Should the world form a colliation to attack Iran

[Sebastian]

Heres the deal: the UN asked Iran to stop enriching unanium, but they didn't. Iran says that they will anniliate Israel with the weapons they will produce. Iran says that they would crush the united states if we started a war. So what do you all think? should the world take them out or should we try to solve this diplomatically?
EDIT: Links. Israels anniliation, Warning to US., Iran announcing they are nuclear

 

[Warbie]

Iran says that they will anniliate Israel with the weapons they will produce. Iran says that they would crush the united states if we started a war.

Links?

 

[DeusExMachina]

I'd like myself and the rest of the world to live for a few more decades. It'd be nice to solve this diplomatically, but I doubt that's going to happen.

 

[Sebastian]

I'd like myself and the rest of the world to live for a few more decades. It'd be nice to solve this diplomatically, but I doubt that's going to happen.

Maybe if the leaders, both of the United States and of Iran, represented the people and not their own special interests, this could be solved dipomatically. I'm sure that most people in Iran are just like me and you, hoping for peace and freedom. But as it is, our leaders don't give a shit about what the people want. (Note Bush's 40% approval rating)

 

[spookymooky]

Maybe if the leaders, both of the United States and of Iran, represented the people and not their own special interests, this could be solved dipomatically. I'm sure that most people in Iran are just like me and you, hoping for peace and freedom. But as it is, our leaders don't give a shit about what the people want. (Note Bush's 40% approval rating)

Peace and freedom? I'm hoping for war and conquest. It makes for better news.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Resolve it diplomatically.

 

[Brassm0n/<ey]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad believes it is his destiny to bring the coming of the Mahdi by creating an apocalypse. His only goal is to create a bomb and destroy Israel. He cannot be dissuaded through diplomatic means, and you bunch are quite nieve to think so.

 

[Sebastian]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad believes it is his destiny to bring the coming of the Mahdi by creating an apocalypse. His only goal is to create a bomb and destroy Israel. He cannot be dissuaded through diplomatic means, and you bunch are quite nieve to think so.

That is a load of bullshit if I've ever heard it. Anything can be solved dipomatically if people are willing to step out of their apathy and do something. For example, if 1,000,000 people marched on the white house at the declaration of a war with Iran, I bet the president would think twice before commiting troops. *note the pure speculation

 

[French Ninja]

Option one, then Option two after trying all things possible with Option one.

 

[Gray Fox]

Optione one is basicly the same as option three.
They will not be stopped with diplomacy, it's either bombing or you say they have the right and leave them be.

 

[Brassm0n/<ey]

Anything can be solved dipomatically if people are willing to step out of their apathy and do something. For example, if 1,000,000 people marched on the white house at the declaration of a war with Iran, I bet the president would think twice before commiting troops. *note the pure speculation

That doesn't have anything to do with my post. What I said was that Iran cannot be dissuaded through diplomatic means. The only goal of the Iranian president is to create an apocalyptic climate in the world, you cannot use diplomacy to dissuade someone with this mindset.

 

[B_MAN]

Maybe if the leaders, both of the United States and of Iran, represented the people and not their own special interests, this could be solved dipomatically. I'm sure that most people in Iran are just like me and you, hoping for peace and freedom. But as it is, our leaders don't give a shit about what the people want. (Note Bush's 40% approval rating)

well said. :thumbs:

 

[Kamikazie]

**** them, just let Iran figure out how to fix their own problems. look at Iraq as an example, US will probably be the last country left that participated in this war, oh wait, theres not really a good oil suppy there so the US might not get involved in the first place :\

 

[Sebastian]

But we're butt buddies with Israel, so if they get attacked we attack the attacker. But if israel is the attacker and attacks iran, we get tacked with attacking iran along side the attacker. So this is a f*cked up situation.

 

[dream431ca]

Diplomacy first. After that it really depends on everything.

 

[Bob_Marley]

Heres the deal: the UN asked Iran to stop enriching unanium, but they didn't.

Not, technically, true. The Iranians announced that they had enriched the uranium before the UN deadline to stop, so, technically, they havent done anything wrong in that reguard.

Anyway, we all know what will happen, the US wont risk a war, so they'll get the Isrealis to bomb the s*it out of them.

 

[Shakermaker]

Anyway, we all know what will happen, the US wont risk a war, so they'll get the Isrealis to bomb the s*it out of them.

Not likely. An Israelian attack on Iran will mean all out war in the Middle East.

 

[Rupertvdb]

I reckon there's a big truck of wrong driving through this thread.

First off, Iran has not said that it is going to use nuclear weapons on Israel. Ahmadinejad has jabbered more than his fair share of threats but has not actually mentioned anything about using nuclear weapons on Israel. So yeah, that's first.

