Situation hotting up in the Middle East

[Jantar]

If Iran does test a nuclear weapon this year, what will that do to oil prices?

http://www.debka.com/article/21635/

[mashman]

"Monday, Jan. 9, top administration officials said that developing a nuclear weapon would cross a red line and precipitate a US strike. US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta: "If Iran takes the step to develop a nuclear weapon or blocking the Strait of Hormuz, they're going to be stopped." He was repeating the warnings of the past month made by himself and Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff. Gen. Martin Dempsey."

bwaaaaaaaa ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa. What a bunch of children. Oil prices will go through the roof, as will most things as the "market" gets twitchy bum syndrome.

[Indiana_Jones]

<img src="http://memegenerator.net/cache/instances/400x/10/10577/10831334.jpg">

-Indy

[SMOKEU]

The yanks should have nuked the terrorists while they still had the chance. Problem solved.

[mashman]

The yanks should have nuked the terrorists while they still had the chance. Problem solved.

The yanks are the terrorists.

[Shadowjack]

I wonder what the average life expectancy is for an Iranian nuclear physicist, these days...
And whether it's currently seen as a good career choice.

[SMOKEU]

The yanks are the terrorists.

At least they don't go blowing themselves up in the name of some fictitious "higher power".

[Shadowjack]

At least they don't go blowing themselves up in the name of some fictitious "higher power".
True, but they have been known to invoke a "higher power" to bless their endeavours.

[p.dath]

This can only end badly. Very badly.

[mashman]

At least they don't go blowing themselves up in the name of some fictitious "higher power".

Haaaaaa ha ha ha haaaaaaaa. Ok, so God doesn't go with them to war eh. Wasn't there a story where a Marine threw a grenade into a tent of US soldiers and blew them to bits? Reckon friendly fire would be classed as blowing themselves up? At least the "terrorists" make sure of their targets first.

[Laava]

At least they don't go blowing themselves up in the name of some fictitious "higher power".

You sure about that? Any one or thing is fair game to them when they strike incl their impressively high friendly fire rate.
Have you seen the documentary, "Team America, World Police"

[george formby]

During the Iran Iraq war the Iranians threw a million soldiers into the front line, boys & old men against British & American tanks & artillery. They had to share guns & bullets like the Russians at Stalingrad. Not one of them took a step backwards. They fought for their country not their religion & they fought because to refuse was certain death by their own officers.

If Amercka & Israel want to pick a fight with the Iranians I hope they have studied recent history. If / when Israel jumps in the whole of the middle east will follow suit against them.

Inevitably oil prices will go through the roof & our current economic woes will look positively rosy.

[pzkpfw]

I wonder what the average life expectancy is for an Iranian nuclear physicist, these days...
And whether it's currently seen as a good career choice.

Not "average", it's "half".

[SMOKEU]

Wasn't there a story where a Marine threw a grenade into a tent of US soldiers and blew them to bits? Reckon friendly fire would be classed as blowing themselves up?

That was an isolated incident.



Have you seen the documentary, "Team America, World Police"

No I haven't seen it.

[Crasherfromwayback]

At least the "terrorists" make sure of their targets first.

What...women and children?

[mashman]

That was an isolated incident.

How much friendly fire is just an isolated incident?


What...women and children?

That's a bit harsh really. I can understand why errant self guided missiles and drones will cause collateral damage. Ohhhh, sorry, you meant the other terrorists :bleh:

[jasonu]

At least the "terrorists" make sure of their targets first.

Yes suicide bombers that blow themselves up in public places ALWAYS ensure those hurt and killed are the intended 'targets'.

[Fatt Max]

As I have said time and time again re the Middle East, Iran are only worth worrying about should Afghanistan jump in with them.

Now, the only way the Afghan's can keep in touch with world events is via satellite, ie SKY TV

But......and here is the answer to the worlds worries, the Afghans will never know what Iran are doing

Because in Afghanistan they have a telly-ban.........

[Fatt Max]

Heard the one about the Irish suicide bomber......

