PeaceGen
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,889
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
i recently posted this to my peacefan account on usmessageboard-dot-com in their 'clean debate zone' sub-forum, for consideration by the Americans, and especially the Repubican support base that tends to be against multi-polarity increasing proposals.
i also posted that post to my mailinglist of 63 international (US, UK, Dutch, Israeli, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Indonesian, Australian) media companies, intelligence organisations and political parties.
So far i have not received any serious opposition to these new proposals, which seek for the west to take several significant steps back in their sanctions programs against the Iranians, but i can not guarantee wide spread acceptance (yet, or ever).
since forum rules on this forum prevent me from posting a direct link to usmessageboard-dot-com, i will merely add (for Iranian and Chinese intel organisations primarily), that the thread there has some interesting follow up comments.
Hi, all.
In the 2000s, i advocated on the Republican hangout forums at compuserve, under the nickname peacefularg (peaceful argument), that Iran should not be regime-changed by military invasion, to curtail their nuclear weapons ambitions.
I won that discussion after several months, when i explained that in Europe, we have large populations of Muslims living peacefully among us, people we imported way back in the 1960s to do the jobs that whites simply didn't want to do anymore (like cleaning offices, for instance).
Their 3rd-generation descendants have now moved into jobs like dentistry, carpentry, overseeing construction sites (pointing people around in complicated traffic situations), etc, etc.
And how i won that discussion was simply to tell them that after the very violent invasion of Iraq, under what later proved to be false pretenses (Iraq having stockpiles of WMDs), that European population of Muslims would be driven right into the hands of groups like alQuada, if we did something similar to Iran.
So i was asked the question "what would you do instead?" by a generous American. I simply answered : "keep them (the Iranians) busy with sanctions, i'll continue my work on forums to seek a better solution".
And the US administration at the time soon came up with the Iran Nuclear Deal, which i of course started advertising towards the Muslims that i kept in touch with at various Muslim oriented forums (now most notably defence.pk).
It all worked out nicely for a while, we even had the Iranians agreeing to nuclear inspections, but then Trump decided that it was "a bad deal", had the US unilaterally step out of that deal, and then expanded the deal to include the Iranians' ballistic missile programs and their regional militancy programs.
I went along with that, advertising to the Muslims that they should yield to this expanded deal. But both ordinary Muslims on those forums, and the Iranian government, rejected my argumentation staunchly at every turn.
Then the situation in the US changed yet again, with the withdrawal of support for the Saudis in their fight against the Iranian-backed Houtis in Yemen.
And it was around the same time that i started thinking : maybe, since i support Russian and Chinese desires for more (but according to my own and NATO's desires not unlimited) "multi-polarity" on Earth.
Multi-polarity is where multiple blocks of larger and smaller nations share the power (and taxation rights) over the world, whereas the 1980s model of uni-polarity and the USA being "the world's police power", is *outdated* now, with China's decision to invest heavily in their military.
At defence.pk, you'll find that the Chinese realistically claim that their military power is in a technical sense near or even better than western military assets.
And me, i'd like to avoid arms races and regional wars as much as possible. That's just a total waste of lives, money, and public image.
So, i'd hereby like to propose the following ideas / solutions to avoid armsraces and regional wars with the Iranians :
- allow the Iranians a non-nuclear, non-biological, non-viral, conventional-explosions-only ballistic missile program, and a civilian space program (yes, they already have one), but NOT an ICBM program (with which they could extort Europe more effectively than that alQuada recruitment threat i talked about earlier in this post).
- allow the Iranians (who have *always* had a measure of regional-imperialistic desires of their own) their militancy programs, because once an Iranian backed group has a solid grip on power, peace and prosperity for that local population *do* tend to follow.
- back up the Israelis in their desire to keep the Iranians a non-nuclear-weapons state. All European nations need this too (suitcase nukes, truck-based nukes, that sorta thing).
