens the same way the Iranian government its citizens, provide credible sources.
> 
> 
> 3)When people speaks of torture, the context is usually pulling of fingernails, for starter, and escalate up to something horrific like what the sons of Saddam Hussein did to young girls and football players who lost a match. In SERE...
> 
> SERE - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4)We were taught about regimes like Iran, Iraq, China, Russia, even Venezuela, routinely uses torture technique that made what SERE has the equivalent of the TV show 'Man versus Wild'. What we experienced in SERE would qualify as 'torture' only in the most comprehensive context. I heard the UK's version of SERE is even harsher than ours.
> 
> 
> 5)Wrong...The reason for the execution is very important. It is amusing and very revealing about *YOU* reading the above. It contradict everything you claimed about yourself regarding how you oppose the current Iranian regime. It also revealed a willful disregard for logical thought processes. Ever wonder why these regimes always classified political prisoners as common criminals charged with civil crimes like rapes or robbery or murders? Because they know that the true charge against them, political dissent, and the subsequent persecution of the dissenters, essentially rendered the regime illegitimate. And here you are trying desperately to associate genuine criminals in the US with persecuted political prisoners in odious regimes like Iran or NKR. Like it or not, you *ARE* defending the mullahs.
> 
> 
> 6)If you can find it then it is covered well enough. Still...What you brought on is old news and inappropriate at that. Let us take a brief look...
> 
> Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition
> 
> 7)So as we can see...The students were not arrested because of their views but because of their disruptive behavior in a controlled environment. The venue is supposed to encourage an *EQUITABLE* exchange of opinions, not lopsided shouting by one side to shut out the other, which is what happened. But then again, I should not be surprised at how quickly people disregard details and logical thought processes when it come to US.
> 
> 
> 8)Some Iranians do and did asked.
> 
> 
> 9)This is a publicly accessible forum. If you do not like to be challenged, do not participate and expressed your opinion. Quite a juvenile response.



1) It isn't you who decides what is meaningless or not, It's the readers who decide that and you here is just someone who is participating in a debate.


2) the word credible resources is funny. you're trying to make a way for saying those sources are not credible. that sounds like "mine is right, yours is B.S" like children. lol

3) unlike you, I've never been working in any army seriously. but drawing off fingernails is the least thing they do in a professional security agency like the CIA. If the obama administration had let the torture case be investigated and revealed, then I would've been expected to provide sources, but when it had refused to do so, I'm not expected to provide anything.
can you provide "credible sources" about the tortures techniques the iranian regime does?

4) It's pretty funny that you're trying to defend yourself against the Iranian regime. I'm not the speaker of the iranian regime. so you can't expect me to respond to this.

5) I didn't claim people executed in the US were political activists, but due to lack of observation over the US prisons, no one can deny such claims either. how can you be sure that they are not covering anything when there's no superior power to watch over the US?. and the things you're saying about the iranian regime are just claims. those are the things YOU say, and I'm not in the position to answer them

6) how many news papers are published in the US? and how many of them published it? since one or two news papers published the report it doesn't mean it has been covered well enough. what percentage of the US newspapers covered it? less than 1%. plus, the website I gave wasn't a giant media. so you can't say It's been published at all.

7) lmao. this one was hella funny. That's exactly what the Iranian regime says. so as we can see, you both are doing the same.

8) It's because iranians know the problem. they've realized that the system is poisoned. but americans haven't realized the problem yet.

9) If I hadn't believed in that, I wouldn't have responded to your post.

10) I'm not supporting the iranian regime. even If the iranian regime was the worst and wildest regime in the world it still doesn't prove that the american system is good. trying to lable me as a supporter of the iranian regime is just a method of psychological warfare to escape the challenge.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

> Would you like a nuclear weaponed Iran on your border or not?
> 
> Its a simple question and i dont want the talk going anything related to India. Please answer in simple words.



I guess GOP dosent have any problem with Iran Armed with Nukes. Pakistan enjoys healthy relations especially in the Bilateral economic arena. 
However owing to the fact that Israel once tried to Bomb Pakistani Nuclear Installation in the Past from Indian soil, having an Iran equiped with Nukes will ofcourse diverge Israel's focus more off the Pakistani Nukes thus there shouldn't be any problem with Iran having Nukes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> Iran's facilities are open for the agency experts and ALL Iranian facilities has been equipped with cameras by the agency to observe what's going on in there. you claim Iran is not cooperating with the agency, That's okay, the world has the right to be worrying about the proliferation of atomic weapons, but have you proved anything yet? saying someone is guilty of something isn't enough, you can't go to court with only claims.
> 
> if you're referring to the appendix of the NPT that it states Iran should open its weaponry factories which Iran didn't sign it, then I can promise you that Iran will never do that cause It's not reasonable and any country that thinks it has the ability to go into war with Iran is welcomed to do so.



actually Iran turned the cameras off and broke the IAEA seals on the monitoring equipment when they resumed enrichment. They also still refuse IAEA unannounced inspections to verify NPT compliance. There is also enough circumstantial evidence to show Iranian military involvement in the nuclear program. And not all the intelligence comes from the U.S. but from the E.U. as well.


I agree with you that Iran will never comply. That is why war is inevitable.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> actually Iran turned the cameras off and broke the IAEA seals on the monitoring equipment when they resumed enrichment. They also still refuse IAEA unannounced inspections to verify NPT compliance. There is also enough circumstantial evidence to show Iranian military involvement in the nuclear program. And not all the intelligence comes from the U.S. but from the E.U. as well.
> 
> 
> I agree with you that Iran will never comply. That is why war is inevitable.



can you provide any announcement from the IAEA referring to the points you made? Iran has been enriching uranium for years after 'Ahmadi Nejad' came to power and It has never stopped its enrichment to resume it again during the A.N era. with respect to you, your information seems to be wrong. well, I agree that All the intelligence doesn't come from the USA only, but why don't you talk about China, Russia and some other countries which they don't agree with you?

well, if you see war as unavoidable and you have the ability to launch a military strike now, what are you waiting for? I'm wondering.


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> can you provide any announcement from the IAEA referring to the points you made? Iran has been enriching uranium for years after 'Ahmadi Nejad' came to power and It has never stopped its enrichment to resume it again during the A.N era. with respect to you, your information seems to be wrong. well, I agree that All the intelligence doesn't come from the USA only, but why don't you talk about China, Russia and some other countries which they don't agree with you?
> 
> well, if you see war as unavoidable and you have the ability to launch a military strike now, what are you waiting for? I'm wondering.



*Paris agreement of 2004* - Under the terms of the Paris Agreement, on November 14, 2004, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator announced a voluntary and temporary suspension of its uranium enrichment program. 

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/2004/infcirc637.pdf

Iran reaffirms that, in accordance with Article II of the NPT, it does not and will
not seek to acquire nuclear weapons. It commits itself to full cooperation and
transparency with the IAEA. *Iran will continue implementing voluntarily the Additional
Protocol pending ratification.* (the additional protocol allows for unannounced inspections)

To build further confidence, *Iran has decided, on a voluntary basis, to continue
and extend its suspension to include all enrichment related and reprocessing activities*,
and specifically: the manufacture and import of gas centrifuges and their components;
the assembly, installation, testing or operation of gas centrifuges; work to undertake any
plutonium separation, or to construct or operate any plutonium separation installation;
and all tests or production at any uranium conversion installation. The IAEA will be
notified of this suspension and invited to verify and monitor it.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> *Paris agreement of 2004* - Under the terms of the Paris Agreement, on November 14, 2004, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator announced a voluntary and temporary suspension of its uranium enrichment program.
> 
> http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/2004/infcirc637.pdf



Yes, I know, but That was during the Khatami era. AhmadiNejad took the office in 2005. and if you read my previous post again, you will notice the difference between What I said and What you misunderstood. plus, Iran announced a voluntary and temporary suspension of its enrichment program. that means Iran wasn't sentenced by the IEAE and since It was mentioned to be a temporary suspension, you can't say that Iran has violated any rule.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

Ok if the wars inevitable , What if the Iran has couple of nukes and would respond by nuking Israel and the Oil feilds of Arab counteries . Is the West prepared for a chaotic scenario like that ..!!! Absolute Power Corrupts .
Attacking Iran would be an act of desperation and would backfire and that would take half a century to pick up the pieces of broken crockery .


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> Yes, I know, but That was during the Khatami era. AhmadiNejad took the office in 2005. and if you read my previous post again, you will notice the difference between What I said and What you misunderstood. plus, Iran announced a voluntary and temporary suspension of its enrichment program. that means Iran wasn't sentenced by the IEAE and since It was mentioned to be a temporary suspension, you can't say that Iran has violated any rule.



Look......The bottom line can be expressed in the words of the IAEA head at the time Dr. ElBaradei.

Iran Begins Removal of IAEA Seals at Enrichment-related Locations

*"In Dr. ElBaradei´s view, maintaining the suspension, resuming the dialogue with all concerned parties, and providing the necessary cooperation and transparency to the IAEA are conditions for a comprehensive and equitable solution that ensures Iran´s right to peaceful nuclear activities while assuring the international community of the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme."*

The IAEA still considers Iran to be in breach of the NPT for a reason. If Iran's Nuke program was peaceful it would have nothing to fear in completely opening up to the IAEA. Which includes unannounced inspections.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> Look......The bottom line can be expressed in the words of the IAEA head at the time Dr. ElBaradei.
> 
> Iran Begins Removal of IAEA Seals at Enrichment-related Locations
> 
> *"In Dr. ElBaradei´s view, maintaining the suspension, resuming the dialogue with all concerned parties, and providing the necessary cooperation and transparency to the IAEA are conditions for a comprehensive and equitable solution that ensures Iran´s right to peaceful nuclear activities while assuring the international community of the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme."*
> 
> The IAEA still considers Iran to be in breach of the NPT for a reason. If Iran's Nuke program was peaceful it would have nothing to fear in completely opening up to the IAEA. Which includes unannounced inspections.



the report is old. last time I checked the USA and its allies attacked ElBaradei because they taught elbaradei was siding with Iran. Elbaradei insisted that Iran's nuclear programme is for power producing purposes and if you remember correctly, during his last speech, he mentioned that the western powers kept pressuring him on Iran's nuclear programme.

the reason that the west is putting pressure on Iran is Iran rejects to open up its weaponry facilities to the agency. why should Iran do so? such an action would completely endanger Iran's national security. plus, Iran signed the NPT like 35 years ago during the Shah era, why should Iran sign the appendixes too when the other sides of the TREATY hasn't been honoring their obligations toward Iran?


----------



## Thomas

*Excerpts: IAEA report on Iran nuclear programme
Excerpts from the International Atomic Energy Agency's report on Iran's nuclear enrichment programme, dated 18 February 2010:*
BBC News - Excerpts: IAEA report on Iran nuclear programme

IAEA CONCERNS

The information available to the agency is extensive and has been collected from a variety of sources over time. This raises concerns about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile.

These alleged activities consist of a number of projects and sub-projects, covering nuclear and missile-related aspects, run by military related organisations.

ALLEGED ACTIVITIES

Among the activities which the agency has attempted to discuss with Iran are: activities involving high-precision detonators fired simultaneously; studies on the initiation of high explosives and missile re-entry body engineering... and various procurement-related activities.

Specifically, the agency has... sought clarification of the following: whether Iran's exploding bridgewire detonator activities were solely for civil or conventional military purposes; whether Iran developed a spherical implosion system, possibly with the assistance of a foreign expert knowledgeable in explosives technology; whether the engineering design and computer modelling studies aimed at producing a new design for the payload chamber of a missile were for a nuclear payload; and the relationship between various attempts by senior Iranian officials with links to military organisations in Iran to obtain nuclear-related technology and equipment.

The agency would also like to discuss with Iran: the project and management structure of alleged activities related to nuclear explosives; nuclear-related safety arrangements for a number of the alleged projects; details relating to the manufacture of components for high explosives initiation systems; and experiments concerning the generation and detection of neutrons.

Since August 2008, Iran has declined to discuss the above issues with the agency or to provide any further information and access (to locations and/or people) to address these concerns, asserting that the allegations relating to possible military dimensions to its nuclear programme are baseless and that the information to which the agency is referring is based on forgeries.

SUMMARY

Iran has not provided the necessary co-operation to permit the agency to confirm that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.

Iran is not implementing the requirements contained in the relevant resolutions of the board of governors and the security council... which are essential to building confidence in the exclusively peaceful purpose of its nuclear programme and to resolve outstanding questions.

In particular, Iran needs to co-operate in clarifying outstanding issues which give rise to concerns about possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme.

Contrary to the relevant resolutions of the board of governors and the security council, Iran has continued with the operation of PFEP and FEP at Natanz, and the construction of a new enrichment plant at Fordow. Iran has also announced the intention to build 10 new enrichment plants.

Contrary to the relevant resolutions of the board of governors and the security council, Iran has also continued with the construction of the IR-40 reactor and related heavy water activities. The agency has not been permitted to take samples of the heavy water which is stored at UCF, and has not been provided with access to the heavy water production plant.

The director general requests Iran to take steps towards the full implementation of its safeguards agreement and its other obligations.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> *Excerpts: IAEA report on Iran nuclear programme
> Excerpts from the International Atomic Energy Agency's report on Iran's nuclear enrichment programme, dated 18 February 2010:*
> BBC News - Excerpts: IAEA report on Iran nuclear programme
> 
> IAEA CONCERNS
> 
> The information available to the agency is extensive and has been collected from a variety of sources over time. This raises concerns about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile.
> 
> These alleged activities consist of a number of projects and sub-projects, covering nuclear and missile-related aspects, run by military related organisations.
> 
> ALLEGED ACTIVITIES
> 
> Among the activities which the agency has attempted to discuss with Iran are: activities involving high-precision detonators fired simultaneously; studies on the initiation of high explosives and missile re-entry body engineering... and various procurement-related activities.
> 
> Specifically, the agency has... sought clarification of the following: whether Iran's exploding bridgewire detonator activities were solely for civil or conventional military purposes; whether Iran developed a spherical implosion system, possibly with the assistance of a foreign expert knowledgeable in explosives technology; whether the engineering design and computer modelling studies aimed at producing a new design for the payload chamber of a missile were for a nuclear payload; and the relationship between various attempts by senior Iranian officials with links to military organisations in Iran to obtain nuclear-related technology and equipment.
> 
> The agency would also like to discuss with Iran: the project and management structure of alleged activities related to nuclear explosives; nuclear-related safety arrangements for a number of the alleged projects; details relating to the manufacture of components for high explosives initiation systems; and experiments concerning the generation and detection of neutrons.
> 
> Since August 2008, Iran has declined to discuss the above issues with the agency or to provide any further information and access (to locations and/or people) to address these concerns, asserting that the allegations relating to possible military dimensions to its nuclear programme are baseless and that the information to which the agency is referring is based on forgeries.
> 
> SUMMARY
> 
> Iran has not provided the necessary co-operation to permit the agency to confirm that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.
> 
> Iran is not implementing the requirements contained in the relevant resolutions of the board of governors and the security council... which are essential to building confidence in the exclusively peaceful purpose of its nuclear programme and to resolve outstanding questions.
> 
> In particular, Iran needs to co-operate in clarifying outstanding issues which give rise to concerns about possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme.
> 
> Contrary to the relevant resolutions of the board of governors and the security council, Iran has continued with the operation of PFEP and FEP at Natanz, and the construction of a new enrichment plant at Fordow. Iran has also announced the intention to build 10 new enrichment plants.
> 
> Contrary to the relevant resolutions of the board of governors and the security council, Iran has also continued with the construction of the IR-40 reactor and related heavy water activities. The agency has not been permitted to take samples of the heavy water which is stored at UCF, and has not been provided with access to the heavy water production plant.
> 
> The director general requests Iran to take steps towards the full implementation of its safeguards agreement and its other obligations.



Yes, and as I said in my first posts, I completely accept that the world should be worrying about Iran's nuclear programme and the proliferation of atomic weapons, but even in this report, the IAEA didn't condemn Iran to pursuing nuclear weapons. It was the first report of the agency after elbaradei left the office.

like 2 weeks ago, Iran accepted to let the agency experts visit Arak's heavy water plant. the refusal of accepting that before can be a mater of controversy but still it doesn't PROVE Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. but let's be fair, have the other sides of the treaty honored their obligations so far? why should Iran trust the west when they have never done anything constructive to boost trust?

plus, being under the direct threat of the US and its ally Israel, It sounds completely rational that Iran wants to spread its nuclear facilities to reduce the chance of being damaged by a possible strike. so That's pretty understandable why Iran is planning for the construction of more enrichment sites. 

one more question that I want you to clarify it for me, why the IAEA doesn't show the same interest to know more about Israel's nuclear programme?


----------



## gambit

QWECXZ said:


> 1) It isn't you who decides what is meaningless or not, It's the readers who decide that and you here is just someone who is participating in a debate.


I say it is meaningless for me. The readers can decide for themselves.



QWECXZ said:


> 2) the word credible resources is funny. you're trying to make a way for saying those sources are not credible. that sounds like "mine is right, yours is B.S" like children. lol


No...Am saying that if you are going claim that the US persecute political dissent, provide credible sources. lol



QWECXZ said:


> 3) unlike you, I've never been working in any army seriously. but drawing off fingernails is the least thing they do in a professional security agency like the CIA. If the obama administration had let the torture case be investigated and revealed, then I would've been expected to provide sources, but when it had refused to do so, I'm not expected to provide anything.
> *can you provide "credible sources" about the tortures techniques the iranian regime does?*


As you wish...

How Ahmad Batebi Survived Torture In Iran - 60 Minutes - CBS News


> "*They kicked me in the teeth and broke them. There was a toilet that was stopped up with feces. They put my head into the toilet," he said.*
> 
> Batebi told Cooper the bottom of his feet and his back were beaten with a cable, and that *his testicles were beaten as well.*
> 
> Asked how long this went on for, Batebi said, "This happened the whole time I was in solitary confinement. It also happened at other times."
> 
> Human rights groups don't know how much torture takes place in Iran's prisons. But *three years ago, Iran's judiciary did publicly admit that torture was used to extract confessions. *
> 
> "It's part of the torture that they use to get a confession or to convince people not to commit another crime," Batebi replied.
> 
> Public hangings in Iran are especially cruel - *instead of a quick drop to break their neck, the doomed are lifted up by a crane so they suffocate slowly.*
> 
> Human rights activists say *two teenaged boys were executed for being gay, but Iran's government says they raped a child.* Iran executed more than 300 people last year, second only to China. The vast majority of executions were by slow hanging.
> 
> "The *Islamic penal code includes a number of punishments which are torture under international law such as flogging, amputations, and stoning,"* explained Hadi Ghaemi, who leads a New York-based group called the International Campaign for Human Rights on Iran.



'Torture, murder and rape' &mdash; Iran&rsquo;s way of breaking the opposition - Times Online


> Some testified that prisoners were subjected to torture including beatings, electrocution and *having their toenails torn out.*
> 
> Female rape victims were mostly held for days, not weeks, like the men. Some said that their jailers claimed to have religious sanction to violate them as they were morally dirty.
> 
> He continued: *There are no few stories about the rape of girls and boys in prison.* I say to myself three decades after the revolution and two decades after the death of the Imam [Ayatollah Khomeini]  what place have we reached?


Now...Can you show the readers if any of the loud mouthed students at UC Irvine suffered similar fates after they were ejected from the lecture hall?



QWECXZ said:


> 4) It's pretty funny that you're trying to defend yourself against the Iranian regime. I'm not the speaker of the iranian regime. so you can't expect me to respond to this.


Nope...Am pointing out, or rather asking you, to show the readers how the oh-so-scary CIA torture prisoners.



QWECXZ said:


> 5) I didn't claim people executed in the US were political activists, but due to *lack of observation over the US prisons, no one can deny such claims either.* how can you be sure that they are not covering anything when there's no superior power to watch over the US?. and the things you're saying about the iranian regime are just claims. those are the things YOU say, and I'm not in the position to answer them


Says who? You? Based on what criteria can you say that US prisons are filled with political dissenters and that no one is watching over them? Yours is the appeal to ignorance argument. Look it up.



QWECXZ said:


> 6) how many news papers are published in the US? and how many of them published it? since one or two news papers published the report it doesn't mean it has been covered well enough. what percentage of the US newspapers covered it? less than 1%. plus, the website I gave wasn't a giant media. so you can't say It's been published at all.


This is the typical inconsistent argument when it come to free speech in the US compared to MEastern despotic regimes. It is somewhat narcissistic as well. What you are saying is that because major newspapers like the NY Times or the LA Times or USA Today, all quite liberal and anti-Bush/conservative prints, did not report your little local news item, therefore it is 'evident' that there is media oppression or collusion among the major news prints to hide political oppression in the US. Ever consider the possibility that after they examined the details of the event, something that you obviously failed to do, they found the story to be a non-story?

The most that CAIR... CAIR > Home ... managed to milk out of that event is a bland statement...

Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition


> The students voiced political views to shame the representative of a foreign government embroiled in controversy for its outrageous violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Delivering this message in a loud and shocking manner expressed the gravity of the charges leveled against Israeli policies, and falls within the purview of protected speech, said *a letter released by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.* That statement followed one by Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, which said: These students had the courage and conscience to stand up against aggression, using peaceful means. We cannot allow our educational institutions to be used as a platform to threaten and discourage students who choose to practice their First Amendment right.


Nothing about if any of the UC Irvine students suffered at the hands of the state anywhere to the level of their Iranian collegiate brothers and sisters. If anyone who should be monitoring this closely would be CAIR, Human Rights Watch or Amnessty International. But what we have is zilch. CAIR's leadership probably behind closed doors considered the event to be a waste of blood sugar to even type up that bland statement.



QWECXZ said:


> 7) lmao. this one was hella funny. That's exactly what the Iranian regime says. so as we can see, you both are doing the same.


It is funny but in a sad way. The streets of America have been proven to be effective venues for political dissenting speech, from calling a sitting US President names such as adulterer and war criminal to pointing out America's societal ills. Whereas the streets of Iran under the mullahs today proved to be shooting ranges with live targets.



QWECXZ said:


> 10) I'm not supporting the iranian regime. *even If the iranian regime was the worst and wildest regime in the world it still doesn't prove that the american system is good.* trying to lable me as a supporter of the iranian regime is just a method of psychological warfare to escape the challenge.


Common wisdom compels people not to seek for what is 'good' but to seek for what is 'better' than the current situation they are in at that time. That is why we see war refugees fleeing to a neighboring country even though this neighbor may not be any better of a government. Frankly, we Americans really do not care if anyone consider our country to be 'good' or not. But if the current immigration problem we have with Mexico is any indicator, it is that we are 'better' than Mexico. Same thing for between US and Iran. We do not care if you or any Iranian consider US to be 'good' or not, only that you are intellectually honest enough to examine the details, apply logical thinking, and be willing to admit that we are 'better'. By demanding that we live up to impossible standards, those impossible standards afford you the way to indirectly shill for the mullahs and give them the latitude to do what they did to your fellow Iranians as shown above.


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> Yes, and as I said in my first posts, I completely accept that the world should be worrying about Iran's nuclear programme and the proliferation of atomic weapons, but even in this report, the IAEA didn't condemn Iran to pursuing nuclear weapons. It was the first report of the agency after elbaradei left the office.
> 
> like 2 weeks ago, Iran accepted to let the agency experts visit Arak's heavy water plant. the refusal of accepting that before can be a mater of controversy but still it doesn't PROVE Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. but let's be fair, have the other sides of the treaty honored their obligations so far? why should Iran trust the west when they have never done anything constructive to boost trust?
> 
> plus, being under the direct threat of the US and its ally Israel, It sounds completely rational that Iran wants to spread its nuclear facilities to reduce the chance of being damaged by a possible strike. so That's pretty understandable why Iran is planning for the construction of more enrichment sites.
> 
> one more question that I want you to clarify it for me, why the IAEA doesn't show the same interest to know more about Israel's nuclear programme?



Israel was never a signer of the NPT and therefor not subject to it. However Personally I think Israel should open up to the IAEA. In fact I think the goal should be the elimination of all nuclear weapons. I do not believe though that is obtainable. 

Iran is a signer of the NPT. And it doesn't matter if it was the Shah's regime that signed it or not. The reason Iran is viewed with such alarm when it comes to their nuke program. Is they are supporters of groups internationally recognized as terrorists. They make inflammatory statements calling into question Israels existence and chant death to America. Then expect everyone to believe them when they say their nuke program is for peaceful power generation. That doesn't garner to much goodwill or trust with the international community.

There is enough circumstantial evidence to suggest that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program. And until Iran can prove otherwise it will be on a collision course with the west.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/18/iran-may-be-working-on-nu_n_467735.html


----------



## below_freezing

gambit said:


> Quite a meaningless one.
> 
> 
> So am I. If you are going to make the charge that the US government treats its citizens the same way the Iranian government its citizens, provide credible sources.
> 
> 
> When people speaks of torture, the context is usually pulling of fingernails, for starter, and escalate up to something horrific like what the sons of Saddam Hussein did to young girls and football players who lost a match. In SERE...
> 
> SERE - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> We were taught about regimes like Iran, Iraq, China, Russia, even Venezuela, routinely uses torture technique that made what SERE has the equivalent of the TV show 'Man versus Wild'. What we experienced in SERE would qualify as 'torture' only in the most comprehensive context. I heard the UK's version of SERE is even harsher than ours.
> 
> 
> Wrong...The reason for the execution is very important. It is amusing and very revealing about *YOU* reading the above. It contradict everything you claimed about yourself regarding how you oppose the current Iranian regime. It also revealed a willful disregard for logical thought processes. Ever wonder why these regimes always classified political prisoners as common criminals charged with civil crimes like rapes or robbery or murders? Because they know that the true charge against them, political dissent, and the subsequent persecution of the dissenters, essentially rendered the regime illegitimate. And here you are trying desperately to associate genuine criminals in the US with persecuted political prisoners in odious regimes like Iran or NKR. Like it or not, you *ARE* defending the mullahs.
> 
> 
> If you can find it then it is covered well enough. Still...What you brought on is old news and inappropriate at that. Let us take a brief look...
> 
> Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition
> 
> So as we can see...The students were not arrested because of their views but because of their disruptive behavior in a controlled environment. The venue is supposed to encourage an *EQUITABLE* exchange of opinions, not lopsided shouting by one side to shut out the other, which is what happened. But then again, I should not be surprised at how quickly people disregard details and logical thought processes when it come to US.
> 
> 
> Some Iranians do and did asked.
> 
> 
> This is a publicly accessible forum. If you do not like to be challenged, do not participate and expressed your opinion. Quite a juvenile response.



hi. US prisoners of war taken by China were treated very humanely. For one, they recieved food, which many Chinese soldiers did not have at least in Korea.

The torture on them was inflicted by the undisciplined North Koreans and North Vietnamese. I won't comment on whether the US tortures or not.


----------



## Thomas

below_freezing said:


> hi. US prisoners of war taken by China were treated very humanely. For one, they recieved food, which many Chinese soldiers did not have at least in Korea.
> 
> The torture on them was inflicted by the undisciplined North Koreans and North Vietnamese. I won't comment on whether the US tortures or not.



