[ElJefe]

I don't know what to make of the Iran deal.

On the one hand, the Iranians/Persian are a far more natural ally than the Arabs, who lie, cheat and backstab. Had we any sense, we would've annihilated their bedouin asses long ago.

On the other hand, it is not clear where the sympathies of those who have real power in Iran lie. The Iranians attacked the embassy in 1979 (an act of war), they support Hezbollah (mortal enemy), hate Israel (the Jews are the only really trustworthy allies of the West in the Near East). The Revolutionary Guard supported militias that attacked American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In general, we should've toppled the regime in Tehran long ago.

For the West, it seems, as horrible as it sounds, that it is to all our advantage that the Arabs, Turks and Persians keep each other busy slaughtering each other. Compartmentalizing their conflicts prevents them from directing their aggression towards us.

But can we effectively monitor the Iranians if those calling the shots in Tehran renege on the deal?

If they do renege, what is our insurance policy? Is the missile shield fully operational yet?

[Cheetah]

Not to in any way detract your post but I was hoping to see a thread on how to leverage the Iran deal into getting more Persian Pussy.

[Saweeep]

My hope is that, with a long enough timeline, the era of the Mad Mullahs will just be a blip.

Iran should be an ally of the West, not an enemy.

Plus the women are hot.

[Phoenix]

Iran is just sad. Had it not been for Khomeini and the Islamic revolution there in 1979, the Travel forum here would contain Tehran lay reports. Perhaps the Shah was to blame for being such a douche.

[N°6]

It is a realistic deal.

The regional balance of power is with Iran after Blair and Bush took out Saddam Hussein.

[Darius]

(04-05-2015 06:32 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

Iran is just sad. Had it not been for Khomeini and the Islamic revolution there in 1979, the Travel forum here would contain Tehran lay reports. Perhaps the Shah was to blame for being such a douche.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Irania...'%C3%A9tat

[Foolsgo1d]

People still get upset that Tehran supported an insurgency effort against coalition forces in the Middle East? I suppose NATO and the US have 0 complicity in the past 60 years on world events, regime changes and drug wars?

Iran is going to look after #1 and the religious sect it belongs too. You might not like it but it is the same stance Israel has taken and to state that Israel is a natural ally of the West is laughable. I would hazard a guess they would create a false flag attack on US soil to push a war with Iran if the need for it becomes a required tactic.

Lets put into context what isolating Iran, Syria and Russia has done to the countries.

- Hardline stances on anything Western

Its hard to get through the propaganda machine when the actions of Western countries meet the same sphere of lies these people have been exposed to as a result of the regime there.

Rich and better off Russians would tell a different story to the one being laid on back home. I'm sure Persian women and business men do the same. But because the West has its head so far up its collective asshole it cannot see the glaringly obvious flaw.

Those regimes are still here, they're still anti-west and a lot of people believe them. Just think of these countries as trolls. You keep feeding them and they grow, they don't die and fuck off into the limelight.

- Unstable countries

Watch two Top Gear episodes where they go to Syria and Ukraine before shit hit the fan. In Syria they were mobbed by thousands and needed to avoid the main roads. In Ukraine they didn't get hit by artillery or sniper fire and were welcomed.

Western imperialism at its finest. Those countries are worse off now and you wouldn't dare go near Syria for fear of being a victim of some mad cochroach who believes it his god given right to enjoy cutting off heads. All as a result of US operations to undermine a sovereign country. We're playing to rich Arabs tune by attacking threats to their power base.

Imagine a strong network of Shi'ite countries with the backing of Russia and China. Yeah, the US and NATO are petrified of that scenario.


But here we are, enclosing countries that did not toe the line but instead wanted their own future and want a means to defend themselves. Could you blame them?

I would be all for giving Iran the bomb. If it makes the US and Israel back down from creating another Iraq/Syria and thousands more blood thirsty holy warriors then so be it. A bomb that levels entire cities brings a fair bit of enlightenment to the table I find.

And lets not forget the Russian problem. Only the ignorant and stupid could paint a big target on their backs by pissing Russia off. I am no fan of Putin nor his regime but it is its own country, its the Russian way and pissing them off like a lot of our politicians have is a good way to end up 6 feet under.

[Phoenix]

(04-05-2015 07:12 AM)Darius Wrote:  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Irania...'%C3%A9tat

(04-05-2015 07:14 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  

People still get upset that Tehran supported an insurgency effort against coalition forces in the Middle East? I suppose NATO and the US have 0 complicity in the past 60 years on world events, regime changes and drug wars?

Regarding the '53 Coup, I actually don't have much of a problem with the US and Britain overthrowing the government of a country after it steals the property of US and British citizens. Your government is supposed to be there to protect your property rights after all. It could probably have done a better job than just chucking an Absolute Monarch in power though.

Also we need to factor in the USSR issue. When you are resisting the expansion of something as destructive and evil as communism, there is going to be some collateral damage.

That said, most of recent history has been completely unjustifiable and a massive over-reach. The drug war (which is unconstitutional despite all judicial bullshitting around the Commerce Clause) is truly awful, and the marching into Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc is absolutely ridiculous. After the USSR fell, the US should have been withdrawing from overseas, not going all imperial and world-police.

[Peregrine]

America signed the deal because they're (rightfully) more worried about China right now. By settling with Iran, they can fully pivot to Asia. Iran is happy because they made out like bandits. Israel and the Sauds are not happy because they think America left them hanging.

