More from Iran. Any thoughts?

[Ghost of BiB]

That bad old Israel must go.

 

I'm having trouble figuring where all this rhetoric fits in. Iran seems to be acting very provocatively, and a lot of it is probably so much BS. The neighbor's dog knows they are lying about their nuclear program and there's a concentrated campaign to piss off Israel.

 

Is this just testing the limits of the envelope? I don't see Iran having the position of strength to be able to start dictating anything to anyone yet. One could make an argument that they are inviting some sort of attack in an attempt to rally the other happy Islamo-fascists, and to push the fence sitters, but that is a stretch.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

That bad old Israel must go.

 

I'm having trouble figuring where all this rhetoric fits in. Iran seems to be acting very provocatively, and a lot of it is probably so much BS. The neighbor's dog knows they are lying about their nuclear program and there's a concentrated campaign to piss off Israel.

 

Is this just testing the limits of the envelope? I don't see Iran having the position of strength to be able to start dictating anything to anyone yet. One could make an argument that they are inviting some sort of attack in an attempt to rally the other happy Islamo-fascists, and to push the fence sitters, but that is a stretch.

662196[/snapback]

 

Of coursem the "other Islamo-fascists" are generally Sunni, so there's no love lost between them and Iran anyway.

 

Rhetoric for the sake of simply keeping the country relatively unified, maybe? Always helps to give the people a boogey-man to focus on...and I have a hard time accepting that the rhetoric is focused outward, as screwball as it is.

[Ghost of BiB]

Of coursem the "other Islamo-fascists" are generally Sunni, so there's no love lost between them and Iran anyway. 

 

Rhetoric for the sake of simply keeping the country relatively unified, maybe?  Always helps to give the people a boogey-man to focus on...and I have a hard time accepting that the rhetoric is focused outward, as screwball as it is.

662199[/snapback]

 

This could be. But, historically the Iranian people have been pretty ambivalent until somebody actually DID something to them. Yeah, I know all the arguments about the Iranians "wanting change", but they are also the same ones we've been hearing for 25 years. I'm getting mixed opinions from my correspondants.

[Fan in San Diego]

I know a few Iranian's and they cant believe this idiot got elected. I don't think he represents the majority of Iranians. Maybe someone will assisnate this retard. That seems like the best solution.

[Ghost of BiB]

I know a few Iranian's and they cant believe this idiot got elected. I don't think he represents the majority of Iranians. Maybe someone will assisnate this retard. That seems like the best solution.

662361[/snapback]

 

I'm afraid they would just move in another idiot saying the same things. The Mullahs approve candidates before they are allowed to run. They would likely just install another clone.

[Jon in Pasadena]

For what it's worth, I was talking to an Iranian friend of mine who recently came back from a lengthy visit, and she told me a couple of interesting things about the current regime. According to her:

 

Most of the middle class of Iranian society view Ahmadinejad as a blustery fool. They usually refer to him by a rather undignified nickname. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Iranians who are not in the middle class. He has a big following in the Revolutionary Guards.

 

Ahmadinejad is, apparently, a "true believer" who really thinks that the Mahdi is coming in two years. (I liken it to having someone like Pat Robertson elected president.) If left to his own devices, he *might* try to actualize some of his loonier fundamentalist beliefs, but remember that under the insanely convoluted Iranian political system, he really doesn't have all that much power. If he goes too far, there is a good chance he'll get smacked down by the mullahs who hold the real power.

 

My take:

The mullahs stand to benefit by anything that seems to increase the importance and relevance of Islam in the world. On the other hand, they risk losing stature whenever the Islamic world suffers any kind of large setback, so they are relatively cautious about moving openly, until they are positive they have a winning hand. On the other other hand, they are also playing the game within a game, vis-a-vis their Sunni neighbors. I think right now they are allowing Ahmadinejad to run his mouth in order to gauge the West's reaction. If we make concessions, they'll let him keep upping the ante. If they ever think they're losing face because of their President's rhetoric, they'll dump his ass and replace him with another goober.

 

I'm still waiting to hear what they need all that heavy water for, that's being produced at Isfahan*. It's not like they can use it in Bushehr.

 

*Whoops, brain-fart; I meant Arak. Isfahan is where they're gonna be making metallic Uranium. (Gee I wonder what that could be used for. )

[blzrul]

For what it's worth, I was talking to an Iranian friend of mine who recently came back from a lengthy visit, and she told me a couple of interesting things about the current regime. According to her:

 

  Most of the middle class of Iranian society view Ahmadinejad as a blustery fool. They usually refer to him by a rather undignified nickname. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Iranians who are not in the middle class. He has a big following in the Revolutionary Guards.