I think you have threads mixed up.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

so a guy having a SERE training can escape Gitmo or abu gharib..?? PPl in Gitmo and abu gharib were subjected to sick torture so much that they prayed that they should have been dead rather that being imprisoned there ..!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## QWECXZ

gambit said:


> I say it is meaningless for me. The readers can decide for themselves.
> 
> 
> No...Am saying that if you are going claim that the US persecute political dissent, provide credible sources. lol
> 
> 
> As you wish...
> 
> How Ahmad Batebi Survived Torture In Iran - 60 Minutes - CBS News
> 
> 
> 'Torture, murder and rape' &mdash; Iran&rsquo;s way of breaking the opposition - Times Online
> 
> Now...Can you show the readers if any of the loud mouthed students at UC Irvine suffered similar fates after they were ejected from the lecture hall?
> 
> 
> Nope...Am pointing out, or rather asking you, to show the readers how the oh-so-scary CIA torture prisoners.
> 
> 
> Says who? You? Based on what criteria can you say that US prisons are filled with political dissenters and that no one is watching over them? Yours is the appeal to ignorance argument. Look it up.
> 
> This is the typical inconsistent argument when it come to free speech in the US compared to MEastern despotic regimes. It is somewhat narcissistic as well. What you are saying is that because major newspapers like the NY Times or the LA Times or USA Today, all quite liberal and anti-Bush/conservative prints, did not report your little local news item, therefore it is 'evident' that there is media oppression or collusion among the major news prints to hide political oppression in the US. Ever consider the possibility that after they examined the details of the event, something that you obviously failed to do, they found the story to be a non-story?
> 
> The most that CAIR... CAIR > Home ... managed to milk out of that event is a bland statement...
> 
> Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition
> 
> Nothing about if any of the UC Irvine students suffered at the hands of the state anywhere to the level of their Iranian collegiate brothers and sisters. If anyone who should be monitoring this closely would be CAIR, Human Rights Watch or Amnessty International. But what we have is zilch. CAIR's leadership probably behind closed doors considered the event to be a waste of blood sugar to even type up that bland statement.
> 
> 
> It is funny but in a sad way. The streets of America have been proven to be effective venues for political dissenting speech, from calling a sitting US President names such as adulterer and war criminal to pointing out America's societal ills. Whereas the streets of Iran under the mullahs today proved to be shooting ranges with live targets.
> 
> 
> Common wisdom compels people not to seek for what is 'good' but to seek for what is 'better' than the current situation they are in at that time. That is why we see war refugees fleeing to a neighboring country even though this neighbor may not be any better of a government. Frankly, we Americans really do not care if anyone consider our country to be 'good' or not. But if the current immigration problem we have with Mexico is any indicator, it is that we are 'better' than Mexico. Same thing for between US and Iran. We do not care if you or any Iranian consider US to be 'good' or not, only that you are intellectually honest enough to examine the details, apply logical thinking, and be willing to admit that we are 'better'. By demanding that we live up to impossible standards, those impossible standards afford you the way to indirectly shill for the mullahs and give them the latitude to do what they did to your fellow Iranians as shown above.



well, from what I see you're not answering my questions. you are not here to answer the questions i asked but you want to pose your own questions.

your request that I should provide any documents of the CIA prisons is ridiculous. no one can believe that the CIA prisons are heaven. lol why should the US have political prisoners when many americans have been brainwashed by the media that the US is the most democratic country of the world? lol. how did we know about Batebi's story in the Evin prison? after he ran away. but did we know about the things he said before he ran away?

you didn't answer my question about the protestors got arrested for protesting against Israeli embassador. you didn't answer my question about Mostafa Tabatabaee nejad, the student of the UCLA who got tasered at least 5 times by the guards. when the UCLA Guards Taser someone 5 times in the public, you don't need to be a genius to guess what the US does in its hidden prisons. I've got something new for you:

In California, a Day of Protests Over Education Budget Cuts - NYTimes.com



> Late Thursday afternoon, however, more than 150 people were arrested after they stopped traffic along an interstate in Oakland, according to the California Highway Patrol. There was also one injury. Protesters in Davis, outside Sacramento, also tried to block an interstate but were rebuffed by the authorities using pepper spray. One student protester was arrested.



as I said before, Iranian people are one step ahead americans because at least they've realized the system is poisoned. but many people in america are still in a trance induced by the media. theocracy is bad, but militarism is worse.
I wonder, what would happen If the US people poured into the streets of the USA and wanted to topple the whole system (like we did). all people remember what happened in the Kent State University during the Vietnam War protests. 



> The Kent State shootings  also known as the May 4 massacre or Kent State massacre  [2][3][4] occurred at Kent State University in the city of Kent, Ohio, and involved the shooting of unarmed college students by members of the Ohio National Guard on Monday, May 4, 1970. The guardsmen fired 67 rounds over a period of 13 seconds, killing four students and wounding nine others, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis.[5]
> 
> Some of the students who were shot had been protesting against the American invasion of Cambodia, which President Richard Nixon announced in a television address on April 30. Other students who were shot had been walking nearby or observing the protest from a distance.[6][7]



Still I should mention again because the Iranian regime is bad, It doesn't mean the US system is good. let's look at your comparison from this perspective, you're comparing "the bad" with "the worse". 
meanwhile, If we want to take the things the US has done in other countries including Iraq and Afghanistan into account for the US resume of human rights, then we can see that the US is the worst.

the Indicator that shows the situation of human rights in a country isn't the number of immigrants. lol. during the Iranian diaspora after the 1979 revolution, a large number of iranians went to the USA and other english-speaking countries and the major reason was language.
Today, many american people go to mexico to have a surgery done, or they go to other latin american countries and cheap european countries due to the expensive prices for health care issues in the US. does that mean those countries are better than the US?
You're ignoring that the USA is in its worst situation from the beginning to now and then you want to cover the problems with saying others are bad too.

you're comparing irrelevant things. the title of this topic has nothing to do with the things you're discussing. if you want to discuss these things, you can create a new topic and I will be there to discuss them with you but this topic has a different subject.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> Israel was never a signer of the NPT and therefor not subject to it. However Personally I think Israel should open up to the IAEA. In fact I think the goal should be the elimination of all nuclear weapons. I do not believe though that is obtainable.
> 
> Iran is a signer of the NPT. And it doesn't matter if it was the Shah's regime that signed it or not. The reason Iran is viewed with such alarm when it comes to their nuke program. Is they are supporters of groups internationally recognized as terrorists. They make inflammatory statements calling into question Israels existence and chant death to America. Then expect everyone to believe them when they say their nuke program is for peaceful power generation. That doesn't garner to much goodwill or trust with the international community.
> 
> There is enough circumstantial evidence to suggest that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program. And until Iran can prove otherwise it will be on a collision course with the west.
> 
> Iran May Be Working On Nuclear Weapon, UN Report Says



Iran is the signer of the NPT but It doesn't mean It is subjected to do everything they say because of that. as I said before, 'the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty' is a TREATY. It's not a rule. Iran can quit the NPT anytime It wants and no one can blame it. If Iran is a signer of the NPT, it's just for boosting trust. would you tell me why Iran should honor its obligations mentioned in the NPT when the other sides of the treaty are not doing so?

let's be fair. Iran hasn't started any war since the last 200 years. Iran has never attacked any country and It has one of the most damaged populations of mass destruction weapons. Israel has never ruled out a nuclear strike on Iran, recently the US has threatened Iran with a nuclear strike. Iran hasn't dropped depleted uranium bombs on civilians. Iran hasn't used white phosphorous. Iran hasn't used any type of biological or chemical weapons. Iran doesn't possess any type of dirty bombs. Iran hasn't sold its biological and chemical weapons to any other party. I think the word terrorist describes only YOU! xD

Iran doesn't have to prove anything to the west at this moment. and even If Iran had to prove something, It'd not be to the west but to the agency. the West is claiming Iran's nuclear program isn't of peaceful purposes. They are claiming, They should provide documents. If you go to a court and accuse someone of murder, It's not him who needs to prove he isn't guilty. It's you who needs to have documents for what you're claiming then after the court accepted your "DOCUMENTS" then the person can either defend himself or accept the claims.
I don't want to defend the Iranian nuclear programme and I believe the international community has the right to be concerned over Iran's nuclear programme but Iran's nuclear program shouldn't be used as a tool to cover the real threats.


----------



## Old School

There are some good words from Dr. Moshe Vered here :
Israeli raid on Iran would start years of war


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> let's be fair. Iran hasn't started any war since the last 200 years. Iran has never attacked any country



No you use proxies to do it through the Revolutionary guard and Qud's force. (Hezbollah, Hamas, Shia Militia groups, and most recently the Taliban)


----------



## Thomas

Old School said:


> There are some good words from Dr. Moshe Vered here :
> Israeli raid on Iran would start years of war



He has some valid points. But I think he over estimates Iran's ability to last years of open conflict with the west. As Saddam Hussein found out. Fighting a war with the west was not the same as fighting a war with Iran. The west along with the Gulf countries could completely decimate Iran's Ports and shore batteries. As well as Air force, Navy, and Army. It's industrial and civil infrastructure would be in tatters and most likely all gasoline production cut off. In fact Gasoline production is probably the most critical area where Iran is vulnerable. 

I have doubts Obama would unilaterally hit Iran. But he would have no choice but to join Israel if they attacked. Since Iran would most likely carry through with it's threat to attack Gulf countries and shipping.


----------



## Old School

Thomas said:


> He has some valid points. But I think he over estimates Iran's ability to last years of open conflict with the west. As Saddam Hussein found out. Fighting a war with the west was not the same as fighting a war with Iran. The west along with the Gulf countries could completely decimate Iran's Ports and shore batteries. As well as Air force, Navy, and Army. It's industrial and civil infrastructure would be in tatters and most likely all gasoline production cut off. In fact Gasoline production is probably the most critical area where Iran is vulnerable.
> 
> I have doubts Obama would unilaterally hit Iran. But he would have no choice but to join Israel if they attacked. Since Iran would most likely carry through with it's threat to attack Gulf countries and shipping.



I agree. These sort of military ( Iran, Syria etc) in the Middle East simply do not have the correct C2 structure to fight a NATO level professional military. They only show some HW for propaganda purpose but war is all about C2. That is the biggest weakness of these 3rd world military. Their overall implementation of MDMP is also very poor. Their C2 is merely based on vertical Detailed Command structure.

On Strategic level, there is also an over estimation of the Iranian capabilities as far as the world financial market is concerned. However, Isreal has already passed the WARNO statge long ago and OPORD has been directed. The H-Hour can take place at anytime and that can be even a minute from now to be practical.


----------



## wali87

dhdhdhdhdhdhd


----------



## wali87

I think with Iran's successful acquisition of the S-300 PMU-2, it will be successful in repelling any misadventure by the Israelis. secondly, no way in a million years will Israel or America be able to fight the Iranians with troops. 

Iraq was an American reliant country battered by the US through sanctions for ten years, their army unpaid and unwilling to fight. Iran on the other hand is a country, whose evert single child will sacrifice his life to fight an invading force. History has proved it. IRAN IS THE LONGEST SURVIVING NATION ON EARTH. go search on the internet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thomas

wali87 said:


> I think with Iran's successful acquisition of the S-300 PMU-2, it will be successful in repelling any misadventure by the Israelis. secondly, no way in a million years will Israel or America be able to fight the Iranians with troops.
> 
> Iraq was an American reliant country battered by the US through sanctions for ten years, their army unpaid and unwilling to fight. Iran on the other hand is a country, whose evert single child will sacrifice his life to fight an invading force. History has proved it. IRAN IS THE LONGEST SURVIVING NATION ON EARTH. go search on the internet.



Other then maybe a few Special Forces raids and target spotting. there will be no ground invasion of Iran. So unless Iran invades Iraq or Afghanistan there will be no ground invasion taking place.

As far as the S-300 Russia has said it will honor it's contract with Iran. However so far no S-300'S have been delivered. Hmmm, I wonder why........ It couldn't have anything to do with Russia's recent acquisition of Israeli drones could it?


----------



## below_freezing

wali87 said:


> I think with Iran's successful acquisition of the S-300 PMU-2, it will be successful in repelling any misadventure by the Israelis. secondly, no way in a million years will Israel or America be able to fight the Iranians with troops.
> 
> Iraq was an American reliant country battered by the US through sanctions for ten years, their army unpaid and unwilling to fight. Iran on the other hand is a country, whose evert single child will sacrifice his life to fight an invading force. History has proved it. IRAN IS THE LONGEST SURVIVING NATION ON EARTH. go search on the internet.



thought that was china. for one, we still write with chinese characters, but no iranian writes with old persian characters =)


----------



## Hussein

below_freezing said:


> thought that was china. for one, we still write with chinese characters, but no iranian writes with old persian characters =)


lol
sometimes it is smart to change. your characters system is not as smart as arab or european.


----------



## wali87

Thomas said:


> Other then maybe a few Special Forces raids and target spotting. there will be no ground invasion of Iran. So unless Iran invades Iraq or Afghanistan there will be no ground invasion taking place.
> 
> As far as the S-300 Russia has said it will honor it's contract with Iran. However so far no S-300'S have been delivered. Hmmm, I wonder why........ It couldn't have anything to do with Russia's recent acquisition of Israeli drones could it?



Hmmm.. Interesting fact you mentioned about the Israeli drones to Russia, however, Russia has a declining arms export relative to what it once had. They are struggling in selling their equipment with China stealing away most of their market share. So i don't think a few drones would affect such a huge and strategic SAM deal, specially in a time when tensions are growing due to the American missile shield over eastern europe.

Information about Iran's military deals are so vague that one can never judge, who knows, maybe they already have the S-300s or maybe they're bluffing, you can never be too sure. However i wouldn't call their bluff if i was in Israel and US's place provided Iran has immense amounts of oil to generate funds. Also, there are several stakeholders who would support Iran covertly to see the US suffer including China and Russia.


----------



## Thomas

wali87 said:


> Hmmm.. Interesting fact you mentioned about the Israeli drones to Russia, however, Russia has a declining arms export relative to what it once had. They are struggling in selling their equipment with China stealing away most of their market share. So i don't think a few drones would affect such a huge and strategic SAM deal, specially in a time when tensions are growing due to the American missile shield over eastern europe.
> 
> Information about Iran's military deals are so vague that one can never judge, who knows, maybe they already have the S-300s or maybe they're bluffing, you can never be too sure. However i wouldn't call their bluff if i was in Israel and US's place provided Iran has immense amounts of oil to generate funds. Also, there are several stakeholders who would support Iran covertly to see the US suffer including China and Russia.



Israel and Russia in UAV Deal

Russia delays delivery of S-300 advanced air defence missiles to Iran - Times Online


----------



## wali87

Thomas said:


> Israel and Russia in UAV Deal
> 
> Russia delays delivery of S-300 advanced air defence missiles to Iran - Times Online



Im not saying i don't believe you, i am only speculating. Compare a million billion dollars SAM deal to a drone deal and weigh them.

Thanks for the link.. however only time will tell my friend. lets hope a conflict doesn't arise in the first place as it will further destabilize the entire region. The blame in the end is going to be placed in the US's hands, again.


----------



## below_freezing

Hussein said:


> lol
> sometimes it is smart to change. your characters system is not as smart as arab or european.



debatable. how do you define a language as smart? that's a very controversial statement. i just stated a fact: iranians don't use persian to write anymore.

maybe israeli air force is on to something.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> No you use proxies to do it through the Revolutionary guard and Qud's force. (Hezbollah, Hamas, Shia Militia groups, and most recently the Taliban)



even if we want to take what you said into account as correct, we all know that none of the groups you said has the power to launch a strike on others and start a war. their doctrine is based on deterrence. meanwhile, because Iran is supplying such groups with weapons it doesn't mean Iran is involved in wars of them.

from what I remember it was Americans who supplied and supported the Taliban during the 8 year war between Russia and Afghanistan. Talbian was good at that time but now they are terrorists? give me a break

and why you ignored the other things I said? 



Thomas said:


> He has some valid points. But I think he over estimates Iran's ability to last years of open conflict with the west. As Saddam Hussein found out. Fighting a war with the west was not the same as fighting a war with Iran. The west along with the Gulf countries could completely decimate Iran's Ports and shore batteries. As well as Air force, Navy, and Army. It's industrial and civil infrastructure would be in tatters and most likely all gasoline production cut off. In fact Gasoline production is probably the most critical area where Iran is vulnerable.
> 
> I have doubts Obama would unilaterally hit Iran. But he would have no choice but to join Israel if they attacked. Since Iran would most likely carry through with it's threat to attack Gulf countries and shipping.



the only cattle wrangling Obama does is with michelle every night in bed.

they said the same things you're saying now when 53 countries directly supported Saddam to attack Iran. they said in the BBC that Iran was going to lose the war within one month, but the war lasted for 8 years and experts without biased ideas can confirm that Iran was the winner. you can read about the Iran-Iraq war to know what the consequences of a new war with Iran would be. also you should be aware of how the situation is different now. I can mention some of them and then you can decide whether It's a good idea to attack Iran or not.

I told you once before thomas, the Iranian nuclear train has no brake and It won't have a brake ever. if you think you have the ability to launch a military strike on Iran at this moment, don't wait. if not, you should try to negotiate it peacefully.



Thomas said:


> Other then maybe a few Special Forces raids and target spotting. there will be no ground invasion of Iran. So unless Iran invades Iraq or Afghanistan there will be no ground invasion taking place.
> 
> As far as the S-300 Russia has said it will honor it's contract with Iran. However so far no S-300'S have been delivered. Hmmm, I wonder why........ It couldn't have anything to do with Russia's recent acquisition of Israeli drones could it?



S-300 (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Iran 's status regarding the S-300 system remains controversial. They seem to have acquired an unknown number of S-300PMU-1 missiles in 1993, maybe even 300 recently from Belarus.[19] Iran claimed to have signed a contract with Russia on 25 December 2007 on the sales of the S-300PMU-2 missile system.[20] Russian officials have denied this.[21] According to senior Israeli defence sources Iran is to receive S-300s by 2009, deliveries will take place from September until begin 2009.[22][23][24] It has also been claimed that Croatia sold their S-300s to Iran.[25] Later, another claim was made saying Libya transferred S-300s to Iran.[26] On December 21, according to a senior Iranian lawmaker, Russia has started the supply of components for S-300 air defense systems to Iran.



as you can see on the map Iran's status is blue.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

QWECXZ said:


> even if we want to take what you said into account as correct, we all know that none of the groups you said has the power to launch a strike on others and start a war. their doctrine is based on deterrence. meanwhile, because Iran is supplying such groups with weapons it doesn't mean Iran is involved in wars of them.
> 
> from what I remember it was Americans who supplied and supported the Taliban during the 8 year war between Russia and Afghanistan. Talbian was good at that time but now they are terrorists? give me a break
> 
> and why you ignored the other things I said?
> 
> 
> 
> the only cattle wrangling Obama does is with michelle every night in bed.
> 
> they said the same things you're saying now when 53 countries directly supported Saddam to attack Iran. they said in the BBC that Iran was going to lose the war within one month, but the war lasted for 8 years and experts without biased ideas can confirm that Iran was the winner. you can read about the Iran-Iraq war to know what the consequences of a new war with Iran would be. also you should be aware of how the situation is different now. I can mention some of them and then you can decide whether It's a good idea to attack Iran or not.
> 
> I told you once before thomas, the Iranian nuclear train has no brake and It won't have a brake ever. if you think you have the ability to launch a military strike on Iran at this moment, don't wait. if not, you should try to negotiate it peacefully.
> 
> 
> 
> S-300 (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> as you can see on the map Iran's status is blue.



Whether the Iranian regime is good or bad, is debatable. I just don't want millions more humans dying. Everyone needs to work together. Let's all become friends!


----------



## MZUBAIR

Israel cant dare to attack Iran.....
May be USA will try to destablize & weak Iran using political and strategical ways. But I feel that almost all Muslim countries are with Iran.....
Besides that more imp is that Iran nation is Iron united


----------



## thebrownguy

MZUBAIR said:


> Israel cant dare to attack Iran.....
> May be USA will try to destablize & weak Iran using political and strategical ways. But I feel that almost all Muslim countries are with Iran.....
> Besides that more imp is that Iran nation is Iron united



You say all Muslim countries are with Iran? I think there was talk about Saudi allowing Israel its air space to attack Iran.


----------



## QWECXZ

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Whether the Iranian regime is good or bad, is debatable. I just don't want millions more humans dying. Everyone needs to work together. Let's all become friends!



the Iranian regime is bad and the majority of the iranian people don't want it but it doesn't mean that we would let others threaten Iran. Today, we are completely ready to deter and thwart any action if need be at any price even if It was the US and Its allies, let alone Israel because Israel threatening Iran is morel like a joke. our local problems won't affect our love for Iran for sure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> even if we want to take what you said into account as correct, we all know that none of the groups you said has the power to launch a strike on others and start a war. their doctrine is based on deterrence. meanwhile, because Iran is supplying such groups with weapons it doesn't mean Iran is involved in wars of them.
> 
> from what I remember it was Americans who supplied and supported the Taliban during the 8 year war between Russia and Afghanistan. Talbian was good at that time but now they are terrorists? give me a break



While many of the people in the Taliban movement received training and support during the soviet occupation years. (many none Taliban did as well) The Taliban themselves didn't come into being till after the Soviets left. I suspect you knew this though. 

Taliban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And as far as some of the other groups listed like Hezbollah. *"Its leaders were inspired by Ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards."* It's forces receive training in Iran.

And On April 16, 2007, Sheikh Naim Qassem admitted in an interview with the Iranian Arabic TV station Al-Kawthar that Hezbollah did not determine its own policies . *He said the organization was subordinate to the authority of the Iranian leadership*

Hezbollah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Two rare statements about Iran-Hezbollah relations




QWECXZ said:


> I told you once before thomas, the Iranian nuclear train has no brake and It won't have a brake ever. if you think you have the ability to launch a military strike on Iran at this moment, don't wait.



If it was up to me It would happen at the end of this year. After the troops in Iraq are withdrawn. Unless of course Iran backed down.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> While many of the people in the Taliban movement received training and support during the soviet occupation years. (many none Taliban did as well) The Taliban themselves didn't come into being till after the Soviets left. I suspect you knew this though.
> 
> Taliban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> And as far as some of the other groups listed like Hezbollah. *"Its leaders were inspired by Ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards."* It's forces receive training in Iran.
> 
> And On April 16, 2007, Sheikh Naim Qassem admitted in an interview with the Iranian Arabic TV station Al-Kawthar that Hezbollah did not determine its own policies . *He said the organization was subordinate to the authority of the Iranian leadership*
> 
> Hezbollah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Two rare statements about Iran-Hezbollah relations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it was up to me It would happen at the end of this year. After the troops in Iraq are withdrawn. Unless of course Iran backed down.



are you kidding? the Taliban was created and supported by the US. ever asked yourself why the US kept the Taliban in power for years? because Taliban was a major threat to Iran. 

no one denied that, Iran helps hizbullah and even lebanese people come to Iran to get trained by the IRGC. I didn't deny it. I said the group said are not powerful enough to launch or start a war.

are you trying to say you're braver than Bush?


----------



## Thomas

As far as Iran already having the S300 we will see. There have been numerous claims but so far no one has seen anything. And having looked at satellite photo's of some of Irans nukes facilities. The defensive SAM sites don't appear to be S300's. I tend to believe Russia when it says it has not delivered them yet. especially since Iran still seems to be still upset over the matter.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> As far as Iran already having the S300 we will see. There have been numerous claims but so far no one has seen anything. And having looking at satellite photo's of some of Irans nukes facilities. The defensive SAM sites don't appear to be S300's. I tend to believe Russia when it says it has not delivered them yet. especially since Iran still seems to be still upset over the matter.



are you debating or you are saying whatever you want? xD

Russians says they haven't delivered the missiles yet, they haven't denied the claims that Iran is in the possession of S300 missiles,
even If Iran doesn't possesses the 300's, It still has enough number of S-200's. 

tell me one thing thomas, for how long you americans want to ignore the elephant in the room?


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> are you debating or you are saying whatever you want? xD
> 
> Russians says they haven't delivered the missiles yet, they haven't denied the claims that Iran is in the possession of S300 missiles,
> even If Iran doesn't possesses the 300's, It still has enough number of S-200's.
> 
> tell me one thing thomas, for how long you americans want to ignore the elephant in the room?



No I was responding to his claim that Iran already possessed the S300. And the SA-5 Gammon (S200) is very easy to defeat.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> No I was responding to his claim that Iran already possessed the S300



whose claim? you can check the provided references before judging.
would you tell me what has happened to Croatia's S-300's? or belarus' S-300's? or libya's S-300's? any idea?


----------



## Thomas

Thomas said:


> As far as Iran already having the S300 we will see. There have been numerous claims but so far no one has seen anything. And having looked at satellite photo's of some of Irans nukes facilities. The defensive SAM sites don't appear to be S300's. I tend to believe Russia when it says it has not delivered them yet. especially since Iran still seems to be still upset over the matter.



http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Iran-SAM-Deployment.html


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> SA-6 missile site at Natanz



sorry thomas, I'm not that expert like you to understand anything special from the photos except some lables. can you teach me how you find out the type of the missiles from such satellite photos?


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Old School said:


> We need to initially identify the nature and intention of the Iranian theocratic regime. *Their ultimate goal is to reincarnate the old Parsian empire under an Islamic template which well extends from the Indus valley to all the way to the Levant including the Fertile Crescent.* They are using Isreal only as pretext and to look safe in the eyes of the Muslim world.
> The neighbouring countries of Iran are no safer than Israel and therefore they must line up a coalition against the Imperialist ambition of the Iranian regime which remain unchanged even after the fall of secular Shah. Everyone must act before it reaches the point of no return. BiBi is disliked by many because he speaks no non sense. However, The initiative must come from the 'naive' neighbours of Iran.



Does Iran need to make tension with US and Israiel in order to restablish Persian Impire? Iran will become more powerful as soon as leave Palistaine alone and make better relation with US.
what you say is garbage which distributing by Saudi against Iran reputation. because Saudi and Egypt are losing their face in Muslim world due to their reaction in Palestine, so they make this kind of against Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cyrus the Great

birdofprey said:


> Would you like a nuclear weaponed Iran on your border or not?
> 
> Its a simple question and i dont want the talk going anything related to India. Please answer in simple words.



Please put yourself in Iran shoes and answer this simple question too.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Old School said:


> I already wrote in my initial post that that Ahmedinjad wants a Persian empire in an' Islamic template' like a 'Khilafa'. Original Persian culture would be too 'unIslamic' for him. But for the neighbours, it is still the same imperialist attitude. Syria , Lebanon ( with Hezbollah proxy) are already under their influence. They are very much busy in Iraq and in Afghanistan . I always oppose any military strike on Iran as it would alienate people like you who are also against the mollahs.



1-Iranian never believe in "Khalifa" what you believe in other Muslim countries.also there is not any references In Quran and Hadith about so called "Khalafat".
2- Iranian concern about Mullahs and Ahmadinejad is a domestic issues and only they can talk about. as Iranian never talk about your military controlled country or your Mr %10 you do not talk about their home issues as well. PLEASE


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> No one is going to like the consequences. But it still needs to be done if Iran doesn't back down and open up ALL it's facilities to the IAEA. And prove it's program is peaceful.



1- who said Iran did not open all facilities to IAEA? what you hear in your media is what your government need that you hear in order to support your government policy against Iran.unfortunately even Iran opened its military sites to IAEA just to prove peaceful nuclear program which made Iranian angry against Iran government.
2- what is challenge here not is not between Iran And IAEA, it is the US clain on Iran nuclear program.
3- just put yourself in Iranian shoes, why US must be closed to IAEA with thousands of nuke but must open all sites to US spies?


----------



## brahmastra

Go through following link(bluffer's guide).it will help you understand about Iranian air defence. 

Bluffers guide: Fortress Iran 2


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Old School said:


> As a Pakistani , I view everything in our immediate neighbourhood is our business. Let me make that clear to you.
> Iran is Pakistan's neighbour and that makes everything in Iran our national security interests. We do not want anyone to rock the boat when the situation is already tense enough. My view is the same view as the view of the government of Pakistan which is not the same as you may find among some Pakistanis who believe in Ummah.



you are right, i do believe Iran policy was stupid when you tested your first nuke Iran president supported Pakistani nuke in front of camera and did not care in Iran national security, and only considered Pakistan as a Muslim country that need support by that time. it is good lesson to Iranian public.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> *Paris agreement of 2004* - Under the terms of the Paris Agreement, on November 14, 2004, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator announced a voluntary and temporary suspension of its uranium enrichment program.
> 
> http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/2004/infcirc637.pdf
> 
> Iran reaffirms that, in accordance with Article II of the NPT, it does not and will
> not seek to acquire nuclear weapons. It commits itself to full cooperation and
> transparency with the IAEA. *Iran will continue implementing voluntarily the Additional
> Protocol pending ratification.* (the additional protocol allows for unannounced inspections)
> 
> To build further confidence, *Iran has decided, on a voluntary basis, to continue
> and extend its suspension to include all enrichment related and reprocessing activities*,
> and specifically: the manufacture and import of gas centrifuges and their components;
> the assembly, installation, testing or operation of gas centrifuges; work to undertake any
> plutonium separation, or to construct or operate any plutonium separation installation;
> and all tests or production at any uranium conversion installation. The IAEA will be
> notified of this suspension and invited to verify and monitor it.



