Categories
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Does the US want diplomacy to work with Iran?
There was an interesting programme on Radio 4 about relations between Iran and America on Monday which you can listen to on their website.
It gives a really interesting perspective on the issue of whether America really wants peace with them at all. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/uncoveringiran/pip/mwr3q/
__________________
My great uncle died while trying to put the ancient Chinese board game he had just bought and had been saving up for on a set of scales, still its the go he would have wanted to weigh. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
They'd probably prefer diplomacy - they're embroiled in Iraq and Afghanistan and war with Iran would be a difficulty the US could do without. That said i think they've got a line in the sand (Iran can't develop nukes) where if tough diplomacy fails they will take military action (I suspect more along airstrikes and limited ground forces, rather than a full scale invasion)
__________________
"There is only the fight to recover what has been lost And found and lost again and again: and now, under conditions That seem unpropitious. But perhaps neither gain nor loss. For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business." TS Eliot - Four Quarters |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Interesting piece. One things for sure. America can never claim to use war as a last resort if they go to war with a country that they've never attempted to have diplomatic relations with. I'm somewhat beyond giving a shit to be honest. America can fuck itself up if it wants, as long as none of my money is going towards helping them.
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
My great uncle died while trying to put the ancient Chinese board game he had just bought and had been saving up for on a set of scales, still its the go he would have wanted to weigh. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
lol i think that's kind of like asking if they ever wanted diplomacy with iraq.......sure they will pursue UN resolutions and whatnot for a while to appear diplomatic, issuing stupid ultimatums like 'surrender your WMDs', and then when the country in question inevitably fails to meet them (somebody please tell me how can iran ever prove that they're not developing nukes), then they might send weapons inspectors in, when the fail to find anything and the international community doesn't go along with it, they'll pull them out (just like iraq), fabricate some theory based on flimsy evidence, scare the crap out of people through the media etc that we're all in danger, and bingo you have a reason to go in and start blowing things up......it's a predicable pattern really, diplomacy is just a formality the US has to get out of the way first.
__________________
“Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.” Obama 2006 on the Senate floor in protest against raising the debt limit. Fastforward to 2009... "Senate must raise debt limit ceiling to $12 trillion to ensure economic stability" - Obama 2009 Change you can believe in, uhuh. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm not sure but they'd be fucking daft to invade Iran, especially after Iraq and Afghanistan. It's going to fuel Islamic Extremism even more, de-stable the middle east, increase oil prices, and probably be a war they can't win (in the long term)
__________________
I KNOW YOU LOVE IT, REALLY ! <
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Had the Iraq war gone as they thought it would (quick victory over Saddam's forces, which happened, and peace and harmony from a grateful and united population, which didn't quite) it is quite possible they would have gone for Iran even before Bush won the re-election in November 2004- or shortly afterwards.
But after the way things have turned up on Iraq, fast becoming Vietnam Mk. II, a full scale occupation is highly unlikely. Like others have said the US might still try to destroy infrastructure and nuclear plants, or even assassinate Ahmadinejad. Which would be a grave error. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
As desirable as dismantling Ahmandinejad vile regime would be it's not going to happen. A full-scale invasion is not possible but nobody interested in securing peace and stability in the region could possibly tolerate such a barbarous and dangerous regime getting its hand on a nuke. Should diplomacy and the UN bureaucracy fail to stop the Iranian threat the US and its allies should not rule out force. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The US government was really stupid to think they could go half way across the world, bomb another country which had been ruled so strictly for so many years - capture their leader and expect everyone to live happily everafter. They probabaly thought it would go more like it did in Afganistan where they removed the Taliban rulers ... If the US and UK forces leave Iraq now they'll for certain have taken a fairly stable but oppressed country (under Saddam's rule) and leave millions of people in a state of total civil war. I doubt the US wants anything other then to have a miltary advantage in every single region of the world. |
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It's all propaganda playing to the masses. |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Also it's good how you call it the "Iranian threat", I'm pretty sure they just want nukes so america can't fuck them around like they have done with the rest of the middle east.
__________________
And as the walls come down and As I look in your eyes My fear begins to fade Recalling all of the times...i have died...and will die... |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
As desirable as dismantling Hussein's vile regime would be it's not going to happen. A full-scale invasion is not possible but nobody interested in securing peace and stability in the region could possibly tolerate such a barbarous and dangerous regime getting its hand on a nuke. Should diplomacy and the UN bureaucracy fail to stop the Iraqi threat the US and its allies should not rule out force. Heard it all before! ![]()
__________________
Conformity before conscience Uniformity before faith! To infinity and beyond! "the reason i took drugs in the first place was because ...i was confused. it's all become clear since" -Rolly. Just as it is true that a stream cannot rise above its source, so it is true that a national literature cannot rise above the moral level of the social conditions of the people from whom it derives its inspiration-James Connolly. |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
i'd be interested to know where all the 'quotes' in this thread are coming from
![]()
__________________
It takes a wise man to know the path, but it takes a brave man to walk it. |
![]() |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29 PM.









Linear Mode
