Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 6:32 am

Freeman
The fact that Netanyahu has been wrong on the time when Iran will develop the bomb is not irrelevant


Excellent post. At the end of the Boy Who Cried Wolf fable, the wolf actually comes and kills all the sheep ...

P.S. Cross Posted with Ricky.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 6:34 am

fate
What some seem to forget is we are dealing with a religiously zealous group of ayatollahs who long to bring the world to an end.


That's the Christian fundamentalists ...

The Mullahs talk a good game but they end up acting rationally. When have they ever acted totally irrationally?
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ ... t-the-bomb

One reason the danger of a nuclear Iran has been grossly exaggerated is that the debate surrounding it has been distorted by misplaced worries and fundamental misunderstandings of how states generally behave in the international system. The first prominent concern, which undergirds many others, is that the Iranian regime is innately irrational. Despite a widespread belief to the contrary, Iranian policy is made not by "mad mullahs" but by perfectly sane ayatollahs who want to survive just like any other leaders. Although Iran's leaders indulge in inflammatory and hateful rhetoric, they show no propensity for self-destruction. It would be a grave error for policymakers in the United States and Israel to assume otherwise.

Yet that is precisely what many U.S. and Israeli officials and analysts have done. Portraying Iran as irrational has allowed them to argue that the logic of nuclear deterrence does not apply to the Islamic Republic. If Iran acquired a nuclear weapon, they warn, it would not hesitate to use it in a first strike against Israel, even though doing so would invite massive retaliation and risk destroying everything the Iranian regime holds dear.

Although it is impossible to be certain of Iranian intentions, it is far more likely that if Iran desires nuclear weapons, it is for the purpose of providing for its own security, not to improve its offensive capabilities (or destroy itself). Iran may be intransigent at the negotiating table and defiant in the face of sanctions, but it still acts to secure its own preservation. Iran's leaders did not, for example, attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz despite issuing blustery warnings that they might do so after the EU announced its planned oil embargo in January. The Iranian regime clearly concluded that it did not want to provoke what would surely have been a swift and devastating American response to such a mov
e.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 6:37 am

ray
At the end of the Boy Who Cried Wolf fable, the wolf actually comes and kills all the sheep


And in Iran there are mullahs warning that Israel will eventually use their nuclear weapons against Iran.
Are they Crying wolf too?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 7:06 am

rickyp wrote:ray
At the end of the Boy Who Cried Wolf fable, the wolf actually comes and kills all the sheep


And in Iran there are mullahs warning that Israel will eventually use their nuclear weapons against Iran.
Are they Crying wolf too?


Ricky, in your desire to bend over backward to see things from the other side, you unwittingly paint the picture of a very dangerous world. If Iran has legitimate rights to a nuclear weapon, then so do Saudi Arabia and Egypt and Turkey. If Egypt has a bomb, then so should Sudan and Libya. If Turkey has a bomb, then so should Greece and Armenia. I can play this game until I name every country in the world.

The reality is that plus or minus, a dozen countries have said or sought to eliminate Israel from the face of the earth. No one has said that about Iran or any of the other countries that I have mentioned. The only war that exists between Israel and Iran is the result of Iran funding terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas. There seems to have been Iranian collusion in killing innocent Jews in Argentina. This is a dangerous regime for its people and others.

In your zeal to be as open minded as possible you have unwittingly recommended a strategy of disaster for the world. I'm glad you are not running it.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 12:00 pm

rickyp wrote:fate
What some seem to forget is we are dealing with a religiously zealous group of ayatollahs who long to bring the world to an end.


That's the Christian fundamentalists ...


That shows your ignorance of Islam and Christianity.I am a Christian fundamentalist. I have no desire to usher in a global war so that the world will end. I don't know many Christian fundies looking to exterminate a country or two either.

The Mullahs talk a good game but they end up acting rationally. When have they ever acted totally irrationally?
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ ... t-the-bomb


Because they've never killed protesters?

Because they don't sponsor terrorism?

Those are "rational" actions?

Is it "rational," as Freeman3 points out, to undergo years of economic sanctions if they don't want a weapon? Is it "rational" to refuse to agree to send enriched uranium to Russia? Is it rational to make some of the claims Iran is making about why they are doing what they are doing (some of the specific claims about the type of materials they want to produce)?

If they were "rational," there would be a GOOD deal on the table.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 12:25 pm

I don't know if i have to bend over backwards to see things from irans view point. Its really not a difficult mental exercise...you just have to remember history.