Paris agreement had tow parts obligations. do you think only Iran must follow that? when you broke the agreement Iran had right do not respect the agreement anymore.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> Look......The bottom line can be expressed in the words of the IAEA head at the time Dr. ElBaradei.
> 
> Iran Begins Removal of IAEA Seals at Enrichment-related Locations
> 
> *"In Dr. ElBaradei´s view, maintaining the suspension, resuming the dialogue with all concerned parties, and providing the necessary cooperation and transparency to the IAEA are conditions for a comprehensive and equitable solution that ensures Iran´s right to peaceful nuclear activities while assuring the international community of the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme."*
> 
> The IAEA still considers Iran to be in breach of the NPT for a reason. If Iran's Nuke program was peaceful it would have nothing to fear in completely opening up to the IAEA. Which includes unannounced inspections.



the final agreement between IAEA and Iran was Mudelitate which IAEA asked all his questions and Iran answered all then the IAEA admitted all answers are credible, but a week or two after that US claimed new things without evidence but not IAEA. 
Albaradei told this claim is meaning less too. but as everybody knows UN is always is under US pressure for US interest. and make a club with his western puppets and call themselves international community.(BIG JOKE).
Iran is not responsible to US.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

QWECXZ said:


> Yes, and as I said in my first posts, I completely accept that the world should be worrying about Iran's nuclear programme and the proliferation of atomic weapons, but even in this report, the IAEA didn't condemn Iran to pursuing nuclear weapons. It was the first report of the agency after elbaradei left the office.
> 
> like 2 weeks ago, Iran accepted to let the agency experts visit Arak's heavy water plant. the refusal of accepting that before can be a mater of controversy but still it doesn't PROVE Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. but let's be fair, have the other sides of the treaty honored their obligations so far? why should Iran trust the west when they have never done anything constructive to boost trust?
> 
> plus, being under the direct threat of the US and its ally Israel, It sounds completely rational that Iran wants to spread its nuclear facilities to reduce the chance of being damaged by a possible strike. so That's pretty understandable why Iran is planning for the construction of more enrichment sites.
> 
> one more question that I want you to clarify it for me, why the IAEA doesn't show the same interest to know more about Israel's nuclear programme?



With all respect, I think you do big mistake when you establish logical argument with american, they use logic and law when has benefit to them and use force whenever is needed. 
they do not have right to questioned anybody in nuclear issues, they are the first nation(not only government because still they have public support on) used nuke.
they are the people must answer the world questions about Hiroshima, Vietname, Iraq, Afganistan, Somalia, Panama, Pakistan,Iran passenger plane.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cyrus the Great

even with your term of definition on "good" or "better". do you think US is better?
who is killing people all cross the world?do you know how many people have been killed by US soldiers and how many people kidnapped with CIA and tortured in last 5 decades? 
If you say you are US treat well with US citizen them American are satisfied with then i am sorry to say you are selfish.
7 Billion people are in danger in the world only for 300 M sure them you feel you are better.change your paradigm then we will be able to see fact and why people hate US. i dont know whether have you been out of US or not. my American friends here always feel shy to say they are American here not for your individual freedom and value there but for your point of view about all people in world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cyrus the Great

gambit said:


> I say it is meaningless for me. The readers can decide for themselves.
> 
> 
> No...Am saying that if you are going claim that the US persecute political dissent, provide credible sources. lol
> 
> 
> As you wish...
> 
> How Ahmad Batebi Survived Torture In Iran - 60 Minutes - CBS News
> 
> 
> 'Torture, murder and rape' &mdash; Iran&rsquo;s way of breaking the opposition - Times Online
> 
> Now...Can you show the readers if any of the loud mouthed students at UC Irvine suffered similar fates after they were ejected from the lecture hall?
> 
> 
> Nope...Am pointing out, or rather asking you, to show the readers how the oh-so-scary CIA torture prisoners.
> 
> 
> Says who? You? Based on what criteria can you say that US prisons are filled with political dissenters and that no one is watching over them? Yours is the appeal to ignorance argument. Look it up.
> 
> 
> This is the typical inconsistent argument when it come to free speech in the US compared to MEastern despotic regimes. It is somewhat narcissistic as well. What you are saying is that because major newspapers like the NY Times or the LA Times or USA Today, all quite liberal and anti-Bush/conservative prints, did not report your little local news item, therefore it is 'evident' that there is media oppression or collusion among the major news prints to hide political oppression in the US. Ever consider the possibility that after they examined the details of the event, something that you obviously failed to do, they found the story to be a non-story?
> 
> The most that CAIR... CAIR > Home ... managed to milk out of that event is a bland statement...
> 
> Student protests at speech of Israeli ambassador at California campus raise free speech issues : First Amendment Coalition
> 
> Nothing about if any of the UC Irvine students suffered at the hands of the state anywhere to the level of their Iranian collegiate brothers and sisters. If anyone who should be monitoring this closely would be CAIR, Human Rights Watch or Amnessty International. But what we have is zilch. CAIR's leadership probably behind closed doors considered the event to be a waste of blood sugar to even type up that bland statement.
> 
> 
> It is funny but in a sad way. The streets of America have been proven to be effective venues for political dissenting speech, from calling a sitting US President names such as adulterer and war criminal to pointing out America's societal ills. Whereas the streets of Iran under the mullahs today proved to be shooting ranges with live targets.
> 
> 
> Common wisdom compels people not to seek for what is 'good' but to seek for what is 'better' than the current situation they are in at that time. That is why we see war refugees fleeing to a neighboring country even though this neighbor may not be any better of a government. Frankly, we Americans really do not care if anyone consider our country to be 'good' or not. But if the current immigration problem we have with Mexico is any indicator, it is that we are 'better' than Mexico. Same thing for between US and Iran. We do not care if you or any Iranian consider US to be 'good' or not, only that you are intellectually honest enough to examine the details, apply logical thinking, and be willing to admit that we are 'better'. By demanding that we live up to impossible standards, those impossible standards afford you the way to indirectly shill for the mullahs and give them the latitude to do what they did to your fellow Iranians as shown above.





Thomas said:


> Israel was never a signer of the NPT and therefor not subject to it. However Personally I think Israel should open up to the IAEA. In fact I think the goal should be the elimination of all nuclear weapons. I do not believe though that is obtainable.
> 
> Iran is a signer of the NPT. And it doesn't matter if it was the Shah's regime that signed it or not. The reason Iran is viewed with such alarm when it comes to their nuke program. Is they are supporters of groups internationally recognized as terrorists. They make inflammatory statements calling into question Israels existence and chant death to America. Then expect everyone to believe them when they say their nuke program is for peaceful power generation. That doesn't garner to much goodwill or trust with the international community.
> 
> There is enough circumstantial evidence to suggest that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program. And until Iran can prove otherwise it will be on a collision course with the west.
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/18/iran-may-be-working-on-nu_n_467735.html



with your logic if Iran quite the NPT then no problem here, whatever Iran does is her own business like Israeil


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> No you use proxies to do it through the Revolutionary guard and Qud's force. (Hezbollah, Hamas, Shia Militia groups, and most recently the Taliban)



first of all Taliban is US made militia and is irrelevant to Iran. make yourself proud of made in USA product.
secondly, Hamas and Hizbolla defending their own country against invasion by Israeil which is US best ally in world. offcourse Iran support them to protect their territory. US support invader and Iran support defender.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> He has some valid points. But I think he over estimates Iran's ability to last years of open conflict with the west. As Saddam Hussein found out. Fighting a war with the west was not the same as fighting a war with Iran. The west along with the Gulf countries could completely decimate Iran's Ports and shore batteries. As well as Air force, Navy, and Army. It's industrial and civil infrastructure would be in tatters and most likely all gasoline production cut off. In fact Gasoline production is probably the most critical area where Iran is vulnerable.
> 
> I have doubts Obama would unilaterally hit Iran. But he would have no choice but to join Israel if they attacked. Since Iran would most likely carry through with it's threat to attack Gulf countries and shipping.



US never had real equal war experience. Vietnam was a very weak and poor country but you lost. you attacked Panama, Afganestan such a honorable art of war!!!!
Iraq had a little bit power you kept it under sanction for 10 years them attacked.
please do not upper estimate your military forces.
your ally Usraeil with advanced weapons lost to a small militia group such Hizbollah in 2006.
i guess if US become sure that can win in war wont wait even for a day.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

below_freezing said:


> thought that was china. for one, we still write with chinese characters, but no iranian writes with old persian characters =)



with my respect to you.1- Chinese recorded history is Max 5000 but Iran's 7000
2- just WW2 helped you overcome the invasion of Japan( Tianjin, Dalian ,.....)


----------



## Thomas

Cyrus the Great said:


> what you say is garbage which distributing by Saudi against Iran reputation. because Saudi and Egypt are losing their face in Muslim world due to their reaction in Palestine, so they make this kind of against Iran



lol, so your saying it's all a Saudi/Egyptian conspiracy against Iran?


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> lol, so your saying it's all a Saudi/Egyptian conspiracy against Iran?



yes, That's what the saudi/egyptian conspiracy theorists have posed.

the genius american with a sense of humor, the conflict between Israel and the Arabs is approximately a 60 year old history. was there any islamic republic of Iran at that time? If Israel wanted to make peace, It could've done it by now before the islamic republic of Iran came to exist.


----------



## Hussein

Thomas said:


> lol, so your saying it's all a Saudi/Egyptian conspiracy against Iran?



for this point i agree with him
it is true that the picture of saudi in muslim countries is bad . look what Egypt is doing: bomb tunnel? what else? forbid Gaza moves when its people are suffering a hell.
Sadly Iran having too much involved in this but it is true that Iran got popularity because of its speech and help.

I don't understand what is not true in what he said
and what is about a conspiracy

in the past with another government the relations with saudi were far better. this special relation is to work hard on it and make lot of efforts. because from all the countries in the region, surely saudi is acting like the ennemy. but hopefully it will change.


----------



## below_freezing

Cyrus the Great said:


> with my respect to you.1- Chinese recorded history is Max 5000 but Iran's 7000
> 2- just WW2 helped you overcome the invasion of Japan( Tianjin, Dalian ,.....)



i see, learn something every day.

hopefully soon it'd be the israelis on this forum that are talking about how they deserve nuclear weapons and don't have to be disarmed, as the iranian air force prepares to bomb dimona.


----------



## QWECXZ

below_freezing said:


> i see, learn something every day.
> 
> hopefully soon it'd be the israelis on this forum that are talking about how they deserve nuclear weapons and don't have to be disarmed, as the iranian air force prepares to bomb dimona.



1) actually right now They are in possession of ~200 nuclear war heads and no one cares about the disarmament of Israel. 
2) Iran's military doctrine is based on position of defense


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

i just have gut feeling that if third WW is going to start it would start by an event like Israelis attacking Iran.


----------



## Thomas

Hussein said:


> for this point i agree with him
> it is true that the picture of saudi in muslim countries is bad . look what Egypt is doing: bomb tunnel? what else? forbid Gaza moves when its people are suffering a hell.
> Sadly Iran having too much involved in this but it is true that Iran got popularity because of its speech and help.
> 
> I don't understand what is not true in what he said
> and what is about a conspiracy
> 
> in the past with another government the relations with saudi were far better. this special relation is to work hard on it and make lot of efforts. because from all the countries in the region, surely saudi is acting like the ennemy. but hopefully it will change.



If Saudi Arabia and Egypt feel threatened by Iran it could have something to do with Iran's wish to export it's brand of Islamic theocracy. and Ayatollah Khomeini's statement "We shall export our revolution to the whole world"


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

Hussein said:


> for this point i agree with him
> it is true that the picture of saudi in muslim countries is bad . look what Egypt is doing: bomb tunnel? what else? forbid Gaza moves when its people are suffering a hell.
> Sadly Iran having too much involved in this but it is true that Iran got popularity because of its speech and help.
> 
> I don't understand what is not true in what he said
> and what is about a conspiracy
> 
> in the past with another government the relations with saudi were far better. this special relation is to work hard on it and make lot of efforts. because from all the countries in the region, surely saudi is acting like the ennemy. but hopefully it will change.



iran is a danger on arabs so they will help demolish them ,egypt will never forget iran's situation calling a street after khaled elislamoly killer of egyptian ex president elsadat .
states of the arab gulf specially UAE have problems with iran occupying the three emirates islands .



> look what Egypt is doing: bomb tunnel? what else? forbid Gaza moves when its people are suffering a hell.



egypt are bombing tunnles over the heads of hizb allah terrorists who pass explosives and weapons to egyptian sinai,,,about gaza your heart won't be more kind on them than egypt.
We enterd wars to free palastein 30.000 egyptian were killed in 1948 war for palasteins,,food and medical care is entering gaza through crossings and egypt has the full right to do any thing in its lands even building the wall.

Saudi treat iran like an enemy cause you are an enemy don't you remember how iran tried to explode the haram of meka with mouslims in it,,, irans record is full and there is awar coming to put every thing in its right place<<UAE islands,,irans helping hauthis in yemen fighting saudis,,helping hizb allah terrorists in egypt>.

so it is time to deal with persia


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

&#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607;&#1605; &#1575;&#1590;&#1585;&#1576; &#1575;&#1604;&#1592;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1610;&#1606; &#1576;&#1575;&#1604;&#1592;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1610;&#1606; &#1608;&#1575;&#1582;&#1585;&#1580;&#1606;&#1575; &#1605;&#1606; &#1576;&#1610;&#1606;&#1607;&#1605; &#1587;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1610;&#1606;

. don't forget if it weren't for iran, iraq and afghanistan wont fall.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Islam wasnt Sadat killed by Akhwan ?
And wat happened in Mecca wasnt sponsored by Iran or its government.
Your criticising Iran but dont u see wat Misr is doing>???
Killing and stoping AID for the Palastinians?
Arent they arabs?also even us Pakistan thousands of miles away from israel havent accepted is...l while u have?
You have no right to talk about critising anybody.


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Islam wasnt Sadat killed by Akhwan ?



yes brother by a pig so called khaled el islamboly supported by iran islmic republic so ikhwan or iran double faces of one coin


----------



## QWECXZ

EnG.IsLaM said:


> iran is a danger on arabs so they will help demolish them ,egypt will never forget iran's situation calling a street after khaled elislamoly killer of egyptian ex president elsadat .
> states of the arab gulf specially UAE have problems with iran occupying the three emirates islands .
> 
> 
> 
> egypt are bombing tunnles over the heads of hizb allah terrorists who pass explosives and weapons to egyptian sinai,,,about gaza your heart won't be more kind on them than egypt.
> We enterd wars to free palastein 30.000 egyptian was killed in 1948 war for palasteins,,food and medical care is entering gaza through crossings and egypt has the full right to do any thing in its lands even building the wall.
> 
> Saudi treat iran like an enemy cause you are an enemy don't you remember how iran tried to explode the haram of meka with mouslims in it,,, irans record is full and there is awar coming to put every thing in its right place<<UAE islands,,irans helping hauthis in yemen fighting saudis,,helping hizb allah terrorists in egypt>.
> 
> so it is time to deal with persia



wait a minute tough boy.

correction, the Persian gulf is Persian and nothing is going to benefit arabs in this case. we didn't occupy the 3 Islands, they are ours. we traded them with bahrain. give us bahrain back, take back your 3 islands. if not, close your mouth before we occupy your other lands.

300 million arabs are just that stupid that they can't even win over 5 million israelis. stop making people laugh on your face ))

claim such things when you learned how to manufacture a bicycle. but before that happens, and that will never happen cause you are not trying to increase your knowledge, you'd better keep quite.


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> wait a minute tough boy.
> 
> correction, the Persian gulf is Persian and nothing is going to benefit arabs in this case. we didn't occupy the 3 Islands, they are ours. we traded them with bahrain. give us bahrain back, take back your 3 islands. if not, close your mouth before we occupy your other lands.
> 
> 300 million arabs are just that stupid that they can't even win over 5 million israelis. stop making people laugh on your face ))
> 
> claim such things when you learned how to manufacture a bicycle. but before that happens, and that will never happen cause you are not trying to increase your knowledge, you'd better keep quite.



Do I hear the yearning for another Persian Empire?


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> Do I hear the yearning for another Persian Empire?



go some posts up, answer my question about the conspiracy theory thing. xD because we want to defend our rights it doesn't mean we're planning for a new persian empire. each country has the right to defend what is hers.


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

QWECXZ said:


> wait a minute tough boy.
> 
> correction, the Persian gulf is Persian and nothing is going to benefit arabs in this case. we didn't occupy the 3 Islands, they are ours. we traded them with bahrain. give us bahrain back, take back your 3 islands. if not, close your mouth before we occupy your other lands.
> 
> 300 million arabs are just that stupid that they can't even win over 5 million israelis. stop making people laugh on your face ))
> 
> claim such things when you learned how to manufacture a bicycle. but before that happens, and that will never happen cause you are not trying to increase your knowledge, you'd better keep quite.



watch?v=miU-2WSTypo && watch?v=CEk5DsC2pi0&feature=related 
on you tube.

the arabian gulf is arabian and i am not talking in this again.

How the 3 islands is yours give me a prove? and how bahrain is iranian soil?? and there are hundreds of kilometers between you??/



> close your mouth before we occupy your other lands.



Will the islamic republic of iran occupy islamic lands??



> 300 million arabs are just that stupid that they can't even win over 5 million israelis. stop making people laugh on your face ))



The arabs hve never been more stubid than worshipers of tombs,,and stop being rude we are talking like men if you can continue.

5 million pigs are supported by the greatest nation in the modern world no single arab country can defeat but in shaa allah we will be united in the near future.



> claim such things when you learned how to manufacture a bicycle



Go educate yourself and read about things that is manufactured in arab states and i can give u a some info>>

Petrolium industries in the arab gulf.

Some electronics and space industries in UAE and Saudi.

Defence industries in syria and Jordan.

and about every thing in my country EGYPT that was the first country in the middle east to maker aballistic missile and a super sonic fighter plane HA-300 search and educate your self.

The ABRAMAS M1-A1 tanks is manufactured in the biggest industry planet in the whole middle east called factory-200 >>search for it and its products and you will be shocked ?>>>poor you

you think the saeqah and azrahksh are real planes and american bombs tha iran claims to manufacture are realy iranian products >>>ignorant you are.


----------



## Thomas

QWECXZ said:


> go some posts up, answer my question about the conspiracy theory thing. xD because we want to defend our rights it doesn't mean we're planning for a new persian empire. each country has the right to defend what is hers.



I would advise not making the same mistake Saddam made with Kuwait. It didn't work out to well for him and it won't for Iran as well. Bahrain is an legitimately recognized U.N. country. Any attempt to take it back will fail. 

Also you never responded to Khomeini's statement about exporting Iran's revolution to the whole world.


----------



## QWECXZ

EnG.IsLaM said:


> watch?v=miU-2WSTypo && watch?v=CEk5DsC2pi0&feature=related
> on you tube.
> 
> the arabian gulf is arabian and i am not talking in this again.
> 
> How the 3 islands is yours give me a prove? and how bahrain is iranian soil?? and there are hundreds of kilometers between you??/
> 
> 
> 
> Will the islamic republic of iran occupy islamic lands??
> 
> 
> 
> The arabs hve never been more stubid than worshipers of tombs,,and stop being rude we are talking like men if you can continue.
> 
> 5 million pigs are supported by the greatest nation in the modern world no single arab country can defeat but in shaa allah we will be united in the near future.
> 
> 
> 
> Go educate yourself and read about things that is manufactured in arab states and i can give u a some info>>
> 
> Petrolium industries in the arab gulf.
> 
> Some electronics and space industries in UAE and Saudi.
> 
> Defence industries in syria and Jordan.
> 
> and about every thing in my country EGYPT that was the first country in the middle east to maker aballistic missile and a super sonic fighter plane HA-300 search and educate your self.
> 
> The ABRAMAS M1-A1 tanks is manufactured in the biggest industry planet in the whole middle east called factory-200 >>search for it and its products and you will be shocked ?>>>poor you
> 
> you think the saeqah and azrahksh are real planes and american bombs tha iran claims to manufacture are realy iranian products >>>ignorant you are.



I don't even bother myself to read your claims about the PERSIAN gulf.
and yes, the Islamic republic of Iran occupies the apple polishers' lands.

let's not go into a debate on which country is more advanced in science.
Iran is the first middle eastern country to successfully clone an animal, Iran is the first middle eastern country to successfully proliferate a transgenic animal, Iran is the 9th country in the world that has sent its own satellite with its own missile,Iran is ranked 15th in nanotechnology, Iran is ranked in top 10 in stem cell research, Iran's scientific growth as of 2009 was 11 times higher than the world's average both that ables Iran to be ranked 1st and ...

Iran is under 3 rounds of sanctions and egypt is not and ....

you can't even produce a bicycle, we would appreciate it even if you build a saeqeh or shafagh. at least Iran has produced a frigate, have you produced even a boat?

you're supposed to be united for 60 straight years )))) you are not that wise to understand the meaning of such words.


----------



## QWECXZ

Thomas said:


> I would advise not making the same mistake Saddam made with Kuwait. It didn't work out to well for him and it won't for Iran as well. Bahrain is an legitimately recognized U.N. country. Any attempt to take it back will fail.
> 
> Also you never responded to Khomeini's statement about exporting Iran's revolution to the whole world.



It seems that you can't even understand your own language xD no one said Iran wants bahrain back, they want the 3 islands back? we took the custody of the 3 Islands afer the British invasion of them to stop claiming about Bahrain. the 3 islands are ours and we have enough documents to prove it.

you didn't quote my post. so you can't expect me to answer it when it's not my business.


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

yes you turn it to adebate ,,yes every thing you said is starting in egypt and will be better soon .

saeqah the american F5 hhhhh was i right and it is stronfer than F-18 poor you are.

The Ha-300 egypt produced in 1964 is better than that saeqah .
the frigate iran claim to have produced is a britain originally made and iran bought it in regime of shah bahlawy .
to be fair iran is good in somethings and claims to manufacture somethings .

your missiles and submarines are originally made by north koria and those missiles are built by egyptian technology passed from western countries so you can imagine how egypt now in missile production,aminister announced that we are cabaple of manufacturing a sattelite and arocket to put it in space but everything in time .


----------



## QWECXZ

EnG.IsLaM said:


> yes you turn it to adebate ,,yes every thing you said is starting in egypt and will be better soon .
> 
> saeqah the american F5 hhhhh was i right and it is stronfer than F-18 poor you are.
> 
> The Ha-300 egypt produced in 1964 is better than that saeqah .
> the frigate iran claim to have produced is a britain originally made and iran bought it in regime of shah bahlawy .
> to be fair iran is good in somethings and claims to manufacture somethings .
> 
> your missiles and submarines are originally made by north koria and those missiles are built by egyptian technology passed from western countries so you can imagine how egypt now in missile production,aminister announced that we are cabaple of manufacturing a sattelite and arocket to put it in space but everything in time .



lol. you are good at joking. no one doubts that Iran has produced the Jamaran frigate, even the US media confirmed it.

I'm dying over here. I didn't know that egypt is thaaat advanced but still it can't survive without the help of the west for one month. if you are that advanced and self sufficient, why do you obey what ever they want you to? any ida? lol

I'm still waiting to see who dares to attack Iran. stop barking please. It's getting old after 31 years. you need new things to say. I'm still waiting for those Israeli airplans that they wear gearing up. lol if you think you've the capability to attack Iran, don't wait! the clock is ticking. tic tac

if you can do something, do it for the sake of yourselves and handle the 60 year old catastrophe


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

QWECXZ said:


> lol. you are good at joking. no one doubts that Iran has produced the Jamaran frigate.
> 
> I'm dying over here. I didn't know that egypt is thaaat advanced but still it can survive with the help of the west for one month. if you are that advanced and self sufficient, why do you obey what ever they want you to? any ida? lol
> 
> I'm still waiting to see who dares to attack Iran. stop barking please. It's getting old after 31 years. you need new things to say. I'm still waiting for those Israeli airplans that they wear gearing up. lol if you think you've the capability to attack Iran, don't wait! the clock is ticking. tic tac
> 
> if you can do something, do it for the sake of yourselves and handle the 60 year old catastrophe



Really you are ignorant and don't know what you are talking about,,what western help and what month you talk about egypt is the biggest non petrolium economy in the middle east or may be second to turkey ,,after loosing your oil we will see the persian empire ) 

The jammraan is a frigate its real name is Alvand class frigate see here 







since 1977 and iran is kidding making it in 2010 ) poor shi3a )


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

and here that iran bought 4 of them and there will be no more than 4 jamraan that iran claims ) poor you .


Alvand class frigate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

tell me every thing you claim that iran has made and i'll give you the real name of it and the prove .you are good in painting things but not building it


----------



## QWECXZ

EnG.IsLaM said:


> tell me every thing you claim that iran has made and i'll give you the real name of it and the prove .you are good in painting things but not building it



you are not even good at painting things unfortunately.
those are old claims. if we want to take into account what the westerners have said so far, Iran's economy must've gone bankrupt!

tic tac.


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

What happened has the cat eaten your tongue???? answer my question is that frigate iranin??? hhhhhhhhhh egypt has the biggest navy in the middle east double of israel ,,,iranian air force is rusty and 80&#37; of it have been destroyed by iraq helped by egypt,,, chemical weapons used to kill your people came from egyptian factories and we are here for any one who want to harm iran and we will help him .


----------



## QWECXZ

EnG.IsLaM said:


> What happened has the cat eaten your tongue???? answer my question is that frigate iranin??? hhhhhhhhhh egypt has the biggest navy in the middle east double of israel ,,,iranian air force is rusty and 80&#37; of it have been destroyed by iraq helped by egypt,,, chemical weapons used to kill your people came from egyptian factories and we are here for any one who want to harm iran and we will help him .



is killing innocent people with chemical weapons something to be proud of? lol
Iran has the most advanced biological research and industry in the ME and It has the ability to purify or vaporize any type of biological microorganisms to produce biological weapons and already It possesses a large number of them
even during the 8 year war, Iran had chemical weapons, but preferred not to use them due to the international pressure.

no one knows for sure about Iranian weapon industry. forget about the Hollywood movies, let's face the reality. Iran hasn't had any noticable linkage with the western weapon manufacturers for years and the west is not completely aware of Iran's strength. that's the worst part of the game for the west. they can only down play Iran's achievements, and no one cares.

don't forget the 6 day war. we saw the productivity of your huge weaponry industry during the war, if there was any though.

study about the Iran-Iraq war, Iranian navy destroyed 80% of the Iraqi Navy in the Operation Morvarid : Operation Morvarid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Date 28 November 1980-29 November 1980
> Location Iraq part of the Persian Gulf
> Result Decisive Iranian victory
> 
> * Destruction of 80% of the Iraqi Navy
> * Destruction of the oil terminals at Mina al Bakr and Khor-al-Amaya
> * Blocking of the port of Al Faw
> * Destruction of many Iraqi oil installations, early warning bases and SAM sites



you are overestimating egypt's strength and underestimating Iran's strength. Iran has enemies all around the world and still we see no one attacks Iran, why? 

tic tac.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

QWECXZ said:


> I don't even bother myself to read your claims about the PERSIAN gulf.
> and yes, the Islamic republic of Iran occupies the apple polishers' lands.
> 
> let's not go into a debate on which country is more advanced in science.
> Iran is the first middle eastern country to successfully clone an animal, Iran is the first middle eastern country to successfully proliferate a transgenic animal, Iran is the 9th country in the world that has sent its own satellite with its own missile,Iran is ranked 15th in nanotechnology, Iran is ranked in top 10 in stem cell research, Iran's scientific growth as of 2009 was 11 times higher than the world's average both that ables Iran to be ranked 1st and ...
> 
> Iran is under 3 rounds of sanctions and egypt is not and ....
> 
> you can't even produce a bicycle, we would appreciate it even if you build a saeqeh or shafagh. at least Iran has produced a frigate, have you produced even a boat?
> 
> you're supposed to be united for 60 straight years )))) you are not that wise to understand the meaning of such words.



Why are you letting this fake(?) eqyptian rattle you up?!! Even if he's a real egyptian, he is not representative. Egypt is like Japan in that it doesn't have full freedom to improve its people's lives, so please understand. Egypt is ruled by a dictator who is under immense pressure by the zionists-europeans-americans. But he is 81 and his health is failing.

Egypt is in a very similar position as Iran, in fact also identical. Think about this: They have comparable population, land, media, military, etc. Even they both have challenges of "modernizations" VS "tradition". There a movements for more liberty in expression (clothing, food, technology), as well as a strong counter movement to 'preserve' native culture.

Egypt & Iran are friendly nations. Both despise the zionists and hypocritical "west".


