PDA

View Full Version : Iran starts mass production of weapons.



Drawing-slim
02-06-2017, 12:47 PM
http://217.218.67.231/Detail/2017/02/06/509344/Iran Defense Dehqan

Is it possible to invade iran if isreal and US decide to?!

Drawing-slim
02-06-2017, 12:54 PM
I think iran will be the next major war. You can sense trump administration simply dont like iran. But bombing Iran can cause a lot of problems for the rest of the western world IMO.

Egyptian
02-06-2017, 12:56 PM
It will be the next war , Iran.

but the war won't be like Iraq it gonna be more dangerous due to the Iranian backed militia in Lebanon , Syria , Yemen and Iraq.
not to mention the shia of the Eastern part of Saudia.

Egypt also will be involved in a coming war

N1019
02-09-2017, 11:36 PM
http://217.218.67.231/Detail/2017/02/06/509344/Iran Defense Dehqan

Is it possible to invade iran if isreal and US decide to?!

The US and allies would be able to devastate most Iranian military, civilian and nuclear infrastructure via a massive aerial bombing campaign. That alone would in many ways cause Iranian society to cease to function, which would be followed by utter chaos in the cities.

The boots on the ground part would not be fun, since Iran is a large country guarded by mountain ranges, but it is still doable.

Despite the large size of the Iranian military and all the media hype coming from the West and Iran itself about how powerful it supposedly is, Iranian military forces are still no match for those of the West, with technology two whole generations behind and mostly conscripted troops that lack the requisite training and discipline.

Remember, when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, the Iranians watched in horror as the US military machine quickly tore the country apart, knowing full-well that if they were next on the hit-list, they were gonners. That Iran was much bigger than Iraq did not make them feel any safer. In fact, they were so afraid of being taken out next that they attempted to start negotiations with the Bush Administration, but their overtures were ignored.

It remains to be seen exactly what strategy the US has planned for men on the ground and for the long term future of Iran, but if the war does happen, the state of Iran as we know it would probably cease to exist.

Expect the chaos to spread beyond the borders of Iran and expect the trouble to go on for years.

Amor Vincit Omnia
02-09-2017, 11:44 PM
http://217.218.67.231/Detail/2017/02/06/509344/Iran Defense Dehqan

Is it possible to invade iran if isreal and US decide to?!

NO

Amor Vincit Omnia
02-09-2017, 11:47 PM
It will not happen
if it will happen it must be with the use of nuclear weapon ...and i think it's not possible
Iran is not afghanistan , it's not iraq , Iran has militar power ...attack iran and start a war with convensional weapons is an economic suicide
Maybe u can win at the end ...but they could kick our ASS so badly that we could not sit down for years and years :_p

BELIVE IT OR NOT but Iran is a bad ass

Shah-Jehan
02-09-2017, 11:54 PM
Obviously it is possible to attack Iran, like every other country.

Iranian military, the Artesh are under-funded, and lack sophisticated weaponry due to being sanctioned, but are still a potent threat. An attack on Iran however, would mean the blocking of the Hormuz strait, which will mean no oil supplies will leave the Persian Gulf (region containing 2/3 of all oil on earth), and basically devastate the economies of US gulf Arab allies, as well bring much of the world economy to a standstill, including the US. Also, Iran is a close ally of Russia, and an attack on Iran would deter Russia, and possibly China. Not to mention, Iran has supporters all over the world, especially Shii'te centers in the Levant, Iraq and Arabia.

Amor Vincit Omnia
02-10-2017, 12:08 AM
the only reason to attack iran could be for neutralize and destroy his nuclear power in the case intelligence think there is a certain possibility about a nuclear attack of iran to israel . that all ...after neutralize iranian nuclear power the war ll stop ...no invasion could be possible at all .


vietnam was a disaster , iraq was a disaster , afghanistan was a disaster
try to image about Iran ?
do u want destroy usa politically and economically ?
a democratic country cannot invade iran . uless you act as an evil killing everyone but it is not possible
uless u ll use nuclear weapon but it is not possible because if u kill millions and millions civilians the history will destroy u .
and then destroy iran for what ? for create another hell as syria is ?another factory of islamic terrorism that will spread around the world forever ?

