By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - So it's obvious we will be going to war with Iran....

Kantor on 19 February 2010
vlad321 said:
okr said:
No, won't happen. No one can (or wants to) afford it at the moment.

WWII saved the US from the great depression much sooner.

The USA was already pretty much out of the depression by WWII.

What it managed to do, was to put the USA on the pedestal of "Great superpower, police force of the world", which for the last few decades had been Britain and France. Iran certainly isn't going to become the police force of the world anytime soon.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

Around the Network
vlad321 on 19 February 2010
Kantor said:
vlad321 said:
okr said:
No, won't happen. No one can (or wants to) afford it at the moment.

WWII saved the US from the great depression much sooner.

The USA was already pretty much out of the depression by WWII.

What it managed to do, was to put the USA on the pedestal of "Great superpower, police force of the world", which for the last few decades had been Britain and France. Iran certainly isn't going to become the police force of the world anytime soon.

It was nowhere near the end of the depression when WWII broke out. Yes it was on its way out but it would have taken many many more years to recover. WWII reduced the amount of recovery time by a significant amount.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

NiKKoM on 19 February 2010

I don't think anyone will go to war with Iran... cause they own 10% of the oil reserves of the world and 15% of the gas reserves.. if someone would attack Iran will fuck us all and destroy every refinery or choke the oil export through the Strait of Hormuz (which is responsible for 20% of the worldwide oil shipments) and will bring the entire world economy down.. they have us by the energy balls.. and China would step in if anyone tries to touch them.. cause China is very dependend of Iran and has invested a lot in that country.. and nobody wants to mess with China..



 

Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!) 

NJ5 on 19 February 2010

China is now a big customer of Iranian oil... good luck getting their UN approval for a war.

Oil prices would shoot up immediately in the event of a war with Iran, and cripple world economies.



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Mise on 19 February 2010
mrstickball said:

The scary thing is, I really worry about how this plays out. Unlike other regimes that want to keep power, Ahmadinejad knows that his power base is waining, and that he won the election illegally. The only way for him to keep his country under control is to do something way out there....And its not *just* getting nukes, but proving they are a superpower by using them.

I would highly advise any and all Iranians to get out of dodge before nuclear fire comes to town.

As unstable as Ahmadinejad might be, he's not completely stupid. Not only would using nuclear weapons signal to everyone who supports him that he's willing to stoop down to the level of the Great Satan itself (as in, the US) to keep himself in power, he'd be signing his own death warrant, along with thousands and thousands of his own people.

Ahmadinejad would need a pretty damn good pretext to "safely" use nuclear weapons, and I doubt that any western power is going to provide him that - provided that Iran even has usable nukes in the first place.

If anyone's going to pull the trigger in this situation, it's Israel.



Warning: The preceding message may or may not have included sarcasm, cynicism, irony, full stops, commas, slashes, words, letters, sentences, lines, quotes,  flaeed  gramar, cryptic metaphors or other means of annoying communication. Viewer discretion is/was strongly advised.

Around the Network
Chairman-Mao on 19 February 2010
Khuutra said:
Chairman-Mao said:
Khuutra said:
Chairman-Mao said:

lmao its pretty much that easy for anyone to immigrate to Canada.

The Hell it is

I'm still trying to get my permanent residency papers

Seriously? We have a ton of immigrants so I don't know why its taking you so long.

It is because you have a ton of immigrants.

Good point.



Zucas on 19 February 2010
Sqrl said:
Zucas said:
quigontcb said:
Zucas said:

This is a rather good point.  War would be the best thing for Iran and better yet an invasion.  Would really help the current government stay in power.  Best way to shut up disillusioned people is make them pretend they are part of something bigger than themselves.  Hell Hitler did a pretty good job of it and the last adiminastration did a hell of a good job with 9/11.  I guess with Iran it's how are they going to get someone to attack them first. 

The only bad thing about this, is this will continually start polarizing the world in similar ways that happened in the Cold War which is probably the cause of a lot of this.  Despite the horror that this will probably cause, will be very interesting to see how it unfolds.  Just amazing that we can sit over here and talk about the exact ploys these countries use and yet no one catches on. 

Comparing Bush to Hitler and saying American's are foolish enough to buy into a quasi-Hitler leader and quasi-nazi mentality...ah well, it's 2010 and kids can sit behind a keyboard and say childish things all day with no accountability, and without having to stand face to face with someone and insult them openly.

Buddy I'd not only say everything that needs to be said to your face, I'd record every last bit of it and hand it right ovedr to you so you could remember it forever.  But the question is, what would you do about it.  Easy to sit behind a keyboard and act like you give a damn, but do you actually. 

Hitler and Bush are nothing alike as people but they did use similar tactics that many politicans have used.  But that you have the nerve to Straw Man my argument like you are some tough guy is rather silly.  That was an insult to the people and the masses as they can be so blindly lead by their political leaders to do whatever they tell them to do.  Whether it be Hitler using loads of things to rally his people from a depression into a nationalist mindset or the American government being able to successfully rally a group of people after a tragic and cheap attack from an underground organization into thinking so rationally.  If you don't like what I jsut said right there, then I suggest you take it up with Mr. James Madison who first wrote about the problems of the violence of factions for those exact same scenarios that played out.  There's a reason this nation tried to be setup to remove public opinion from decision making, but we didn't do a good enough job it seems.  I don't know if you blame them or the public for not taking a stand against it.

First, you both should really cool off a bit with the rhetoric. 