Three successful missions to date.....

[Crasherfromwayback]

. Ohhhh, sorry, you meant the other terrorists :bleh:

The ones that use intellectually handicapped people to bomb others.

[jasonu]

The ones that use intellectually handicapped people to bomb others.

Or the ones that will kill your family if you don't bomb others.

[mashman]

Yes suicide bombers that blow themselves up in public places ALWAYS ensure those hurt and killed are the intended 'targets'.

Aye, indiscriminate bombing is so much better.


The ones that use intellectually handicapped people to bomb others.

I guess we believe what we believe... both sides are as stupid as the other and at least one side is doing it for virgins... which can't be all bad, they need love too

[Shadowjack]

I wonder what the average life expectancy is for an Iranian nuclear physicist, these days...
And whether it's currently seen as a good career choice.


Not "average", it's "half".


Right there: Gold!!:laugh:

[Hitcher]

I'm just waiting for the doomsaying "god told you all so" brigade to get their bibles out. That contribution will provide us all with a lot of useful insight.

[SMOKEU]

How much friendly fire is just an isolated incident?



People go crazy and then go on a rampage. It's not part of a big cause like Islamic terrorists.

[mashman]

People go crazy and then go on a rampage. It's not part of a big cause like Islamic terrorists.

So one has a reason and the other is just mindless spray and walk away? Awesome.

[Edbear]

I'm just waiting for the doomsaying "god told you all so" brigade to get their bibles out. That contribution will provide us all with a lot of useful insight.

Nah, it's just all part of the world scene today. Nothing really special just comes under the general "You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars; see that you are not terrified. For these things must take place, but the end is not yet." Matt 24:6

[Crasherfromwayback]

So one has a reason and the other is just mindless spray and walk away? Awesome.

Are you glad the Yanks saved our sorry asses in WWII?

[SMOKEU]

So one has a reason and the other is just mindless spray and walk away? Awesome.

Pretty much.

[mashman]

Are you glad the Yanks saved our sorry asses in WWII?

Are we going for godwins here? I'd much rather be buff blonde haired and blue eyed if that's what yer gettin at. :rofl:@saved... wonder where the economy woulda been had they failed? We are where we are in history, I give a shit not where we've been, only where we're going.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Are we going for godwins here? I'd much rather be buff blonde haired and blue eyed if that's what yer gettin at. :rofl:@saved... wonder where the economy woulda been had they failed? We are where we are in history, I give a shit not where we've been, only where we're going.

Yeah and I've always quite fancied wee Asian chicks. But I'm glad I get to speak English still. The way I see it is...someone has to be the world police. Sure they prefer countries rich in oil (funny that), but if you'd like Iran to have nuclear weapons you're not as smart as I though you were. They'd have no hesitation in sending them to Israel and that wouldn't be good.

[mashman]

Yeah and I've always quite fancied wee Asian chicks. But I'm glad I get to speak English still. The way I see it is...someone has to be the world police. Sure they prefer countries rich in oil (funny that), but if you'd like Iran to have nuclear weapons you're not as smart as I though you were. They'd have no hesitation in sending them to Israel and that wouldn't be good.

If the Germans had have won, would you have been born at all? and would you have cared that you didn't speak Engrish? Oh I dunno. Israel have nukes and would probably send them back. How's that going to help anyone? We'll destroy ourselves, but at least the Israeli's will be gone too? For some reason I don't see it happening. Perhaps they've seen the Israeli's throwing their weight around and decided that they'd have themselves a deterrent?

p.s. don't underestimate my dumbness again, I don't like it

[pete376403]

No-one took North Korea even the slightest bit seriously until they aquired nukes. Can't really blame Iran for wanting the same sort of clout.

Besides, theres already one nuclear-armed middle eastern country with religious fanatics at the helm - another would just balance things a bit

[Hans]

No-one took North Korea even the slightest bit seriously until they aquired nukes. Can't really blame Iran for wanting the same sort of clout.