Bezprym
02-10-2017, 12:12 AM
War with Iran? Nah. I don't see how that would be supposed to help in anything.

On the other hand if Iran wants to invade Saudi Arabia, no one should "help" anybody.

Pennywise
02-10-2017, 12:45 AM
So scary.

Dema
02-10-2017, 01:16 AM
Iran is vicious


https://youtu.be/LklxdSdyZXU

Wadaad
02-10-2017, 01:28 AM
Iran's been mass producing and exporting weapons systems for decades now...from the Houthis to the Sudanis to Hamas to even Nicaragua. There is nothing new emerging from Iran, all its cards are known. As for Russian being an ally...only so far as geopolitics allows, afterall, Iran had its own "Sykes-Picot" after WW2, when British and USSR decided between themselves how to appropriate 'spheres of influences'. Russia got the north, Brits got the south (and the oil).

N1019
02-10-2017, 01:51 AM
It will not happen
if it will happen it must be with the use of nuclear weapon ...and i think it's not possible
Iran is not afghanistan , it's not iraq , Iran has militar power ...attack iran and start a war with convensional weapons is an economic suicide
Maybe u can win at the end ...but they could kick our ASS so badly that we could not sit down for years and years :_p

BELIVE IT OR NOT but Iran is a bad ass

Sorry mate, but you're obviously still under the spell of Iran. Their rich history, culture and big-eyed women with pornstar hairstyles have won your heart. I love it, too, but we mustn't let our emotions get in the way of what is unfolding before our very eyes.

In the last 15 years, the US has ploughed through every middle eastern country that got in its way. They have no reason to stop now. If you really believe Iran is somehow an exception - that somehow it will be left untouched when everything else has been razed to the ground - you've been reading too much Iranian propaganda. They and their Western leftist sympathisers are the only ones who say that war with Iran is not going to happen/impossible etc., and even they don't really believe it. Look at the facts of American and allied military power compared to Iran. There is no compariosn. The forces of the US plus European and other allies make up the greatest nation-crushing machine in world history. Nothing else comes close. That's before you even start looking at nukes.

The US also has a plan to use nuclear weapons on Iran. It has been on the table since 2005. With rumours that tactical nukes have already been used in Syria and elsewhere, it wouldn't surprise me if the US did nuke Iran, albeit using tactical nukes rather than the doomsday strategic variety. Of course, it won't be reported in Western media, though.

As we speak, there is a bill in US Congress called H.J. Res. 10. Check it out. If passed into law it would authorize the use of US military forces against Iran. You might say that shit is getting more and more real by the day.

But you can continue living in your world of fantasy if it makes you feel better.

Smitty
02-10-2017, 02:20 AM
The US and allies would be able to devastate most Iranian military, civilian and nuclear infrastructure via a massive aerial bombing campaign. That alone would in many ways cause Iranian society to cease to function, which would be followed by utter chaos in the cities.

The boots on the ground part would not be fun, since Iran is a large country guarded by mountain ranges, but it is still doable.

Despite the large size of the Iranian military and all the media hype coming from the West and Iran itself about how powerful it supposedly is, Iranian military forces are still no match for those of the West, with technology two whole generations behind and mostly conscripted troops that lack the requisite training and discipline.

Remember, when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, the Iranians watched in horror as the US military machine quickly tore the country apart, knowing full-well that if they were next on the hit-list, they were gonners. That Iran was much bigger than Iraq did not make them feel any safer. In fact, they were so afraid of being taken out next that they attempted to start negotiations with the Bush Administration, but their overtures were ignored.

It remains to be seen exactly what strategy the US has planned for men on the ground and for the long term future of Iran, but if the war does happen, the state of Iran as we know it would probably cease to exist.

Expect the chaos to spread beyond the borders of Iran and expect the trouble to go on for years.

Could the US not take out Iran's nuclear capabilities and call it quits as Amor Vincit Omnia suggests? I'm not saying that will happen, but it seems workable to me.

Shah-Jehan
02-10-2017, 02:22 AM
Could the US not take out Iran's nuclear capabilities and call it quits as Amor Vincit Omnia suggests? I'm not saying that will happen, but it seems workable to me.

Except that Iran doesn't have the nuclear capability, just like Iraq never did. While on the other hand, everyone knows that Israel possesses them, despite being part of the NPT agreement.


