Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


Larry Pubes

Recommended Posts

1give shiite iraq to Iran, sunni arab iraq to saudi arabia and let the kurds have their soveriegnty, with turkish kurdistan carved out too for good measure...


2big picture this would solve the most long term



1. The war within Islam is not that involves territory, giving sunni's and shite's land and expecting everything to work out is just adding fuel to a fire. The Syrian state will not allow for the creation of a Kurdistan, They will use force. For everything to go better in the middle east land can't be "carved out". That would create another Africa with tribal and country lines crosssecting and creating more problems. The Islamic world needs time to evolve, it's been out of the spotlight for a couple of centuries. It's been along time since it had power and now to rule the world you need more than horses and sheer force to rule the world, you need multinational corporations.


2. The answers aren't going to standardized test style, no choosing C. The solutions won't be created by the people you see on TV or in the News. They will be made by small officials you've never heard of. Anyone that tells you they know the solution...doesn't. Even Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A Strike on Iran would signify the Beginning of an Epoch of Nuclear War



by Dmitriy Sedov


Global Research, February 10, 2007

Strategic Cultural Foundation (Russia)


In my paper entitled “2007: Opening a New Page in the World’s History”, published in September, 2006, I examined the possibility that a US strike on Iran using small-scale nuclear munitions [mini-nukes] would be launched, and that the strike would become the beginning of an epoch of nuclear wars. There were various responses to the paper. Some authors, including recognized experts, doubted the possibility of such a development. At present, few people doubt that there will be a strike on Iran. Rather, the question is whether nuclear or conventional weapons will be used in the offensive.

In this context, I would like to present the following considerations.


1. An attack on Iran is motivated by nothing but the US domestic political expediency and the unlimited appetites of the country’s military-industrial complex. President G. Bush has no choice – his only option is a breakthrough. The problem does not originate from the total failure of his doctrine of the “war on international terrorism”. If the US political elite represented by Bush based its decisions solely on the estimates of the damage to its public image that might be caused by the fiasco of the global anti-terrorist campaign, it would have extremely serious reservations about starting a new regional war. However, they are motivated by something else – they need to continue Bush’s politics backed by a conglomerate of weapons suppliers, who established control over the country’s oversized military spending. Should Bush recognize being defeated and withdraw the US military forces from the Middle East, the Democrat’s elite would overtake the financial leverage, and a major redistribution of the military commissioning would follow. When such enormous funds are at stake, people’s lives and those of entire nations become tokens in the game. For these operations, the destiny of the Middle East and its nations means absolutely nothing, just as the lives of the Vietnamese and the Cambodians showered with napalm and defoliants meant nothing either. One must be naïve to suppose that the Pentagon machine will stop and miss the new incredibly high profits.


2. The coming war between the US and Iran has to conform to certain parameters defined a priori. The US is tired of Iraq, and the public opinion in the country is turning increasingly anti-war. Therefore, the offensive against Iran has to be swift and victorious. This will save Bush’s political group and give it a higher rating in the country. There can be no doubt that a successful aggression will make Bush extremely popular in the US – in this anti-Christian society the pagan god of victory has long taken the place of the Savior. A triumph will make the US public blind and deaf – it will remain unaware of the price of the US victory for the nations of the Middle East. The crucial circumstance is that only nuclear weapons can guarantee the US victory in this war. Knowing that the US failed to win even in Iraq, a country plagued by religious and ethnic strife, one cannot expect it to prevail in the united and spiritually strong Iran. Only the use of nuclear weapons can make it possible to cause severe damage to the Iranian control system hidden in bunkers and, importantly, to behead its leadership no matter how deep underground it might be hiding. Iran without its leaders and with a paralyzed system of control, with an army devastated by “baby nukes”, is the only option which suits the US - it agrees to talk about peace only to a totally subdued offender. Such talks would let the US leaders’ old dream of a Middle Eastern Disneyland, mastered by the US and Israel, come true.


Here are the facts which illustrate the process of preparation for the devastation of Iran:


- The UN Security Council Resolution envisions that a further tightening of the sanctions imposed on Iran must take place after February 21, 2006. From the standpoint of international law, this is a pretext (essentially, a poor one, but one that does exist) to legalize an aggression against the country.


- Two US aircraft carrier groups armed with nukes are moving into the region. The US aircraft carrier groups have been on missions 5 times over the past 15 years. In 4 cases out of the 5, they launched military offensives. In March, 2007 both groups are to take their combat positions.


- Additional ground forces have been shifted to the border between Iraq and Iran. Preparations for a new phase of hostilities are underway.