Besides, theres already one nuclear-armed middle eastern country with religious fanatics at the helm - another would just balance things a bit

There may be two nuclear armed countries in the middle east. Rumour has it that Saudi Arabia...

[pete376403]

There may be two nuclear armed countries in the middle east. Rumour has it that Saudi Arabia...

Not as silly as it sounds. Saudi is about the only country in the region that Israel leaves more or less alone.

[Hans]

Nothing silly about it at all. What's more, they have the IRBMs to deliver the rumoured warheads. Israel and the Saudis get along fairly well. It is also rumoured that they might provide overflight rights or perhaps even the use of airbases for an Israli airstrike on Iran. Iran and Saudi Arabia also happen to be mortal enemies.
BTW: it doesn't take a great deal of imagination to figure where the Saudis might have got their nukes from...Pakistan...

[Macontour]

I have an old school mate who has done very well for himself in the Royal Air Force. He has worked in Whitehall and various NATO postings around the world. Just by coincidence he sent this to me today. a bit of a long read and only one persons opinion but he is pretty well qualified to make it!!

NATO School Oberammergau

Strategic Commentary Nr 20120113

UNCLASSIFIED

Iran, Nuclear Weapons and Pakistan – a Perfect Storm?

This briefing and analysis is about the strategic challenges posed by rapidly unfolding events in Iran and Pakistan. Though the issues are not directly related, the countries involved are neighbours and relations between them are, at best cool.

Situation:

Iran: Iran continues to enrich uranium at levels ‘consistent with the production of fissile material for a nuclear device’ according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. This is another clear indication of a desire of Iran to develop an independent nuclear capability. This, of course, has raised global concerns and both the US and the EU have imposed economic sanctions on Iran – in particular trade with its financial institutions. Iran, in response to these sanctions, has threatened to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz, were a significant percentage (between 30 – 60% - depending on how it is measured) of world crude oil is shipped. To reinforce this threat, the Iranian Navy and the Republic Guard have recently conducted a series of maritime and land-based exercises that demonstrated some capability to carry out this threat – by use of submarines, land-based anti-shipping missiles and by the employment of deep-hulled ultra-high speed missile boats with a mine-laying capability. The Head of the Iranian Navy also issued a specific threat about attacking a US Carrier Group if it attempted to intervene.

Comment: Such rhetoric is common, and Iranian attempts to close the strait have been present since 1979, and Western naval forces, working in ad hoc coalitions have periodically ensured the right of free passage of both merchant and naval vessels. Strategists typically yawn, and state that Iran would not cut off its only major source of foreign revenue by closing the Strait. Japan has announced that it is reducing its dependency on Iranian oil and the difference this time is that the sanctions have the potential to financially isolate Iran, and the regimes that run Iran (the Supreme Council of absolutists on one side and the less-than rational Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the other) could inflict huge global economic damage by closing the Strait, howsoever temporary, as revenge to these sanctions.

However, on the nuclear side, there have been a number of successful attacks against ‘key’ Iranian nuclear scientists, as well as a widely-reported cyber attack against SCIDA controls within some of the nculcear facilities. These are routinely attributed to MOSSAD – or the US (or both) - but, there is no open source material that supports these claims. A recent article by Shashank Joshi, of the widely-respected security think-tank RUSI, points out that there are many possible threats to the Iranian nuclear programme, from across the region – and from dissident groups within the country. Apart from Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, Iran has few friends internationally that are not Pariah states, in spite of technical assistance from China, and a lesser extent, Russia. Countries across the region may publically denounce attacks against Iran, however, behind closed doors, they are likely to welcome a bluntening of Iran’s nuclear (and conventional) ambitions. One-off alliances may be established to allow attacks to be prosecuted because of mutual self interest.