Edit: Nvm, Israel isn't part of the NPT.

Smitty
02-10-2017, 02:25 AM
Except that Iran doesn't have the nuclear capability, just like Iraq never did. While on the other hand, everyone knows that Israel possesses them, despite being part of the NPT agreement.

Not now. But it certainly will in the near future.

Shah-Jehan
02-10-2017, 02:33 AM
Not now. But it certainly will in the near future.

Not really, it is certainly not easy to build warheads, and apt delivery systems are even harder to get by. North Korea for e.g., have potential nuclear warheads, but no good delivery system. Also, the US is merely using the nuclear thing as an excuse to get rid of the anti-Israel/US regime of Iran, and basically activate the classic American military-industrial-complex once again. Both Pakistan and India have developed nuclear weapons for e.g.. They were briefly put under sanctions, yes, but relationships resumed. During that time, it was also US of the major powers to veto these countries, while basically everyone else in the West had maintained relations. These countries weren't seen as "anti-American" and thus there was no threat of invasion or whatever.

N1019
02-10-2017, 02:39 AM
Could the US not take out Iran's nuclear capabilities and call it quits as Amor Vincit Omnia suggests? I'm not saying that will happen, but it seems workable to me.

Oh, you mean like the "surgical strikes" the US and Israelis have been talking about for years? Yes, it could be done, IF the only reason Iran became an enemy was because of its nuclear programme. Alas, that is not the case.

Iran is a problem child for more reasons than that. It stands as a major obstacle or deterrent to unfettered Anglo-American hegemony in the region, refuses to follow orders from the empire, strives for independence and sovereignty rather than submitting to imperial domination under the global economic system led by the US, it is set to completely abandon the US petrdollar for oil exports, may form stronger strategic alliances with other anti-American states, tries to maintain a degree of military industrial sovereignty rather than being fully-dependent on global powers for imports, etc. Additionally, Iran is the most inherently powerful nation in the region, with a huge amount of natural resources and human capital, requiring alliances of other nations to offset its power (similar to Germany in Europe). Put all that together and you have an unacceptable situation for the Anglo-American empire, which is in a position to do something about it

Iran has lots of oil and gas that "the empire" wants to get its hands on. Unfortunately, "the empire" sees the people who live above that oil and gas as an inconvenience. The Iranian people, like most peoples of the middle east, just get in the way of resource exploitation. They are a nuisance. So, with all that in mind, I have my doubts about a simple set of surgical strikes to take out nuclear research facilities while leaving everything else intact. It just doesn't seem realistic to me, and it's also inconsistent with the game of nation-breaking that America has been playing elsewhere in the region.



Except that Iran doesn't have the nuclear capability, just like Iraq never did. While on the other hand, everyone knows that Israel possesses them, despite being part of the NPT agreement.

The whole Iranian nuke thing is the favoured pretext for war with Iran that the US latched onto years ago and has not given up. We know Iran does not have nukes and probably wasn't anywhere near having them. But like with Saddam and his WMDs, if the world can be persuaded that Iran really is pursuing nuclear weaponisation, making the case for war would be much easier.

It is not hard to imagine that if the US cannot find the smoking gun it needs to present to the UN Security Council, it will eventually fake it or try another of the many options it has considered, like a false flag attack or provocation.

As for Israel's nukes, no-one will hold Israel accountable for them, force inspection of inventories or signing of the NPT, so there's nothing that can be done. The fact is that Israel has been permitted to have nukes by world powers.

Smitty
02-10-2017, 02:39 AM
Not really, it is certainly not easy to build warheads, and apt delivery systems are even harder to get by. North Korea for e.g., have potential nuclear warheads, but no good delivery system. Also, the US is merely using the nuclear thing as an excuse to get rid of the anti-Israel/US regime of Iran, and basically activate the classic American military-industrial-complex once again. Both Pakistan and India have developed nuclear weapons for e.g.. They were briefly put under sanctions, yes, but relationships resumed. During that time, it was also US of the major powers to veto these countries, while basically everyone else in the West had maintained relations. These countries weren't seen as "anti-American" and thus there was no threat of invasion or whatever.