 

  Ahmadinejad is, apparently, a "true believer" who really thinks that the Mahdi is coming in two years.  (I liken it to having someone like Pat Robertson elected president.) If left to his own devices, he *might* try to actualize some of his loonier fundamentalist beliefs, but remember that under the insanely convoluted Iranian political system, he really doesn't have all that much power. If he goes too far, there is a good chance he'll get smacked down by the mullahs  who hold the real power.

 

My take:

The mullahs stand to benefit by anything that seems to increase the importance and relevance of Islam in the world. On the other hand, they risk losing stature whenever the Islamic world suffers any  kind of  large setback, so they are relatively cautious about moving openly, until they are positive they have a winning hand. On the other other hand, they are also playing the game within a game, vis-a-vis their Sunni neighbors. I think right now they are allowing Ahmadinejad to run his mouth in order to gauge the West's reaction. If we make concessions, they'll let him keep upping the ante. If they ever think they're losing face because of their President's rhetoric, they'll dump his ass and replace him with another goober.

 

I'm still waiting to hear what they need all that heavy water for, that's being produced at Isfahan. It's not like they can use it in Bushehr. 

662575[/snapback]

Sounds oddly familiar. A blustering fool who no-one can believe got elected whose religiosity crafts his extremist views and makes him do and say stupid things that inflame the enemy? hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[pdh1]

Sounds oddly familiar.  A blustering fool who no-one can believe got elected whose religiosity crafts his extremist views and makes him do and say stupid things that inflame the enemy? hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

662738[/snapback]

 

 

ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggay

[Fan in San Diego]

For what it's worth, I was talking to an Iranian friend of mine who recently came back from a lengthy visit, and she told me a couple of interesting things about the current regime. According to her:

 

  Most of the middle class of Iranian society view Ahmadinejad as a blustery fool. They usually refer to him by a rather undignified nickname. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Iranians who are not in the middle class. He has a big following in the Revolutionary Guards.

 

  Ahmadinejad is, apparently, a "true believer" who really thinks that the Mahdi is coming in two years.  (I liken it to having someone like Pat Robertson elected president.) If left to his own devices, he *might* try to actualize some of his loonier fundamentalist beliefs, but remember that under the insanely convoluted Iranian political system, he really doesn't have all that much power. If he goes too far, there is a good chance he'll get smacked down by the mullahs  who hold the real power.

 

My take:

The mullahs stand to benefit by anything that seems to increase the importance and relevance of Islam in the world. On the other hand, they risk losing stature whenever the Islamic world suffers any  kind of  large setback, so they are relatively cautious about moving openly, until they are positive they have a winning hand. On the other other hand, they are also playing the game within a game, vis-a-vis their Sunni neighbors. I think right now they are allowing Ahmadinejad to run his mouth in order to gauge the West's reaction. If we make concessions, they'll let him keep upping the ante. If they ever think they're losing face because of their President's rhetoric, they'll dump his ass and replace him with another goober.

 

I'm still waiting to hear what they need all that heavy water for, that's being produced at Isfahan. It's not like they can use it in Bushehr. 

662575[/snapback]

 

Well they must know that either Israel or USA will do a pre-emptive strike. There will be no concessions. Israel for sure will just take out the facilities. I like Israel they have the spine to smack down retarded Islamic blustering hate the world B word fag pigs like this.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Well they must know that either Israel or USA will do a pre-emptive strike. There will be no concessions. Israel for sure will just take out the facilities. I like Israel they have the spine to smack down retarded Islamic blustering hate the world B word fag pigs like this.

663143[/snapback]

 

Israel doesn't have the reach. Plus, even to hit Iran with what can reach, Israel would have to violate Iraqi or Saudi air space...which means they couldn't do it without US approval, which as a practical matter means an Israeli strike on Iran is a de facto US strike anyway.

[VABills]

Israel doesn't have the reach.  Plus, even to hit Iran with what can reach, Israel would have to violate Iraqi or Saudi air space...which means they couldn't do it without US approval, which as a practical matter means an Israeli strike on Iran is a de facto US strike anyway.

663190[/snapback]

What?? That sound like a friggen liberal set of reasoning. What if SA or Iraqi governments gave approval without US knowledge? What if Israel did it without any approval?

 

That's like saying someone was murdered because the police allowed it since they weren't there to stop it. Therefore the police were culpable.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

What??  That sound like a friggen liberal set of reasoning.  What if SA or Iraqi governments gave approval without US knowledge?  What if Israel did it without any approval? 

 

That's like saying someone was murdered because the police allowed it since they weren't there to stop it.  Therefore the police were culpable. 

663196[/snapback]

 

If, by "friggen liberal", you mean "rational in that it realizes that, due to US operations in Iraqi and Saudi airspace, Israel could not overfly those countries without US knowledge and acquiescence"...then yes, it's liberal.