But why is Iran behaving like this? Partly for domestic consumption – with Parliamentary elections in 6 weeks. But partly because of a reaction to the Arab Spring. Tunisia, Libya and Egypt have undergone revolutions which have lead – so far – to moderate (albeit Islamist-leaning) governments-in-waiting, and not rabid anti-Western (and anti-Sunni) pro-Shi’a and pro-Iranian regimes. Demographically, Iran and Syria are very similar. Three years ago Iran managed to suppress the amorphous ‘green revolution’ but must the regimes must be concerned that domestic opposition groups are heartened by results of other dissent across much of the neighbouring Arab world, and in particular, Syria’s inability to stop the spread of dissent and revolution in spite of Draconian measures and widespread loss of life.


Pakistan:

Pakistan could be on the edge of a military coup. The Prime Minister is calling for a confidence vote in Parliament on Monday 17 Jan, amidst a deepening crisis between the Government, the Military and the Judiciary. Here’s the time line (courtesy of the BBC News website):

2 May: Pakistan's army widely criticised after the US raid on Bin Laden's Abbottabad home
10 October: A Financial Times article reveals the existence of an anonymous memo written after the raid, asking for US help to curb the army
22 November: Pakistan's US envoy Husain Haqqani resigns after claims he and President Zardari wrote the memo - they deny this
23 December: Army chief dismisses coup rumours after PM Yousuf Raza Gilani speaks out against an alleged coup plot
30 December: Pakistan's Supreme Court opens an inquiry into the "memogate" affair. There are suspicions that the memo was forged in order to discredit the Government.
11 January: The army publicly rebukes Mr Gilani after he criticised army leaders in an interview. He responds by sacking Pakistan's defence secretary.
It is also reported on some websites that General Pervez Musharraf plans to return to Pakistan by the end of January, facing possible arrest. Pakistan came under military rule again in October 1999 after Musharraf ousted a civilian government that had lost a great deal of public support. Under growing pressure to reintroduce democratic rule, Mr Musharraf relinquished his army post in November 2007, but at parliamentary elections in February 2008, his supporters were defeated by the opposition Pakistan People's Party and former PM Nawaz Sharif's Muslim League. The two parties formed a coalition government and an impeachment process was launched against Mr Musharraf, who resigned in Aug 08 and then left the country.

Comment: Musharraf’s arrival could be the catalyst for another military coup, which could lead to widespread insurrection, strengthing the ambiguous role the Taliban and AQ have in country. Relations with the US and the West (including NATO) are at an all-time low; the NATO report on the border incident (released on 23 Dec) in which a number of PAK soldiers were killed by ‘NATO’ drew oblique criticism of the Pakistan Army’s behaviour and raised questions about opsec and allegiances. If a coup took place, NATO is unlikely to have the southern MSR restored into Afghanistan; moreover it is likely that border cooperation – already patchy – would all but collapse. India’s response to a coup would be concerning – especially as both countries have nuclear weapons and controls within PAK might be further eroded.

So what?

It is difficult to asses which crisis is more serious. If attempts were made to close the Strait of Hormuz, there would be immediate economic impact with global implications. The price of crude oil would rise considerably, inflicting further – and possible irreparable – damage on faltering Global economies. If offensive action was taken by, say, Israel, against Iranian Nuclear facilities, Iran would respond asymmetrically (and probably close the Strait for good measure). As mentioned above, there would be covert support for such action from countries in the region – principally Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Suadi Arabia is currently attempting to suppress a Shi’a rebellion in its Western provinces which is believed to be supported by Iran.

If Pakistan undergoes yet another military coup (possibly with Musharref restored), relations with the West and India would collapse. Although Musharref was always seen as friendly to the West, he would realize that his political (and physical) survival would rest on the support of the Army. This would have an immediate impact on the conflict in Afghanistan, with the likelihood of Taliban presence in Quetta, for example, being tolerated even more that it is at present. India would necessarily be concerned about a militant Pakistan and could seek to seize and advance in the disputed territories on Kashmir during the Spring thaw, whilst the PAK Army is distracted by internal strife arising from the coup. Pakistan is unlikely to allow such a move to pass ‘unpunished’ and could call on Chinese assistance, given the huge level of trade, financial and military assistance China provides in return for access to the Arabian sea and the wider Indian Ocean.