Right. It's Iran's anti-America stance that makes it a threat - I think a real one. I'm certainly not hankering to go to war. I'd like nothing better than to ignore the world for awhile and focus on domestic issues. But Iran worries me some. And it seems better to eliminate them as a threat now rather than wait till they bomb us. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that could be done with a minimum of damage on both sides. Again, not that I think our obese and corrupt government would stop there.

Shah-Jehan
02-10-2017, 02:48 AM
The whole Iranian nuke thing is the favoured pretext for war with Iran that the US latched onto years ago and has not given up. We know Iran does not have nukes and probably wasn't anywhere near having them. But like with Saddam and his WMDs, if the world can be persuaded that Iran really is pursuing nuclear weaponisation, making the case for war would be much easier.

It is not hard to imagine that if the US cannot find the smoking gun it needs to present to the UN Security Council, it will eventually fake it or try another of the many options it has considered, like a false flag attack or provocation.

As for Israel's nukes, no-one will hold Israel accountable for them, force inspection of inventories or signing of the NPT, so there's nothing that can be done. The fact is that Israel has been permitted to have nukes by world powers whereas Iran has not. Iran cannot do anything to change that now because no-one trusts them.

Yeah, basically. However, I don't think the US will invade Iran to be honest. These are just threats (to appease the American public who are born into thinking that Iran is some kind of crazy terroristic regime), just like how the US has threatened China on the disputed areas of the South China Sea.


Right. It's Iran's anti-America stance that makes it a threat - I think a real one. I'm certainly not hankering to go to war. I'd like nothing better than to ignore the world for awhile and focus on domestic issues. But Iran worries me some. And it seems better to eliminate them as a threat now rather than wait till they bomb us. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that could be done with a minimum of damage on both sides. Again, not that I think our obese and corrupt government would stop there.

Actually, besides the hostage crisis during the Iranian revolution, Iran hasn't been the aggressor against Americans. While on the contrary, the US has devastated the Iranian economy by putting unjust sanctions, and in 1988, even shot down a passenger plane (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655) that resulted in the death of 290 (all) of its passengers who were just civilians, and not all of them were even Iranian. To this day, the US has not yet apologized for that incident.

Smitty
02-10-2017, 02:53 AM
Yeah, basically. However, I don't think the US will invade Iran to be honest. These are just threats (to appease the American public who are born into thinking that Iran is some kind of crazy terroristic regime), just like how the US has threatened China on the disputed areas of the South China Sea.



Actually, besides the hostage crisis during the Iranian revolution, Iran hasn't been the aggressor against Americans. While on the contrary, the US has devastated the Iranian economy by putting unjust sanctions, and in 1988, even shot down a passenger plane (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655) that resulted in the death of 290 (all) of its passengers who were just civilians, and not all of them were even Iranian. To this day, the US has not yet apologized for that incident.

Yeah, I need to read more on the subject. We just hear over and over again that Iran considers us the Great Satan, hence the suspicion and fear. Maybe we started it. I don't know.

N1019
02-10-2017, 03:03 AM
Yeah, basically. However, I don't think the US will invade Iran to be honest. These are just threats (to appease the American public who are born into thinking that Iran is some kind of crazy terroristic regime), just like how the US has threatened China on the disputed areas of the South China Sea.

I don't see any reason why Iran will be left alone when everything around it has been reduced to rubble, but I hope you're right.



Actually, besides the hostage crisis during the Iranian revolution, Iran hasn't been the aggressor against Americans. While on the contrary, the US has devastated the Iranian economy by putting unjust sanctions, and in 1988, even shot down a passenger plane (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655) that resulted in the death of 290 (all) of its passengers who were just civilians, and not all of them were even Iranian. To this day, the US has not yet apologized for that incident.

After the US-UK tried to replace the rogue Shah with the ayatollahs, they too went rogue, almost immediately. They played with fire and got burnt. Kissinger discussed the risks of getting rid of the Shah years earlier, stating "if we get rid of the Shah, we will have a radical regime on our hands". Well, they went ahead and did it, and got exactly that.

