Iran

  • Thread starter s0nny80y
  • 458 comments
  • 26,802 views
GT4_Rule
Holy cow...

Its kind of weird to think that Nazi and Japan both had superior weapons compared to the Allied, and had they used it, then the tide of the war could have turned. But, the Axis still lost. Kind of weird, isnt it?
Their resources had ran out. I don't know about Nazi Germany, but Japan had exhausted food, manpower, fuel, materials to build with. Plus, B-29's had burned down all the factories. One of the greatest Japanese leader at the time, Admiral Yamamoto saw this coming, even before he conducted the attack on Pearl Harbor. Naturally, he was against going to war against the U.S., but unfortunately for Japan and the world, the Army had taken control of the government............. we are bit off-topic. Aren't we?
 
Yeah we are off topic...but who cares until they stop in.

That was the same with Nazi Germany. They used up their resources but Japan was the most "destroyed" because of all the firebombing and the attacks.
 
...They say that if the Nazi jet-aircraft program would have been given enough time to develop, there is a good chance they would have pushed the Mustangs and Spitfires out of the skies, without a question.

Similarly, the Nazis were in the middle of planning and producing a full-sized flying-wing bomber similar to the US B-2 design so that the Nazis could strike at the heart of America. Rational thinking goes on to say that the Nazis very well could have developed their nuclear weapons by then, and when using the new plane, could have used it's long-range capabilities to destroy and American city such as New York, Boston, or Washington D.C. without a problem.
 
YSSMAN
...They say that if the Nazi jet-aircraft program would have been given enough time to develop, there is a good chance they would have pushed the Mustangs and Spitfires out of the skies, without a question.

Similarly, the Nazis were in the middle of planning and producing a full-sized flying-wing bomber similar to the US B-2 design so that the Nazis could strike at the heart of America. Rational thinking goes on to say that the Nazis very well could have developed their nuclear weapons by then, and when using the new plane, could have used it's long-range capabilities to destroy and American city such as New York, Boston, or Washington D.C. without a problem.

The tide of the war might have turned, but the Axis couldnt keep it a few more months.

I've read many reports of Nazi and to some extent Japanes gov't developing ultra-destructive weapons; Sarin was originally developed in Nazi Germany as a super-destructive chemical weapon, I think...

Scary to think about it eh? If Nazis won the war right now we will all be living under the Third Reich :nervous:
 
The Germans would have been hard pressed to have been able to invade the mainland US. There were still millions of young men and women who were willing and able to fight, and I doubt Germany had the resources to pull off a massive ampibious (sp?) landing on US soil...

Back to the topic, Iran:
- Have you guys been seeing these crazy videos/stories about the new Iranian millitary equipment? I'm begining to wonder if they just want to start a war, because I do not think they realise that our current state of technology far surpasses their own. Sure, they may be able to deliver a nuclear warhead into Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly southern Europe, but we know how to shoot them down. They also claim that their new "200MPH" torpedo could destroy any American aircraft carrier or destroyer, but I doubt Iran can fully comprehend the complexity of a sea battle, espically if the US Navy or the British Royal Navy get involved.

...The best one so far? The "flying boat!" Yeah, its a flying boat, baisicly a plane that can land in the water and function as a boat if necessary. They say it cannot be detected on radar, and can carry a large paylod (possibly nuclear) of a single shot. Do they not realise that American radar would probably spot the damn thing, if not with our own eyes, and all it would take is a gunship or a fast-mover to blow the thing out of the sky.

Silly Iranians, wars are for big kids!
 
YSSMAN
They also claim that their new "200MPH" torpedo could destroy any American aircraft carrier or destroyer, but I doubt Iran can fully comprehend the complexity of a sea battle, espically if the US Navy or the British Royal Navy get involved.
You are talking about that (sea?) missile, right? It does sound pretty impressive, but I agree with you. I'm not sure if Iran is capable of positioning the launcher where it needs to be. I wonder how good the targeting is with a weapon like that.
 