And NATO…so What?

In spite of stringent financial constraints amongst member states (or indeed because of them) if the Strait of Hormuz is threatened, it is possible that NATO could stand up a Naval force to maintain security of the Strait after it was cleared by a smaller coalition, led by the USN 5th Fleet. Legally, it is likely that NATO would do so in response to a UNSCR – on this occasion, it is likely that neither China nor Russia would veto such a move, because of economic self-interest. Russia has a Carrier task group (led by the Adm Kusnetzov CVN) in the Eastern Mediterranean, and reported it is planning to head to the Arabian Sea. Chinese Naval surface unitsd are also assisting in CP missions of the nearby Horn of Africa.

As discussed above, a collapsing Pakistan would lead to increased cross-border insurgency, possibly with the overt support of the PAK Army. Clearly, the Southern MSR would not reopen, nor would extant ABO be supported. This would drastically change the 2014 ISAF force reduction calculus, and lead to a collapse of the already-fractious relations between Karzai’s Government in Kabul and an unknown regime in Islamabad..

And what if both of the scenarios played out over the next month….?


Of course, I hope I wrong.

Wg Cdr Bryan J Hunt SPPD Strategic Analyst, NATO School Oberammergau. Compiled for open sources.


This analysis is personal opinion and does not reflect the policy of the NATO School Oberammergau, or indeed, of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and its constituent bodies.



.

[Berries]

Heard the one about the Irish suicide bomber........
Funny. I went in to a leather shop today, run by Pakistanis as it happens. All I asked for was a bomber jacket and I got thrown out.

[ellipsis]

...you can worry, expostulate, be slightly concerned,be terrified, not give two fucks, be slightly miffed with the stuation...it really makes no odds....we cant even make Nick Smith go away...why even bother about the bigger picture...

[TrentNz]

Thoughts: the US should drop every nuclear bomb they have on Iran, fuck the civilians there all as bad as each-other.
although... they probably don't want to do this because then the country would be inaccessible and no further crude oil would be able to be extracted..

[Mungatoke Mad]

Why just Iran ? There's plenty 2 go around Kill em all :niceone:

[scissorhands]

Obama is the man for the job


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLcyIfh6-m4

[jasonu]

Obama is the man for the job



Obama will be out of a job (hopefully) come this November.

[Edbear]

Why just Iran ? There's plenty 2 go around Kill em all :niceone:

There are enough nuclear warheads to obliterate all life on Earth many times over.

[240]

The problem is with these towel heads is that dying is a GOOD thing to them!
Meeting Allah and taking out the infidels is a great way to go, they don't give a fuck.
I heard someone on the radio last week say what better way for them to show that they are serious about having nuclear capability than exploding a bomb on a small remote country like NZ?
Fuck em I say the Yanks should sort them NOW.

[TrentNz]

The problem is with these towel heads is that dying is a GOOD thing to them!
Meeting Allah and taking out the infidels is a great way to go, they don't give a fuck.
I heard someone on the radio last week say what better way for them to show that they are serious about having nuclear capability than exploding a bomb on a small remote country like NZ?
Fuck em I say the Yanks should sort them NOW.

i agree, BUT they know we have an alliance with the Usa, australia, england.. etc.
so they've got to be thinking if they did, they would have them on their asses asap.

[Indiana_Jones]

If Iran are going to use a bomb of that nature, they're not going to directly attack anyone, They will just give the bomb to some terrorist group to do their dirty work and take the fall.

-Indy

[SPman]

Are you glad the Yanks saved our sorry asses in WWII? that was 65 years and three generations ago....times change.

[SPman]

The problem is with these towel heads is that dying is a GOOD thing to them! Not according to all the towel heads I know over here - Iraquis, Iranians, most of them reckon it's a load of shit and just wish the fanatics would fuck off and die somewhere else - just like most westerners wish the christian fanatics would fuck off and die somewhere else, then leave everyone else to get on with life free of their invective and hate (we come in peace, shoot to kill....)