The US eliminated a democratically elected government in Iran and put a despot in place . So there's that. Israel was a good friend of that regime. So there's that.
The enmity between Iran since the revolution and the US and Israel was a natural out growth of that. So was the US support for Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war. Which was an existential event for iran.
The US has also armed Iranian resistance movements that would legitimately be called armed insurgents or terrorists in other nations... And Seymout Hersch documented covert action in Iran by the CIA and special forces.
There's also the little matter of a Iranian civilian airliner shot down by a US warship.
Can you see how that might cause long term resentments?

Israel and the US have served as a bogey men for the Mullahs, in order to distract their domestic audience from their inept economic performance....and resentment over the conservative social agenda... That much is certainly true.
But the reality is that only one power in the Middle East has the ability to destroy any other. And the US also possesses that ability. Can you understand Iran's insecurity on that then?
If it is okay for Israel to own nukes as a "deterrent". Why not Iran? FFrom an Iranian point of view, this is a natural balance.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3741
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 31 Mar 2015, 1:21 pm

Ok, Ricky , so Iran will develop the weapon if the costs are not too high. So you are accepting the idea it appears that Iran's primary purpose for developing nuclear power is to have nuclear weapons. I think any agreement that allows Iran's nuclear program to develop will allow Iran the potential to develop a weapon at lower costs. I think that if you accept that Iran's real purpose in having a nuclear industry is to develop a weapon , then we should not be talking about an agreement. We should be putting more and more pressure on Iran to give up its program.

As for the argument that Iran needs the nuclear weapon for defense purposes, I accept that might be their primary intent (I don't know that but that certainly could be true). But the rhetoric regarding Israel gives one cause for concern, such that we can't take the chance that they might not use it for offensive purposes (or give it to a terrorist group, hoping to avoid responsibility). It might be unfair in some sense that Israel was allowed to develop the bomb and Iran't can't but I think most reasonable people would agree that Israel poses much less of a threat to Iran than vice-versa. Isn't it telling that Saudi Arabia threatened in 2012 that they would need to have nuclear weapons if Iran did, but feel no such need with Israel having them? Apart from the risk that Iran might use the weapon offensively, it is apparent that it would also start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East--that is surely not in our best interests or in the world's interests. Nuclear non- proliferation is an important goal because the more countries that get the weapon the more chance we will see nuclear weapons being used.

So, in some sense, I don't care if Iran has entirely defensive purposes (for now at least) in developing nuclear weapons. Even if that is their intent it is not in our (and the world 's )best interests that they be allowed to have them. And with regard to the argument that if you have nuclear weapons the US will not attack you (like Iraq), no country has to worry about such things if they are not sponsoring terrorism or invading other countries.
Last edited by freeman3 on 31 Mar 2015, 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7463
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 31 Mar 2015, 1:22 pm

Are you able to see things from Israel's point of view? (Seeing as you are so flexible, mentally)
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 1:40 pm

bbauska wrote:Are you able to see things from Israel's point of view? (Seeing as you are so flexible, mentally)


Too funny ... some history on Israel and nukes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/06/opini ... oment.html

It was in the early hours of Oct. 9 that senior Israeli military leaders brought up the idea of using Israel's doomsday weapons. By that time Israel had lost some 50 combat planes and more than 500 tanks -- 400 on the Egyptian battlefield alone. ...

By that time, American intelligence had signs that Israel had put its Jericho missiles, which could be fitted with nuclear warheads, on high alert (the Israelis had done so in an easily detectible way, probably to sway the Americans into preventive action).

Mr. Kissinger instead started to arrange air supply to Israel, and within three days a tremendous United States airlift to Israel was in action. The tide was turned. By Oct. 21 the Israelis were within 20 miles of Damascus and had crossed the Suez Canal, encircling the Egyptian Third Army. A permanent cease-fire was established within a few days.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 2:02 pm

freeman, i think that if Iran was irrational they would build nuclear weapons regardless of the cost or the risk.North Korea? That is a country that has persevered undeer the most severe sanctions and created nuclear weapons.
This also proves that extreme sanctions would not guarantee iran doesn't achieve nuclear weapons.

However, they aren't irrationally. They've never really acted irrationally.
I think that they would like a deterrent to Israel, because they have a different feeling towards Israel's nature then many in the West. I think this animus is in large part due to the unresolved issue in the West Bank.
From the Arab worlds point of view (and increasingly in Europe and unaligned nations) Israel has not been an honest "partner" in seeking a two state solution. Nethanyahu admitted as much.

As it states in the Foreign Affairs article I linked, the world has accepted a lot of previously thought to be irrational countries having nukes. Who then behaved rationally. (Maoist China. Pakistan. India.) Something about annihation clears the mind I guess.