Any country that refuses to follow American orders will be made to suffer dearly and it could lead to destruction of their entire nation. The US has surely managed to put Iran through hell since 1979. They made sure the Iran-Iraq war happened, which killed at least 500,000 Iranians. That war would not have happened if the Shah's regime had been left in place, but the US made sure it fell, then pushed and supported the inherently weaker party Saddam to attack Iran during its time of weakness after the revolution, while also throwing a few bones at the new Islamic Republic to ensure the war dragged on for years to maximize damage.

The IR655 shoot-down incident may well have been deliberate, as a means of increasing pressure on Iran during the Iran-Iraq war at a time when Iran was pissing off America by laying mines in the Gulf etc.

N1019
02-10-2017, 03:16 AM
Yeah, I need to read more on the subject. We just hear over and over again that Iran considers us the Great Satan, hence the suspicion and fear. Maybe we started it. I don't know.

Iran was probably behind the 1983 US Marine barracks bombing in Beirut and there has been speculation that they may also have been behind Lockerbie.

But no, the US didn't start the aggression. The US only had a serious presence in Iran after the 1953 Mossadegh incident. Before that it was dominated by the British, who found oil in Persia in 1901 and began meddling soon afterwards. They installed the last Shah in 1941 after exiling his father to Mauritius, whom they had also initially backed. The Russians also had a presence in the north, jointly invading with the British in 1941 when Reza Shah was removed, then refusing to leave for some time after WWII had ended.

What the Iranians just don't understand or accept is that they are not going to be left alone. They have too much oil and gas, and too much potential to cause trouble due to their inherent strength*. The more they refuse to submit, the more likely they are to be beaten into submission.

*compared to others in the region, not world powers

Sarmatian
02-10-2017, 03:23 AM
Right. It's Iran's anti-America stance that makes it a threat - I think a real one.

That just doesn't make any sense. It's same as saying Democrats anti-Republican stance makes them a threat. Especially given the fact in over 100 years Iran haven't started a single war.

Profileid
02-10-2017, 03:26 AM
Wish we wouldn't have elected a fkn zionist

Smitty
02-10-2017, 03:29 AM
Iran was probably behind the 1983 US Marine barracks bombing in Beirut and there has been speculation that they may also have been behind Lockerbie.

But no, the US didn't start the aggression. The US only had a serious presence in Iran after the 1953 Mossadegh incident. Before that it was dominated by the British, who found oil in Persia in 1901 and began meddling soon afterwards. They installed the last Shah in 1941 after exiling his father to Mauritius, whom they had also initially backed. The Russians also had a presence in the north, jointly invading with the British in 1941 when Reza Shah was removed, then refusing to leave for some time after WWII had ended.

What the Iranians just don't understand or accept is that they are not going to be left alone. They have too much oil and gas, and too much potential to cause trouble due to their inherent strength*. The more they refuse to submit, the more likely they are to be beaten into submission.

*compared to others in the region, not world powers

Well, we've got a chance with Trump. He's more independent-minded than anyone else we might have got.

Smitty
02-10-2017, 03:32 AM
That just doesn't make any sense. It's same as saying Democrats anti-Republican stance makes them a threat. Especially given the fact in over 100 years Iran haven't started a single war.

Well, if words mean anything, they want us gone. That's all I meant. That's a little stronger than party rivalry.

Drawing-slim
02-10-2017, 03:33 AM
Putin will outplay US & Israel in the next 10 years. Netnhyahu is already emboldened and starting to beat the war drums on iran encouraging trump for an all out war.

Sarmatian
02-10-2017, 03:41 AM
Well, if words mean anything, they want us gone. That's all I meant. That's a little stronger than party rivalry.

They want US to be gone from Mideast. There is no way Iran could be an existential threat to US mainland.

War Chef
02-10-2017, 03:43 AM
eat. An attack on Iran however, would mean the blocking of the Hormuz strait, which will mean no oil supplies will leave the Persian Gulf (region containing 2/3 of all oil on earth), and basically devastate the economies of US gulf Arab allies, as well bring much of the world economy to a standstill,

This.......

Smitty
02-10-2017, 03:44 AM
They want US to be gone from Mideast. There is no way Iran could be an existential threat to US mainland.

At this point, no. But I imagine they'd take us out completely, if they could. I'm wary, that's all. And I'm certain I don't want them to acquire nukes.