Ahmadinejad does indeed believe that an apocalypse is on route and that he is here to help it along, but this is more useful as a basis for fiery rhetoric than global policy development.

Another thing that seems to have been overlooked by all and sundry is that Iran currently only has a 164 centrifuge set-up. The rate at which this produces Uranium-238 (prety sure that's the enriched variety) is not sufficient for Iran to get a hold of nuclear weapons in under 16 years. So currently there is a lot less to worry about than many people seem to think.

This is not to say that the Iranian government are not in the process of developing more advanced production facilities -with many thousands of centrifuges, that could reduce the time-scale required for production of enough weapons grade uranium down to weeks, but this shall take time and further expertise.

I think that diplomacy is the way to go, there is currently no real reason to go to war. North Korea broke a lot more rules than Iran and that didn't result in invasion, although this could well be to do with the fact they definitely have the bomb. They currently do not have the capability to produce a nuclear weapon, so it wouldn't even be a war that could be justified with WMDs that won't turn up, they don't exist right now.

I do not see a problem with allowing Iran to develop nuclear energy to benefit and sustain its society as long as it occurs in a responsible manner, but therein lies the crux. I don't believe that they can do, or intend to. This isn't too fuzzy logic bearing in mind the wealth of natural resources that Iran contains, and which makes the need for alternative energy sources somewhat less pressing than in most nations. It's still worth bearing this motive for nuclear development in mind though, this is a matter of national pride to a large degree...I was going to make this paragraph really long and rambly about Iranian perspectives on Western interference and the way that Ahmadinejad obtains popular support because of this but I can't be bothered...do some reading.

Thinking about it this nuclear situation is not reason enough to go ballistic and begin yet another conflict in the middle-east, further destabilising the global political situation. Things are not as far gone as is seemingly thought, there is time for diplomacy and with some good will and real effort there is no reason why it should not succeed. That is not to say that it shall or that the prerequisites necessary exist, but here's hoping.

Apologies for how far I strayed around the topic, if I could be bothered I'd really go for something cogent, but i'm making this up as I go along.

 

[DeusExMachina]

And there goes the Kingdom of Heaven...

 

[kirovman]

They're more scared of us than we are of them.
Wait, that's bears...

 

[Pesmerga]

Nuke it from orbit.

 

[Dalamari]

Tell Iran they smell like shit and need some god damn deoderant

 

[Rupertvdb]

damn i'm glad i put the effort into that post.

 

[CptStern]

damn i'm glad i put the effort into that post.

people take notice, dont worry

 

[Cole]

The world wouldn't and if diplomacy fails:
It would be like this:
U.S. goes in and no one else wants to....gets blamed for everything that happens.

or

No one goes in, Iran becomes a nuclear nation, U.S. gets blamed for not going in.

Either way we loose.

 

[SAJ]

Iran says that they will anniliate Israel with the weapons they will produce.

Link? I call bullshit on that statement until an unequivical quote is dug up.
Iran has claimed from the get go that its enrichment program is for domestic purpoes only, hence no weapons with which to "anniliate Israel" with.

What you have is a loony Iranian president ( Iran's very own Dubya, in that respect) , and a nuclear research program that had been kept under wraps for over a decade.
What that doesnt add up to is a nuclear threat to the world, regardless of what Washington would have you believe.

 

[GhostBoi]

^^^ Exactly everyone's taking that statement as if its true, but the President of Iran has uttered nothing of nuclear weapons. Its just fear mongering by Washington and the media.

 

[15357]

Bomb them with 30 high-explosive missles each in every major city/town, and take out the power plants, paradrop infantry on the capital city and capture it, and then get the heavy armor to mow down any resistance.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

But we're butt buddies with Israel, so if they get attacked we attack the attacker. But if israel is the attacker and attacks iran, we get tacked with attacking iran along side the attacker. So this is a f*cked up situation.

If Israel strikes Iran's facilities it'll just be that- not a war but some single strikes to cut off it's nuclear capability. I happen to think they may do so and pull it off like they did against Iraq's Osirak nuclear facilities.

 

[CptStern]

what if israel uses nuke buster bombers?

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

what if israel uses nuke buster bombers?

I doubt it.

 

[Rupertvdb]

Bomb them with 30 high-explosive missles each in every major city/town, and take out the power plants, paradrop infantry on the capital city and capture it, and then get the heavy armor to mow down any resistance.

Then disband their army, deny a growing insurgency, find Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hiding in a hole, put him before a tribunal that he refutes the authority of and... wait a minute

 

[15357]

.... and then put a 'scarecrow/minion goverment' that does everything the US tells it to do....