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Cyrus the Great said:


> with my respect to you.1- Chinese recorded history is Max 5000 but Iran's 7000
> 2- just WW2 helped you overcome the invasion of Japan( Tianjin, Dalian ,.....)



 Chinese Civilization is even OLDER than the Ancient Egyptians by THOUSANDS OF YEARS. "Persian" is YOUNGER than Vietnam, and SE ASIA.

There's also strong evidence that challenges the theory of "Homo Sapiens emerge from Africa", and homo-sapian bone artifacts uncovered in China seem to indicate humans evolved from China first. This is collaborated by other evidence, in particular lineage of other primates. 

Furthermore, if you consider primates (humans included) are more adapted towards lush forests/jungles in warm climates ===> you can see that 3 major giant tributaries in China provide that ideal environment for primates. If you factor in human habitation effect on the land, thousands of years back China was even more lush in fauna. Only the Amazon river offers suitable habitat for primates, but as we can see from fossil evidence that it is ASIA + AFRICA that contained primates of numerous species. However, Africa is dominated by mostly flat open sahara-like environment, with sparse trees and hot dry landscape with the yearly monsoon ====> this is not ideal habitat for primates.


That is enough of a lesson for biologists, environmentalogists, zoologists, etc. 

Back to my research fellas!


----------



## QWECXZ

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Why are you letting this fake(?) eqyptian rattle you up?!! Even if he's a real egyptian, he is not representative. Egypt is like Japan in that it doesn't have full freedom to improve its people's lives, so please understand. Egypt is ruled by a dictator who is under immense pressure by the zionists-europeans-americans. But he is 81 and his health is failing.
> 
> Egypt is in a very similar position as Iran, in fact also identical. Think about this: They have comparable population, land, media, military, etc. Even they both have challenges of "modernizations" VS "tradition". There a movements for more liberty in expression (clothing, food, technology), as well as a strong counter movement to 'preserve' native culture.
> 
> Egypt & Iran are friendly nations. Both despise the zionists and hypocritical "west".



sorry but Iran has never made false claims about others' lands.
You don't need to be a genius to know who will win a war between Iran and Egypt. We're talking about countries such as America and Israel and then he comes and talks about Egypt. lmao It's like you talk about the F-! races and someone interrupts you talking about Camel riding.

53 countries supported Iraq to attack Iran, with the direct support and involvement of the USA and Kuwait. the Iran-Iraq war is among the only wars during the cold war that the USSR and the USA both sided with the same country.
history proves everything:



> belligerents:
> Iraq Iraq¹
> 
> MKO Logo.jpg People's Mujahedin of Iran
> Flag of Kuwait.svg Kuwait
> Flag of the Soviet Union.svg Soviet Union
> Flag of the Arab League.svg Arab League[1]
> Flag of the United States.svg United States[2][3]
> 
> Iran
> 
> Flag of PUK.png PUK
> Former Flag of KDP.png KDP
> Sciri logo.jpg SCIRI
> Islamic Dawa Party logo.jpg Da'awa
> 
> ¹ With support from the U.S.S.R., France, Brazil, Egypt, Denmark, the United States, and other Arab, NATO and Warsaw Pact countries for Iraq.[13][14]



now if you do the math, who should've won the war? and what was the final result? experts continuously said that Iran was not going to resist more than one month but we all saw what happened. If the US hadn't involved in the war directly, we would've continued occupying Iraqi lands to Baghdad.
plus, you should take this into account that the Iraq-Iran war happened after the Nozheh Coup, a coup that resulted to the execution of most Iranian expertized Generals to strengthen the roots of the new-born revolution.

as of 2006 Iran was suggested to be the strongest military power of the middle east according to the US Gen. Abizaid, considering Iranian new advancements Iran's today military power is more than that of 2006 for sure.
Iran Favors Asymmetric Strategy In Joust With US

I don't want to offend anyone, but the 60 year old history of Israel and the arabs shows how advanced they are. lol 53 countries planned to destroy Iran completely, we fought back for 8 years and we didn't even lose one km of our borders and you can see today what has happened to those invaders. but one country, attacked the Arabs, and it won all of them in 6 days! lol



SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Chinese Civilization is even OLDER than the Ancient Egyptians by THOUSANDS OF YEARS. "Persian" is YOUNGER than Vietnam, and SE ASIA.
> 
> There's also strong evidence that challenges the theory of "Homo Sapiens emerge from Africa", and homo-sapian bone artifacts uncovered in China seem to indicate humans evolved from China first. This is collaborated by other evidence, in particular lineage of other primates.
> 
> Furthermore, if you consider primates (humans included) are more adapted towards lush forests/jungles in warm climates ===> you can see that 3 major giant tributaries in China provide that ideal environment for primates. If you factor in human habitation effect on the land, thousands of years back China was even more lush in fauna. Only the Amazon river offers suitable habitat for primates, but as we can see from fossil evidence that it is ASIA + AFRICA that contained primates of numerous species. However, Africa is dominated by mostly flat open sahara-like environment, with sparse trees and hot dry landscape with the yearly monsoon ====> this is not ideal habitat for primates.
> 
> 
> That is enough of a lesson for biologists, environmentalogists, zoologists, etc.
> 
> Back to my research fellas!



as a student of medicine, I should make you informed that the history of mankind is believed to trace back to south african countries regarding the latest Genetic researchs. but Iran has been called as the oldest continuous civilzation on earth many times. one of the oldest civilzations of this blue planet came to exist in the Persian Gulf and the 10,000 year old fossils found in Iran's Ilam province can support the theory but It doesn't mean that Iran has the oldest history.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

QWECXZ said:


> sorry but Iran has never made false claims about others' lands.
> You don't need to be a genius to know who will win a war between Iran and Egypt. We're talking about countries such as America and Israel and then he comes and talks about Egypt. lmao It's like you talk about the F-! races and someone interrupts you talking about Camel riding.
> 
> 53 countries supported Iraq to attack Iran, with the direct support and involvement of the USA and Kuwait. the Iran-Iraq war is among the only wars during the cold war that the USSR and the USA both sided with the same country.
> history proves everything:
> 
> 
> 
> now if you do the math, who should've won the war? and what was the final result? experts continuously said that Iran was not going to resist more than one month but we all saw what happened. If the US hadn't involved in the war directly, we would've continued occupying Iraqi lands to Baghdad.
> plus, you should take this into account that the Iraq-Iran war happened after the Nozheh Coup, a coup that resulted to the execution of most Iranian expertized Generals to strengthen the roots of the new-born revolution.
> 
> as of 2006 Iran was suggested to be the strongest military power of the middle east according to the US Gen. Abizaid, considering Iranian new advancements Iran's today military power is more than that of 2006 for sure.
> Iran Favors Asymmetric Strategy In Joust With US
> 
> I don't want to offend anyone, but the 60 year old history of Israel and the arabs shows how advanced they are. lol 53 countries planned to destroy Iran completely, we fought back for 8 years and we didn't even lose one km of our borders and you can see today what has happened to those invaders. but one country, attacked the Arabs, and it won all of them in 6 days! lol
> 
> 
> 
> as a student of medicine, I should make you informed that the history of mankind is believed to trace back to south african countries regarding the latest Genetic researchs. but Iran has been called as the oldest continuous civilzation on earth many times. one of the oldest civilzations of this blue planet came to exist in the Persian Gulf and the 10,000 year old fossils found in Iran's Ilam province can support the theory but It doesn't mean that Iran has the oldest history.



Then you flunk. People don't do "genetic research" on bones. Are you aware most tests done of DNA sequencing is done using enzymes that chop up the dna and then the pieces are separated. To do *actual* DNA sequencing is a much LONGER process, and most studies take short cuts -- for example, using Mitochondria only. The newest machines are developed in China with the fastest and most accurate combination. Before this sequencing the ENTIRE DNA of a single individual took weeks (using the then fastest machine). If you are representative of the standard of education in Iran, then it is sad. 

You Iranians are making fools of yourselves. I didn't want to bring up it before, but you need to wake up from your propaganda. 

Do you know the oldest fossils, human habitation, etc are found in Asia, and in particular China??? 

When I saw Iran, I could help but laugh. Dude, wake up man! Your great Persian "empire" was nothing more than a few hundred men on horses, and the rest of them barefoot. There was no "great" Persian empire. It is comparable to Afghans today.

Are you aware of the great civilization is SE Asia??? It makes the Roman "empire" look pathetic! I kid you not kiddo.



But getting back to topic, I do understand how you feel betrayed by Egypt and the Arabs. But keep in mind that Egypt only "signed" the papers to support Iraq against Iran through coercion and because of a few dictators. That did not represent the people of Egypt. Keep in mind USA was very powerful back then, and with the recent fall of USSR (and before the emergence of China).... not many countries dare challenge the USA. If the same thing happened today, we'll see much less than 53 countries giving their "support".





> *It is apparent Iranian Nationalism is strong. But to put it into context for you, I will give you some comparisons of countries of comparable sizes: Now, I left out the giants (PRC, USA, Russia) and the one midget (India) because it wouldn't be fare to compare with Iran. *
> 
> *
> ECONOMY:*
> 
> All of these nations easily exceed Iran:
> 
> a) IN EUROPE --- France, England, Germany
> 
> b) IN ASIA -- Japan, SOK, Indonesia
> 
> c) IN AMERICAS -- Canada, Mexico, Brazil
> 
> d) IN AFRICA + ME --
> 
> All of these nations are comparable (if not greater than) to Iran:
> 
> a) IN EUROPE --- Spain, Italy, Ukraine, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Norway
> 
> b) IN ASIA -- Vietnam, Phillipines, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand, Singapore, DPRK, Pakistan, BD
> 
> c) IN AMERICAS -- Argentina, Colombia, Venezuela
> 
> d) IN AFRICA + ME -- Nigeria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, S Africa, Congo
> 
> 
> *
> MILITARY:*
> 
> All of these nations easily exceed Iran:
> 
> a) IN EUROPE --- France, England, Germany
> 
> b) IN ASIA -- Japan, ROK, DPRK, Pakistan, Indonesia
> 
> c) IN AMERICAS -- Mexico, Brazil
> 
> d) IN AFRICA + ME --
> 
> All of these nations are comparable (if not greater than) to Iran:
> 
> a) IN EUROPE --- Spain, Italy, Ukraine, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Norway
> 
> b) IN ASIA -- Vietnam, Phillipines, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand, Singapore, Pakistan, BD
> 
> c) IN AMERICAS -- Argentina, Colombia, Venezuela
> 
> d) IN AFRICA + ME -- Nigeria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, S Africa
> 
> 
> *
> SCI & TECH:*
> 
> All of these nations easily exceed Iran:
> 
> a) IN EUROPE --- France, England, Germany, Spain, Italy, Ukraine, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Norway
> 
> b) IN ASIA -- Japan, ROK, DPRK, Pakistan, Indonesia, Vietnam, Phillipines, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand, Singapore
> 
> c) IN AMERICAS -- Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Venezuela
> 
> d) IN AFRICA + ME --
> 
> All of these nations are comparable (if not greater than) to Iran:
> 
> a) IN EUROPE --- Iranian science & technology is so weak, that most of the tiny countries are comparable.
> 
> b) IN ASIA -- Pakistan, BD, Iranian science & technology is so weak, that most of the tiny countries are comparable.
> 
> c) IN AMERICAS -- Iranian science & technology is so weak, that most of the tiny countries are comparable.
> 
> d) IN AFRICA + ME -- Iranian science & technology is so weak, that most of the tiny countries are comparable.
> 
> 
> To conclude, the advantage Iran has is location and access to sea, some oil and a lot of gas. Problem with gas is the storage and delivery of gas, which significantly reduces the price and customers.




As you can see, although Iran is a significant player on the world stage, it is till a small tiny little fry. Yes, you will attempt to justify the lies and propaganda that has been instilled upon you since birth --- but it won't change reality.

To be filled with delusion and stupidity is not a good thing. Once you realize how small and weak you are compared to your neighbors, you'll become better off.


----------



## QWECXZ

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Then you flunk. People don't do "genetic research" on bones. Are you aware most tests done of DNA sequencing is done using enzymes that chop up the dna and then the pieces are separated. To do *actual* DNA sequencing is a much LONGER process, and most studies take short cuts -- for example, using Mitochondria only. The newest machines are developed in China with the fastest and most accurate combination. Before this sequencing the ENTIRE DNA of a single individual took weeks (using the then fastest machine). If you are representative of the standard of education in Iran, then it is sad.
> 
> You Iranians are making fools of yourselves. I didn't want to bring up it before, but you need to wake up from your propaganda.
> 
> Do you know the oldest fossils, human habitation, etc are found in Asia, and in particular China???
> 
> When I saw Iran, I could help but laugh. Dude, wake up man! Your great Persian "empire" was nothing more than a few hundred men on horses, and the rest of them barefoot. There was no "great" Persian empire. It is comparable to Afghans today.
> 
> Are you aware of the great civilization is SE Asia??? It makes the Roman "empire" look pathetic! I kid you not kiddo.
> 
> 
> 
> But getting back to topic, I do understand how you feel betrayed by Egypt and the Arabs. But keep in mind that Egypt only "signed" the papers to support Iraq against Iran through coercion and because of a few dictators. That did not represent the people of Egypt. Keep in mind USA was very powerful back then, and with the recent fall of USSR (and before the emergence of China).... not many countries dare challenge the USA. If the same thing happened today, we'll see much less than 53 countries giving their "support".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, although Iran is a significant player on the world stage, it is till a small tiny little fry. Yes, you will attempt to justify the lies and propaganda that has been instilled upon you since birth --- but it won't change reality.
> 
> To be filled with delusion and stupidity is not a good thing. Once you realize how small and weak you are compared to your neighbors, you'll become better off.



sorry, at least It was an empire. you didn't have a simple civilzation lol
do you want me to start debating about the things you said? I'm sure you wouldn't like the things I'm going to say

according to wikipedia:



> It was the largest empire in ancient history. At the height of its power, the empire encompassed approximately 8 million km2.[1][2] The empire was forged by Cyrus the Great, and spanned three continents: Asia, Africa and Europe. At its greatest extent, the empire included the territories of Iran, Afghanistan and the territories of northern India, parts of Central Asia, Asia Minor, Thrace and Macedonia, much of the Black Sea coastal regions, Iraq, northern Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Palestine/Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and all significant population centers of ancient Egypt as far west as Libya.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

QWECXZ said:


> sorry, at least It was an empire. you didn't have a simple civilzation lol
> do you want me to start debating about the things you said? I'm sure you wouldn't like the things I'm going to say
> 
> according to wikipedia:



At the height of Ghenghis Khan's empire, it encompassed nearly ALL OF ASIA, EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST --- that includes Iran.

In fact, here's an interesting historical fact:

Ghenghis Khan sent an envoy into Iran normadic lands. The stupid Persians instead of welcoming and respecting the envoy, they murdered & beheaded the envoy, and then sent the head in a box back to Ghenghis Khan.

*Genghis Khan was furious and sent a few troops and wiped out thousands of Persians and annexed the ENTIRE Persia in a few months time! * So much for this pathetic "warrior race".... LOL.

Lesson to be learned: Know whom to mess with, and whom to respect.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hussein

Thomas said:


> If Saudi Arabia and Egypt feel threatened by Iran it could have something to do with Iran's wish to export it's brand of Islamic theocracy. and Ayatollah Khomeini's statement "We shall export our revolution to the whole world"


ok it is important to understand what he was meaning then

he was meaning spread the idea of a revolution based on Islam
he didn' tmean Iranians were sending guys to make a revolution 
you can say about Lebanon but it was Lebanon who asked from Iran's concern because they admired what happened in Iran (revolution): see Hezbollah creation

Khomeini said exporting Islam, the words of our prophet in the countries . 

It's ideological. Like the idea to spread the revolution idea from France two centuries ago.
This is not a good policy, i think.. when it is followed by financial and military (even formation) help.

But you should understand that these words of Imam Khomeini was that PROMOTION of the revolution. 

Remember in the streets you could hear green saying "NO WEST NO EAST" It's all about Khomeiny idea.


----------



## below_freezing

what is the point of arguing which is older, both iran and china are ancient civilizations that survived to this day. this is a major accomplishment, any country having over 2000 years of civilization is a major achievement.

sino, using restriction endonuclease is a requirement for all sequencing; you can't use the chain termination method for anything longer than 1000 base pairs, and most DNA is on the orders of billions of base pairs. mitochondrial DNA sequencing isn't a shortcut, it's because mitochondrial DNA is inherited through mothers and can trace ancestry.

sorry i study biology =)

anyhow...

i don't think arabs should compare themselves to iran in technology and science. there's just no comparison, arabs don't have it. they have money, that's OK, just like hong kong has no technology but alot of money.


----------



## Thomas

Hussein said:


> ok it is important to understand what he was meaning then
> 
> he was meaning spread the idea of a revolution based on Islam
> he didn' tmean Iranians were sending guys to make a revolution
> you can say about Lebanon but it was Lebanon who asked from Iran's concern because they admired what happened in Iran (revolution): see Hezbollah creation
> 
> Khomeini said exporting Islam, the words of our prophet in the countries .
> 
> It's ideological. Like the idea to spread the revolution idea from France two centuries ago.
> This is not a good policy, i think.. when it is followed by financial and military (even formation) help.
> 
> But you should understand that these words of Imam Khomeini was that PROMOTION of the revolution.
> 
> Remember in the streets you could hear green saying "NO WEST NO EAST" It's all about Khomeiny idea.



To seek the spread of Islam is one thing. but to seek it's spread by Iranian style revolution is another. That is what it appears he is saying.

Let me ask you this. Has Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ever called for the overthrow of the Saudi Monarchy? Has he ever threatened to break the teeth of Pakistan? Has he ever called for the overthrow of the Egyptian Government and the establishment of an Iranian style theocracy?


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

below_freezing said:


> what is the point of arguing which is older, both iran and china are ancient civilizations that survived to this day. this is a major accomplishment, any country having over 2000 years of civilization is a major achievement.
> 
> sino, using restriction endonuclease is a requirement for all sequencing; you can't use the chain termination method for anything longer than 1000 base pairs, and most DNA is on the orders of billions of base pairs. mitochondrial DNA sequencing isn't a shortcut, it's because mitochondrial DNA is inherited through mothers and can trace ancestry.
> 
> sorry i study biology =)
> 
> anyhow...
> 
> i don't think arabs should compare themselves to iran in technology and science. there's just no comparison, arabs don't have it. they have money, that's OK, just like hong kong has no technology but alot of money.



What you say about biology is correct but you mistunderstood my explanation. Either way, the fellow was spewing nonsense so I corrected him.

Yes, I do respect and somewhat admire Iran. However, to put it into perspective Iran is under-par compared to its peers.

Why so hard on HK? HK is quite advanced, we should be proud of them. I know some mainlanders think that HK are not patriotic. That is simply untrue. HKers are *very patriotic! * I used to think the same but now I know better. In fact, TWers are also patriotic toward mainland.

And even Singapore as well. We must understand how Singapore we born, it was born out of ostracization from Malaysia. Being an isolated island nation it had to find ways to survive. Unfortunately, PRC was isolated at that time as well. So Singapore had no choice but to reach out to .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## below_freezing

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> What you say about biology is correct but you mistunderstood my explanation. Either way, the fellow was spewing nonsense so I corrected him.
> 
> Yes, I do respect and somewhat admire Iran. However, to put it into perspective Iran is under-par compared to its peers.
> 
> Why so hard on HK? HK is quite advanced, we should be proud of them. I know some mainlanders think that HK are not patriotic. That is simply untrue. HKers are *very patriotic! * I used to think the same but now I know better. In fact, TWers are also patriotic toward mainland.
> 
> And even Singapore as well. We must understand how Singapore we born, it was born out of ostracization from Malaysia. Being an isolated island nation it had to find ways to survive. Unfortunately, PRC was isolated at that time as well. So Singapore had no choice but to reach out to .



lets not derail the topic.

iran.


----------



## Hussein

Thomas said:


> To seek the spread of Islam is one thing. but to seek it's spread by Iranian style revolution is another. That is what it appears he is saying.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Has Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ever called for the overthrow of the Saudi Monarchy? Has he ever threatened to break the teeth of Pakistan? Has he ever called for the overthrow of the Egyptian Government and the establishment of an Iranian style theocracy?


This speech was about it. To spread the idea of revolution.

Dear Thomas, what you are saying about Khomeini:
- i never heard directly from him what you said about Saudi. If any source , it would be welcomed. Saudi is not an exemple of democracy any way. Guess you agree with it?
- Pakistan .. that's our history between our two countries. Many times some people in my country were thinking Pakistan was doing bad actions against our country. But it improving. And i hope we smartly be friends more and more. We have to otherwise we will remain weak.

It is something very different that saying words when you are upset and having a speech like the one you said about .. about spreading the revolution idea


----------



## Cyrus the Great

EnG.IsLaM said:


> i
> states of the arab gulf specially UAE have problems with iran occupying the three emirates islands .
> 
> *1-there is not so called arab gulf in world Naser used is fake term about Persian Gulf to say he is Pan arab. and leader of arabs. there is not arab community any more. just look at arab luge summit every time is a joke.
> this gulf name is Persian Gulf first go to book then talk.*
> 
> 
> 
> Saudi treat iran like an enemy cause you are an enemy don't you remember how iran tried to explode the haram of meka with mouslims in it,,, irans record is full and there is awar coming to put every thing in its right place<<UAE islands,,irans helping hauthis in yemen fighting saudis,,helping hizb allah terrorists in egypt>.
> 
> so it is time to deal with persia



*2- big lie about Iran intention of the explosion of Mecca. Iranian wanted to do demonstration in Haj against US. US ordered his Saudi poppet to kill them and Saudi made this BIG LIE and kiiled 400 Iranian Haji there(300 women and 100 men). do those 300 women wanted bomb our holly Mecc?

3-Mecca and Madineh is not belong to a country that what they like do there.

4- if UAE has right ti claim about our three islands then we have right to claim at least about Bahrain, Kuwait, Yaman, should i say more? if i go i will reach to Egypt *


----------



## Kashmiri Nationalist

Why are we fighting? We are all Muslims, Arabs should be ashamed of helping Israel kill muslims in Iran. One things, WHERE were the Arabs when Israel recently massacred the population of Gaza? 
Another thing, the Shah supported Pak in the against India, offered to refuel our planes. Whereas Iraq was on India's side, I think Saddam said he would help India massacre the population of Pakistan or something along those lines (not sure).
Also, Iran has helped the Iraqi freedom fighters after the occupation of Iraq. 

If Iran, Pakistan, all Arabs were to be united, that would surpass any empire China or the US will EVER reach.

+ Arab Legue should be disbanded and replaced with a Muslim League instead including all muslim nations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cyrus the Great

EnG.IsLaM said:


> &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607;&#1605; &#1575;&#1590;&#1585;&#1576; &#1575;&#1604;&#1592;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1610;&#1606; &#1576;&#1575;&#1604;&#1592;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1610;&#1606; &#1608;&#1575;&#1582;&#1585;&#1580;&#1606;&#1575; &#1605;&#1606; &#1576;&#1610;&#1606;&#1607;&#1605; &#1587;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1610;&#1606;
> 
> . don't forget if it weren't for iran, iraq and afghanistan wont fall.



&#1575;&#1604;&#1607;&#1605; &#1575;&#1588;&#1594;&#1604; &#1575;&#1604;&#1592;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1740;&#1606; &#1576;&#1575;&#1604;&#1592;&#1575;&#1604;&#1605;&#1740;&#1606;. &#1575;&#1604;&#1581;&#1605;&#1583;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607;


----------



## Cyrus the Great

EnG.IsLaM said:


> yes brother by a pig so called khaled el islamboly supported by iran islmic republic so ikhwan or iran double faces of one coin



Khaled was a Egyptian militant and killed Sadat because Sadat titrated Muslims in Camp Davide


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> Do I hear the yearning for another Persian Empire?



if try for keeping original name is trying to rise Persian empire so we do. can i call Alaska as Russian Alaska?


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> I would advise not making the same mistake Saddam made with Kuwait. It didn't work out to well for him and it won't for Iran as well. Bahrain is an legitimately recognized U.N. country. Any attempt to take it back will fail.
> 
> Also you never responded to Khomeini's statement about exporting Iran's revolution to the whole world.



thank you for your point about UN recognized country. as so Persian Gulf is UN recognized name too, *I hope you will use the name which is recognized with UN, if you are honest about what you say in all your future pots and comments*

i already answered your question about revolution export in former posts


----------



## Cyrus the Great

EnG.IsLaM said:


> Really you are ignorant and don't know what you are talking about,,what western help and what month you talk about egypt is the biggest non petrolium economy in the middle east or may be second to turkey ,,after loosing your oil we will see the persian empire )
> 
> The jammraan is a frigate its real name is Alvand class frigate see here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> since 1977 and iran is kidding making it in 2010 ) poor shi3a )



I would be really happy if Egypt economy is going well. because Egypt is not only Mobarack and its security system, this improvement will help Egyptian in life so that is good
but i checked world banck report does not prove what you said. also biggest non petroleum economy does not mean you are manufacturer. maybe your tourism industry is good. i will Egypt economy goes well


----------



## xMustiiej70

Turkey is the strongest and biggest in ME.
In all terms.
And egypt isn't that big.
They should go for big modernization like turkey in 90's.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Why are you letting this fake(?) eqyptian rattle you up?!! Even if he's a real egyptian, he is not representative. Egypt is like Japan in that it doesn't have full freedom to improve its people's lives, so please understand. Egypt is ruled by a dictator who is under immense pressure by the zionists-europeans-americans. But he is 81 and his health is failing.
> 
> Egypt is in a very similar position as Iran, in fact also identical. Think about this: They have comparable population, land, media, military, etc. Even they both have challenges of "modernizations" VS "tradition". There a movements for more liberty in expression (clothing, food, technology), as well as a strong counter movement to 'preserve' native culture.
> 
> Egypt & Iran are friendly nations. Both despise the zionists and hypocritical "west".



i agree people of Egypt are not same as their politicians.and generally one person is not representing his country, but when he defend Sadat at least we can say he is supporting Camp David.
I hope egyption live in peace and prosperity. but if any of them claim on Persian Gulf name Iranian consider them as enemy and attacker to Iran territory.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Do you know the oldest fossils, human habitation, etc are found in Asia, and in particular China??? 

when we talk about civilization it does not mean fossiles or where had the first human been. it mean the group of people who could make a society and community to live together and create knowledge and technology.also i do believe what has happened in everybody mother land nothing honor or shame for us.
finally i am not a historian but what i read from text prove so far recorded civilization in Iran (not only land of life) is back to 7000 years ago by discovery of " Burned city" . and what Chinese right in there text as their civilization is back to 5000 years ago( i learned this in a Chinese university).
i do believe we should not ignore any even new nation even with 200 years history while i do believe china has a great history.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Thomas said:


> To seek the spread of Islam is one thing. but to seek it's spread by Iranian style revolution is another. That is what it appears he is saying.
> 
> Let me ask you this. Has Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ever called for the overthrow of the Saudi Monarchy? Has he ever threatened to break the teeth of Pakistan? Has he ever called for the overthrow of the Egyptian Government and the establishment of an Iranian style theocracy?



never. before revolution Shah was anti arabs and pro Israeil and US for sure, but after revolution Khomeni changed public mind in Iran for better relation with arabs ( not Sadat and Saudi's king). but arabs leaders did not want their people learn from Iranian so they started Iran phobia project.


----------



## EnG.IsLaM

Cyrus the Great said:


> if what you say is true (you have the biggest navy in ME)bro, i am sorry to say why you lost to Israeli? is not for that your leaders and soldiers are not brave enough to fight with your side-door enemy?