Anyway - Iran is at least 5 years away from a bomb, according to those who know, but are conveniently ignored. The Christian fundamentalists in the USA combined with Israel will, however, tell us otherwise. Personally, I'd be more worried about Pakistan and Israel. They do have nuclear weapons......

[EJK]

If Iran are going to use a bomb of that nature, they're not going to directly attack anyone, They will just give the bomb to some terrorist group to do their dirty work and take the fall.

-Indy

<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a5/SOAF_movie.JPG/220px-SOAF_movie.JPG" />

. ..

[Mungatoke Mad]

that was 65 years and three generations ago....times change.65 years ago there were a bunch of crazy fucks who believed that it was right to die because someone told them so -the solution nuke EM abracadabra peace the fucking towel heads cant afford to use 1 directly because it's taking to much time/money & heat to produce just 1 or 2 & it would leave them with no bargaining chip at the table as well as the extinction of all party members :laugh:

[SPman]

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/289-134/9488-focus-put-iran-war-march-on-trial

[Tigadee]

Saber-rattling has always been good for the economy, especially when times are tough - Keeps the minds of the masses off the fact that life is tough, and keeps the military industrial complex in business churning out more and more weapons.

Besides, after leaving Iraq, where else are the Yanks gonna dump and use their expiring ammo on?

[avgas]

At least they don't go blowing themselves up in the name of some fictitious "higher power".
Your kidding right?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa

[avgas]

I have an old school mate who has done very well for himself in the Royal Air Force. He has worked in Whitehall and various NATO postings around the world. Just by coincidence he sent this to me today. a bit of a long read and only one persons opinion but he is pretty well qualified to make it!!

NATO School Oberammergau

Strategic Commentary Nr 20120113

UNCLASSIFIED

Iran, Nuclear Weapons and Pakistan – a Perfect Storm?

This briefing and analysis is about the strategic challenges posed by rapidly unfolding events in Iran and Pakistan. Though the issues are not directly related, the countries involved are neighbours and relations between them are, at best cool.

Situation:

Iran:


Pakistan:


And what if both of the scenarios played out over the next month….?


Of course, I hope I wrong.

Wg Cdr Bryan J Hunt SPPD Strategic Analyst, NATO School Oberammergau. Compiled for open sources.


This analysis is personal opinion and does not reflect the policy of the NATO School Oberammergau, or indeed, of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and its constituent bodies.

.
He forgot Korea's change in leadership
<object id="vid_4c50d3eeaeaed848b9d204cc" class="ign-videoplayer" width="480" height="270" data="http://media.ign.com/ev/prod/embed.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash">




</object>More Homefront Videos (http://www.ign.com/videos/2010/06/10/homefront-x360-e3-2010-back-story-trailer)

[mashman]

Just 1 of the many reasons I detest history. Too many are quick to hold up what has been done in the past as an excuse to, in this case, start a war. Israel have a history of itchy trigger finger syndrome, the US are happy that they're right and the rest of us just sit back and cheers for one side or the other. I hope the Iranians have nuclear missiles and Israel and/or the US get it drastically wrong. It might wake us the fuck up to what's important... and it isn't the stupid fuckin rat race that we currently live in.

Whatever happened to returning fire? Why the need for a pre-emptive strike? It certainly isn't for the people. I've said it before and I'll say it again. If it were for the people, then they woulda sorted out Zimbabwe before now. A lot of puff and pomp but that's the acceptable way to do things. If Obama starts it, I'd be asking for his Nobel Peace Prize back. Fucks me right off.

[jasonu]

If Obama starts it, I'd be asking for his Nobel Peace Prize back. Fucks me right off.

Don't worry Obanana is weak as piss, he won't start anything.

[mashman]

Don't worry Obanana is weak as piss, he won't start anything.

Great to finally see a president that has control and taking responsibility in regards to decisions made for his country :blink:

[Indiana_Jones]

Great to finally see a president that has control and taking responsibility in regards to decisions made for his country :blink:

On the flip side if we had someone like him in charge in the 80s he would of rolled over for the Falklands...