Sarmatian
02-10-2017, 03:55 AM
At this point, no. But I imagine they'd take us out completely, if they could. I'm wary, that's all. And I'm certain I don't want them to acquire nukes.

Typical American paranoia. Do you even realize what 'take us out completely' would involve? How many people are there on the face of Earth eager to go full Hitler on some other people? Do you realize it's statistically impossible to have full nation of genocidal psychopaths?

Smitty
02-10-2017, 03:59 AM
Typical American paranoia. Do you even realize what 'take us out completely' would involve? How many people are there on the face of Earth eager to go full Hitler on some other people? Do you realize it's statistically impossible to have full nation of genocidal psychopaths?

All it takes is one such person in charge. But I'm not paranoid at all. You're the one jumping to conclusions.

N1019
02-10-2017, 05:04 AM
Well, we've got a chance with Trump. He's more independent-minded than anyone else we might have got.

And yet listen to everything he has said about Iran since his election campaign. Maybe a couple of positive sentences about the Iranian people, but otherwise he's anti JCPOA and seems pretty much pro war. He also surrounded himself with pretty strong anti-Iran figures in the form of Flynn and Mattis.


Putin will outplay US & Israel in the next 10 years. Netnhyahu is already emboldened and starting to beat the war drums on iran encouraging trump for an all out war.

Putin will be broke later this year unless he manages to get the sanctions lifted or the oil price goes way up. Funny that - an American war with Iran would be a good thing for Russia because the oil price would skyrocket.


This.......

Not really. Iran's pissy little navy doesn't have the capacity to "close" the strait of Hormuz for more than a few days before the Americans arrive en masse to blow them out of the water. All they can do is disrupt. They cannot prevail.



That just doesn't make any sense. It's same as saying Democrats anti-Republican stance makes them a threat. Especially given the fact in over 100 years Iran haven't started a single war.

Iran's anti-American stance being a threat to American interests makes perfect sense if you allow it to. Iran not only has an anti-American stance but the capacity to put its ideology into action. The United States doesn't like that very much. It's a perfect excuse for America to draw up war plans. You don't have to start a single hot war to be razed to the ground by America. Look at Libya, Syria and Yemen. What wars did they start to deserve destruction? None.


At this point, no. But I imagine they'd take us out completely, if they could. I'm wary, that's all. And I'm certain I don't want them to acquire nukes.

If they could, I expect Iran would do a lot of things. Luckily, it can't and never will have that ability.

Sarmatian
02-10-2017, 05:08 AM
All it takes is one such person in charge.

In normal world such people don't make it up the ranks. USA is the only exception.


But I'm not paranoid at all. You're the one jumping to conclusions.

Yes you are paranoid if you think Iran is a real threat to US.

Sarmatian
02-10-2017, 05:09 AM
Iran's anti-American stance being a threat to American interests makes perfect sense if you allow it to. It's a perfect excuse for America to draw up war plans. You don't have to start a single hot war to be razed to the ground by America. Look at Libya, Syria and Yemen. What wars did they start to deserve destruction? None.

In that twisted logic of US political games sure it does.

N1019
02-10-2017, 05:12 AM
In that twisted logic of US political games sure it does.

The point is, it doesn't matter whether it makes sense to you or not. Iran has been earmarked for destruction without starting a single war in over a century. It's like magic.

mustang981
02-10-2017, 05:34 AM
At this point, no. But I imagine they'd take us out completely, if they could. I'm wary, that's all. And I'm certain I don't want them to acquire nukes.

That stupid Russky is actually advocating for Iran to have nukes. If Iran gets nukes, it would ignite a cold war in the middle east. Saudi Arabia will develop their own as will other unstable countries in that region. IF it means they all nuke themselves back to the stone age, I'm all for it. Problem is with nuclear weapons is it has an effect on other countries and the planet.

Paris-Brest
02-10-2017, 04:05 PM
They are going to need it soon...

Egyptian
02-10-2017, 04:21 PM
That stupid Russky is actually advocating for Iran to have nukes. If Iran gets nukes, it would ignite a cold war in the middle east. Saudi Arabia will develop their own as will other unstable countries in that region. IF it means they all nuke themselves back to the stone age, I'm all for it. Problem is with nuclear weapons is it has an effect on other countries and the planet.