Egyptian soldiers are the best not my talk but its belng's to prophet muhammed's &#1589;&#1604;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1607; &#1608;&#1587;&#1604;&#1605; when he said &#1575;&#1584;&#1575; &#1601;&#1578;&#1581; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1603;&#1605; &#1605;&#1589;&#1585; &#1601;&#1575;&#1578;&#1582;&#1584;&#1608;&#1575; &#1605;&#1606;&#1607;&#1575; &#1580;&#1606;&#1583;&#1575; &#1603;&#1579;&#1610;&#1601;&#1575; &#1601;&#1584;&#1604;&#1603; &#1575;&#1604;&#1580;&#1606;&#1583; &#1582;&#1610;&#1585; &#1575;&#1580;&#1606;&#1575;&#1583; &#1575;&#1604;&#1575;&#1585;&#1590;. &#1589;&#1604;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1607; &#1608;&#1587;&#1604;&#1605;

What happened in last war was lessons and we have understood it ,,don't you know how a small rocket boat saked the israeli eilat go and read,,,don't you know how egyptian commandos destroyed the bet shefaa &bet yaam and the militry pave go and read son and come back to talk,,,,israeli leaders said so that egyptian navy are double than israeili


----------



## Thomas

Hussein said:


> This speech was about it. To spread the idea of revolution.
> 
> Dear Thomas, what you are saying about Khomeini:
> - *i never heard directly from him what you said about Saudi. If any source , it would be welcomed.* Saudi is not an exemple of democracy any way. Guess you agree with it?
> - Pakistan .. that's our history between our two countries. Many times some people in my country were thinking Pakistan was doing bad actions against our country. But it improving. And i hope we smartly be friends more and more. We have to otherwise we will remain weak.
> 
> It is something very different that saying words when you are upset and having a speech like the one you said about .. about spreading the revolution idea



Saudi Arabia Enters the Twenty-first ... - Google Books


----------



## Hussein

Thomas said:


> Saudi Arabia Enters the Twenty-first ... - Google Books


sorry without any offence, for me it is not trustable source
i would prefer from inside Iran. i mean a speech which was related.
here nothing is said which speech. strange and maybe fake.


----------



## Cyrus the Great

EnG.IsLaM said:


> Egyptian soldiers are the best not my talk but its belng's to prophet muhammed's &#1589;&#1604;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1607; &#1608;&#1587;&#1604;&#1605; when he said &#1575;&#1584;&#1575; &#1601;&#1578;&#1581; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1603;&#1605; &#1605;&#1589;&#1585; &#1601;&#1575;&#1578;&#1582;&#1584;&#1608;&#1575; &#1605;&#1606;&#1607;&#1575; &#1580;&#1606;&#1583;&#1575; &#1603;&#1579;&#1610;&#1601;&#1575; &#1601;&#1584;&#1604;&#1603; &#1575;&#1604;&#1580;&#1606;&#1583; &#1582;&#1610;&#1585; &#1575;&#1580;&#1606;&#1575;&#1583; &#1575;&#1604;&#1575;&#1585;&#1590;. &#1589;&#1604;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1607; &#1608;&#1587;&#1604;&#1605;
> 
> What happened in last war was lessons and we have understood it ,,don't you know how a small rocket boat saked the israeli eilat go and read,,,don't you know how egyptian commandos destroyed the bet shefaa &bet yaam and the militry pave go and read son and come back to talk,,,,israeli leaders said so that egyptian navy are double than israeili



i wish i could accept what you say. but what was the final result? we dont care about ant small battle there. the final was you along other 3 arab forces lost the Israeil. and thanks to Allah that Hizbollah a small militia( not even one Vlasic army won in war with Zionist regime


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Then you flunk. People don't do "genetic research" on bones. Are you aware most tests done of DNA sequencing is done using enzymes that chop up the dna and then the pieces are separated. To do *actual* DNA sequencing is a much LONGER process, and most studies take short cuts -- for example, using Mitochondria only. The newest machines are developed in China with the fastest and most accurate combination. Before this sequencing the ENTIRE DNA of a single individual took weeks (using the then fastest machine). If you are representative of the standard of education in Iran, then it is sad.
> 
> You Iranians are making fools of yourselves. I didn't want to bring up it before, but you need to wake up from your propaganda.
> 
> Do you know the oldest fossils, human habitation, etc are found in Asia, and in particular China???
> 
> When I saw Iran, I could help but laugh. Dude, wake up man! Your great Persian "empire" was nothing more than a few hundred men on horses, and the rest of them barefoot. There was no "great" Persian empire. It is comparable to Afghans today.
> 
> Are you aware of the great civilization is SE Asia??? It makes the Roman "empire" look pathetic! I kid you not kiddo.
> 
> 
> 
> But getting back to topic, I do understand how you feel betrayed by Egypt and the Arabs. But keep in mind that Egypt only "signed" the papers to support Iraq against Iran through coercion and because of a few dictators. That did not represent the people of Egypt. Keep in mind USA was very powerful back then, and with the recent fall of USSR (and before the emergence of China).... not many countries dare challenge the USA. If the same thing happened today, we'll see much less than 53 countries giving their "support".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, although Iran is a significant player on the world stage, it is till a small tiny little fry. Yes, you will attempt to justify the lies and propaganda that has been instilled upon you since birth --- but it won't change reality.
> 
> To be filled with delusion and stupidity is not a good thing. Once you realize how small and weak you are compared to your neighbors, you'll become better off.



The iranian members are deluding themselves with iran's power to a certain extent,but some of the facts are right.

The mesopotamian civilization is called the cradle of civilization,ie in modern day iraq-iran.
The first known empire was that of the assyrians.same geographical area.
The persian empire was hardle a few men on horses.The sassanid persians were a powerful empire,that they kept the romans at bay.
The chinese empire was a great civilization but the roman empire is widely recognized as the GREATEST empire in human history.I know ur from china but facts are facts.i am from india and could easily have claimed indus valley civ to be earliest ,but mesopotamian civ is historically regarded the first.
Unfortunately iranians delude their current situation with glories of their ancestors.
Thank u.


----------



## Nima

AUSTERLITZ said:


> The iranian members are deluding themselves with iran's power to a certain extent,but some of the facts are right.
> 
> The mesopotamian civilization is called the cradle of civilization,ie in modern day iraq-iran.
> The first known empire was that of the assyrians.same geographical area.
> The persian empire was hardle a few men on horses.The sassanid persians were a powerful empire,that they kept the romans at bay.
> The chinese empire was a great civilization but the roman empire is widely recognized as the GREATEST empire in human history.I know ur from china but facts are facts.i am from india and could easily have claimed indus valley civ to be earliest ,but mesopotamian civ is historically regarded the first.
> Unfortunately iranians delude their current situation with glories of their ancestors.
> Thank u.


we didn't just keep Romans @ bay, we killed 2 roman Emperors and captured one ALIVE!!!
Persians were the only people in history to capture a roman emperor alive. You guys can check it out. 
Winners write history and unfortunately everything we know today is from the libraries of ancient Greeks. Every library in Persia was burned by Alexander and later by the muslim arabs. Also, b/c of the bad publicity we get today, it is very easy to make a case against us but in the end we know our own history and that's what matters.


----------



## Kompromat

*Get back to the Topic boys.*


----------



## below_freezing

AUSTERLITZ said:


> The iranian members are deluding themselves with iran's power to a certain extent,but some of the facts are right.
> 
> The mesopotamian civilization is called the cradle of civilization,ie in modern day iraq-iran.
> The first known empire was that of the assyrians.same geographical area.
> The persian empire was hardle a few men on horses.The sassanid persians were a powerful empire,that they kept the romans at bay.
> The chinese empire was a great civilization but the roman empire is widely recognized as the GREATEST empire in human history.I know ur from china but facts are facts.i am from india and could easily have claimed indus valley civ to be earliest ,but mesopotamian civ is historically regarded the first.
> Unfortunately iranians delude their current situation with glories of their ancestors.
> Thank u.



Well, we can put it this way:

Italy is a client state of the US.
China is a nuclear world power.

Guess the Romans didn't turn out so good did they? greatest empire my *** they were stuck in a small region smaller than China today and had an emperor that died in a Persian jail, and 1 that got killed by a bunch of weak barbarians.


----------



## makikirkiri

below_freezing said:


> Well, we can put it this way:
> 
> Italy is a client state of the US.
> China is a nuclear world power.
> 
> Guess the Romans didn't turn out so good did they? greatest empire my *** they were stuck in a small region smaller than China today and had an emperor that died in a Persian jail, and 1 that got killed by a bunch of weak barbarians.


 And the chinese were for centuries bogged down by the nomadic barbarians the mongols...so much so that they resorted to building a great wall around their country ..but in vain.Their forts were seiged by these tent living barbarians and the chinese had to resort to cannibalism in their own palaces to save their lives.
No doubt the chinese civilization was on of the greatest.
But the catch word is empire.The romans were the innovators of governance and modern rule.


----------



## Solomon2

AUSTERLITZ said:


> t the roman empire is widely recognized as the GREATEST empire in human history...iranians delude their current situation with glories of their ancestors.


The Persian Empire was the world's largest, at times stretching from Libya to the Indus, and from Greece and the Caucasus to Ethiopia. It may be a "delusion" for Iranians to dream of re-establishing this, but it is the dream of the current leadership, and has been since the Islamic Republic of Iran was established.

If you read Persian history, there were two strategies the Persians employed: rule via local satraps wherever practical, and to make peace on all fronts save the one where military effort was concentrated. We see successful satraps in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza, and attempts at establishing such in Iraq and even Egypt. 

For now Iran's attempts are mostly westward. They mouth peace to neighbors who, if offended, have the strength to challenge them. But if mullahs ever attain their western goals, why do you think they wouldn't seek to turn their eyes on Pakistan next? Do the peoples of "Pakistan is my life!" look forward to becoming another Persian satellite?


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Solomon2 said:


> The Persian Empire was the world's largest, at times stretching from Libya to the Indus, and from Greece and the Caucasus to Ethiopia. It may be a "delusion" for Iranians to dream of re-establishing this, but it is the dream of the current leadership, and has been since the Islamic Republic of Iran was established.
> 
> If you read Persian history, there were two strategies the Persians employed: rule via local satraps wherever practical, and to make peace on all fronts save the one where military effort was concentrated. We see successful satraps in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza, and attempts at establishing such in Iraq and even Egypt.
> 
> For now Iran's attempts are mostly westward. They mouth peace to neighbors who, if offended, have the strength to challenge them. But if mullahs ever attain their western goals, why do you think they wouldn't seek to turn their eyes on Pakistan next? Do the peoples of "Pakistan is my life!" look forward to becoming another Persian satellite?



Iran phobia is a western project. are you trying for that?Ir-Pak relation is brotherhood


----------



## Solomon2

Cyrus the Great said:


> Iran phobia is a western project. are you trying for that?Ir-Pak relation is brotherhood


A "phobia" is an _unreasonable_ fear. Is fear of a new Persian Empire fearful or not? The Empire of Cyrus the Great:


----------



## pak-yes

Solomon2 said:


> The Persian Empire was the world's largest, at times stretching from Libya to the Indus, and from Greece and the Caucasus to Ethiopia. It may be a "delusion" for Iranians to dream of re-establishing this, but it is the dream of the current leadership, and has been since the Islamic Republic of Iran was established.
> 
> If you read Persian history, there were two strategies the Persians employed: rule via local satraps wherever practical, and to make peace on all fronts save the one where military effort was concentrated. We see successful satraps in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza, and attempts at establishing such in Iraq and even Egypt.
> 
> *For now Iran's attempts are mostly westward. They mouth peace to neighbors who, if offended, have the strength to challenge them. But if mullahs ever attain their western goals, why do you think they wouldn't seek to turn their eyes on Pakistan next? Do the peoples of "Pakistan is my life!" look forward to becoming another Persian satellite?*



The only threat we ever faced from south west was that of Israel.Which we even face today.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

below_freezing said:


> Well, we can put it this way:
> 
> Italy is a client state of the US.
> China is a nuclear world power.
> 
> Guess the Romans didn't turn out so good did they? greatest empire my *** they were stuck in a small region smaller than China today and had an emperor that died in a Persian jail, and 1 that got killed by a bunch of weak barbarians.



U speak of the times when rome was divided up into the western and eastern roman empires through later corruption and civil dissent.
I talk of Rome at its peak from the first punic war till the division.
Which empire has ever been able to claim THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA as 'OUR SEA'.
Rome is the foreleader of modern civilization till the 18th century europe ,north africa and syria still used the old roman roads as the major travelling roads ,that's after 1500 yrs.all roads did lead to rome.
The roman empire produced the most efficient military organization until frederick and napoleon.Its studied in all all major war colleges even today.Roman constructions were the backbone of european civilization.they also carried through the heritage of the greeks.

Why do u think every emperor hence styled themselves as a roman emperor since,huh?
from charlemagne[king of once the barbarous franks now civilized by exposure to roman culture,later to became the french]to frederick barbarossa,the emperors of austria who called themselves kaizer[german of caesar,they were descendants of the same germans'barbarians']to the russian czars,to ottoman sultans who formally claimed to be caesars of europe.
to the german kaizers, in world war 1.napoleon styled himself as a roman emperor.gave his army roman eagles as standards.

Why did the great men of their time have such fascination with rome if it was a small region that got whipped by barbarians.
rome's greatness lies in the fact that it held such a vast empire of different ethnicities,africans,gauls,germans,greeks,punics,libyans,egyptians,arabs and ruled with stability and prosperity for so vast a time.
They changed the face of the world and left an awesome legacy. Chinese empires never had to rule over such diifferent peoples.They kept to china.Rome held modern day france,part of germany,england,spain,italy,greece,the balkans,turkey,syria,parts of arabia,egypt,entire north africa.
The decline of the roman empire began with the advent of christianity.

Read up on rome.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

pak-yes said:


> The only threat we ever faced from south west was that of Israel.Which we even face today.



Largest empire was mongols.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Solomon2

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Largest empire was mongols.


I think you're right.



pak-yes said:


> The only threat we ever faced from south west was that of Israel.Which we even face today.


Go on, don't stop there. Tell everybody exactly how Israel is a threat to Pakistan.


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> I think you're right.
> 
> Go on, don't stop there. Tell everybody exactly how Israel is a threat to Pakistan.



lmao
I think you're the one that has to explain!
Iran is not the Persia of 2500 years ago lmaoooooo
why would we even DREAM of taking Pakistan etc? 
Today small puny countries like England are many times richer than bigger countries like India and Iran. Size doesn't matter anymore. 

If Iran is in Iraq today it is because Iranians and Iraqis have A LOT in common, believe it or not. To sunni arabs, shia muslims are all bunched up in a basket and are called kafirs. A few centuries ago Iran and shia Iraq were one. In the past century however, a lot has happened in the region. Iran was under the rule of the Pahlavi dynasty which tried to emphasize "persianism" unlike the previous dynasty who were Turkish speaking. In Iraq you had ultra nationalist leaders like saddam that tried to move closer to the sunni arab world and hated Iran. So effectively two brother countries became enemies after generations of hateful teachings on both sides. With time people will rediscover past alliances and who knows, some countries in the region might again join up BUT NOT THROUGH WAR! Tajikistan and Northern AFG both speak Persian. The accent of ppl in Tajikistan is closer to the accent of Tehrani Iranians than Isfahan and Tehran who are both major Iranian cities! Tajikistan and Northern AFG are also very poor countries. Who knows, maybe one day when Iran's situation is better and we have a democracy, these countries will see it beneficial to them to join Iran!

you're talking as if "the Persian empire" is on the verge of taking over the Asian continent when in reality we're more concerned with our out of control inflation lmao We haven't attacked ANY COUNTRY in well over 3 centuries and if we wanted to we don't have the power.


----------



## Kompromat

Grow up Kids , Persian times are over forever , stick to the topic.


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> lmao
> I think you're the one that has to explain!...why would we even DREAM of taking Pakistan etc?


A fair and relevant question. As one pro-Khomeini demonstrator explained to me in the early months of the '79 revolution, with the withdrawal of Britain from the Gulf, the paralyzing post-Vietnam angst of the United States, and the absence of the Soviet Union they saw an opening for their own imperial ambitions.

You may see them as fanatical Shia Islamists, but I saw your masters as calculating manipulators, men who took political science courses at Western universities to learn about dictatorships and totalitarianism. Not so they could avoid that fate, but so they could build a better one of their own.

Thus informed by their boasting, the Iran-Iraq war was no surprise to me. If the Iranians didn't turn their attentions on Pakistan instead, that's probably because (1) Saddam started the war first; (2) Pakistan is a much bigger and stronger state than Iraq was, and (3) their principal goal was Mecca, where pro-Iranian revolutionaries tried (but failed) to seize the Grand Mosque in late 1979. Basically, the Iranian mullahs wanted then (as the leadership does now) to dictate their form of Islam to everyone, and conquest of Arabia was the way to do it. With no U.S. troops in Arabia at the time, if the Iraqi Army fell the way would have been wide open.



> Today small puny countries like England are many times richer than bigger countries like India and Iran. Size doesn't matter anymore.


Oppression, opportunity, freedom, and the destructiveness of war matter more. Your point?



> If Iran is in Iraq today it is because Iranians and Iraqis have A LOT in common, believe it or not. To sunni arabs, shia muslims are all bunched up in a basket and are called kafirs. A few centuries ago Iran and shia Iraq were one. In the past century however, a lot has happened in the region. Iran was under the rule of the Pahlavi dynasty which tried to emphasize "persianism" unlike the previous dynasty who were Turkish speaking. In Iraq you had ultra nationalist leaders like saddam that tried to move closer to the sunni arab world and hated Iran. So effectively two brother countries became enemies after generations of hateful teachings on both sides.


Nationalism - people having a country to call their own - is not the enemy of peace. The desire to expand to rule others - imperialism - is. Empires must always either expand or contract. That means war. Thousands of years of history back this up. 



> With time people will rediscover past alliances and who knows, some countries in the region might again join up BUT NOT THROUGH WAR! Tajikistan and Northern AFG both speak Persian. The accent of ppl in Tajikistan is closer to the accent of Tehrani Iranians than Isfahan and Tehran who are both major Iranian cities! Tajikistan and Northern AFG are also very poor countries. Who knows, maybe one day when Iran's situation is better and we have a democracy, these countries will see it beneficial to them to join Iran!


Possibly. So why don't they seek to join Iran now? Personally I thought the Azeris would be the first to desire this when the USSR collapsed, but I don't see even a hint of that happening.



> you're talking as if "the Persian empire" is on the verge of taking over the Asian continent when in reality we're more concerned with our out of control inflation -


Yes, economics is not your masters' best subject.



> We haven't attacked ANY COUNTRY in well over 3 centuries and if we wanted to we don't have the power.


Tell that to the Lebanese who suffer under Hezbollah's collar, or the Gazans who feel Hamas' lash.

There is something else I've noted - and I'm sure others have to. Did you ever ask yourself where the '79 revolution went wrong? I argued with the pro-Khomeini demonstrators that they were a minority, the opposition to the Shah was broad-based, and the Iranian people would stop them. They laughed. They were, of course, correct. They knew, as I did not, that the Iranian people lacked the sort of steel to resist their thuggery; all think they are entitled to an easy, risk-free life. 

That's why even Iranians who despise the mullahs' regime don't want invasion or bombing to remove it, isn't it? Yet matters are reaching the point where such action may occur - and because the mullahs tend to locate key facilities near civilian targets, that will mean a lot of civilians will be killed. Very uncomfortable, indeed.

So what do you think your moral duty is in all this, Nima?


----------



## below_freezing

wait did i hear that correctly?

israel is supporting hereditary kings and dictators, instead of an elected government?

what an insight into the jewish mind. and yet they're still labled a "democracy" of the middle east.


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> A fair and relevant question. As one pro-Khomeini demonstrator explained to me in the early months of the '79 revolution, with the withdrawal of Britain from the Gulf, the paralyzing post-Vietnam angst of the United States, and the absence of the Soviet Union they saw an opening for their own imperial ambitions.
> 
> You may see them as fanatical Shia Islamists, but I saw your masters as calculating manipulators, men who took political science courses at Western universities to learn about dictatorships and totalitarianism. Not so they could avoid that fate, but so they could build a better one of their own.
> 
> Thus informed by their boasting, the Iran-Iraq war was no surprise to me. If the Iranians didn't turn their attentions on Pakistan instead, that's probably because (1) Saddam started the war first; (2) Pakistan is a much bigger and stronger state than Iraq was, and (3) their principal goal was Mecca, where pro-Iranian revolutionaries tried (but failed) to seize the Grand Mosque in late 1979. Basically, the Iranian mullahs wanted then (as the leadership does now) to dictate their form of Islam to everyone, and conquest of Arabia was the way to do it. With no U.S. troops in Arabia at the time, if the Iraqi Army fell the way would have been wide open.
> 
> Oppression, opportunity, freedom, and the destructiveness of war matter more. Your point?
> 
> Nationalism - people having a country to call their own - is not the enemy of peace. The desire to expand to rule others - imperialism - is. Empires must always either expand or contract. That means war. Thousands of years of history back this up.
> 
> Possibly. So why don't they seek to join Iran now? Personally I thought the Azeris would be the first to desire this when the USSR collapsed, but I don't see even a hint of that happening.
> 
> Yes, economics is not your masters' best subject.
> 
> Tell that to the Lebanese who suffer under Hezbollah's collar, or the Gazans who feel Hamas' lash.
> 
> There is something else I've noted - and I'm sure others have to. Did you ever ask yourself where the '79 revolution went wrong? I argued with the pro-Khomeini demonstrators that they were a minority, the opposition to the Shah was broad-based, and the Iranian people would stop them. They laughed. They were, of course, correct. They knew, as I did not, that the Iranian people lacked the sort of steel to resist their thuggery; all think they are entitled to an easy, risk-free life.
> 
> That's why even Iranians who despise the mullahs' regime don't want invasion or bombing to remove it, isn't it? Yet matters are reaching the point where such action may occur - and because the mullahs tend to locate key facilities near civilian targets, that will mean a lot of civilians will be killed. Very uncomfortable, indeed.
> 
> So what do you think your moral duty is in all this, Nima?



edit


----------



## TheWarriorIndian

Nima said:


> kjhgfiufgifgif



Is it? man thats horrible


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> A fair and relevant question. As one pro-Khomeini demonstrator explained to me in the early months of the '79 revolution, with the withdrawal of Britain from the Gulf, the paralyzing post-Vietnam angst of the United States, and the absence of the Soviet Union they saw an opening for their own imperial ambitions.
> 
> You may see them as fanatical Shia Islamists, but I saw your masters as calculating manipulators, men who took political science courses at Western universities to learn about dictatorships and totalitarianism. Not so they could avoid that fate, but so they could build a better one of their own.
> 
> Thus informed by their boasting, the Iran-Iraq war was no surprise to me. If the Iranians didn't turn their attentions on Pakistan instead, that's probably because (1) Saddam started the war first; (2) Pakistan is a much bigger and stronger state than Iraq was, and (3) their principal goal was Mecca, where pro-Iranian revolutionaries tried (but failed) to seize the Grand Mosque in late 1979. Basically, the Iranian mullahs wanted then (as the leadership does now) to dictate their form of Islam to everyone, and conquest of Arabia was the way to do it. With no U.S. troops in Arabia at the time, if the Iraqi Army fell the way would have been wide open.
> 
> Oppression, opportunity, freedom, and the destructiveness of war matter more. Your point?
> 
> Nationalism - people having a country to call their own - is not the enemy of peace. The desire to expand to rule others - imperialism - is. Empires must always either expand or contract. That means war. Thousands of years of history back this up.
> 
> Possibly. So why don't they seek to join Iran now? Personally I thought the Azeris would be the first to desire this when the USSR collapsed, but I don't see even a hint of that happening.
> 
> Yes, economics is not your masters' best subject.
> 
> Tell that to the Lebanese who suffer under Hezbollah's collar, or the Gazans who feel Hamas' lash.
> 
> There is something else I've noted - and I'm sure others have to. Did you ever ask yourself where the '79 revolution went wrong? I argued with the pro-Khomeini demonstrators that they were a minority, the opposition to the Shah was broad-based, and the Iranian people would stop them. They laughed. They were, of course, correct. They knew, as I did not, that the Iranian people lacked the sort of steel to resist their thuggery; all think they are entitled to an easy, risk-free life.
> 
> That's why even Iranians who despise the mullahs' regime don't want invasion or bombing to remove it, isn't it? Yet matters are reaching the point where such action may occur - and because the mullahs tend to locate key facilities near civilian targets, that will mean a lot of civilians will be killed. Very uncomfortable, indeed.
> 
> So what do you think your moral duty is in all this, Nima?





TheWarriorIndian said:


> Is it? man thats horrible


lol I was testing out my keyboard and accidentally clicked on submit lol


----------



## TheWarriorIndian

Nima said:


> lol I was testing out my keyboard and accidentally clicked on submit lol



hahahah, Its ok


----------



## Nima

@ solomon

"You may see them as fanatical Shia Islamists, but I saw your masters as calculating manipulators, men who took political science courses at Western universities to learn about dictatorships and totalitarianism. Not so they could avoid that fate, but so they could build a better one of their own."

well they either suck at it or they don't want to do it.
having proxies doesn't count. 

"Oppression, opportunity, freedom, and the destructiveness of war matter more. Your point?"

I meant that countries like England, who are smaller than many IRanian provinces, are richer and therefore have more say in this world. Iran can keep doing what it is doing but put its main focus on the economy. Capturing other countries will do nothing for Iran but make us even poorer.


"Possibly. So why don't they seek to join Iran now? Personally I thought the Azeris would be the first to desire this when the USSR collapsed, but I don't see even a hint of that happening."

Under the rule of the soviet union, all these republics were forced to adopt a brand spanking new alphabet. Their language was manipulated. Generation after generation were thought a brand new version of history. Religion was looked down upon in Soviet Russia etc... After a century of soviet rule they were a new country.
After the collapse, IRan had a great opportunity to get close to these countries again but it did nothing while Saudi Arabia was funding mosques in Turkeministan and Uzbekistan from the other end of the ME!!!! 
Today the republic of Azarbaijan sees itself as a Turkish country and they see themselves closer to Turkey. Some republics like Tajikistan however have kept their Persian language and culture under the soviet occupation and will undoubtedly one day join IRan again.
NOW TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
Why they don't want to join Iran in the short term????
Very easy. Which country wants to join a country that is under a theocratic dictatorship, is under 3 UN sanctions, cares more about Islam then Iran etc... The time is not right but I'm sure one day Iran and other Persian speaking nations will unite under one flag.

"There is something else I've noted - and I'm sure others have to. Did you ever ask yourself where the '79 revolution went wrong? I argued with the pro-Khomeini demonstrators that they were a minority, the opposition to the Shah was broad-based, and the Iranian people would stop them. They laughed. They were, of course, correct. They knew, as I did not, that the Iranian people lacked the sort of steel to resist their thuggery; all think they are entitled to an easy, risk-free life. "

My father was a leftist and as you know they were the main reason why the rev happened. 
As a "child of the revolution" I always compare the new generation to the past generation. In the past people were much more idealistic but the society as a whole was uneducated and backward. Today 9 out of 10 people under 35 are educated compared to less than 50 percent during shah's time. I hate this regime and I'm not muslim but I rather see reforms then a revolution.

"
That's why even Iranians who despise the mullahs' regime don't want invasion or bombing to remove it, isn't it? Yet matters are reaching the point where such action may occur - and because the mullahs tend to locate key facilities near civilian targets, that will mean a lot of civilians will be killed. Very uncomfortable, indeed.

So what do you think your moral duty is in all this, Nima?"

I visited the natanz enrichment facility 3 years ago and it was in the middle of a desert near the highway! If that is close to a populated center then I don't know what to say. But of coarse if anybody wants to attack they will target military forts, training sites etc... which have to be built in cities. 

"So what do you think your moral duty is in all this, Nima?"

I'm a nationalist.
I care about nothing but the independence of Iran and this means I will fight to protect the theocratic dictatorship against foreign powers. At the same time I am 100 &#37; pro reform, but everything has to happen from inside.


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> I'm a nationalist.
> I care about nothing but the independence of Iran and this means I will fight to protect the theocratic dictatorship against foreign powers. At the same time I am 100 % pro reform, but everything has to happen from inside.