-Indy

[mashman]

On the flip side if we had someone like him in charge in the 80s he would of rolled over for the Falklands...

-Indy

I probably wouldn't have a problem with that as it wasn't as though the Argies were gonna come and conquer the UK because they didn't defend a piece of land in the middle of an ocean somewhere. I'm getting hacked off with the excuses that drag countries into wars. Reckon if they had have polled the UK public with: Do you want to go to war with Argentina because they're contesting the ownership of a piece of land, even though it's off their coastline and nowhere near ours... expect people to die. Reckon the public woulda thought, yeah great?

[Tigadee]

Wasn't it that there were possibly substantial oil fields around the Falklands?

[TrentNz]

Fuck it. i say bring on WW3

[Indiana_Jones]

I probably wouldn't have a problem with that as it wasn't as though the Argies were gonna come and conquer the UK because they didn't defend a piece of land in the middle of an ocean somewhere. I'm getting hacked off with the excuses that drag countries into wars. Reckon if they had have polled the UK public with: Do you want to go to war with Argentina because they're contesting the ownership of a piece of land, even though it's off their coastline and nowhere near ours... expect people to die. Reckon the public woulda thought, yeah great?

Depends on your point of view, some people are quite happy to die trying to stop the Japs whaling in the middle of the Antarctic even though it's not near our coastline.

-Indy

[Indiana_Jones]

Fuck it. i say bring on WW3

Reckon it'll help the economy? :lol:

-Indy

[TrentNz]

economys fucked enough haha.
but once we get the sand niggers out of the place and usa takes over the oil then it might become a bit better.

[mashman]

Depends on your point of view, some people are quite happy to die trying to stop the Japs whaling in the middle of the Antarctic even though it's not near our coastline.

-Indy

True, although that involves slightly less weaponry. I take your point, I'm just fed up with the shitty reasons for it. 5000+ years of civilisation hasn't taught us a single fuckin thing. There are small groups of people throughout history that have wanted to war over land and resources and to what end? It certainly isn't for the benefit of the majority. I'm kinda fed up with it and what they're doing and how they're doing it.

[Indiana_Jones]

True, although that involves slightly less weaponry. I take your point, I'm just fed up with the shitty reasons for it. 5000+ years of civilisation hasn't taught us a single fuckin thing. There are small groups of people throughout history that have wanted to war over land and resources and to what end? It certainly isn't for the benefit of the majority. I'm kinda fed up with it and what they're doing and how they're doing it.

I agree. I firmly believe in the defence of a nation etc, but to turn to the guy next door and say "Oh yeah, I fancy your land" and then take it is something else entirely.

In the ideal world there wouldn't be a need for armed forces, but this is the real world and shit like this sadly happens. It'll never stop and to think otherwise is a pure dream.

-Indy

[Tigadee]

Reckon it'll help the economy?

economys fucked enough haha.

Heck, you can be sure some peoples somewhere are making money some way from these rumours of war...

[mashman]

I agree. I firmly believe in the defence of a nation etc, but to turn to the guy next door and say "Oh yeah, I fancy your land" and then take it is something else entirely.

In the ideal world there wouldn't be a need for armed forces, but this is the real world and shit like this sadly happens. It'll never stop and to think otherwise is a pure dream.

-Indy

I have a dream :wacko:... Shit like this happens because the people in charge want it to happen, no other reason. It's not like the majority want war and as we're a democracy ,,, meh, fuckit, it is what it is, but it will stop one way or another... just not in the way the dreamers would like it to :)

[SMOKEU]

economys fucked enough haha.
but once we get the sand niggers out of the place and usa takes over the oil then it might become a bit better.

+1 to that. The yanks should have nuked the cunts when they had the chance in WW2.