YSSMAN
The Germans would have been hard pressed to have been able to invade the mainland US. There were still millions of young men and women who were willing and able to fight, and I doubt Germany had the resources to pull off a massive ampibious (sp?) landing on US soil...

Back to the topic, Iran:
- Have you guys been seeing these crazy videos/stories about the new Iranian millitary equipment? I'm begining to wonder if they just want to start a war, because I do not think they realise that our current state of technology far surpasses their own. Sure, they may be able to deliver a nuclear warhead into Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly southern Europe, but we know how to shoot them down. They also claim that their new "200MPH" torpedo could destroy any American aircraft carrier or destroyer, but I doubt Iran can fully comprehend the complexity of a sea battle, espically if the US Navy or the British Royal Navy get involved.

...The best one so far? The "flying boat!" Yeah, its a flying boat, baisicly a plane that can land in the water and function as a boat if necessary. They say it cannot be detected on radar, and can carry a large paylod (possibly nuclear) of a single shot. Do they not realise that American radar would probably spot the damn thing, if not with our own eyes, and all it would take is a gunship or a fast-mover to blow the thing out of the sky.

Silly Iranians, wars are for big kids!

Its all talk, just for show. Just to intimidate the Western nations. They cant do it; if a Third-world country like Iran can do that then I guess we developed Western nations are a 1000years behind Iran, eh.

Those Iraqi ba$tard$ need to realize that US and other Western nation has soooo much more technology than them; Iran relies on traditional warfare, where killing as much as possible is the target. Modern warfare is killing the least possible, but destroying important and strategic sites and buildings.

Hope you get what I mean.
 
Of course we understand what you mean. That is America's intent when we go into war. Destroy the equipment, the supplies, the weapons, but try to spare the people, unless it's necessary to kill them. Those are the rules we try to follow, and sometimes soldiers break them, sometimes missiles miss, sometimes plans backfire, but we try as best we can. UN counrties are in on that idea, too, as is the rest of the "1st world". Hopefully. Iran can only fight a primitive blood war. I bet the Islreali military would whoop on them pretty nice. Those Isrealis are crazy sons of *****es!
 
keef
Of course we understand what you mean. That is America's intent when we go into war. Destroy the equipment, the supplies, the weapons, but try to spare the people, unless it's necessary to kill them. Those are the rules we try to follow, and sometimes soldiers break them, sometimes missiles miss, sometimes plans backfire, but we try as best we can. UN counrties are in on that idea, too, as is the rest of the "1st world". Hopefully. Iran can only fight a primitive blood war. I bet the Islreali military would whoop on them pretty nice. Those Isrealis are crazy sons of *****es!

Hahaha :lol:

Iran doesnt give a crap on human lives and rights as well as all those Third-World countries.
 
Now THAT would be funny. Lets let Israel handle all future wars in the Middle East, lol.
 
A message with a more moderate view here...

I am not denying that Ahmendinejad's denial of the holocaust and call for the destruction of Israel are inexcusable, but with that out of the way, i think we also need to recognize a couple of things, before we look at things trough our own glasses too much.

The US has overthrown an elected government of Iran

And the US also actively armed and backed Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war complete with resources for biological and chemical warfare it seems.

Currently, Iran is lodged between Iraq, with a strong American military presence, and Afganistan, with again a strong American military presence together with some western allies, my own country included.
The Persian gulf area had/has a very strong presence of warships, especially during the start of the Afghan invasion, quite possibly with atomic weapons on board, if not in the ships, then in subs nearby.

A civil airplane from Iran was shot down by a US warship

And strong retoric has been directed at Iran which did include threats of attack.

What i mean to say is, i can understand why Iran feels very threatened by all that.
It is not surprising they have a negative American / western sentiment.
Though not good, it is not surprising that they might be looking to acquire atomic weapons for self defense with their back garden literally filled with foreign forces up to their borders.
 