You may wish to ponder these words:


> Surely, Bonaparte is a thousand times more guilty than those barbarous conquerors who, ruling over barbarians, were by no means at odds with their age. Unlike them, he has chosen barbarism; he has preferred it. In the midst of enlightenment, he has sought to bring back the night. He has chosen to transform into greedy and bloodthirsty nomads a mild and polite people: his crime lies in this premeditated intention, in his obstinate effort to rob us of the heritage of all the enlightened generations who have preceded us on this earth. But why have we given him the right to conceive such project?...When he listened to what was professed in our circles, why did serious thinkers tell him that man had no other motivation than his own interest? If he discovered easily enough that all the subtle interpretations through which, once the principle had been stated, we sought to elude its implications, were illusory, it was because his instinct was sound and his judgment quick...If in the heart of man there is nothing but interest, tyranny has only to frighten or to seduce him in order to dominate him. If in the heart of man there is nothing but self-interest, it is not true that moralitythat is, elevation, nobility, resistance to injusticeis in accord with real self-interest. Properly understood, self-interest, in this case, given the certainty of death, is nothing but enjoyment, combined, since life can be more or less long, with that prudence which grants to enjoyment a certain duration. Finally, when in a France torn apart, tired of suffering and lamenting, and demanding only a ruler, he offered to become that ruler, why did the multitude hasten to solicit from him enslavement? When the crowd is pleased to show its love for servitude, it would be too much for it to expect its master to insist on giving it liberty instead...
> 
> Because immediate usurpation was easy, he believed it could be durable, and once he became a usurper, he did all that usurpation condemns a usurper to do in our century. It was necessary to stifle inside the country all intellectual life: he banished discussion and proscribed the freedom of the press. The nation might have been stunned by that silence: he provided, extorted, or paid for acclamation which sounded like the national voice.
> 
> Had France remained at peace, her peaceful citizens, her idle warriors would have observed the despot, would have judged him, and would have communicated their judgments to him. Truth would have passed through the ranks of the people. Usurpation would not have long withstood the influence of truth. Thus Bonaparte was compelled to distract public attention by bellicose enterprises. War flung onto distant shores that part of the French nation that still had some real energy. It prompted the police harassment of the timid, whom it could not force abroad. It struck terror into men's hearts, and left there a certain hope that chance would take responsibility for their deliverance: a hope agreeable to fear and convenient to inertia. How many times have I heard men who were pressed to resist tyranny postponing this, during wartime till the coming of peace, and in peacetime until war commences!


Similarly, the IRI has successfully stifled reform for decades. Matters turned worse with last year's stolen election. I see no hope (save a blind faith in "chance") that reform can come within, and all the regime has left is the threat of external conflict. Too much peace, no matter what the rhetoric, and support for them will fade. 

Real war, then, becomes their only option. Do you think, then, that Iran would benefit more by letting the mullahs choose the hour, or if someone else strikes first to disarm or remove the regime?


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Solomon2 said:


> You may wish to ponder these words:
> Similarly, the IRI has successfully stifled reform for decades. Matters turned worse with last year's stolen election. I see no hope (save a blind faith in "chance") that reform can come within, and all the regime has left is the threat of external conflict. Too much peace, no matter what the rhetoric, and support for them will fade.
> 
> Real war, then, becomes their only option. Do you think, then, that Iran would benefit more by letting the mullahs choose the hour, or if someone else strikes first to disarm or remove the regime?



do not forget you are talking about Iran.nobody can change Islamic republic with strike.
changing ruling system is only Iranian option.
US got bad lesson from easy targets such as :Iraq and Panama and Afghanistan,... just last week Iran's F-27 flew over US aircraft carrier and took photo from the board, like Iran's UAV did 2 years ago for 15 minutes.be aware d that Iranian are son of Cyrus the Great:


----------



## Solomon2

Cyrus the Great said:


> do not forget you are talking about Iran.nobody can change Islamic republic with strike.
> changing ruling system is only Iranian option.
> US got bad lesson from easy targets such as :Iraq and Panama and Afghanistan,... just last week Iran's F-27 flew over US aircraft carrier...


OK, I got it Cyrus:

1) You no longer dispute that the IRI is a threat to Pakistan and the region. 

2) You assert that change must be from internal forces (nothing the mullahs can't deal with since they are willing to employ violence and depravity against their populace).

3) You threaten anybody who contemplates regime change from without with destruction of their armed forces.

Would a shill for Ahmedinijad write anything different? Isn't that the line he peddles abroad?

#1 grabs our attention, #2 is a misleading hope, and as for #3 - the U.S., Pakistan, and Israel have all been bloodied in battle. The troops will do their duty, for nobody wants more bombs killing civilians at home, and many of us have gotten tired with living under the shadow of terror.


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> You may wish to ponder these words:
> Similarly, the IRI has successfully stifled reform for decades. Matters turned worse with last year's stolen election. I see no hope (save a blind faith in "chance") that reform can come within, and all the regime has left is the threat of external conflict. Too much peace, no matter what the rhetoric, and support for them will fade.
> 
> Real war, then, becomes their only option. Do you think, then, that Iran would benefit more by letting the mullahs choose the hour, or if someone else strikes first to disarm or remove the regime?



IRI wanted to turn the new aeration of Iranians into muslim nationalists and to destroy Persian nationalism. By doing this it would have 30 million ready soldiers at its disposal. 30 mill soldiers that would never question its authority.
IT FAILED and it failed miserably. Many ppl from shah's time will tell you that young Iranians today are the least religious EVER. 

You're trying to compare Iran and France when they're nothing alike. 
1) IRan has been going through change and it will change. The mullahs had plans to make Iran into Saudi Arabia but thousands died in the 80's and 90's to stop this. 

2) The Iranian regime has been becoming weaker and weaker each decade and public outcry has been growing and growing.

3) @ THE VERY LEAST Iran will change when the older generation dies off in the next couple of decades cuz as you know Iran is a land of paradox where two diff sets of ppl coexist. 

4) The mullahs are actually not looking for a fight, but for an enemy!
Unlike Napoleon, the mullahs DO NOT HAVE THE POWER to wage war. They know full well that a war would mean the end of the Islamic Republic. We saw this in 03 when the Iranian regime sent a letter to Bush in which they wanted to give everything to the US for a grantee that the US wouldn't attack. They wanted to give up support for hamas+Hezbollah and the nuke program b/c they feared that they were next. 

5) Finally you insulted hundreds of thousands of dead Iranians that have died fighting the Islamic Republic by putting up that comparison. Iranians have done a lot and will do everything in their power to change their country. But you have to realize that ppl DO NOT want a revolution and they want stability.


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> IRI wanted to turn the new aeration of Iranians into muslim nationalists and to destroy Persian nationalism. By doing this it would have 30 million ready soldiers at its disposal. 30 mill soldiers that would never question its authority.
> IT FAILED and it failed miserably...the Iranian regime has been becoming weaker and weaker each decade and public outcry has been growing and growing.


They didn't _need_ it to succeed, they only _required_ citizens to be apathetic. Instead, they moved on to Plan B: develop nuclear weapons to terrorize the region. 



> Many ppl from shah's time will tell you that young Iranians today are the least religious EVER.


Really, you should learn more history of Islamic countries! They don't need the populace to be religious, just a small community of enforcers.



> You're trying to compare Iran and France when they're nothing alike.


I quoted from Constant because I thought his words could apply to the general case of people afflicted by tyranny, not because I thought France and Iran were similar; that's _your_ idea.



> IRan has been going through change and it will change. The mullahs had plans to make Iran into Saudi Arabia but thousands died in the 80's and 90's to stop this.you insulted hundreds of thousands of dead Iranians that have died fighting the Islamic Republic -


I am not familiar with these matters. Will you condemn me or educate me?



> @ THE VERY LEAST Iran will change when the older generation dies off in the next couple of decades -


I doubt that the world - or the mullahs - can wait that long. 



> The mullahs are actually not looking for a fight, but for an enemy!


The prefer to have Hamas and Hezbollah do the fighting, and the little people do the suffering.




> the mullahs DO NOT HAVE THE POWER to wage war. They know full well that a war would mean the end of the Islamic Republic.


Why is that? It didn't mean that before. These guys stop at nothing to hold onto power. They send children into minefields. They employ child soldiers as crowd control. What was that line the thug called out in "Persepolis"? Something like, "I rape women like you for breakfast!"? 



> We saw this in 03 when the Iranian regime sent a letter to Bush in which they wanted to give everything to the US for a grantee that the US wouldn't attack. They wanted to give up support for hamas+Hezbollah and the nuke program b/c they feared that they were next.


This is sheer fantasy. You should be able to figure this out yourself by recalling the context of events: any offer by Iran to neuter Hezbollah would have been reflected by a renewed and public UN emphasis on enforcing UNSC 1559, which provides for the disarmament of all Lebanese militias - all save Hezbollah had complied. That didn't happen.



> Iranians have done a lot and will do everything in their power to change their country. But you have to realize that ppl DO NOT want a revolution and they want stability.


The Iranian people don't have liberty to share debate, but the regime does everything it can to ensure they share fear. The liberation of Iraq scared them, didn't it? All that terror, all those civilian casualties. 

Of course, much of that was sponsored and sustained by the IRI itself. And of the domestic terror the IRI we may only see the tip of the iceberg.

"Stability" isn't always a good thing. Dictatorships and tyrannies are "stable" - until they fall. Then the situation becomes disastrous. Not all revolutions are especially bloody. The Second Russian Revolution is a good example. Three people were killed. Then the picked troops of the Communist Party decided that the price was too high to sustain a system they hated, turned around, and returned to their barracks. When Communism collapsed, so did Communist support for guerilla movements world-wide. Many conflicts ended or lessened in intensity. 

I once calculated that Saddam Hussein's regime murdered about 25,000 people a year for twenty years. That doesn't even include the half-million or so who died in his wars. When the mullahs fall, how much terror and murder will fail with them? 

Suppose you still decide that opposing the mullahs isn't worth it. But that itself is a form of endorsement, isn't it? The IRI has enemies: Israel, the Gulf Arab states, even Europe is threatened by Iran's missiles. Your failure to oppose the regime may allow them to complete their plans for regional domination. The resulting war will kill millions and, of course, devastate Iran, but the "Twelvers" see that as desirable, isn't that so?

And although you didn't make the decisions, nor set such events in motion, your continued apathy will help it to happen. The fate of all those dead people will be on you, as well as on the Ahmedinijads of the world. There's "stability" for you!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Nima said:


> IRI wanted to turn the new aeration of Iranians into *muslim nationalists* and to destroy *Persian nationalism*. By doing this it would have 30 million ready soldiers at its disposal. 30 mill soldiers that would never question its authority.
> IT FAILED and it failed miserably. Many ppl from shah's time will tell you that young Iranians today are the least religious EVER.
> 
> You're trying to compare Iran and France when they're nothing alike.
> 1) IRan has been going through change and it will change. The mullahs had plans to make Iran into Saudi Arabia but thousands died in the 80's and 90's to stop this.
> 
> 2) The Iranian regime has been becoming weaker and weaker each decade and public outcry has been growing and growing.
> 
> 3) @ THE VERY LEAST Iran will change when the older generation dies off in the next couple of decades cuz as you know Iran is a land of paradox where two diff sets of ppl coexist.
> 
> 4) The mullahs are actually not looking for a fight, but for an enemy!
> Unlike Napoleon, the mullahs DO NOT HAVE THE POWER to wage war. They know full well that a war would mean the end of the Islamic Republic. We saw this in 03 when the Iranian regime sent a letter to Bush in which they wanted to give everything to the US for a grantee that the US wouldn't attack. They wanted to give up support for hamas+Hezbollah and the nuke program b/c they feared that they were next.
> 
> 5) Finally you insulted hundreds of thousands of dead Iranians that have died fighting the Islamic Republic by putting up that comparison. Iranians have done a lot and will do everything in their power to change their country. But you have to realize that ppl DO NOT want a revolution and they want stability.



Here's the crux of the matter, which will affect Iran's neighbors (and give them just reason to be concerned) because both 

Muslim Nationalism -- vs -- Persian Nationalism.

have an eye on territorial expansion.


----------



## Nima

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Here's the crux of the matter, which will affect Iran's neighbors (and give them just reason to be concerned) because both
> 
> Muslim Nationalism -- vs -- Persian Nationalism.
> 
> have an eye on territorial expansion.



not really!
As I said before, this isn't 500 BC. Having the largest land mass is no longer relevant. We have resources (oil, gas etc...), we have two important bodies of water on our Northern and Southern borders and we have a relatively large population. Why would we want more land!!!!!!!!??? Look @ England for gods sake! If you have a good economy, you rule the world. The mullahs might look stupid, but they're not all stupid. They know what they have to do and they couldn't care less about territorial expansion.
Let me give you an example. During the Qajar dynasty, which started after the 1700's, Iran started to decline. At the same time the Russians started to expand. In two wars we lost a shitload of Iranian provinces (Azarbaijan, etc...). After the fall of the Soviets many though that Iran might start brotherly relationships with these former republics, that didn't happen. Saudi Arabia was sending billions to these poor republics so that they build mosques while Iran was sending money to Lebanon and Palestine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Think about it

In Tajikistan people speak better Persian then some Iranian provinces and they consider themselves Persians. We share a history with them but you don't see Iran remotely interested in taking back those lands. So your fear is not warranted one bit. At least as a Pakistani you're safe. If you were Afghan you would have a reason but I have no idea why as a Pakistani you would be worried.


----------



## Luftwaffe

*Mods thread is going no where need to be locked down till actual attack takes place..*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nima

luftwaffe said:


> *Mods thread is going no where need to be locked down till actual attack takes place..*



what he said


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> Why would we want more land...The mullahs might look stupid, but they're not all stupid.


Do you really think they behave the way they do out of a sense of custodianship of the Iranian people? Like the ruse they use to justify seizing property for their own purposes? 

The mullahs aren't stupid. But they are greedy. And they do have sons. Since they prefer to seize wealth rather than create it they are turning Iran brown. Naturally they seek new green pastures farther afield. What the little people want or need - why would that concern them?


----------



## T-Rex

Solomon2 said:


> Do you really think they behave the way they do out of a sense of custodianship of the Iranian people? Like the ruse they use to justify seizing property for their own purposes?
> 
> The mullahs aren't stupid. But they are greedy. And they do have sons. Since they prefer to seize wealth rather than create it they are turning Iran brown. Naturally they seek new green pastures farther afield. What the little people want or need - why would that concern them?



And some in Washington and Tel-Aviv seek green fields with oil under them, so what if those lands belong to others. Those landowners are small people, so they can be easily painetd as "Islamic terrorists"! Once the land is invaded, of course to save the world from the 500 megaton nukes hidden in the toilets of those small people, the oil fields of thsoe small people generate jobs in Washington and London and thus more wealth is created for consumption and confort of the peddlers who sell democracy and human rights to the world at a very affordable price.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Comet

T-Rex said:


> And some in Washington and Tel-Aviv seek green fields with oil under them, so what if those lands belong to others. Those landowners are small people, so they can be easily painetd as "Islamic terrorists"! Once the land is invaded, of course to save the world from the 500 megaton nukes hidden in the toilets of those small people, the oil fields of thsoe small people generate jobs in Washington and London and thus more wealth is created for consumption and confort of the peddlers who sell democracy and human rights to the world at a very affordable price.



I like the way you put it. This is the hidden reality.


----------



## below_freezing

more i think about it, the less likely US and israeli are going to attack iran.

their propaganda war isn't like the one in 2003. there's no wave and wave of fake news. there's no "sense of urgency". it's just normal background noise to distract the ignorant sheep from everyday problems caused by their government.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## no_name

^^^ but if saction is a possibility they will still jump at the chance to weaken Iran.


----------



## Nima

no_name said:


> ^^^ but if saction is a possibility they will still jump at the chance to weaken Iran.



and who's gonna vote for sanctions?
China and Russia already said that they will only vote for sanctions that won't hurt Iran, meaning that they are going to vote for sanctions against IRGC etc...
The US is looking for the same type of sanctions that Saddam's Iraq was under in the 90's and it has been looking for it for 31 years unsuccessfully. Before the 2000's China and Russia had nothing in Iran.Today China is investing Billions and the Russians are getting billion dollar contracts to make nuclear facilities. If they didn't vote for sanctions back then, they won't vote for em now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Solomon2

T-Rex, I take it from your response that you agree with me 100&#37;. Now you're trying to invert the argument. But why should anybody believe that the U.S. and Israel are hell-bent for conquest? Israel has conquered yet withdrawn from territory many times. The U.S. didn't invade Iraq to steal its oil - nobody talks about that now, right? Since your argument reduces to absurdity, you've only succeeded in highlighting that some peoples have different motives and different values that others.



below_freezing said:


> more i think about it, the less likely US and israeli are going to attack iran. their propaganda war isn't like the one in 2003. there's no wave and wave of fake news. there's no "sense of urgency". it's just normal background noise -


Now _that_ is a most interesting observation! Yet in 2003 the U.S. tried the U.N. route first, so it had an incentive to conduct a propaganda war as support. Several commenters here have argued that Iran has sufficient support in the UNSC to block any effective moves against it. So today the incentive for the U.S. to conduct such a campaign is much less. As for Israel, I don't recall them warning Saddam in 1983 about their imminent attack on Osirak, either.


----------



## Kompromat

Solomon2 said:


> T-Rex, I take it from your response that you agree with me 100&#37;. Now you're trying to invert the argument. But why should anybody believe that the U.S. and Israel are hell-bent for conquest? Israel has conquered yet withdrawn from territory many times. *The U.S. didn't invade Iraq to steal its oil - nobody talks about that now, right?* Since your argument reduces to absurdity, you've only succeeded in highlighting that some peoples have different motives and different values that others.



Yes they didn't steal any oil from iraq because stealing on this massive scale is called a *Robbery*.

One day US and Israelis will surely pay for what they did in Iraq , afghanistan and Palestine respectively.

Anyone involved in a small scale of violence in these "worm countries" are tagged as terrorist but Black water is a security organisation who kill and torture under US Flag , pathetic doubble standards.


----------



## Solomon2

Only your accusations are pathetic, BB. But you don't want to evaluate that yourself, do you?


----------



## rohailmalhi

Solomon2 said:


> Only your accusations are pathetic, BB. But you don't want to evaluate that yourself, do you?



I think Americans are pretty much pathetic .They keep crying for human rights and they dont think other are humans like wht the hell americans has done to Iraq .Killing thousands of people ........

Sumday u have to give account for all this crap u have done .......


----------



## Solomon2

rohailmalhi said:


> I think Americans are pretty much pathetic .They keep crying for human rights and they dont think other are humans like wht the hell americans has done to Iraq .Killing thousands of people ........Sumday u have to give account for all this crap u have done .......


We're going OT here, but -

I once calculated that Saddam killed 250,000 people in over twenty years of power. That doesn't include the million or so who died in his useless war with Iran. Whatever coalition troops did can't compare to that. And our troops, unlike those in some other countries, get court-martialed and jailed for transgressions. So why not visit Iraq and do a little accounting yourself? I understand much of the populace now refers to American troops as "guests".


----------



## pak-yes

Solomon2 said:


> We're going OT here, but -
> 
> *I once calculated that Saddam killed 250,000 people in over twenty years of power*. That doesn't include the million or so who died in his useless war with Iran. Whatever coalition troops did can't compare to that. And our troops, unlike those in some other countries, get court-martialed and jailed for transgressions. So why not visit Iraq and do a little accounting yourself? I understand much of the populace now refers to American troops as "guests".



Care to share what accounting methods you used?

Although i don't expect an honest review(after all you are pro American,and Pro Israel)but i would like that you also do a counting of how many people have been killed and how many injured since the invasion of Iraq.


----------



## Thomas

pak-yes said:


> Care to share what accounting methods you used?
> 
> Although i don't expect an honest review(after all you are pro American,and Pro Israel)but i would like that you also do a counting of how many people have been killed and how many injured since the invasion of Iraq.



Be sure to include everyone the insurgents killed or wounded in the U.S. tally. I'm sure that's what he is looking for. After all it's all the U.S. fault.


----------



## Solomon2

pak-yes said:


> Care to share what accounting methods you used?


Good question. I can't remember! Human Rights Watch, however, came up with about the same number, even though it opposed the invasion on humanitarian grounds: link

_Addendum:_ The USG came up with 300,000. link



> Although i don't expect an honest review(after all you are pro American,and Pro Israel)but i would like that you also do a counting of how many people have been killed and how many injured since the invasion of Iraq.


I suppose you can do an accounting of the morgues and hospitals for that. Isn't it more relevant to ask how many non-combatants have been killed as a result of actions of coalition forces?


----------



## pak-yes

Solomon2 said:


> Good question. I can't remember! Human Rights Watch, however, came up with about the same number, even though it opposed the invasion on humanitarian grounds: link
> 
> _Addendum:_ The USG came up with 300,000. link
> 
> I suppose you can do an accounting of the morgues and hospitals for that. Isn't it more relevant to ask how many non-combatants have been killed as a result of actions of coalition forces?



1.ok 

2.Actually you are right.So how many non combatants were killed.I am sure for every insurgent killed 20 were civilians were killed as evident from previous US record.

3.Now i am going to ask you a tougher question(Actually it will be tough for you only because you blind follower of Zionism.And Please Please Please only answer my question don't give me your typical topic derailing arguments).How many Non Combatants Palestinians and Non Combatants Israeli's have been killed since 1947 or should i ask 1967.Honest Answer Please.


----------



## Solomon2

pak-yes said:


> So how many non combatants were killed.I am sure for every insurgent killed 20 were civilians were killed


I very much doubt that. Several organizations are working on this one, it is still considered something of a hot potato. The Iraq Body Count project came up with a figure of 9,270 for the years 2003-2005. (After 2004 civilian casualties due to U.S.-led forces rapidly declined.) IMO their methodology probably undercounted bodies and overestimated the proportion of civilian dead.



> How many Non Combatants Palestinians and Non Combatants Israeli's have been killed since 1947 or should i ask 1967.


In 2007 American historian Bruce Thornton came up with a combined figure of 8,000 civilian dead since 1947. link

That's all for today, folks!


----------



## Comet

Solomon2 said:


> We're going OT here, but -
> 
> I once calculated that Saddam killed 250,000 people in over twenty years of power. That doesn't include the million or so who died in his useless war with Iran. Whatever coalition troops did can't compare to that. And our troops, unlike those in some other countries, get court-martialed and jailed for transgressions. So why not visit Iraq and do a little accounting yourself? I understand much of the populace now refers to American troops as "guests".



SO you are *justifying *the killings done by US troops by comparing them with Sadam's?


----------



## Nima

umairp said:


> SO you are *justifying *the killings done by US troops by comparing them with Sadam's?



exactly! what an argument lol 




Solomon2 said:


> We're going OT here, but -
> 
> I once calculated that Saddam killed 250,000 people in over twenty years of power. That doesn't include the million or so who died in his useless war with Iran. Whatever coalition troops did can't compare to that. And our troops, unlike those in some other countries, get court-martialed and jailed for transgressions. So why not visit Iraq and do a little accounting yourself? I understand much of the populace now refers to American troops as "guests".



who gives a fudge how many saddam killed! And according to you it was in 2 decades! You guys killed 4 times more in less than a decade. How many Cambodians and Vietnamese did you guys *massacred*?


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Might makes right,it is the oldest law of nature.Those who forget this and are blinded by civilization delude themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pak-yes

> I very much doubt that. Several organizations are working on this one, it is still considered something of a hot potato. The Iraq Body Count project came up with a figure of 9,270 for the years 2003-2005. (After 2004 civilian casualties due to U.S.-led forces rapidly declined.) IMO their methodology probably undercounted bodies and overestimated the proportion of civilian dead.



Hmmm.Considering what American did in Vietnam this figure is well what should i say disputed.



> In 2007 American historian Bruce Thornton came up with a combined figure of 8,000 civilian dead since 1947. link
> 
> That's all for today, folks!



Solomon i was asking the figure for 60 years and you give me a figure only for 2007.8k Palestinian Civilians killed in 2007.Hmmm seems quite less.


----------



## Nima

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Might makes right,it is the oldest law of nature.Those who forget this and are blinded by civilization delude themselves.



wooooooooooord

what pisses me off is that Americans don't have a sense of nationalism like that. They consider themselves god's gift to humanity when they're nothing but the opposite.


----------



## below_freezing

pak-yes said:


> Hmmm.Considering what American did in Vietnam this figure is well what should i say disputed.
> 
> 
> 
> Solomon i was asking the figure for 60 years and you give me a figure only for 2007.8k Palestinian Civilians killed in 2007.Hmmm seems quite less.



in Vietnam, the US originally claimed 0 civilian dead.

anyone that died was labeled a communist rebel.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rohailmalhi

Yes actually Americans are pathetic .They think they have license to kill anyone..
They dont damn care if people die ,they label thm all as terrorists ..

*@Solomon_2 *Oh man go get a life U r justifing tht killing done by americans is right coz they have not reached the limit for 250000 killing done by Sadam.....
and btw Saddam has been punished for his crimes ................thn y not Ur political people who actually decided to attack on fake WMD report. and y not those secret agency ppl who gave this fake WMD report.Now dont tell me tht ur agency are little kids who dont know tht if there is sum WMD or not..
One more thing ur sole purpose in iraq to go in there was to capture the soo called WMD whn u found none wht is ur business there now.except killing more and more people..............
*How does u feel whn sum one cumes to ur house and kill ur family just tell how will u feel.*


----------



## Solomon2

pak-yes said:


> Hmmm.Considering what American did in Vietnam this figure is well what should i say disputed.


Different war, very different methods. No "free-fire zones", no "carpet bombings", etc.



> Solomon i was asking the figure for 60 years and you give me a figure only for 2007.


No, 8,000 civilian casualties is the figure for the whole sixty years.


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> who gives a fudge how many saddam killed!


Is that the hardness of your heart you've exposed, or are you criticizing rohailmalhi and I for our digression?



> You guys killed 4 times more in less than a decade. How many Cambodians and Vietnamese did you guys *massacred*?


Way too far off-topic to address here.


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> what pisses me off is that Americans don't have a sense of nationalism like that. They consider themselves god's gift to humanity when they're nothing but the opposite.


Spoken like a true Canadian!


----------



## Solomon2

rohailmalhi said:


> Yes actually Americans are pathetic .They think they have license to kill anyone..
> They dont damn care if people die ,they label thm all as terrorists ..


Get real! You obviously know little or nothing about this stuff. Why don't you try going to Iraq and talk to the people there?



> @Solomon_2 [/B]Oh man go get a life U r justifing tht killing done by americans is right coz they have not reached the limit for 250000 killing done by Sadam.....


You're right, that is an absurd justification - yours, not mine. But characterizing all deaths of civilians killed by the coalition as "crimes" is too much of a stretch. Removing Saddam from power was pretty clean, dealing with the terrorism was messy. Civilians were killed by coaltion forces inadvertently, or because they were employed as human shields and it was deemed more of a risk to civilians and U.S. troops to let the targets go than attack. Why not ask the Iraqis themselves if they think their liberation was worth the cost?



> thn y not Ur political people who actually decided to attack on fake WMD report.


Congress listed over twenty reasons to remove Saddam and nuclear weapons were just one of them.



> Now dont tell me tht ur agency are little kids who dont know tht if there is sum WMD or not.


Are you implying that Americans are so smart that we know everything?



> How does u feel whn -


You can appreciate that the main reason why the Israelis feel Iran must be attacked is so this never happens to them. They have a responsibility to protect their own populace. The current Iranian leadership, on the other hand, has very different notions of responsibility.


----------



## Patriot

Is NPT legally binding and did Iran sign this treaty?


----------



## Thomas

Patriot said:


> Is NPT legally binding and did Iran sign this treaty?



NPT legally binding: Yes 

Did Iran sign this treaty? Yes


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Solomon2 said:


> We're going OT here, but -
> 
> I once calculated that Saddam killed 250,000 people in over twenty years of power. That doesn't include the million or so who died in his useless war with Iran. *Whatever coalition troops did can't compare to that. And our troops, unlike those in some other countries, *get court-martialed and jailed for transgressions. So why not visit Iraq and do a little accounting yourself? I understand much of the populace now refers to American troops as "guests".



A big joke. who are you? even if Saddam killed 1000000 (not 250000) but nobody asked US for help? why do you american think you are police of the world(but bad police).


----------



## Solomon2

Cyrus the Great said:


> A big joke. who are you?


Who do I have to be?



> why do you american think you are police of the world(but bad police).


Nobody else steps up to the plate to do the job, yes? Nevertheless, most Americans would deny that the U.S. is the world's policeman. Perhaps the best explanation of U.S. policy under the G.W. Bush Administration was given by newspaper columnist Charles Krauthammer, who termed it "Democratic Realism":

_We will support democracy everywhere, but we will commit blood and treasure only in places where there is a strategic necessity--meaning, places central to the larger war against the existential enemy, the enemy that poses a global mortal threat to freedom._


----------



## Patriot

Thomas said:


> NPT legally binding: Yes
> 
> Did Iran sign this treaty? Yes


Then i think US Should be punished for proliferating weapons to NATO STATES under Nuclear Sharing Agreement - No?and Iran can withdraw just as North Korea did.


----------



## Solomon2

So, guys, after fifty pages think hard: is there any _good_ outcome possible to the Islamic Republic of Iran possessing nuclear weapons?