 

[Angry Lawyer]

Trhere's something odd about the way a person can have 21 posts, and his major topics being controversial matters.

Before anyone flips out at people with different views, bare it in mind.
-Angry Lawyer

 

[kirovman]

You mean the knghenry/Lex Luthor paradigm? D:

 

[CptStern]

I doubt it.

why not, they have nukes, the us could easily support them and bomb iran by proxy

 

[Remus]

Nuke it from orbit.

That's what they should've done with Iraq in the first place muahaahaha:flame:

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

I reckon there's a big truck of wrong driving through this thread.

First off, Iran has not said that it is going to use nuclear weapons on Israel. Ahmadinejad has jabbered more than his fair share of threats but has not actually mentioned anything about using nuclear weapons on Israel. So yeah, that's first.

Ahmadinejad does indeed believe that an apocalypse is on route and that he is here to help it along, but this is more useful as a basis for fiery rhetoric than global policy development.

Another thing that seems to have been overlooked by all and sundry is that Iran currently only has a 164 centrifuge set-up. The rate at which this produces Uranium-238 (prety sure that's the enriched variety) is not sufficient for Iran to get a hold of nuclear weapons in under 16 years. So currently there is a lot less to worry about than many people seem to think.

This is not to say that the Iranian government are not in the process of developing more advanced production facilities -with many thousands of centrifuges, that could reduce the time-scale required for production of enough weapons grade uranium down to weeks, but this shall take time and further expertise.

I think that diplomacy is the way to go, there is currently no real reason to go to war. North Korea broke a lot more rules than Iran and that didn't result in invasion, although this could well be to do with the fact they definitely have the bomb. They currently do not have the capability to produce a nuclear weapon, so it wouldn't even be a war that could be justified with WMDs that won't turn up, they don't exist right now.

I do not see a problem with allowing Iran to develop nuclear energy to benefit and sustain its society as long as it occurs in a responsible manner, but therein lies the crux. I don't believe that they can do, or intend to. This isn't too fuzzy logic bearing in mind the wealth of natural resources that Iran contains, and which makes the need for alternative energy sources somewhat less pressing than in most nations. It's still worth bearing this motive for nuclear development in mind though, this is a matter of national pride to a large degree...I was going to make this paragraph really long and rambly about Iranian perspectives on Western interference and the way that Ahmadinejad obtains popular support because of this but I can't be bothered...do some reading.

Thinking about it this nuclear situation is not reason enough to go ballistic and begin yet another conflict in the middle-east, further destabilising the global political situation. Things are not as far gone as is seemingly thought, there is time for diplomacy and with some good will and real effort there is no reason why it should not succeed. That is not to say that it shall or that the prerequisites necessary exist, but here's hoping.

Apologies for how far I strayed around the topic, if I could be bothered I'd really go for something cogent, but i'm making this up as I go along.

Thank-you for this post actually, for people like me who just lurk the politics board it really helps sum up the situation and increase my knowledge about things a little more. Most of the posts here seem to be spam sadly D:

 

[kaf11]

Accidentally voted for let them be, I wanted to vote for diplomacy. I agree with rupert (very well said). Improving relations between our nations would be the best course of action for all parties involved.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

First off, Iran has not said that it is going to use nuclear weapons on Israel.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9995386/site/newsweek/from/RL.5/ <- And lets not get too qualitive on words. Just because he does'nt say 'Nuclear' does not mean it will all be sunshine and kittens for Israel.

Ahmadinejad does indeed believe that an apocalypse is on route and that he is here to help it along, but this is more useful as a basis for fiery rhetoric than global policy development.

Firey rhetoric thats meant to ignite another war in the middle east, and, words aside. He's stepping up his missle program. The Shahab-3 and Fajr-3 can carry WMD Warheads. The Fajr-3 specifically can carry multiple warheads, and can reach as far as Turkey.

The Shahab can reach further. These missles, with or without Nuclear payloads can clear entire blocks of homes or commercial structures:

http://www.iranwatch.org/wmd/wmd-iranmissileessay.htm

These movements are'nt entirely warranting of diplomacy on his half. I want diplomacy as much as anyone. But this ... is a total step up to a war against Israel.

Another thing that seems to have been overlooked by all and sundry is that Iran currently only has a 164 centrifuge set-up. The rate at which this produces Uranium-238 (prety sure that's the enriched variety) is not sufficient for Iran to get a hold of nuclear weapons in under 16 years. So currently there is a lot less to worry about than many people seem to think.

With enough artillery and missles, a country can kill just as much as a Nuke.

IMHO