I think we need to separate the feelings between the Iranian Government and the Iranian People. In that situation, feelings are far more hostile with the government than the people, despite our dirty deeds done in the past. More or less, Iran has a lot of strong rhetoric backed up by a crazy guy with a beard, but they aren't dumb enough to do something stupid. We've got more to worry about with Israel pulling the trigger in the Mid-East than anyone else.
 
All signs indicate that the Irananian PEOPLE want better relation with the US --
This is a documented fact .

As is our PAST behavior and MISSED chances --to help elect a " moderate " --Bill Clinton AND George Bush BOTH blew Chances to Keep Acmadman from becomming pres of Iran.

For more on this go to institute of Iran -USA study's --and Google Iran / USA --for MANY books on the history of relationship .

Both sides have made mistakes --and Both sides have missed signals --there is a very poor record in the USA re-DIPLOMACY of ANY KIND .

Our Diplomats --if we are ti be intellectually HONEST are for the most part Buffoons and idiots .
Our Diplomacy often reflects this --and the US often succeeds DESPITE itself.

Our track record on Diplomacy --except for some individual moments and some spectactular success --for the most part is Underwhelming .

I will Give ONE example --April Gillepsie --telling Saddam basicly we don't care about Kuwait ..

What happened ?

If she had been ASTUTE instead of an idiot --Saddam doesn't invade Kuwait ...We do NOT have Gulf war ONE .

Not to say the region would be better off.

Jimmy Carter --he scuttled the two state solution for Israel and --helped encourage the intifada ---Why ? Aside from he is moron --still trying to make up for a Hostage crisis and ruining the USA in 4 years ..who knows .

( Google info on his role in advising Arafat to hold out for more --instead of accepting peace accords..)

Now we have an another Election --all signs --early reported in the US press--I hesitate to trust ANYTHING ..comming from them --but this is also being reoported in Arabic and other press corps--show that MadmanInajad is losing to the Moderate ...
I Credit Our president for this --his speech and the very fact he can be elected --alone --have proven many of the radical claims of the Jihadist to be horsecrap..
So he has had a POSITIVE effect on relations in the Middle East .

Watch the elections .

If the Nutjob is still in power --we are in for some rough weather..I do not see Israel allowing a nuke ready Iran --Just listen to what the nuts say --( yea I am sure people reading Mein Kampf --said --" this guys an idiot no one thinks this way --it can never happen " .) ...

But the US --still needs to Back Democracy --and NOT remove its Army from the field in the region .

after all --talk means NOTHING without a big stick to back it up .

In this region they eat the weak .


next Up North Korea .

Only player able to fix that is China .
 
The people are contesting it too. Violence in the streets has been on the television all afternoon.
 
Ayatollah Khamenai has apparently ordered an investigation into Mousavi's claims of widespread vote-rigging in the Iranian elections (link). Either way, it is he who remains in charge, regardless of the outcome, but it would be fascinating if Ahmadenijad was rumbled.
 
I'm still not sure if that will mean much, given that the Ayatollah already gave his blessing to the results. The good news is that most of our major allies in Europe have voiced their concerns, but the problem is, we won't be able to. We don't want to look like we're intervening, in hopes that we are able to re-ignite relations with Iran (regardless of who wins), but we reallllly don't want to be stuck with the current crop of leadership.

Still, the fail that was the mainstream media over the weekend... And on into today... Is just, wow. Thank God for the internet.
 
Newsflash: Iranian democracy best in world; makes American democracy look rubbish in comparison.

American, European, Asian democracies tend to work best when turnouts are high - 70% is generally considered 'impressive', 'excellent' or 'great'. But that's small fry compared to Iran, where, according to certain sources within Iran tonight, are reporting turnouts in many towns in Iran of over 95% - considered by polling experts to be nigh on impossible... but even 95% could be considered disappointing! Some towns, such as Taft (in the central province of Yazd) had a turnout of 141%. Kouhrang (in Chahar Mahaal Bakhtiari province) got 132% turnout, and Chadegan (in Isfahan province) got 120%. Although the claims haven't been verified, they do support a claim made earlier in the week by the former Iranian interior minister, Ali Akbar Mohtashamipour, who reported that atleast 70 polling stations returned more completed ballot papers than the number of locally eligible voters... go figure.
 