----------



## Thomas

Solomon2 said:


> So, guys, after fifty pages think hard: is there any _good_ outcome possible to the Islamic Republic of Iran possessing nuclear weapons?



coupled with it's interest in exporting it's revolution. they will only bring it strife and misery.


----------



## pak-yes

Solomon2 said:


> So, guys, after fifty pages think hard: is there any _good_ outcome possible to the Islamic Republic of Iran possessing nuclear weapons?



Why Not?When Israel can import WMDs from US so why can't IRAN make Nukes for Protection.(Please Don't give me Ahmedinijad's Israel wipe off the map thing it just talk for domestic consumption and Israel knows it.Iranians are not stupid enough to endanger their existence by starting a Nuclear war)

and 2 Islamic Nuclear Powers are always better than 1.


----------



## Nima

pak-yes said:


> Why Not?When Israel can import WMDs from US so why can't IRAN make Nukes for Protection.(Please Don't give me Ahmedinijad's Israel wipe off the map thing it just talk for domestic consumption and Israel knows it.Iranians are not stupid enough to endanger their existence by starting a Nuclear war)
> 
> and 2 Islamic Nuclear Powers are always better than 1.



Iran isn't looking for a nuke anyways.
The mullahs want Iran to be like Japan, to be able to make a nuke @ moments notice but never ever make one. 
Iran will never make or test a nuke unless it's under imminent danger. Anybody that is familiar with Iran will tell you the same but unfortunately I can't expect Americans to understand this. 

The Soviet Union had *THOUSANDS OF NUKES * but it fell on its ***! Nukes are useless. You want power you better stick to improving your economy etc...


----------



## Solomon2

Unh-uh, py. My question was about _good_, not _right_. "Please be honest."


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> Iran isn't looking for a nuke -


I don't believe that, I don't see why anyone else would.



> The mullahs want Iran to be like Japan -


Nobody is worried about Japan's ambitions nowadays. You do know what happened to Japan's imperial ambitions, don't you?



> Iran will never make or test a nuke unless it's under imminent danger.


And the mullahs are very good at creating that atmosphere, aren't they?



> The Soviet Union had *THOUSANDS OF NUKES * but it fell on its ***


The Soviets didn't both threaten others with annihilation AND run external terror networks so they couldn't be held accountable in case of attack. 

No, the mullahs are giving out every signal that they intend not just to acquire but to USE nuclear weapons. Already, before they have them, they are intent on using their dark shadow to inspire fear and obedience in others:

_Try picturing a Shiite-Muslim mega-church in a huge downtown tent, with separate entrances for men and women and separate seating (with the women all covered in black). A huge poster of a nuclear mushroom cloud surmounts the scene, with the inscription oh zionists, if you want this type of war then so be it! _link


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> I don't believe that, I don't see why anyone else would.
> 
> Nobody is worried about Japan's ambitions nowadays. You do know what happened to Japan's imperial ambitions, don't you?
> 
> And the mullahs are very good at creating that atmosphere, aren't they?
> 
> The Soviets didn't both threaten others with annihilation AND run external terror networks so they couldn't be held accountable in case of attack.
> 
> No, the mullahs are giving out every signal that they intend not just to acquire but to USE nuclear weapons. Already, before they have them, they are intent on using their dark shadow to inspire fear and obedience in others:
> 
> _Try picturing a Shiite-Muslim mega-church in a huge downtown tent, with separate entrances for men and women and separate seating (with the women all covered in black). A huge poster of a nuclear mushroom cloud surmounts the scene, with the inscription oh zionists, if you want this type of war then so be it! _link



you're giving the Western European view. The 118 member non aligned movement always sides with Iran and they account for the majority of countries on earth. 
For 2500 years we haven't gave a **** about the Western opinion and we're not about to change how we do things. You think we are making nukes than you're welcome to come and attack. 

Only a brain dead American will believe the **** that repeated on Fox and CNN 24/7


----------



## Solomon2

So you refuse to answer the question. You're really scared aren't you, Nima?


----------



## Kompromat

Iran has every right to produce limited number of nukes to defend itself against Israeli aggression.

When the notorious jewish state can have 300 warheads and no one likes to talk about them so what the bloody hell is so wrong with iran ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> So you refuse to answer the question. You're really scared aren't you, Nima?



those are questions to you; to me they're nothing but the same old sentences being repeated on American TV stations. 

You guys justify nukes by saying "we're not worried about such and such country b/c they don't do such and such."
well as you know a revolution can change everything in two generations. One day Japan could become Nazi Germany again. Why do you guys condone Japan's ability to make nukes or Israel's acquired nukes??? What if Israel becomes a failed state, what will happen to all those nukes? What if......
This is not about double standards, this is about being naive and stupid enough to believe everything your govt wants you to believe. 

In Iran we all watch the state run TV like we're watching a Benny hill movie, nobody takes it seriously. In the US everybody watches Fox and CNN like they're the mouth pieces of God himself!!!!


You also think Mullahs are still running Iran! LMAO
It's been a decade since they lost control. Today the IRGC runs Iran. They will just abolish the "velayate faqih" system once they're completely done with them. Khamenei doesn't run Iran any longer, it's IRGC and it's branches. They're the ones calling the shots today.


----------



## below_freezing

Solomon2 said:


> Who do I have to be?
> 
> Nobody else steps up to the plate to do the job, yes? Nevertheless, most Americans would deny that the U.S. is the world's policeman. Perhaps the best explanation of U.S. policy under the G.W. Bush Administration was given by newspaper columnist Charles Krauthammer, who termed it "Democratic Realism":
> 
> _We will support democracy everywhere, but we will commit blood and treasure only in places where there is a strategic necessity--meaning, places central to the larger war against the existential enemy, the enemy that poses a global mortal threat to freedom._



The Wall Street regime is doing a great job of crushing democracy at home. Maybe the US Army need to liberate the US from Wall Street. Send some B-52's to Manhattan, that'd be quite the show.


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> One day Japan could become Nazi Germany again. Why do you guys condone Japan's ability to make nukes or Israel's acquired nukes??? What if Israel becomes a failed state, what will happen to all those nukes? What if......


Nima, I do believe you're starting to panic.



> You also think Mullahs are still running Iran! LMAO
> It's been a decade since they lost control. Today the IRGC runs Iran. They will just abolish the "velayate faqih" system once they're completely done with them. Khamenei doesn't run Iran any longer, it's IRGC and it's branches.


Like the Janissaries did to the Ottomans, yes? In that case the Pasdaran would have to control the purse as well as the gun, but the last time I checked disposition of property was in the hands of the mullahs. Do correct me if I'm wrong.

_*So far nobody has argued that there is any possible good outcome to the IRI possessing nuclear weapons.*_


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> Nima, I do believe you're starting to panic.
> 
> Like the Janissaries did to the Ottomans, yes? In that case the Pasdaran would have to control the purse as well as the gun, but the last time I checked disposition of property was in the hands of the mullahs. Do correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> _*So far nobody has argued that there is any possible good outcome to the IRI possessing nuclear weapons.*_



I'm starting to panic?
what do you mean?


The mullahs no longer control Iran, the IRGC does. 
piece by piece they are taking over. First it was the military, now it's the economy. They have now taken over the stock exchange and all major companies including Iran's telecom companies. 
Worrying Trend: IRGC taking over the economy. - Iran Defense Forum

about your moronic sentence at the end.
nuclear weapons are against humanity and are disgusting in the hands of all, not just the mullahs. Ask the hundreds of thousands of murdered Japanese.


----------



## Solomon2

Nima said:


> I'm starting to panic?
> what do you mean?


You're not effectively challenging anything I write, instead you are going all nutter on unsupportable what-ifs. 



> The mullahs no longer control Iran, the IRGC does.
> piece by piece they are taking over. First it was the military, now it's the economy -


Very interesting. Once the Janissaries started running things they became more interested in using their position to build wealth and didn't want to risk their comfy situation by war. Do you see the same thing happening with the IRGC?



> about your moronic sentence at the end.
> nuclear weapons are against humanity and are disgusting in the hands of all, not just the mullahs. Ask the hundreds of thousands of murdered Japanese.


You can write that and then accuse _me_ of making moronic statements? If the fate of millions of people wasn't at stake I might laugh.


----------



## T-Rex

Solomon2 said:


> So you refuse to answer the question. You're really scared aren't you, Nima?





Why don't you respond to this guy who says:* Iran has every right to produce limited number of nukes to defend itself against Israeli aggression.

When the notorious jewish state can have 300 warheads and no one likes to talk about them so what the bloody hell is so wrong with iran ?*

You're avoiding it, are u scared ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

^^ He is just paranoid by truth


----------



## Nima

Solomon2 said:


> You're not effectively challenging anything I write, instead you are going all nutter on unsupportable what-ifs.
> 
> Very interesting. Once the Janissaries started running things they became more interested in using their position to build wealth and didn't want to risk their comfy situation by war. Do you see the same thing happening with the IRGC?
> 
> You can write that and then accuse _me_ of making moronic statements? If the fate of millions of people wasn't at stake I might laugh.



1) well everything that you write is based on the impression that the mullahs in Iran are a suicidal bunch which is completely false.

2) War or no war the IRGC will collect its oil money but year by year they're expanding their operations, they have a hand in everything now. They will definitely try to avoid a war but they will do it in their own way. An open society with a liberal economy is not what they want. The status quo is very much in their favor so the only way that they can avoid a war, which is smtg they want in order to remain in power, is to continue making Iran's military stronger. 

3) you don't value human life. If you did you would stop this none sense and go ***** and moan about the Iraq war or the Afghanistan war or maybe about the fact that the USA is spending close to 1/14 of its GDP on the military!!!


----------



## Cyrus the Great

Solomon2 said:


> I don't believe that, I don't see why anyone else would.
> 
> 
> Iran does not need the american believe them. as long as you have your nuke, you dont have right to talk about other countries nuclear program

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Solomon2

T-Rex said:


> Iran has every right to produce limited number of nukes to defend itself against Israeli aggression...When the notorious jewish state can have 300 warheads and no one likes to talk about them so what the bloody hell is so wrong with iran ?


The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Iran has signed, forbids Iran to develop nukes. In exchange Iran has access to nuclear technologies.

Israel is not a signatory to the NPT, so its nukes - if they have them, which they aren't admitting to - would be legal under international law. 

And "defending against Israeli aggression" is a real stretch, because Israel, while it doesn't let its enemies walk over it all the time, is very far from being an aggressive power. 

Still, I can tell you don't care very much for the legal niceties. Do you think it's O.K. for big bullies in the schoolyard to beat up the little guys? When the little guy has the gun the school is safer; when the bullies get guns everyone is scared, right? How is this different? Or do you believe in siding with the bullies, because they look strong and act mean and you fear opposing them? As one _Dawn_ columnist put it recently, 



> Exhibiting a somewhat cowardly strain of Machiavellian tact, a number of politicians, former military men and journalists are known to loudly support and defend the position of the extremists on various TV channels, blissfully believing they are protecting themselves from the ideologically-motivated violence various anti-Taliban politicians face every day.


Is the Iran situation really very different?



Cyrus the Great said:


> Iran does not need the american believe them -


Of course they do, because America could bomb the country to smithereens at any time, and has had that ability for decades. Probably Israel has the same capability, for that matter, or can have on short notice. They just don't want to, because Americans and Israelis aren't the kind of people to kill for terror and conquest, but for defense.



> ...as long as you have your nuke, you dont have right to talk about other countries nuclear program.


Why do you think you have a right to decide who has a "right to talk" about anything?


----------



## Evil Flare

Self Delete


----------



## Nima

@ solomon
The Romans had 3 major offensives against Sassanid Persia.
In those 3 wars we killed 2 of their emperors and captured the last one alive and imprisoned him in a fort built by his own soldiers. He spent the rest of his life there. I've had the honor of visiting it actually. 
You guys are very welcome to try but you will just be added to the long list of invaders we have pooped on in the last 2500 years 
for over 31 years you've been talking ****. Our soldiers fear old age more than your over exaggerated military. 
Iranian tribes have flourished for 7000 years on the Iranian plateau and we're not about to roll over for a 200 year old, culture less country like yours. 
Talk **** all you want but we will do what we want, when we want and no bomb will stop us.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

This is the same Band which created the sound track of spiderman movie.
The song is abt the Israeli Raids against innocent women and children of Lebanon and Gaza..


----------



## munzo

I think the Israeli's have been practicing an attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities for years...... this is nothing new, also the Iranian's have probably made some decent preperations to defend their instilations but lets face it - If Isreal gets a green light to strike Iran, then its only a question of how badly damaged will the reactors get. In all probablity looking at time scales every month that passes brings Iran closer to achieving their goals and sooneer than later they will have the material they need. So if Isreal is going to strike it would be when they are pretty sure there is no more time to lose and all other options have been exhausted. in my opinion if that could still mean there are months if not years before Israel acts. In the mean time if Iran sleep walks with its security then they deserve to see their reactors in a pile of rubble.


----------



## Nima

munzo said:


> I think the Israeli's have been practicing an attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities for years...... this is nothing new, also the Iranian's have probably made some decent preperations to defend their instilations but lets face it - If Isreal gets a green light to strike Iran, then its only a question of how badly damaged will the reactors get. In all probablity looking at time scales every month that passes brings Iran closer to achieving their goals and sooneer than later they will have the material they need. So if Isreal is going to strike it would be when they are pretty sure there is no more time to lose and all other options have been exhausted. in my opinion if that could still mean there are months if not years before Israel acts. In the mean time if Iran sleep walks with its security then they deserve to see their reactors in a pile of rubble.


I love arm chair generals
Israel doesn't have the refueling capacity to launch an attack and they have admitted it. Until they can fix that then we shouldn't even be talking about an attack. And Iran's main defense is its geography. We have a big country with mountains through out. All installations are deep inside mountains and scattered through out the country. Even if they bomb one location they still have to travel hundreds and hundreds of miles to get to location B. An attack by Israel is absolutely impossible and they know it. Has Israel *EVER *acted like this before? Do they ever advertise before going to a war? Never! This whole thing is an attempt to force the Americans into a war b/c they're the ones that can do some damage.

look @ this map btw
these are just the main nuke installations. They still have to hit the air defenses and missile silos etc... when they attack! That's literally hundreds and hundreds of targets in a country where location A could be 1000 miles away from location B. The only certain thing about all this is that Iran will never ever be attacked by Israel. The US is another debate all together though.


----------



## Kompromat

@ solomon:

Iran has Signed the NPT which means that they are not allowed to make any Nukes that could be used against the zionist state for defense.

Israel has NOT signed NPT but still IS a nuclear power which makes the whole thing unvalid and since the Zionists have wet dreams of Attacking Iran then NPT for iran is nothing morethan a Toilet paper.

Israel being a supreme threat to the security of the Iranians gives Iran every right to protect its people even if it means to become a Nuclear power.

cheerz


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Nima said:


> I love arm chair generals
> Israel doesn't have the refueling capacity to launch an attack and they have admitted it. Until they can fix that then we shouldn't even be talking about an attack. And Iran's main defense is its geography. We have a big country with mountains through out. All installations are deep inside mountains and scattered through out the country. Even if they bomb one location they still have to travel hundreds and hundreds of miles to get to location B. An attack by Israel is absolutely impossible and they know it. Has Israel *EVER *acted like this before? Do they ever advertise before going to a war? Never! This whole thing is an attempt to force the Americans into a war b/c they're the ones that can do some damage.
> 
> look @ this map btw
> these are just the main nuke installations. They still have to hit the air defenses and missile silos etc... when they attack! That's literally hundreds and hundreds of targets in a country where location A could be 1000 miles away from location B. The only certain thing about all this is that Iran will never ever be attacked by Israel. The US is another debate all together though.



Nima, you're assuming Israel is far, FAR away. When in fact both Israel and Iran are within firing range of each other. I don't see the mullahs to be complete fools, so they must have acquired some MEGA-TON NUKES FROM UKRAINE & KHAZAKISTAN during the breakup of the USSR. Do keep in mind hundreds of nukes are *UNACCOUNTED FOR.* Beyond these defensive measures, Iran has made more advanced preparations.

Prepare for the worst, but hope for the best.


----------



## Jigs

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> Nima, you're assuming Israel is far, FAR away. When in fact both Israel and Iran are within firing range of each other. I don't see the mullahs to be complete fools, so they must have acquired some MEGA-TON NUKES FROM UKRAINE & KHAZAKISTAN during the breakup of the USSR. Do keep in mind hundreds of nukes are *UNACCOUNTED FOR.* Beyond these defensive measures, Iran has made more advanced preparations.
> 
> Prepare for the worst, but hope for the best.



Remember the Israeli F-16s that hit the Iraqi site ? they almost ran out of fuel when coming back. And they had drop tanks. How many planes can Israel refuel ? And over what country ? Will they ask the U.S. to refuel there aircraft over Iraq? What would the Iraqi government say ? Lots of factors to consider. Then again they could just throw missiles at each other. Only risk with that is Iranian proxy close to Israel. Would Israel risk going nuclear first if Iran has not ?

1,250 miles, the distance by air between Israel and Iran's main nuclear and missile sites

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Solomon2

Black Blood said:


> Israel has NOT signed NPT but still IS a nuclear power which makes the whole thing unvalid and since the Zionists have wet dreams of Attacking Iran then NPT for iran is nothing morethan a Toilet paper.


The "wet dreams" only exist because of Iran's developing WMD capability and stated desire to make destroying Israel a national goal. Don't put the cart b4 the horse, BB, or you won't get anywhere, yes?


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Jigs said:


> Remember the Israeli F-16s that hit the Iraqi site ? they almost ran out of fuel when coming back. And they had drop tanks. How many planes can Israel refuel ? And over what country ? Will they ask the U.S. to refuel there aircraft over Iraq? What would the Iraqi government say ? Lots of factors to consider. Then again they could just throw missiles at each other. Only risk with that is Iranian proxy close to Israel. Would Israel risk going nuclear first if Iran has not ?
> 
> 1,250 miles, the distance by air between Israel and Iran's main nuclear and missile sites



Yeah, I'm thinking the same. Striking distance for rockets / missiles. In the situation you describe, I can see it quickly turning nuclear. Israel and USA are convinced Iran *already possesses Nukes (bought from black market in Ukraine).* Hence, the issue of "crippling sanctions" on Iran, which they hope will throw the country into chaos and mutiny.


----------



## T-Rex

Solomon2 said:


> The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Iran has signed, forbids Iran to develop nukes. In exchange Iran has access to nuclear technologies.
> Israel is not a signatory to the NPT, so its nukes - if they have them, which they aren't admitting to - would be legal under international law.



Since uncle sam is so eager to make all the Muslim states sign the ******* NPT what stops it from persuading Israel to do this noble deed?


Solomon2 said:


> And "defending against Israeli aggression" is a real stretch, because Israel, while it doesn't let its enemies walk over it all the time, is very far from being an aggressive power.



After having stolen the land of the Palestinians if Israel is not aggressive then Hitler must have been equally peace-loving.


----------



## Kompromat

NPT is no more than a tactic to restric powers to those big brothers favoured by Uncle SAM.


----------



## munzo

Nima said:


> I love arm chair generals
> Israel doesn't have the refueling capacity to launch an attack and they have admitted it. Until they can fix that then we shouldn't even be talking about an attack. And Iran's main defense is its geography. We have a big country with mountains through out. All installations are deep inside mountains and scattered through out the country. Even if they bomb one location they still have to travel hundreds and hundreds of miles to get to location B. An attack by Israel is absolutely impossible and they know it. Has Israel *EVER *acted like this before? Do they ever advertise before going to a war? Never! This whole thing is an attempt to force the Americans into a war b/c they're the ones that can do some damage.
> 
> Read the whole post mate! Israel would attack only after exhausting all other options..... by the way since when was an air strike the only option??? a clever enemy chooses the most impossible route that you don't expect. Surely if the terraine is your biggest ally then its your biggest enemy as well. I can certainly see now that the Israeli's will for sure blow all Iranian nuke facilities and you won't be able to do jack.


----------



## Solomon2

T-Rex said:


> Since uncle sam is so eager to make all the Muslim states sign the ******* NPT what stops it from persuading Israel to do this noble deed?


As I've pointed out repeatedly, it's the difference between someone who uses power responsibly and someone who doesn't. Israel has demonstrated great restraint and responsibility in the application of power; much of the rest of the world, the IRI included, sticks to the "might-makes-right-make-war-when-you-can-profit" school of thinking. 



> After having stolen the land of the Palestinians if Israel is not aggressive then Hitler must have been equally peace-loving.


You live in a country, Bangladesh, where champions of Israel suffer official harassment, if not social ostracism. link The information available is limited, and the context of events absent or even falsified. You can't be expected to judge this matter, but why do you even bring it up in this thread? Don't you perceive that Israel-bashing is an instrument of your own oppression?


----------



## Jigs

Solomon2 said:


> As I've pointed out repeatedly, it's the difference between someone who uses power responsibly and someone who doesn't. *Israel has demonstrated great restraint and responsibility in the application of power*; much of the rest of the world, the IRI included, sticks to the "might-makes-right-make-war-when-you-can-profit" school of thinking.
> 
> You live in a country, Bangladesh, where champions of Israel suffer official harassment, if not social ostracism. link The information available is limited, and the context of events absent or even falsified. You can't be expected to judge this matter, but why do you even bring it up in this thread? Don't you perceive that Israel-bashing is an instrument of your own oppression?



I disagree with that part. 926 non combatants were killed in the Gaza Conflict. 116 women 313 Children. While Israel lost 3 civilians and 10 soliders (4 by friendly fire). Plz by all means explain how this great restraint applied to this specific conflict. Also CNN even pointed out who started it in the first place. Also plz help me understand why Israel used White Phosphorus shells in one of the most highly populated areas. (that resulted in confirmed casualties by them) 

Also don't give me the "But they pulled completely out of there excuse" talk.

I have also seen a documentary where a British reporter inside a school was talking about something when a Israeli shell/bomb hits the school. (Might i add this person was covering both sides not just one)


----------



## Solomon2

Jigs - go to the Israel/Gaza-related threads.


----------



## Jigs

Solomon2 said:


> Jigs - go to the Israel/Gaza-related threads.



No need my friend i got the numbers right here. As well as what exactly went down. Israel said it responded to rocket attacks and bombarded and invaded Gaza causing massive damage and then pulled out. The results are pretty clear.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Solomon2

Thread discipline, Jigs.


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

Can Israel and Iran, both live in peace with both possessing Nuclear arms.. i think this would some how keep a balance and check onto Israel form not attacking innocent women and children of Palestine and Lebanon.
Oh man finally the God will hear the prayers of the those who suffered the cruelty and barbarism of Israeli Aerial Bombing and Artillery shelling, not to mention the phosphorous weapons being used in urban areas. 
So the next 25 years are not looking good for state of Israel..
An Iran armed with Nuclear weapons would definitely put Pakistan out of Israeli Radars.


----------



## T-Rex

Solomon2 said:


> As I've pointed out repeatedly, it's the difference between someone who uses power responsibly and someone who doesn't. Israel has demonstrated great restraint and responsibility in the application of power; much of the rest of the world, the IRI included, sticks to the "might-makes-right-make-war-when-you-can-profit" school of thinking.
> 
> You live in a country, Bangladesh, where champions of Israel suffer official harassment, if not social ostracism. link The information available is limited, and the context of events absent or even falsified. You can't be expected to judge this matter, but why do you even bring it up in this thread? Don't you perceive that Israel-bashing is an instrument of your own oppression?



Israel is the most irresponsible, war-mongering state according to most people but of course the so-called champions of democracy and human rights are not among those people.

A rabid anti-Muslim calls exposing Israel's dirty tactics as "Israel bashing".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Solomon2

T-Rex said:


> Israel is the most irresponsible, war-mongering state according to most people -


"Most people"? What kind of condemnation is that? Mob justice? Yeah, right.

Look, all that has been done in the Arab states is that the strong men have said to their subjects, "Hate Jews or die!" People aren't even allowed to argue Israel's case. Thus their own dictatorships are strengthened. How do you consider that justice? After three or four generations, the poison of hate has bitten them deep. Pakistan, which surrendered much of its education system to the Gulf Arabs two generations back, is suffering from religious-based hatred as well. Bangladesh has essentially outlawed Israel advocacy, and it's no coincidence, imo, that democracy is suffering and corruption increasing there as well.

The current Iranian leadership is both intolerant (as their domestic repressions have demonstrated) and calculating - they know they have a "go" from people like you for building nuclear weapons as long as they say its for use against Israel, not their immediate neighbors. Yet if you re-read this thread you can read Iranians who start out objecting to the regime and protesting my description of its ambitions, then end up championing Iranian strength and issuing threats. 

They want their ancient Empire back. Given these ambitions, if the IRI get nukes, how can it fail to have a conflict with Pakistan?


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

Solomon2 said:


> "Most people"? What kind of condemnation is that? Mob justice? Yeah, right.
> 
> Look, all that has been done in the Arab states is that the strong men have said to their subjects, "Hate Jews or die!" People aren't even allowed to argue Israel's case. Thus their own dictatorships are strengthened. How do you consider that justice? After three or four generations, the poison of hate has bitten them deep. Pakistan, which surrendered much of its education system to the Gulf Arabs two generations back, is suffering from religious-based hatred as well. Bangladesh has essentially outlawed Israel advocacy, and it's no coincidence, imo, that democracy is suffering and corruption increasing there as well.
> 
> The current Iranian leadership is both intolerant (as their domestic repressions have demonstrated) and calculating - they know they have a "go" from people like you for building nuclear weapons as long as they say its for use against Israel, not their immediate neighbors. Yet if you re-read this thread you can read Iranians who start out objecting to the regime and protesting my description of its ambitions, then end up championing Iranian strength and issuing threats.
> 
> They want their ancient Empire back. Given these ambitions, if the IRI get nukes, how can it fail to have a conflict with Pakistan?





Is this photshoped,Hel Yeahhhh ...


----------



## tingumaster

If wars happens no one can save Iran.....even god


----------



## Nima

tingumaster said:


> If wars happens no one can save Iran.....even god



Iranians aren't useless Indian pussies
we fight for our land and honour


----------



## ARSENAL6

Solomon2 said:


> Like the way the govt of Pakistan sold out to the Gulf Arabs, yielding control of education and leading to the creation and popular support of the Taliban?



Not having a good education can have major effects in ones ablity to communicate and getting the correct facts instead of fantasising world events as your post clearly shows this.

But what the real issue you should be concered as well as with all your jewsih zionists is your country trying to imitates its first class hero Adolf Hitler. You know the one you keep making up stories of "the Holocaust" 
So its kinda stupid that you are worried about other people affairs and not your own.

yeah you keep with you useless comments its no wonder Hamas and Hesbollah are fire rockes in your back yard.
Lets hope it lands on you.


----------



## ARSENAL6

tingumaster said:


> If wars happens no one can save Iran.....*even god*



Y'know if i bowed down to dolls, than yes I could understand why God won't save us.


----------



## Solomon2

ARSENAL6 said:


> But what the real issue you should be concered as well as with all your jewsih zionists is your country trying to imitates its first class hero Adolf Hitler. You know the one you keep making up stories of "the Holocaust"


Three of my grandparents, one of my uncles, and one of my aunts died in the Holocaust, as well as many cousins. There is a great deal of evidence for demonstrating the Holocaust was a reality and that its extent - some 5,850,000 Jews slaughtered - was not exaggerated. 

In response to a question earlier, I pointed out that one American academic had calculated in 2007 that over the past sixty years the TOTAL of civilian dead - Arab plus Jewish - in the Israeli-Arab conflict was around 8,000. That includes Jewish victims from Arab terror attacks as well as Arab victims of terrorists who employ them as human shields. 

Furthermore, the Jews were promised Palestine as a National Home after World War I, not World War II - and the Ottoman Caliph endorsed doing so in the Treaty of Sèvres. 

I could go on and on, but as you say, 


> Not having a good education can have major effects in ones ablity to communicate and getting the correct facts instead of fantasising world events


***



> no wonder Hamas and Hesbollah are fire rockes in your back yard. Lets hope it lands on you.


I'm an American. I am also Jewish. Hezbollah has stated they want all Jews to return to Israel so they can kill all 14 million or so at once. Is that where your sympathies lie? Then it's no wonder the Iranians can pull a fast one on you, is it?


----------



## Hussein

ARSENAL6 said:


> But what the real issue you should be concered as well as with all your jewsih zionists is your country trying to imitates its first class hero Adolf Hitler.


it is a shame to read this.
really a shame.


