Korean Job Discussion Forums

[mises]

[The Happy Warrior]

1) No. The IAEA has not proven the negative (you cannot prove a negative!). More importantly, the IAEA has continually asked for Iran to be more open and provide access to more facilities.

2) Horton doesn't really explain why Iran needs uranium enriched to 20% instead of 3.6%. If there's an explanation, I'd like to hear it.

3) The Iranians do have sophisticated missile technology allowing conventional warheads to reach Europe. They merely need to get more powerful rockets that might deliver nuclear warheads. This task would be just a matter of years for even a middle-ranged power.

[recessiontime]

[caniff]

[recessiontime]

[caniff]

[The Happy Warrior]

[bacasper]

People (including myself) have been talking about this war starting for a long time now. I wish it would (not) start already.

Obama is Preparing to Bomb Iran

Webster G. Tarpley
TARPLEY.net
July 21, 2010

After about two and a half years during which the danger of war between the United States and Iran was at a relatively low level, this threat is now rapidly increasing. A pattern of political and diplomatic events, military deployments, and media chatter now indicates that Anglo-American ruling circles, acting through the troubled Obama administration, are currently gearing up for a campaign of bombing against Iran, combined with special forces incursions designed to stir up rebellions among the non-Persian nationalities of the Islamic Republic. Naturally, the probability of a new fake Gulf of Tonkin incident or false flag terror attack staged by the Anglo-American war party and attributed to Iran or its proxies is also growing rapidly.

The moment in the recent past when the US came closest to attacking Iran was August-September 2007, at about the time of the major Israeli bombing raid on Syria. This was the phase during which the Cheney faction in effect hijacked a fully loaded B-52 bomber equipped with six nuclear-armed cruise missiles, and attempted to take it to the Middle East outside of the command and control of the Pentagon, presumably to be used in a colossal provocation designed by the private rogue network for which Cheney was the visible face. A few days before the B-52 escaped control of legally constituted US authorities, a group of antiwar activists issued The Kennebunkport Warning of August 24-25, 2007, which had been drafted by the present writer. It was very significant that US institutional forces acted at that time to prevent the rogue B-52 from proceeding on its way towards the Middle East. The refusal to let the rogue B-52 take off reflected a growing consensus in the US military-intelligence community and the ruling elite in general that the Bush-Cheney-neocon policy of direct military aggression towards all comers had become counterproductive and very dangerous, running the risk of a terminal case of imperial overstretch.

A prominent spokesman for the growing disaffection with the neocons was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who had been a national security director in the Carter administration. Brzezinski argued that no more direct military attacks by the United States should be made for the time being, and that US policy should rather focus on playing off other states against each other, while the US remained somewhat aloof. Brzezinski�s model was always his own successful playing of the Soviet Union against Afghanistan in 1979, leading to the collapse of the Soviet empire a decade later. A centerpiece of Brzezinski�s argument was evidently the claim that color revolutions on the model of Ukraine 2004 were much a better tool than the costly and dangerous US bombing and US invasion always championed by the monomaniacal neocons. There was clearly an implication that Brzezinski could deliver a color revolution in Iran, as he had done in Ukraine.

more at link

[caniff]

This is another completely meaningless post by me, but I as an American am very pissed at the direction in which this whole debate has been headed.

The Iranian gov't is desperate to hold onto power, they took glee in the oust of Saddam, and Ahmeh-whatever fuels the flames at the behest of the Islamic state that sets him up to talk smack in his blazer.

I love America, and I want us to have a pre-eminent military. A military that noone would ever dream of confronting.

At the same time, soft power is the key. America has to lead by example (and we actually can, even though many others may/will say otherwise).

I guess I just don't like wingnuts of any nationality is all I'm laying down.

(caniff crawls back in his makkeoli bottle.)

[recessiontime]

America does have the best military and they are the most feared bully on the streets. So, you got your wish.

Yes I agree America has to lead by example. I believe Ron Paul suggested on many occasions that America ought to do this by stopping the policing of the world and concentration on defending their own borders. Eventually countries would try emulating America's greatness.

I think regardless of Iran's cooperation, the US is going to bully them no matter what. It was like this before and nothing has changed. The US will find reasons to drop bombs on Iran. This is probably why Iran is telling the US to screw off despite their military power. Think about it, Iran reaches out a hand toward them and the US bullies them to hand over their resources. It's the same result. The only reason why they haven't started the Iran campaign is because they already too stretched out in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Let me just finish off by saying that the US isn't as popular around the world as you may think. I've been around the world, places from Australia, Japan, Canada and all over Europe and from what I've seen, America is not liked. Even Americans are highly critical of their own government's foreign policy. That just shows you that your government is just plain bad and needs improvement.

[caniff]

Was that "you" stuff directed at me? If so, you either misunderstand my posting history or you most likely have no idea about the average American.

Let's hear some more. I'm a sucker for this kind of stuff.

[Leon]

[recessiontime]

You agree that their foreign policy is disagreeable to many people. Then we are in complete agreement. I am merely telling you that saying the word "America" elicits negative emotions in people around the world. It's because of their foreign policy, not because of their movies or culture.

[Leon]

[conrad2]