- In February, Patriot missile defense systems will be ready to defend Israel and the aircraft carrier groups from enemy airstrikes.


- British combat engineers are entering the regions of the future fighting, clearly in order to operate in the Strait of Ormuz, where Iranians are most likely to lay mines.


- The US and Israel launched a powerful information and propaganda campaign preparing the global public opinion for the aggression.


- CENTCOM’s Commander John Abizaid, an opponent of the war with Iran, resigned. His position was taken over by Admiral W. Fallon, a veteran of the 1991 Iraq and 1995 Bosnia campaigns.


- John Negroponte has been removed from his position as the Director of National Intelligence for persistently resisting the use of force against Iran.


- Tony. Blair, the “staff peacemaker” for the Middle East, never mentions a peaceful settlement of the Iran dossier. He makes no attempts to find a way to resolve the crisis in a peaceful way, and this is highly indicative.


All of the above constitute evidence of Iran being prepared for sacrifice. Will a major provocation be orchestrated for this purpose?


A number of observers opine that Washington needs one. We believe that what we will see is going to be a plain cowboy-style scenario like the one which materialized in Iraq. The media has never stop debating the issue of the “Iranian atomic bomb” – just as they focused on “Saddam. Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction”. It is time for them to start. It absolutely does not matter that eventually nothing of the kind will be found in Iran. Those who disagree will be silenced by force.


The question is – will such a “breakthrough” do George Bush any good? The idea of attacking Iran was born in the primitive minds of those who, just for the sake of their profits, can sell the rope on which they will be hanged. This time it will be neither they nor their children who will perish in the nuclear Holocaust, and they’d rather not worry that by this they will take the whole of mankind a step closer to total catastrophe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey dude, i was pretty sure you were villainous..

man, shit is going to be fucking unbelievably tasty cakes if they attack iran hard. a couple of years ago i was riding my bike on a sidewalk and wasn't paying attn. i turned my head foward and right then i smashed face first into the trunk of a hard ass leaning tree and got totally close lined. it was pretty insane...got a concussion and basically writhed around on the ground for 5 minutes trying to control the of feeling wanting to simultaneously puke, shit and piss myself. i imagine attacking iran will be a simliar exercise in stupidity and illness. obviously the big question is are they really crazy enough to actually do it?....personally i think it's on..but it's hard to imagine they could really be so frighteningly reckless..

..it's freaky how they wield the image of their power: remorseless, arrogant, totally shameless, unpredictable and prone to all sorts of incredible acts of depravity and they not only not care that they are perceived this way, they're totally into it and perpetuate it! i mean, fuck! i love recycled reaganites!


i know absolutely nothing about china underwriting american debt dude...hook it up, i'd be interested in some links if you have any...


dig the sig.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

fact is that the iranian nuclear program can't technically be a civilian oriented one... what they are doing is fast nuclear bombs building...

i think we can make a parallel between Iran 2007 and Japan 1930-45 in the fact that both countries leaders are complete fanatics ready to destroy everything in order to reach their expansionists goals... iran want to spread his islamic revolution by any means necessary (for ex when they say that they will wipe off Israel they really don't care about their palestinians "brothers"), but there is a lot of differences between the two situations, most of iranians like the american way of life (really!) and they don't care about islamic revolution etc...

i think that now the USA want to show to the world ( more specifically China Russia etc...)that they can still military rule the world after the disasters of Irak and Afghanistan and they will not do the same errors than in irak, so they will use nuclear weapons against iran...



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
fact is that the iranian nuclear program can't technically be a civilian oriented one... what they are doing is fast nuclear bombs building...

Is there any evidence for your claim? And please don't refer to US gov or US gov controlled sources (CIA, DOD, Fox news etc.)! They are not trustworthy.


iran want to spread his islamic revolution by any means necessary (for ex when they say that they will wipe off Israel they really don't care about their palestinians "brothers"),

Iran will not attack anyone. They know that the US and Israel would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons in return. I don't think Amadinejad is that dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
my own opinion is that if we move into iran, it will set up the ww4 scenario.


yea itll do the exact thing it did to russia...REVOLUTION! as much as i hate war, i think that a world war could cause a lot of suffering and lead to revolution...

if dirty ass selfish zionist bitches get weapons, then so does iran...fuck what anyone says...and abou the dude who's friends with rummy, i cant evne believe that fuckin midwestern boys who are fuckin down with rummy are now writin. i mean im not poor myslef but graff is just strayin too far now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...