 

If, on the other hand, you're using "friggen liberal" in your typical meaning of "Wah wah wah, somebody disagrees with me and I don't like it because it makes me feel like a !@#$ing idiot!"...then shut up, Frodo.

[UConn James]

If, on the other hand, you're using "friggen liberal" in your typical meaning of "Wah wah wah, somebody disagrees with me and I don't like it because it makes me feel like a !@#$ing idiot!"...then shut up, Frodo. 

663214[/snapback]

 

Hey, you stinkin' liberal! When VABills says 4 x 4 = 256, don't you dare question it!

 

Psshaw, you liberal!

 

[Jon in Pasadena]

Well they must know that either Israel or USA will do a pre-emptive strike. There will be no concessions. Israel for sure will just take out the facilities. I like Israel they have the spine to smack down retarded Islamic blustering hate the world B word fag pigs like this.

663143[/snapback]

While I am right there with you in your disdain for the radical Islamists and their !@#$ed up world-view, you should know that, although power-hungry, evil and, in many cases, quite nuts, most of the powerful ruling clerics are not retarded in the ordinary sense (in another sense, like socially, yes they probably are); but they've been immersed in an evil brain-washing program since birth. They are well aware of the consequences of an Israeli or American first-strike. Some of those consequences would be to convince even more Muslims that the Islamists were right all along in their characterization of the West as seeking the destruction of Islam, hence bringing even more people under the sway of the most violent and regressive leaders. The Iraqi insurgency IMHO has emboldened them immensely by providing a working model of a way to successfully prosecute a modern war of attrition against the Western powers (mainly us & UK)

[Adam]

They want nuclear weapons, lets send them some!

[Ghost of BiB]

While I am right there with you in your disdain for the radical Islamists and their !@#$ed up world-view, you should know that, although power-hungry, evil and, in many cases, quite nuts, most of the powerful  ruling clerics are not retarded in the ordinary sense (in another sense, like socially, yes they probably are); but they've been immersed in an evil brain-washing program since birth. They are well aware of the consequences of an Israeli or American first-strike. Some of those consequences would be to convince even more Muslims that the Islamists were right all along in their characterization of the West as seeking the destruction of Islam, hence bringing even more people under the sway of the  most violent and regressive leaders. The Iraqi insurgency IMHO has emboldened them immensely by providing a working model of a way to successfully prosecute a modern war of attrition against the Western powers (mainly us & UK)

663252[/snapback]

 

We should talk.

 

I get the sense overall that you realize things are more complicated than can be easilly posted here.

[UConn James]

We should talk.

 

I get the sense overall that you realize things are more complicated than can be easilly posted here.

663298[/snapback]

 

No, no, no! All of the Iran problems eminate from the President's precocious daughter eating too much chocolate ice cream in the White House kitchen. Once Libby starts eating carrots, they won't want to threaten us anymore.

 

Don't you watch "Commander in Chief"!?

[Ghost of BiB]

No, no, no! All of the Iran problems eminate from the President's precocious daughter eating too much chocolate ice cream in the White House kitchen. Once Libby starts eating carrots, they won't want to threaten us anymore.

 

Don't you watch "Commander in Chief"!?

663354[/snapback]

 

No? Should I? Is it a good show?

 

Why can't TV come up with any really hot women.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

While I am right there with you in your disdain for the radical Islamists and their !@#$ed up world-view, you should know that, although power-hungry, evil and, in many cases, quite nuts, most of the powerful  ruling clerics are not retarded in the ordinary sense (in another sense, like socially, yes they probably are); but they've been immersed in an evil brain-washing program since birth. They are well aware of the consequences of an Israeli or American first-strike. Some of those consequences would be to convince even more Muslims that the Islamists were right all along in their characterization of the West as seeking the destruction of Islam, hence bringing even more people under the sway of the  most violent and regressive leaders. The Iraqi insurgency IMHO has emboldened them immensely by providing a working model of a way to successfully prosecute a modern war of attrition against the Western powers (mainly us & UK)

663252[/snapback]

And that is why the decision to go to war with Sadam was so short sighted. It is not that I didn't like to see the world rid of the bastard, just that there were too many unintended consequences likely to result from doing so and not a lot of answers on how to adequately solve to seeable problems, let alone the unanticipated ones.

 

Short of Nukeing or firebombing the whole region, I am not sure there could be a "successful scenario" unless a lot of ground work and undercover allies were brought to bear against the extremsts. That could take years and we our intelligence capability was obviously indequate, so reallly we were starting at ground zero.

 

Wonder if backing off is still a viable solution, with all its potential consequences?

[cromagnum]

They want nuclear weapons, lets send them some!

663281[/snapback]

Did you hear, iran would unleash 40.000 suicide bombers on u.s. and u.k. targets, if any hostile action was used on iran..... An army of suicide bombers........