----------



## GolaniB

Hussein said:


> it is a shame to read this.
> really a shame.



it is a shame, but unforuately the muslim world is an avid-consumer of antisemitism.

After all, over 1 million jews were expelled in post-Israel Middle East.

Jewish exodus from Arab lands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think it is truly sad when people trivialize the holocaust Germany by smearing Israelis with Nazi buzzwords. Ironically, it was the early Islamist movements that had a strong relationship with Hitler.

The Mufti of Jerusalem for example was buddy-buddy with Hitler, and Muslim-SS exterminated most of the Jews in what was formally Yugoslavia.




And of course the Nazis bank-rolled the muslim brotherhood, but then again so did Britain and the USA.

Funny to note that Yasser Arafat is al-husseinis nephew and was an early follower of the Muslim brotherhood.

I think when the Muslim world recognizes the suffering of the Jews, and their complicity in it - then there will be peace. As long as they considering themselves victim to Israel's existence - a country the size of a finger nail - then it will continue to be a cesspool.

I look at the Arab countries and see a lot of potential. A very young population, a developing economy, under-developed land. And yet, their leadership continues use Israel as a lightening rod and keep the people subjugated by obsessing over the irrelevant I/P conflict.

I think Pakistan, foreign-policy wise, is slightly more progressive since Israel has unofficially supported pakistani-sponsored pro-western militants during the soviet invasion.

Just as it supported pro-saudi/american yemeni militants during the egyptian invasion.

Pakistan and Israel both share an opposition to terrorism and homicidal Islamists. If we put our differences aside I think Israel has a lot to offer, just as it has helped India, Britain, Turkey, and the USA in counter-terrorism.

But first things first - the holocaust denial has to stop.

It is one of the most studied and researched events in human history. Accusing Zionists of inventing facts to elicit sympathy for Israel does not only make one a bigot but also detached from reality.

It's like denying gravity. 6 million+ Jews were killed, in addition to 10+ million gypsies/communists/sexual minorities/mentally disabled.

This is a fact. I know it's taught when you've been spoon-fed anti-israel/jewish propaganda...but accept it.

And move on.


----------



## Hussein

@Golani
I understand this was disgusting to know muslim brotherhood link to nazis.
Ok 
But it doesn't mean all muslims did. It is opposite. How many did fight against nazis? Just look at History.

And it doesn't help to look for bad points in a religion based on a group of people. We should think of respect . Don't forget that the solidarity with Palestinians is based on injustice: the injustice that for exemple in Cisjordanie there is a colonization not stopped and many Palestinians had to leave and lost their lands. What a pain. Pls respect it.

Nobody named human being can accept Tibet, can accept Chechenia and nobody can accept Cisjordanie suffers.

And damned the anti semits like Ahmadinejad who dont care at all for justice, democracy or Arabs (he insulted many times the sunnis , the afghans, and so on). We all want (except few extremists ) to kick out our monsters: ttp in pakistan, moudjahidines of people or ahmadinejad in iran, pkk in turkey ...


----------



## GolaniB

Hussein said:


> @Golani
> I understand this was disgusting to know muslim brotherhood link to nazis.
> Ok
> But it doesn't mean all muslims did. It is opposite. How many did fight against nazis? Just look at History.
> 
> And it doesn't help to look for bad points in a religion based on a group of people. We should think of respect . Don't forget that the solidarity with Palestinians is based on injustice: the injustice that for exemple in Cisjordanie there is a colonization not stopped and many Palestinians had to leave and lost their lands. What a pain. Pls respect it.
> 
> Nobody named human being can accept Tibet, can accept Chechenia and nobody can accept Cisjordanie suffers.
> 
> And damned the anti semits like Ahmadinejad who dont care at all for justice, democracy or Arabs (he insulted many times the sunnis , the afghans, and so on). We all want (except few extremists ) to kick out our monsters: ttp in pakistan, moudjahidines of people or ahmadinejad in iran, pkk in turkey ...



I never said all Muslims were Nazis, I said the Muslim world is an avid consumer of antisemitism.

Glorification of Nazi propaganda is standard. Holocaust denial, demonizing Israel and Jews...all part of the general Islamic media.

Even in so-called enlightened states like Turkey Mein Kampf continues to be the #1 book...well, second to the Quran.

This is a problem. Many in the West really don't buy the Muslim's world obsession with Israel in the name of "injustice" because they make Israel look like green peace with their long, human rights record and history of supporting genocide and terrorism.

I say Islamic states should spend less time telling Israel how to behave and more time...say...giving women rights. stop stoning homosexuals, exporting terrorism, hating jews...

you'll be better off in the long run, and people will have more respect for muslims.


----------



## Hussein

GolaniB said:


> I never said all Muslims were Nazis, I said the Muslim world is an avid consumer of antisemitism.
> 
> Glorification of Nazi propaganda is standard. Holocaust denial, demonizing Israel and Jews...all part of the general Islamic media.
> 
> Even in so-called enlightened states like Turkey Mein Kampf continues to be the #1 book...well, second to the Quran.
> 
> This is a problem. Many in the West really don't buy the Muslim's world obsession with Israel in the name of "injustice" because they make Israel look like green peace with their long, human rights record and history of supporting genocide and terrorism.
> 
> I say Islamic states should spend less time telling Israel how to behave and more time...say...giving women rights. stop stoning homosexuals, exporting terrorism, hating jews...
> 
> you'll be better off in the long run, and people will have more respect for muslims.


Without insulting you , believe me sincerely, but stop thinking everyone around is antisemit

maybe some speaking a lot are. but understand that god sake, for your country and for all of us, you need to speak and make peace.

about stoning it is for adultery. and used by stupid middle aged people
very rare indeed in Iran but very ashamed of it. 
We have a lot of work you're right.
we're on the way


----------



## xMustiiej70

So what?
I'm anti-jew,anti-israeli.
Who isn't?


----------



## Solomon2

xMustiiej70 said:


> So what?
> I'm anti-jew,anti-israeli.
> Who isn't?


According to pechter polls, about 20&#37; of the Arab world supports the concept of a Jewish Israel. How many Arabs are there, 80 million? 100 million? Do the math: there are more Arab Zionists than Jewish ones! 

Shabbat comes, gotta go.


----------



## GolaniB

Solomon2 said:


> According to pechter polls, about 20% of the Arab world supports the concept of a Jewish Israel. How many Arabs are there, 80 million? 100 million? Do the math: there are more Arab Zionists than Jewish ones!
> 
> Shabbat comes, gotta go.



30% of Israeli Arabs vote for Zionist parties.

Are they racist?

Arabs who live in a Jewish state have a more positive view of Jews than Arabs/Muslims who live in a Jew-free state.

What does this tell us?

I'm not trying to insult Muslims but the victimhood has to stop. Many in the West are truly appalled at the violence, injustice, and self-inflicted wounds that have consumed the Muslim world.

If Israel suddenly disappeared, would anything change?


----------



## gambit

GolaniB said:


> 30% of Israeli Arabs vote for Zionist parties.
> 
> Are they racist?
> 
> Arabs who live in a Jewish state have a more positive view of Jews than Arabs/Muslims who live in a Jew-free state.
> 
> What does this tell us?
> 
> I'm not trying to insult Muslims but *the victimhood has to stop*. Many in the West are truly appalled at the violence, injustice, and self-inflicted wounds that have consumed the Muslim world.
> 
> *If Israel suddenly disappeared, would anything change?*


Nope. If Israel suddenly disappeared, the muslim world would still find some reasons to retain that victimhood mentality. Right now, in order to keep themselves distracted from their own self inflicted problems, it is identification with the Palestinians, legacy of colonialism, the CIA, and the list goes on with other reasons of lesser importance.


----------



## Patriot

Hey not everyone who thinks you're being a douchebag is anti-Semitic. It means they think you're being a collective douchebag, independent of your national origin.I can point several douchebags here who are from different countries.The Israeli's have got to stop playing the victim card, screaming "anti-Semitism" every time someone criticizes them. It's really denigrating to all those who have suffered from real anti-Semitism throughout history (I am not sure solomon if your forefathers would be proud of you considering you support a regime that is openly supporting settlements in Palestine).The fact is Zionism and is the major cause of antisemitism.You disagree with something jews say you MUST be anti-semetic. Nothing to do with the fact they did something bad, nope. It's because you hate Jews....use that card somewhere else.


----------



## ARSENAL6

Hussein said:


> it is a shame to read this.
> really a shame.



Oh Please, quit your *** licking or should I say stop hindiing yourself with a Msulim name
I don;t understand is how you could be ashamed of post and nt what Israel has done.

Not as much shame of coming here on this forum constantly
justifying the genocide of Palistiens and lebanese people like Solomon has done.
yknow there are people who lost families and friends by IDF game od slaughter.

Just look at his post constantly cheering and being satisfied of the death of innocent people. In fact Solomon is proud of it i simply have no simpathy of such species.
I wouldn't be surprised if the people of Gaza and Lebanon had strong hatred against Israel. in fact:

History Revisited in Lebanon Fighting - washingtonpost.com

Remembering The Sabra & Shatilla Massacre The Ugly Truth


You wanna stop those rockes then stop killing those people

This attitude fits people like the Nazi. 
I'm only disguisting to those people who deserve it, want me to stop then stop justifing IDF forces kills.
I'm sorry to say.

PS nice story tell that to innocent arab children who were murderd by IDF


----------



## ARSENAL6

gambit said:


> Nope. If Israel suddenly disappeared, the muslim world would still find some reasons to retain that victimhood mentality. Right now, in order to keep themselves distracted from their own self inflicted problems, it is identification with the Palestinians, legacy of colonialism, the CIA, and the list goes on with other reasons of lesser importance.



Really last time I'd checked the US had whole histiory of victimhood against other race and culture.

It started out against naitive Americans:
Native American Genocide Still Haunts U.S.
500 years...

then it was the Blacks:
African Americans in Slavery - Lower Mississippi Delta Region - National Park Service
Mass Media and Racism


then Far easten people like Chinese, Japanese:
Negative Stereotyping of Asian Americans
Japanese Americans - History, Modern era, Migration to hawaii and america, Efforts to ban japanese immigration
Anti-Asian Racism & Violence : Asian-Nation :: Asian American History, Demographics, & Issues

then Russia:
Then Hispanic

and now Muslim.
Eat The Press | Fox News Airs Suggestion for 'Muslim-Only' Airport Line | The Huffington Post
100 Years of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim stereotyping
Muslim advocates charge NYPD is racial profiling in Queens raids tied to alleged Zazi terror plot
Arabs in Hollywood: An Undeserved Image
100 Years of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim stereotyping












See the pattern here !
Its too much and thats just the tip of the Ice berg ! 


Media radical sterotypes:
Racial Stereotypes in the Media
Racial Stereotypes in the Media - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com
http://www.nhaeyc.org/newsletters/articles/Racism_in_Childrens_Movies.pdf


So we can safely say with great ambition and confidence that the US 
would still find some reasons to retain thier victimhood, mentality, _ even if every Muslims around the world suddenly disappeared._
And who forget the Untimate support that The US give unconditional support for to Isreal
which Israel has been exposed continously the genocide of the Arab people.

Please gambit get an actual account of Muslim who actually do hate the US for *no apperent reason *not ones that have their families killed or brutilise by the US and don't go off on a lunatic journey against Muslims.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Solomon2

ARSENAL6 said:


> Not as much shame of coming here on this forum constantly justifying the genocide of Palistiens and lebanese people like Solomon has done -


Everybody who waves the bloody flag of dead civilians to encourage hatred of Israel empowers and certifies as valid those who employ civilians as human shields in their attacks on other humans.


----------



## gambit

ARSENAL6 said:


> Really last time I'd checked the US had whole histiory of victimhood against other race and culture.


I think you got the wrong definition of 'victimhood' here.



ARSENAL6 said:


> It started out against naitive Americans:
> Native American Genocide Still Haunts U.S.
> 500 years...


And now we have American Indians in various leadership positions. The tribes are highly autonomous on their own lands. There are many exemptions specifically for them. I have American Indian friends from military service, a few Cherokees in Florida and even a couple of Sioux.



ARSENAL6 said:


> then it was the Blacks:
> African Americans in Slavery - Lower Mississippi Delta Region - National Park Service
> Mass Media and Racism


And now we have a black President, a black Supreme Court justice, the same court that interpret a constitution that said a black is only 3/5 of a white?



ARSENAL6 said:


> then Far easten people like Chinese, Japanese:
> Negative Stereotyping of Asian Americans
> Japanese Americans - History, Modern era, Migration to hawaii and america, Efforts to ban japanese immigration
> Anti-Asian Racism & Violence : Asian-Nation :: Asian American History, Demographics, & Issues


Funny that you should bring up Asian-Nation. I know the owner/creator of that website......He has a source with a lot of notable Asian Americans you might to check out.



ARSENAL6 said:


> then Russia:


And...???



ARSENAL6 said:


> Then Hispanic


Another Supreme Court justice and a wise Latina at that.



ARSENAL6 said:


> and now Muslim.


CAIR...errr...I mean...Care to explain how does CAIR continue to exist?


ARSENAL6 said:


> See the pattern here !
> Its too much and thats just the tip of the Ice berg !


The pattern is that no society is perfect and that we make better efforts than expected to correct past injustices.



ARSENAL6 said:


> So we can safely say with great ambition and confidence that the US
> would still find some reasons to retain thier victimhood, mentality, _ even if every Muslims around the world suddenly disappeared._
> And who forget the Untimate support that The US give unconditional support for to Isreal
> which Israel has been exposed continously the genocide of the Arab people.


I think you got the wrong definition of 'victimhood'.



ARSENAL6 said:


> Please gambit get an actual account of Muslim who actually do hate the US for *no apperent reason *not ones that have their families killed or brutilise by the US and don't go off on a lunatic journey against Muslims.


Of course not. No one hate for no reasons. We do not live in an intellectual and moral vacuum. If a muslim want to hate US, he will find a reason for it. The issue is if the reason is legitimate or not. You do not like American support for Israel? That is a reason to hate US. Is it legitimate? Depends on who you ask, naturally.

But I think you got wrong definition of 'victimhood' here. The question is if Israel is wiped off the map, will the muslim world find another grievance to justify any anger? I do not believe the muslims will be satisfied.


----------



## Jigs

I have seen first hand how Native Americans live being in Arizona. I can tell you it is very bad. They live in little rooms that are called houses. Away from the rest of society. I have been to these places so i know.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xMustiiej70

I really dont see how israel can bomb iran.
Without getting destroyed by Iran.
I mean if iran cant handle 300combat fleet.
Then i mean destroy all of them.
If they cant do that..
I say Iran has REALLY POOR defence.
I mean the reactors are at incredibly tough places.
in the ground in the mountains..
russians sams.
and the air fleet of iran.
should stop isreali air attack.


----------



## gambit

Jigs said:


> I have seen first hand how Native Americans live being in Arizona. I can tell you it is very bad. They live in little rooms that are called houses. Away from the rest of society. I have been to these places so i know.


Tribal lands are highly autonomous, even my American Indian friends acknowledged the poverty on tribal lands are largely self inflicted. All you need to look at is something like this...

National Indian Gaming Assoc.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

xMustiiej70 said:


> I really dont see how israel can bomb iran.
> Without getting destroyed by Iran.
> I mean if iran cant handle 300combat fleet.
> Then i mean destroy all of them.
> If they cant do that..
> I say Iran has REALLY POOR defence.
> I mean the reactors are at incredibly tough places.
> in the ground in the mountains..
> russians sams.
> and the air fleet of iran.
> should stop isreali air attack.



That's the point. The Zionist Regime can't take on Iran ALONE. It needs either USA or UK-France-Germany-Spain to do its bidding. 

Now USA is in a real bad position to open up more war fronts. And Europe is on the brink of collapse, any stupid move will get the tens of millions of muslims in Europe into Jihad Frenzy (they are already on the brink of tensions!).

If it was 1-on-1 (Israel vs Iran), without spewing across borders, most of us would welcome it. Battle of gladiators!


----------



## GolaniB

SinoIndusFriendship said:


> That's the point. The Zionist Regime can't take on Iran ALONE. It needs either USA or UK-France-Germany-Spain to do its bidding.
> 
> Now USA is in a real bad position to open up more war fronts. And Europe is on the brink of collapse, any stupid move will get the tens of millions of muslims in Europe into Jihad Frenzy (they are already on the brink of tensions!).
> 
> If it was 1-on-1 (Israel vs Iran), without spewing across borders, most of us would welcome it. Battle of gladiators!



uk france spain bidding?

since when is the last time any of these countries fought for israel, ever?

europe is far from the brink of collapse, especially over a war with iran.

it would immediately side with the muslims. it does over 50 billion annually in trade with the state.

america would never send in forces into iran, it would simply bomb the country from afar.

as far as the muslim immigants in europe, no doubt they would flip if israel attacked iran.

but that's not surprising considering a simple cartoon makes them go crazy.


----------



## Nima

GolaniB said:


> uk france spain bidding?
> 
> since when is the last time any of these countries fought for israel, ever?
> 
> europe is far from the brink of collapse, especially over a war with iran.
> 
> it would immediately side with the muslims. it does over 50 billion annually in trade with the state.
> 
> america would never send in forces into iran, it would simply bomb the country from afar.
> 
> as far as the muslim immigants in europe, no doubt they would flip if israel attacked iran.
> 
> but that's not surprising considering a simple cartoon makes them go crazy.



there is only so much that you can do by bombing. You eventually have to put troops on the ground. Ask any military expert and they will confirm. As you know there is a very very tiny chance that 54 nuke installations+secret locations+other key targets can be taken out by air strikes. In the mean time Israel will have to deal with a stronger hizbullah (since 06 they have been armed with scud based short range ballistic missiles) and hamas and Iran's ballistics. 
Everything is pointing towards Iran joining the nuke family. The US will threaten Iran for some time to come but eventually they will just throw in the towel. 
You my friend need to stop this chest beating cuz according to all military experts Israel doesn't have the power to hurt Iran. ONLY AMERICA DOES. Your best option is to send a plane for a random bombing mission and hope IRan attacks the US forces in retaliation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Nima said:


> there is only so much that you can do by bombing. *You eventually have to put troops on the ground*. Ask any military expert and they will confirm.


Wrong...Political goals determines military objectives. If the political goal is to retard Iranian nuclear weapons program, then bombing will do that 'so much' level you talked about.


----------



## Nima

gambit said:


> Wrong...Political goals determines military objectives. If the political goal is to retard Iranian nuclear weapons program, then bombing will do that 'so much' level you talked about.



1) how do you know Iran doesn't have a bomb already?
2) how do you know a site isn't deeper than what you expected?
3) how do you know that a bombed site is actually destroyed?
4) how do you know where all the secret facilities are?
5) how do you want to take out the scientists?
etc...
you can't figure out the depth of a site by flying over it

put down the pipe man 
stop the chest beating

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Nima said:


> 1) how do you know Iran doesn't have a bomb already?
> 2) how do you know a site isn't deeper than what you expected?
> 3) how do you know that a bombed site is actually destroyed?
> 4) how do you know where all the secret facilities are?
> 5) how do you want to take out the scientists?
> etc...
> you can't figure out the depth of a site by flying over it
> 
> put down the pipe man
> stop the chest beating



It's pathetic how an Asian man can grovel so low to the White man (the same who raped, beheaded, Agent Orange his own people). It is truly pathetic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GolaniB

Nima said:


> there is only so much that you can do by bombing. You eventually have to put troops on the ground. Ask any military expert and they will confirm. As you know there is a very very tiny chance that 54 nuke installations+secret locations+other key targets can be taken out by air strikes. In the mean time Israel will have to deal with a stronger hizbullah (since 06 they have been armed with scud based short range ballistic missiles) and hamas and Iran's ballistics.
> Everything is pointing towards Iran joining the nuke family. The US will threaten Iran for some time to come but eventually they will just throw in the towel.
> You my friend need to stop this chest beating cuz according to all military experts Israel doesn't have the power to hurt Iran. ONLY AMERICA DOES. Your best option is to send a plane for a random bombing mission and hope IRan attacks the US forces in retaliation.



are you saying israel cant hit 54 targets?

seriously?



The IDF is the most advanced and pound-for-pound professional airforce of all industrialized nations.

it has set historic precedents now studied by its western and muslim critics in their academies.

i dont doubt our militaries capacity to hit iran.


----------



## Nima

GolaniB said:


> are you saying israel cant hit 54 targets?
> 
> seriously?
> 
> 
> 
> The IDF is the most advanced and pound-for-pound professional airforce of all industrialized nations.
> 
> it has set historic precedents now studied by its western and muslim critics in their academies.
> 
> i dont doubt our militaries capacity to hit iran.



I am actually pulling out my hair right now!!!
The distance between some of the sites in Iran are more than the distance between Israel and IRan!!!!!!! Iran can fit a billion gaza strips into one of its provinces alone.
Do you know how many different groups of f-16s, f-15s and support planes you have to send??? You need to break your air force into 10 groups and send them separately into different provinces! You will need a *miracle *to pull something like that off which is EXACTLY WHY ISRAEL HASN'T ACTED AND WILL NOT ACT. 
THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL THAT ISRAEL can do this! You don't have enough planes, *PERIOD*.

This isn't a video game. Go and talk to some real military people and they will tell you. 
Israel can't announce to its people that we can't attack Iran nor can they stop their pressure on Iran so they go around threatening an attack, but just b/c they say it doesn't mean that they can.


----------



## gambit

Nima said:


> 1) how do you know Iran doesn't have a bomb already?


Because there are no test detonations. Contrary to popular beliefs, to this day, the best verification method for an indigenous nuclear weapons program is to have at least one test detonation. India and Pakistan did.



Nima said:


> 2) how do you know a site isn't deeper than what you expected?


We do not know for certain. But then again, no one here has access to that kind of intelligence. We do know the sites' locations.



Nima said:


> 3) how do you know that a bombed site is actually destroyed?


We do not need to utterly destroy it. We can make it expensive to repair it.



Nima said:


> 4) how do you know where all the secret facilities are?


See answer 2.



Nima said:


> 5) how do you want to take out the scientists?


We do not have to.



Nima said:


> you can't figure out the depth of a site by flying over it


See answer 2.



Nima said:


> put down the pipe man
> stop the chest beating


Not a smoker.


----------



## honour

Israel wont attack iran till it is forced/helped by us to do so...and i think obama wont risk to attack iran at the moment when half of his earlier office bearers are being questioned by iraq war commitee...


----------



## Old School

If there is a pre-emptive strike on Iran by the Israelis , it will not involve long rage sorties as anticipated by most. There are other interesting areas to explore as far as IDF is concerned. It will come from the least expected front for the Iranians which they never could have imagined - a real shock. IDF is no such naive to employ long range sorties when there are other options at it's disposal. However, one thing is for sure that IDF will neutralize Hezbollah first prior to any action involving Iran. That effectively makes Lebanon as the opening theatre.


----------



## Nima

Old School said:


> If there is a pre-emptive strike on Iran by the Israelis , it will not involve long rage sorties as anticipated by most. There are other interesting areas to explore as far as IDF is concerned. It will come from the least expected front for the Iranians which they never could have imagined - a real shock. IDF is no such naive to employ long range sorties when there are other options at it's disposal. However, one thing is for sure that IDF will neutralize Hezbollah first prior to any action involving Iran. That effectively makes Lebanon as the opening theatre.



yeah good luck with that
Back in 06 hezbollah had a 5% success rate w/ their missiles and in the eyes of many they won.
This time around they are armed with scud based ballistic missiles and both Israel and America have predicted a 95% success rate and their missiles will also have bigger payloads.


----------



## Old School

Nima said:


> yeah good luck with that
> Back in 06 hezbollah had a 5&#37; success rate w/ their missiles and in the eyes of many they won.
> This time around they are armed with scud based ballistic missiles and both Israel and America have predicted a 95% success rate and their missiles will also have bigger payloads.




Please provide source of this prediction from a professional military/government body which I believe does not exist. I know that Iran supplied Hezbollah with Shahab - I (Scud-B class) and Shahab -II ( Scud - C class) missiles which are manufactured at Shiraz Plant in addition to Zelzal II artilary rockets in the heavier logistics inventory . However, this is not even publicly acknowledged by Israel or the US government let alone any prediction of the success ratio.

Unlike tiny Katyusha rockets , Scud class missiles are difficult to hide as they require larger launchers-transporters -erectors which are proned to be picked up by RISTA network operated by IDF. The response time required is within the IDF capacity. So those launchers can be destroyed on sight even on today if they are spotted as per the OPORD given by IDF NCA. If launched , Arrow II is well capable of intercepting these outdated comical missiles.

Then also think of the consequences of prohibited missiles being found on Lebanese territory. No one will object to full scale IDF ground invasion all the way to Bekah Valley in such scenario.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ahsanraza81

Being Pakistani...*i support Iran *(against Israel)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Galaxy

I hope there won't be any War between Iran and Israel. But if happens, then Israel will win easily as per current inventory. Even I am not considering Nuke (which no one will use due to huge sanctions for decades + U.S. Support to Israel)

India has good relations with both. So India will be neutral most likely.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Respect4Respect01

who? what is israel? i dont know that country, idk i once read that name on my passport but i forgot

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tshering22

^^ Israel is a reality that most who think like you have not come to accept on the map. It is visible on the map, Israelis live there and are registered in UN and still you don't know what the country is. Your de-recognition doesn't really affect it in any manner you know. It is something you guys need to understand. 

As for us, we won't participate in any war that is not ours, simple as that. Israel is more than capable to clobbering Iranian military with the present arsenal. Not to mention the fact that if at all Iran gets uppity and puts Israel at risk, US will start meddling as well. 

But why are we discussing a war that will not happen? Iran knows its limits despite its repeated gasbag by mullas and so do Israel.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Two state solution 

*High Rise Condos* , and metros and subways not small villas conserve space

And UN controlled Jerusalem is answer for Israel and Palestine for 500 years 

Other route is self destruction

UN should allocate 50 billion for Palestine, and 4 Billion for Israeli resettlement


----------



## Kompromat

Another Route Israelis can use.
Its also possible that the USAF stationed in Afghanistan would spring into action.


----------



## somebozo

Aeronaut said:


> Another Route Israelis can use.
> Its also possible that the USAF stationed in Afghanistan would spring into action.



If you look at the map, Iraq and Afghanistan both border Iran and the purpose of American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan is to simply control energy reserves. Iran is the last nail in the coffin as it will give America access upto caucus energy routes as well a strong base to counter Russia!

Ameriica already sitting in Afghanistan and Iraq does not want to be precived as the bad guy so it has outsourced its war trumpets to its poster child Israel!


----------



## westtowel




----------



## Quasar

GolaniB said:


> I never said all Muslims were Nazis, I said the Muslim world is an avid consumer of antisemitism.
> 
> Glorification of Nazi propaganda is standard. Holocaust denial, demonizing Israel and Jews...all part of the general Islamic media.
> 
> Even in so-called enlightened states like Turkey Mein Kampf continues to be the #1 book...well, second to the Quran.
> 
> This is a problem. Many in the West really don't buy the Muslim's world obsession with Israel in the name of "injustice" because they make Israel look like green peace with their long, human rights record and history of supporting genocide and terrorism.
> 
> I say Islamic states should spend less time telling Israel how to behave and more time...say...giving women rights. stop stoning homosexuals, exporting terrorism, hating jews...
> 
> you'll be better off in the long run, and people will have more respect for muslims.



reading some old posts most probably this guy is not even here anymore

bestsellers in Turkey

1-Quran
2-Mein Kampf

so we Turks are Islamist and Fascist

wait! wait! yep now I know from where the Bush guy got this islamofascism thing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monitor

Aeronaut said:


> Where the Heck are those 250 Su-30MKM Iran was buying



It was reported in early 2007 they are getting 250 Su-30 and 8 refueling aircraft but still they are illusive .just wonder if they really got that number of Su-30 in their arsenal can the Israel threat Iran ?


----------



## Zabaniyah

Aeronaut said:


> Where the Heck are those 250 Su-30MKM Iran was buying



The SU-30MKM is the Malaysian variant. 

I am not sure if Iran can receive offensive weapons from Russia easily due to all the sanctions placed now. 

But yes, it seriously needs to modernize its air force. Most of it are 70's-80's equipment.


----------



## SQ8

Iran will not be able to purchase any Russian weapons in quantity, as the relationship between Israel and Russia is not cold these days. 
Iran's only hope was China.. but that too looks like an option not exercised.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