I would much rather have an Iran committed to an open relationship with the world, and committed to peaceful use of nuclear energy.

Ray, i think the ;point you make about Iran and KSA is vital. KSa never saw the Israelis bomb as the threat that Iran did because KSA has been an "ally" of the US. And protected by the US. For reasons of energy security.
Iran has not had the protection of the US, rather they've been threatened by the US. SO they see Israel's bomb as a threat...
Now with Shiite against Sunni, and the religious war .... I do think KSA might want nukes if Iran got them. And yes that should worry us. But shouldn't that encourage us to seek accomodations that work for both sides rather than continued or increased sanctions which ultimately haven't proven ultimately successful in the past?
By the way.... consider the original sin of ending the Iranian democracy and installing the Shah. If Iran had developed as a democracy .... an oil rich democracy .... consider how much less we would have had to depend on the KSA and other Sunni totalitarian states?
At the time of the installation of the Shah Iran was friendly towards Israel too.... it was Israel's support for the Shah which drove Iranian enmity as much as anything...
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 2:18 pm

bbauska I can certainly understand Israels' point of view. After all, its expressed by most of the posters on this board .
I think in a negotiation its important to actually try and understand things from both sides. And I don't often hear the Iranian side presented here ever. Except occasionally from Danivon.
Unrealistic impressions of Iranians can lead to unrealistic expectations.
Painting unrealistic caricatures of them as a people based upon oft repeated snippets of rhetoric doesn't help. They are a large and complex nation who have endured much interference in their domestic affairs from the West for many years. They have genuine concerns about security, and genuine concerns about the well being of their Arab neighbors and Shiite brothers in the region.
if you look at them as caricatures I'm sure its easy to see them as evil...
Then, low and behold they are fighting ISIS and on the same side. Maybe not so evil...

Its also important to actually learn from history and understand the origins of current political problems. When you don't understand fundamental issues, you can't make decisions that are going to work out. (Like invading Iraq without understanding the Shiite Sunni thing wholly.)
And that means looking at what actually happened with nuclear weapons in the past, and why and how nations have used them. Pakistan and India wouldn't be a dissimilar circumstance to Iran and Israel would it? yet we've lived with that. (I'd have preferred not to...but they haven't resorted to their use and its difficult to conceive that they might)
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 2:19 pm

This is Comedy Central. Thank you for watching.

rickyp wrote:However, they aren't irrationally.(sic) They've never really acted irrationally.


Yes, the Islamic State of Iran was founded on rational principles! Let's see what the past President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had to say at the UN:

In a fiery speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad railed today against the United States and European Union, whom he said have "have entrusted themselves to the devil."

The assembly hall was not full when Ahmadinejad spoke. The United States delegation to the United Nations, along with Israel's delegation, boycotted Ahmadinejad's speech to protest the anti-Israel views Ahmadinejad has perpetuated this week during in a spurt of media interviews.

The Iranian leader, who has repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel and denied the existence of the Holocaust, spoke today on one of Judaism's holiest days, Yom Kippur. During his speech he referred to Israelis as "uncivilized Zionists."

. . .

"The current abysmal situations of the world are due mainly to the wrong leadership of the world who have entrusted themselves to the devil," he said, referring to America's commanding position in world affairs.


I would much rather have an Iran committed to an open relationship with the world, and committed to peaceful use of nuclear energy.


I would much rather have the cure for cancer, an end to poverty, and energy from cold fusion.

SO they see Israel's bomb as a threat...


Good catch! I'm sure you have a citation for Netanyahu threatening to wipe Iran off the map? Does he speak about "dirty Iranians?"

If Iran had developed as a democracy .... an oil rich democracy .... consider how much less we would have had to depend on the KSA and other Sunni totalitarian states?


Yes, but then we would have problems of social mobility and income inequality, so . . .
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 5:36 pm

Ricky:
At the time of the installation of the Shah Iran was friendly towards Israel too.... it was Israel's support for the Shah which drove Iranian enmity as much as anything...


Wikipedia:

Israel sold Iran US$75 million worth of arms from stocks of Israel Military Industries, Israel Aircraft Industries and Israel Defense Forces stockpiles, in their Operation Seashell in 1981.[21] Materiel included 150 M-40 antitank guns with 24,000 shells for each gun, spare parts for tank and aircraft engines, 106 mm, 130 mm, 203 mm and 175 mm shells and TOW missiles. This material was transported first by air by Argentine airline Transporte Aéreo Rioplatense and then by ship. The same year Israel provided active military support against Iraq by destroying a previously attacked Iranian target, but the doctrine established by the attack would increase potential conflict in future years.