Second, for Zucas (but a point that I think everyone should keep in mind), ignoring the merits of your argument, you really should consider that comparing someone to Hitler, no matter how reasoned, is likely to elicit strong replies.  This is perfectly fine (provided other forum rules are followed) in a thread where this is the topic but in threads where it isn't the topic the rule of 'the most heated debate tends to hijack the discussion' will almost always come into play.  In short, think a bit about how your comment will effect the thread before posting Hitler comparisons please! It's a touchy subject for people no matter how you approach it, so when you do, it really should be a crucial part of your point rather than an example of your point.  I can promise you that a comment with a hitler comparison is a lot more likely to get into trouble by the mods than the same comment without that comparison.  That's just plain good advice everyone should consider.

For now I can see where you're coming from but since your point can stand up without the comparison I think we should move forward with the discussion minus the hitler comparison. Which brings me to.....

Third, lets try to keep this a friendly(or at least civil) discussion/debate focused on Iran. 

 

Well I do thank for the advice, I also hope along with a civil debate we can have an intellectual one too.  That's all I ask for as well.  Now maybe I devoided the eomtion factor a little too much because due to my field of study, I'm used to talking about all this from a non-biased perspective, something I know most don't do on a daily basis.  I'm not purposely trying to offend anyone with it, but give a pretty valid comparison that helped to confirm Rath's point of potential ways of how public opinion can be manipulated to support a political agenda they may not morally agree with. 



Kasz216 on 19 February 2010
mrstickball said:
Kasz216 said:
mrstickball said:
Kasz216 said:
TheRealMafoo said:

The question is when?

it is my opinion, if it was left up to the US to make a move, we would do it after they nuke someone (probably not us).

I don't think it will get that far. I think sometime in the next year, Israel will take the offensive, and strike.

How do you think this will play out?

So you suspect before you move then based on we?  (Oh, the entire UN... I don't see that.  I think they'll sit back, let the US bailout Israel and convientaly blame the US for something they would do anyway if the US didn't step in.)

As for when... no clue really.  It's going to REALLY suck...

Iran makes Afghanistan and Iraq look like childsplay when it comes to guerilla warfare.  The east half of Iran is pretty much nothing but a Guerilla Haven, wile all the important stuff is in west Iran... which means... the east is where they're going to end up being pushed.

If they try a rebuilding war... good luck.  It'll be worse then Iraq and Afghanistan combined.   A just mess stuff up war... I'm not sure how much good it will do.

 

Either way I suspect the EU will use the situation to get Israel to give up concessions to Palesetine.

If the UN or such goes to war with Iran, I don't see why they'd try a war of occupation. Their ADA isn't stellar, and it would be fairly easy to simply route their air force and defenses surrounding any uranium plant.

But honestly, I don't think the US, under Obama, nor the UN will do anything militarily against Iran unless Iran nukes Europe or the US. I honestly wonder if they'd even do anything against Iran if they hit Israel.

Personal opinion is that Israel will strike at some point, and get denounced by the world as evil for its actions.

If Iran tries to strike Israel....Expect the population of the middle east to thin out really quickly. War scenarios point to ~30 million dead Iranians within a day or two.

I mostly agree with that.  Is Israel really strong enough to take out the offending Iranian stuff themselves though?

Yes, Israel has the capabilities to pacify Iran's nuclear program. They've been building up an incredible fleet of F-15's that have the distance and capability of hitting Iranian targets. Interesting factoid, I've met the guy that sold them the F-15s. He knew his stuff (I played 20 questions about F-15I specs and he knew his stuff top to bottom), and he made the statement that Israel wasn't playing when they purchase armaments. They know exactly what 15's are for, and what they can do to Iran.

Speaking from a tactical standpoint, the real question is if Israel has the intelligence to strike enough Iranian targets to cause enough damage to have the Iranian programme shut down, or hindered until other sanctions/blockers can be placed. That would be where other friendly nations come in (US, Turkey).

The scary thing is, I really worry about how this plays out. Unlike other regimes that want to keep power, Ahmadinejad knows that his power base is waining, and that he won the election illegally. The only way for him to keep his country under control is to do something way out there....And its not *just* getting nukes, but proving they are a superpower by using them.

I would highly advise any and all Iranians to get out of dodge before nuclear fire comes to town.

I thought Iran was really building up their anti-aircraft stockpiles though.

 



Kasz216 on 19 February 2010
Kantor said:
vlad321 said:
okr said:
No, won't happen. No one can (or wants to) afford it at the moment.

WWII saved the US from the great depression much sooner.

The USA was already pretty much out of the depression by WWII.

What it managed to do, was to put the USA on the pedestal of "Great superpower, police force of the world", which for the last few decades had been Britain and France. Iran certainly isn't going to become the police force of the world anytime soon.

Not really considered true.  Economists actually believe FDR's plans didn't get us out of the great depression and actually prolonged it.  Things were "fixed" shortly however were headed for another massive downturn until WW2.



mrstickball on 19 February 2010
Kasz216 said:

I thought Iran was really building up their anti-aircraft stockpiles though.

 

I am glad you asked that question. On the surface, Iran's ADA would seem to be 'good', but:

  1. Russia has delayed shipment of their good stuff: http://www.alsumaria.tv/en/World-News/2-45061-Russia-delays-delivery-of-air-defense-missiles-to-Tehran.html
  2. What Iran has now is mostly 1970's technology which would be useless against an Israeli strike (think Gulf War)
  3. Here is a fantastic writeup in 2008 about ADA capabilities around their nuclear sites. If this is still the case in 2010, then Israel would certainly have no trouble obliterating them: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?129494-Fortress-Iran


Back from the dead, I'm afraid.