Too late for that,Saudia already under the nuclear protection of Pakistan.

Egypt has started their own Nuclear , Chemical and biological weapons since Israel Nuclear program.

A part from that the Egyptian Bomb Nasr 9000

http://i.imgur.com/jkkHM2n.jpg

HERK
02-10-2017, 04:25 PM
I don't think there will ever be an invasion of Iran, it is the last bastion of the Shia Muslims and i am sure the Americans do not expect them to just get invaded like Iraq.

Sacrificed Ram
02-10-2017, 04:34 PM
This people isn't even capable to defeat ISIS and says a lot of shit about destroy Iran.

Root
02-10-2017, 04:38 PM
A simple question to experts.. why should USA have nuclear weapons but Iran shouldn't? Why is so much hysteria and such a panic disorder of westerners?

Egyptian
02-10-2017, 04:46 PM
This people isn't even capable to defeat ISIS and says a lot of shit about destroy Iran.

you can defeat Iraq but you can't defeat Taliban
you can defeat Iran but you can't defeat ISIS

there is difference in faith and strategy .. ISIS or Qaida or Talidan is basically an idea not a state , anyone in any country in the world can adopt their Idea and become one of them .. how they gonna destroy any idea spreading in many countries?

but you can defeat Iran or Iraq or libya or what so ever , because they are a system and regime not an idea.

Egyptian
02-10-2017, 04:46 PM
A simple question to experts.. why should USA have nuclear weapons but Iran shouldn't? Why is so much hysteria and such a panic disorder of westerners?

because it's a fucked up world ..

Sacrificed Ram
02-10-2017, 04:58 PM
you can defeat Iraq but you can't defeat Taliban
you can defeat Iran but you can't defeat ISIS

there is difference in faith and strategy .. ISIS or Qaida or Talidan is basically an idea not a state , anyone in any country in the world can adopt their Idea and become one of them .. how they gonna destroy any idea spreading in many countries?

but you can defeat Iran or Iraq or libya or what so ever , because they are a system and regime not an idea.

What ISIS occupies is much more than ideas, are territories in Syria and Iraq. With ideas or not they are occupying a territory and no one expells them from there.

Ideas mean nothing. Democrats had more votes in the last USA election, it means most of americans have democrat ideas. But republicans won.

N1019
02-11-2017, 12:15 AM
That stupid Russky is actually advocating for Iran to have nukes. If Iran gets nukes, it would ignite a cold war in the middle east. Saudi Arabia will develop their own as will other unstable countries in that region. IF it means they all nuke themselves back to the stone age, I'm all for it. Problem is with nuclear weapons is it has an effect on other countries and the planet.

Interesting, given that there is no indication that the Russian government would like to see Iran become a nuclear weapons state. Both Russia and China supported sanctions on Iran due to lack of transparency surrounding its nuclear programme, and neither are willing to enter into a mutual defence pact with their supposed ally. I think people just like to masturbate over the thought of a powerful new anti-American alliance, to help bring justice to the middle east, but it isn't really happening.



A simple question to experts.. why should USA have nuclear weapons but Iran shouldn't? Why is so much hysteria and such a panic disorder of westerners?

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the US is the strongest military power in world history, and therefore has the capacity to bully other countries around, whereas Iran has minimal influence outside its immediate vicinity and effectively only exists because no greater power has decided to destroy it yet despite having ample opportunity.

You can argue the injustice of that situation all you want, but it will change nothing. The world isn't fair.

There are big fish and smaller fish, with the former feeding on the latter. Iran is one of the latter, with the US poised to lob a few sticks of gelignite into its pond.

Dema
02-11-2017, 12:46 AM
why not

alpha
02-11-2017, 03:03 AM
Time to shoot em down

Mraz
02-11-2017, 12:11 PM
Good, I wish them to get nukes.

Incal
02-11-2017, 12:33 PM
http://img.memecdn.com/oooo-i-amp-039-m-so-scared-of-war_o_2395143.jpg

wvwvw
02-12-2017, 03:41 AM
A simple question to experts.. why should USA have nuclear weapons but Iran shouldn't? Why is so much hysteria and such a panic disorder of westerners?

For the same reason a cop can have a gun but a schizophrenic person cannot.