Arms sales to Iran that totaled an estimated $500 million from 1981 to 1983 according to the Jafe Institute for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University. Most of it was paid for by Iranian oil delivered to Israel. "According to Ahmad Haidari, "an Iranian arms dealer working for the Khomeini government, roughly 80% of the weaponry bought by Tehran" immediately after the onset of the war originated in Israel.[22]

According to Mark Phythian, the fact "that the Iranian air force could function at all" after Iraq's initial attack and "was able to undertake a number of sorties over Baghdad and strike at strategic installations" was "at least partly due to the decision of the Reagan administration to allow Israel to channel arms of US origin to Iran to prevent an easy and early Iraqi victory."[23]

Despite all the speeches of Iranian leaders and the denunciation of Israel at Friday prayers, there were never less than around one hundred Israeli advisers and technicians in Iran at any time throughout the war, living in a carefully guarded and secluded camp just north of Tehran, where they remained even after the ceasefire.[24]

Israel's support was "crucial" to keeping Iran's air force flying against Iraq. Israeli sales also included spare parts for U.S.-made F-4 Phantom jets.
...
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in December 2000 called Israel a "cancerous tumor" that should be removed from the region.[27][28] In 2005 he emphasized that “Palestine belongs to Palestinians, and the fate of Palestine should also be determined by the Palestinian people”.[29] In 2005 Khamenei responded to President Ahmadinejad's alleged remark that Israel should be "wiped off the map" by saying that "the Islamic Republic has never threatened and will never threaten any country."[30]

On 15 August 2012, during a meeting with veterans of the Iran-Iraq War, Ayatollah Khamenei said that he was confident that "the fake Zionist (regime) will disappear from the landscape of geography."[31][32] In addition, on 19 August, Khamenei reiterated comments made by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which members of the international community, including the United States, France, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, and United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned,[33] during which he called Israel a "cancerous tumor in the heart of the Islamic world" and said that its existence is responsible for many problems facing the Muslim world ...

Under reformist Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, elected in 1997, some believed Iran–Israel relations would improve. Khatami called Israel an "illegal state" and a "parasite. ...

With the election of Mahmud Ahmedinijiad, a hardliner of the Iranian politics, the relations of the countries became increasingly strained as the countries became to be engaged in a series of proxy conflicts and covert operations against each other.

During the 2006 Lebanon War, Iranian Revolutionary Guards were believed to have directly assisted Hezbollah fighters in their attacks on Israel. Multiple sources suggested that hundreds of Revolutionary Guard operatives participated in the firing of rockets into Israel during the war, and secured Hezbollah's long-range missiles. Revolutionary Guard operatives were allegedly seen operating openly at Hezbollah outposts during the war. In addition, Revolutionary Guard operatives were alleged to have supervised Hezbollah's attack on the INS Hanit with a C-802 anti-ship missile. The attack severely damaged the warship and killed four crewmen. It is alleged that between six and nine Revolutionary Guard operatives were killed by the Israeli military during the war. According to the Israeli media their bodies were transferred to Syria and from there, flown to Tehran.[40]

During and immediately after the Gaza War, the Israeli Air Force, with the assistance of Israeli commandos, was reported to have carried out three airstrikes against Iranian arms being smuggled to Hamas through Sudan, as Iran launched an intensive effort to supply Hamas with weapons and ammunition. Israel hinted that it was behind the attacks. Two truck convoys were destroyed, and an arms-laden ship was sunk in the Red Sea.[41][42] On 4 November 2009, Israel captured a ship in the eastern Mediterranean Sea and its cargo of hundreds of tons of weapons allegedly bound from Iran to Hezbollah.
...
On July 18, 2012, a bus carrying Israeli tourists in Bulgaria was destroyed in a bombing attack that killed five Israeli tourists and the driver, and injured 32 people. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blamed Iran and Hezbollah for the attack.[71] In July 2012, a senior Israeli defense official stated that since May 2011, more than 20 terrorist attacks planned by Iran and Hezbollah against Israeli targets worldwide had been foiled, including in South Africa, Azerbaijan, Kenya, Turkey, Thailand, Cyprus, Bulgaria, Nepal, and Nigeria, and that Iranian and Hezbollah operatives were incarcerated in jails throughout the world.[


P.S. They don't seem very scared of Israeli nukes.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 5:38 pm

Ricky, if you are a stamp collector here's a must have for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80 ... Khater.jpg
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 31 Mar 2015, 5:42 pm

And if you prefer architecture, here's something else for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80 ... Israel.jpg

Isn't it amazing how Iran cares so much for the Palestinians in the West Bank, and so little for the Sunnis in Syria and Lebanon.