I'm reading now on Huff Post that there are a reported 32 people dead so far in this "revolution" (can we call it that?) in Iran. Talk about being "the most stable country in the world."

I have to admit lulz ensued when Iran attempted to blame all this on us (the US) as well. Ah well.

Weird too that they were knocked out of the World Cup by North Korea. Really Weird.
 
Newsflash: Iranian democracy best in world; makes American democracy look rubbish in comparison.

American, European, Asian democracies tend to work best when turnouts are high - 70% is generally considered 'impressive', 'excellent' or 'great'. But that's small fry compared to Iran, where, according to certain sources within Iran tonight, are reporting turnouts in many towns in Iran of over 95% - considered by polling experts to be nigh on impossible... but even 95% could be considered disappointing! Some towns, such as Taft (in the central province of Yazd) had a turnout of 141%. Kouhrang (in Chahar Mahaal Bakhtiari province) got 132% turnout, and Chadegan (in Isfahan province) got 120%. Although the claims haven't been verified, they do support a claim made earlier in the week by the former Iranian interior minister, Ali Akbar Mohtashamipour, who reported that atleast 70 polling stations returned more completed ballot papers than the number of locally eligible voters... go figure.

I think they used a guy from Chicago as an election advisor--that explains the extra ballots .


The Mullahs pick what candidates get to run .

The " moderate" in this case had thousands of dissidents executed after the revolution and was responsible for the beginning of the Iranian nuke program.

Its not so important though the " who " and the mechanics..

Whats important is that the people of Iran " think " they have a democracy of sorts and are now fighting for it ---for what its worth.

There is NO evidence the Crazier candiate did not win --as he has strong support outside of Tehran --and this could have just been a VERY close election--the fact the idiots called it --before they could have counted a small percentage of the ballots .---well thats the mistake .

The US needs to just say we support democracy --and leave the people of Iran to decide the issue.

If the USA butts in in any way --its all the excuse the Mullahs need to kill off every dissenting voice that exist in Iran.

Just back off and let them roll.
I do not think they anticipated this result -- So maybe they continue making mistakes.

remember these guys at on time WHERE the revolutionary's --they know what can happen.
 
Congress Votes on Resolution for Iran

From our friend, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX):

I rise in reluctant opposition to H Res 560, which condemns the Iranian government for its recent actions during the unrest in that country. While I never condone violence, much less the violence that governments are only too willing to mete out to their own citizens, I am always very cautious about “condemning” the actions of governments overseas. As an elected member of the United States House of Representatives, I have always questioned our constitutional authority to sit in judgment of the actions of foreign governments of which we are not representatives. I have always hesitated when my colleagues rush to pronounce final judgment on events thousands of miles away about which we know very little. And we know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran.

Of course I do not support attempts by foreign governments to suppress the democratic aspirations of their people, but when is the last time we condemned Saudi Arabia or Egypt or the many other countries where unlike in Iran there is no opportunity to exercise any substantial vote on political leadership? It seems our criticism is selective and applied when there are political points to be made. I have admired President Obama’s cautious approach to the situation in Iran and I would have preferred that we in the House had acted similarly.

I adhere to the foreign policy of our Founders, who advised that we not interfere in the internal affairs of countries overseas. I believe that is the best policy for the United States, for our national security and for our prosperity. I urge my colleagues to reject this and all similar meddling resolutions.

Thumbs up to Dr. Paul on this, a good call.
 
I overheard the roll call on CNN and I figured Crazy Uncle would be the one nay vote.

Students shot (super NSFW. Do not click on link if you're under 18 or scared of bad people):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWiSlVddLH8

happy-face-istock-456.jpg


The description says they were shot by riot police and paramilitary.