- unilaterally suspend all sanctions that affect the common men and common women in Iran. re-direct sanctions at their richest 10% and their government and military and intel and police leaders instead.
resources to look at while you're considering this all :
Houthi movement - Wikipedia
'Israel won't stand by as Iran advances nuclear program' - Benny Gantz - The Jerusalem Post
i also posted that post to my mailinglist of 63 international (US, UK, Dutch, Israeli, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Indonesian, Australian) media companies, intelligence organisations and political parties.
So far i have not received any serious opposition to these new proposals, which seek for the west to take several significant steps back in their sanctions programs against the Iranians, but i can not guarantee wide spread acceptance (yet, or ever).
since forum rules on this forum prevent me from posting a direct link to usmessageboard-dot-com, i will merely add (for Iranian and Chinese intel organisations primarily), that the thread there has some interesting follow up comments.
Hi, all.
In the 2000s, i advocated on the Republican hangout forums at compuserve, under the nickname peacefularg (peaceful argument), that Iran should not be regime-changed by military invasion, to curtail their nuclear weapons ambitions.
I won that discussion after several months, when i explained that in Europe, we have large populations of Muslims living peacefully among us, people we imported way back in the 1960s to do the jobs that whites simply didn't want to do anymore (like cleaning offices, for instance).
Their 3rd-generation descendants have now moved into jobs like dentistry, carpentry, overseeing construction sites (pointing people around in complicated traffic situations), etc, etc.
And how i won that discussion was simply to tell them that after the very violent invasion of Iraq, under what later proved to be false pretenses (Iraq having stockpiles of WMDs), that European population of Muslims would be driven right into the hands of groups like alQuada, if we did something similar to Iran.
So i was asked the question "what would you do instead?" by a generous American. I simply answered : "keep them (the Iranians) busy with sanctions, i'll continue my work on forums to seek a better solution".
And the US administration at the time soon came up with the Iran Nuclear Deal, which i of course started advertising towards the Muslims that i kept in touch with at various Muslim oriented forums (now most notably defence.pk).
It all worked out nicely for a while, we even had the Iranians agreeing to nuclear inspections, but then Trump decided that it was "a bad deal", had the US unilaterally step out of that deal, and then expanded the deal to include the Iranians' ballistic missile programs and their regional militancy programs.
I went along with that, advertising to the Muslims that they should yield to this expanded deal. But both ordinary Muslims on those forums, and the Iranian government, rejected my argumentation staunchly at every turn.
Then the situation in the US changed yet again, with the withdrawal of support for the Saudis in their fight against the Iranian-backed Houtis in Yemen.
And it was around the same time that i started thinking : maybe, since i support Russian and Chinese desires for more (but according to my own and NATO's desires not unlimited) "multi-polarity" on Earth.
Multi-polarity is where multiple blocks of larger and smaller nations share the power (and taxation rights) over the world, whereas the 1980s model of uni-polarity and the USA being "the world's police power", is *outdated* now, with China's decision to invest heavily in their military.
At defence.pk, you'll find that the Chinese realistically claim that their military power is in a technical sense near or even better than western military assets.
And me, i'd like to avoid arms races and regional wars as much as possible. That's just a total waste of lives, money, and public image.
So, i'd hereby like to propose the following ideas / solutions to avoid armsraces and regional wars with the Iranians :
- allow the Iranians a non-nuclear, non-biological, non-viral, conventional-explosions-only ballistic missile program, and a civilian space program (yes, they already have one), but NOT an ICBM program (with which they could extort Europe more effectively than that alQuada recruitment threat i talked about earlier in this post).
- allow the Iranians (who have *always* had a measure of regional-imperialistic desires of their own) their militancy programs, because once an Iranian backed group has a solid grip on power, peace and prosperity for that local population *do* tend to follow.
- back up the Israelis in their desire to keep the Iranians a non-nuclear-weapons state. All European nations need this too (suitcase nukes, truck-based nukes, that sorta thing).
- unilaterally suspend all sanctions that affect the common men and common women in Iran. re-direct sanctions at their richest 10% and their government and military and intel and police leaders instead.
resources to look at while you're considering this all :
Houthi movement - Wikipedia
'Israel won't stand by as Iran advances nuclear program' - Benny Gantz - The Jerusalem Post