[TrentNz]

i know what you mean bro!
only fuckn anoying thing is they cant nuke the filthy fuckers because then they cant get in to get the oil out

[mashman]

i know what you mean bro!
only fuckn anoying thing is they cant nuke the filthy fuckers because then they cant get in to get the oil out

Now that they're next door to Iran, why don't they just dig a tunnel or two instead of killing people. Maybe whitey needs his pound of flesh to show how tough he is to his mates

[SMOKEU]

i know what you mean bro!
only fuckn anoying thing is they cant nuke the filthy fuckers because then they cant get in to get the oil out

It's worth a shot.

[TrentNz]

not too sure what they've been doing over their for the last how ever fuckn long but they sure fucked around a lot for the time it took and how many people they sent over.

[pzkpfw]

not too sure what they've been doing over their for the last how ever fuckn long but they sure fucked around a lot for the time it took and how many people they sent over.

Winning a war is easier than keeping the peace. The U.S. rolled over the Iraqi army in weeks. It's stopping them suicide bombing each other afterwards that's the hard part.

If the U.S. has to use force to keep the sea-lanes open, it can. The Iranian Navy would be sunk pretty quickly, and their air-force downed too. Keeping the sea lanes safe from land-based missile attack would be the hardest part of that.

The U.S. wouldn't be trying to occupy the country, well, unless they really went nuts.

[jasonu]

True, although that involves slightly less weaponry. I take your point, I'm just fed up with the shitty reasons for it. 5000+ years of civilisation hasn't taught us a single fuckin thing. There are small groups of people throughout history that have wanted to war over land and resources and to what end? It certainly isn't for the benefit of the majority. I'm kinda fed up with it and what they're doing and how they're doing it.

Why don't you start a petition?

[mashman]

Why don't you start a petition?

I'd rather push the big red button.

[avgas]

economys fucked enough haha.
but once we get the sand niggers out of the place and usa takes over the oil then it might become a bit better.
Or worse.
Sand niggers get their oil at cost. Even the US has 300% markup on theirs before the petro companies can refine it.

Also anyone remember Enron? Imagine if Enron ran OPEC and you can guess how bad oil prices would be if US ran the joint.

[davereid]

you can guess how bad oil prices would be if US ran the joint.

Israel is shutting down its Dimona Nuclear plant. Pretty clearly if you anticipate a war starting, cleaning up the potential liabilities in your own back yard is a good first move.

And the DimPost reports this morning that the Israelis have said they will only give the USA 12 hours notice of any attack on Iran, as they fear President Obama will try and stop any pre-emptive strike on Irans reactors.

Netanyahu apparently said that Obama is fearful of soaring energy prices being unhelpful to his presidential re-election chances.

Good to hear that Obama is not fearful of a war then. But it does raise the issue of how expensive energy may get in NZ.

[george formby]

Sabre rattling or cocking the hammer?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10783798

An attack could really put the dampers on my New Year optimism. I think they should all have a nice holiday together here in the Bay of Islands & discuss their differences holding a coldie & a fishing rod.

[mashman]

Sabre rattling or cocking the hammer?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10783798

An attack could really put the dampers on my New Year optimism. I think they should all have a nice holiday together here in the Bay of Islands & discuss their differences holding a coldie & a fishing rod.

How's about a pre-emptive strike and we destroy Israel. The Palestinians can have their land back and with America pulling out of the middle east, give or take, Al-Qaeda will cease their "terrorist" activity as their "conditions" will have been met. Bombing Iran does fuck all but stop a POTENTIAL threat to Israel... let's take the short cut :)

[blue rider]

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175496/tomgram%3A_michael_klare%2C_no_exit_in_the_persian _gulf/

good read

followed by

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175498/tomgram%3A_engelhardt%2C_kicking_down_the_world%27 s_door/


and just because


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y4vIzEkd6s

[SPman]

http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/2214-super-savage-sunday-obama-tightens-the-screws-on-iran.html

followed by

http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com.au/2012/02/hysteria-is-our-god.html

[george formby]

My New Year optimism has been replaced by a horrid sense of De ja' vu. Lies, damn lies & politicians.

[SPman]

and if you want to know what it's really like in Afghanistan...
http://armedforcesjournal.com/2012/02/8904030