People chanting: "Marg Bar Khameini / death to Khameini"



Another video:



and another:



Student shot and killed (super NSFW. Really, don't click if you're under 18 or you dont like being outside of your personal bubble):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYaL4mA-bSY

happy-face-istock-456.jpg


Police trap women against gate with nightsticks:

http://elections.7rooz.com/link/845/

Woman shot and killed (super NSFW. If you're under 18... you're not ready for reality. These people have it harder than you do... so... uh, shut your mouth and don't click!):

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=89928823259&ref=nf

happy-face-istock-456.jpg


Home invasion in the dark of night.



This is what John Kerry was accusing American troops of doing. I hope Mr. Kerry is getting a good history lesson right now.


OBAMA ICE CREAM CAPADE
PLUS TONY HAWK SKATEBOARDING IN THE WHITE HOUSE

capt.5a250b39a54f41b2bf4f1f0949c209b7.obama__vaab102.jpg


The Messiah: Hmmm, lets see here. Uh, um... chaos in Iran? North Korea readies missiles to launch... ships carrying illegal cargo? $1.6 trillion dollar government controlled health care? Racist Supreme Court nominee?

Nah!

One frozen custard cone, please!!!


adored.gif
Liberal reporter Mark Knoller tweets how The One fancies frozen custard.
adored.gif
Awww, Messiah's daughters got Puppy Pops for their undeniable father, and with love, scrapes off whipped cream from their waffle cones. Oh, Anointed One, you can do no wrong!
love.gif


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/fathers-day-for-the-obama-girls.html
http://www.examiner.com/x-2304-DC-R...ot-to-death-on-video-Obama-goes-for-ice-cream
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/06/a_real_false_choice_war_or_ice.asp
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-06-20-18-35-23

Imagine if President Bush went to get ice cream while serious foreign policy problems are accruing as I type.... oh waitz:



The silence is deafening.

0619_tony_hawk.jpg


WOO HOO! This is way better than my craptastic video games!

http://www.tmz.com/2009/06/19/tony-hawk-rolls-through-the-white-house/
 
Last edited:
(super NSFW)

(super NSFW)

(super NSFW)

I may not be a big poster here and to be honest, I try to stay away from the opinions forum as much as possible. But even with the nsfw tags, I think these videos are a tad over the line.
 
since reality is too scary for some.

What an idiotic comment

It's not a matter of reality being too scary... I've probably seen and lived harder times than you have in your little bubble where you point out how hard the world is but know nothing of living in it.

My point is that they may bee too harsh for the average GTP under 18 member.
 
The balance of diplomacy is tipping again based on today's events...

Obama Says 'Justice' Is Needed for Iranians

WASHINGTON — President Obama ratcheted up his language against Iran’s leadership on Saturday, in a statement that invoked the American civil rights movement as an analogy for what was unfolding on the streets of Tehran.

“Martin Luther King once said, ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice,’ ” Mr. Obama said in a statement released after security forces in the Iranian capital clashed repeatedly with protesters. “I believe that. The international community believes that. And right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian people’s belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness.”

Mr. Obama’s remarks came after intense debate and multiple meetings all day Saturday at the White House, administration officials said, and reflected growing concern within the administration that the violence in Iran could continue to escalate.

Despite his forceful words, however, Mr. Obama is still resisting calls from conservatives and Republicans to harshly and publicly condemn the Iranian government and impose stiff sanctions on refined gas exports to Iran. In particular, the president’s use of the word “justice,” which White House officials have been debating all week, is a departure from the more measured tones he had struck earlier in the week. “The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching,” Mr. Obama said. “We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people.” Mr. Obama said that the “universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.”

White House officials were monitoring the events unfolding in Tehran throughout the day on Saturday, including in meetings in the president’s study next to the Oval Office. But they were hampered by the fact that the United States does not have an embassy in Tehran, or consulates in any Iranian cities, because the two countries do not have diplomatic relations.

In addition to intelligence reports, the White House also is relying on information from European and other allies with more resources in Iran, along with news reports.

In invoking Martin Luther King Jr. and the American civil rights movement, Mr. Obama moved toward adorning the protesters on the streets of Tehran with the mantle of America’s most intense movement for human rights and justice. Even as Mr. Obama’s statement was released, on Saturday afternoon Eastern time, the leader of Iran’s opposition, Mir Hussein Moussavi, announced to supporters that he was ready to take on that role, and its risks. “I am ready for martyrdom,” he told supporters at a street gathering in southern Tehran, as he called for more civil disobedience and an annulment of the announced result that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been re-elected as president.

Mr. Obama did not comment on the disputed election results. But he did appear to take on a difficult balancing act, trying to strike a note of moral clarity while still shying away from demonizing Iran’s clerical leadership.

“As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away,” Mr. Obama said. “The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government.”

And he delivered a warning to the Iranian authorities: “If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.”

Stronger words that still appear to be somewhat favorable, and in line with much of the rest of the Western parts of the world. We as the United States run a major risk by showing too much support for the protestors, severely de-legitimizing their protest(s) in the eyes of the current Iranian government. While we do not want to see more innocent people dying in the streets of Iran, our hands remain tied.


Der Spiegel International has a very, very good piece describing the American situation with Iran, "Obama and the Iran Crisis: Why Washington is Playing it Safe" - definately worth a read for those who are interested.

Der Spiegel
Obama does not want to give the impression that his administration is interfering in a foreign country's elections and power struggles. Particularly in Iran, where the memories of the US involvement in the toppling of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq in 1953 and the subsequent return of the shah is fresh in people's minds.

The US had avoided making any comments during the Iranian election campaign. Admittedly Vice President Joe Biden voiced some cautious doubts about the election results. "We don't have all the details," Biden said. "It sure looks like the way they're suppressing speech, the way they're suppressing the crowds, the way in which people are being treated, there's some real doubt about that." However, he did not speak openly about election fraud.

The Obama administration knows that if Ahmadinejad remains in office, then it will have to work with him in its pursuit of negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. Accusing him of involvement in an election fraud conspiracy would only make this dialogue much more difficult and could also serve in Iran as propaganda against the US.

Washington also knows that it is Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who wields the greatest influence in Iran. Obama's advisers "realize that it is the supreme leader and those around him who shape any movement in terms of US-Iranian relations … regardless of who was elected as Iranian president," Anthony Cordesman, an analyst at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, told the Associated Press.

In other words: In the conflict with Iran, the question of who is president is ultimately not decisive. Additionally, the US administration is still unsure what it should make of the accusations of electoral fraud. According to the Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, initial assessments by the intelligence community suggest that Ahmadinejad and the ayatollah may have cheated -- but the incumbent might actually have won the vote nevertheless.
 
I'm reading now on Huff Post that there are a reported 32 people dead so far in this "revolution" (can we call it that?) in Iran. Talk about being "the most stable country in the world."

I have to admit lulz ensued when Iran attempted to blame all this on us (the US) as well. Ah well.

Weird too that they were knocked out of the World Cup by North Korea. Really Weird.

You're kidding yourself if you think we don't have people in Iran. But, yeah, Iran blaming us is pretty funny.

The US needs to just say we support democracy --and leave the people of Iran to decide the issue.

No, we need to just say nothing. We should not support pure democracy either here or at home. Look at what Iran's democracy brought it: more Ahmadinejad, apparently. I don't think it would be such a big deal if Iran were a republic with good laws.

It's ironic because Iran used to be the bedrock of "democracy" and limited government in the middle east and south asia. ... Until we installed the Shah over oil.
 
Last edited:
“As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away,” Mr. Obama said. “The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government.”

Obama and suppressing ideas?

lulz

Releasing a paper statement is not enough. Obama might be able to use his mouth if it wasn't so full of ice cream.
 
Back