[Onto]

I'm sure Iran will renege at some point. The few people controlling Iran are unstable and if we had the ability to overthrow and replace them with a more stable government I would be all for it, but we don't.

Iraq wasn't much of a success and Iran would be much more difficult.

[spalex]

Normally I wouldn't comment on this sort of stuff.
But I just finished working in Tehran for 7 weeks.
I work for a German Company building Robots essentially.
I'm Australian.


The amount of times I heard "oh you are German, you kill the jews, we love you!" or "OH you kill Americans in WW2 we love you". I just basically stopped telling colleagues there that I wasn't German. Actually I had the same reception in Al-Riyadh.

If I was a normal person I would brush it off as the casual "a few bad apples" bullshit.

But sometimes I sit there and really thing about how much these left wingers really understand about what they stand up for.
It seems to me that defending something till you death for the sake of being politically correct is no better, if not worse than being bigoted towards something for the sake of being a racist dick. (let alone the the fact that people are against certain religions / races because they have real concerns).

P.s Not race baiting or any of that shit. Just think that there are hundreds of ways to point out left wing stupidity.

[turuk]

(04-05-2015 03:46 PM)spalex Wrote:  

The amount of times I heard "oh you are German, you kill the jews, we love you!" or "OH you kill Americans in WW2 we love you". I just basically stopped telling colleagues there that I wasn't German. Actually I had the same reception in Al-Riyadh.

People might not know it but the Mullah regime is probably the sole reason why there is so much sectarian wars in the middle-east. If it wasn't for Iran, the issue in Syria would be solved long time ago. The Mullah regime of Iran is spending millions upon millions to help Assad to kill its own people.

I really don't get Obama's logic of decreasing the sanctions since it would give Iran more money to throw at terrorism in the region. Iran is n1 sponsor of terrorism in the middle-east.
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/markaz/po...-terrorism

Sometimes you have to make the least bad choice. Israeli understand that and they allied themselves with the Saudi's against Iranian aggression in the region. If we take the average Arab versus the average Iranian. I would say the average Iranian is more fundamental and self-centered.

At least from my own experience most Arabs (other than Palestinians) recognize Israel. They see Iran is a bigger thread. For now, we should ally with Israel and the Arabs. There is no way the fundamental regime of Iran will change through peaceful means. Our best option would be to increase the sanctions and let a revolution happen in Iran and install an anti-Mullah regime.

[VolandoVengoVolandoVoy]

(04-05-2015 05:52 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  

I don't know what to make of the Iran deal.

On the one hand, the Iranians/Persian are a far more natural ally than the Arabs, who lie, cheat and backstab. Had we any sense, we would've annihilated their bedouin asses long ago.

On the other hand, it is not clear where the sympathies of those who have real power in Iran lie. The Iranians attacked the embassy in 1979 (an act of war), they support Hezbollah (mortal enemy), hate Israel (the Jews are the only really trustworthy allies of the West in the Near East). The Revolutionary Guard supported militias that attacked American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In general, we should've toppled the regime in Tehran long ago.

For the West, it seems, as horrible as it sounds, that it is to all our advantage that the Arabs, Turks and Persians keep each other busy slaughtering each other. Compartmentalizing their conflicts prevents them from directing their aggression towards us.

But can we effectively monitor the Iranians if those calling the shots in Tehran renege on the deal?

If they do renege, what is our insurance policy? Is the missile shield fully operational yet?

Israel is not our ally or our friend, and cannot be trusted. Israel cares only about its own interests and cynically uses the United States to promote a Zionist vision of Greater Israel.

Israel has absolutely no intention of ever agreeing to a two state solution, deliberately keeps surrounding countries weak and divided, and has a grand vision of a gradually expanding settlements to create a Jewish apartheid state where Palestinians are marginalized and eventually expelled.

They are violently opposed to a nuclear Iran not because they believe Iran would ever use its weapons, but because it balances out Israel's own nuclear arsenal. This in turn reduces Israel's ability to do whatever it wants and dictate the terms of political settlements in the Middle East.

[scotian]

Do any of you guys know if this deal will affect the price of oil?

[zayfran]

On a long enough timeline there won't be an era of the West and the rest. The deal is a strategically excellent one and was achieved through diplomacy which is commendable.

Intervention has always categorically been a failure. The democratically elected leader of Iran had every right to nationalize industries on sovereign soil in order to achieve better standards for his people.

What the Americans did was stupid , illogical , unethical and immoral and we basically got our asses handed to us with the Ayatollah's taking control after the shah. Sanctions are absurd and have never served any purpose.

[Aurini]

(04-05-2015 04:15 PM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  

Israel is not our ally or our friend, and cannot be trusted. Israel cares only about its own interests and cynically uses the United States to promote a Zionist vision of Greater Israel.

Israel has absolutely no intention of ever agreeing to a two state solution, deliberately keeps surrounding countries weak and divided, and has a grand vision of a gradually expanding settlements to create a Jewish apartheid state where Palestinians are marginalized and eventually expelled.

They are violently opposed to a nuclear Iran not because they believe Iran would ever use its weapons, but because it balances out Israel's own nuclear arsenal. This in turn reduces Israel's ability to do whatever it wants and dictate the terms of political settlements in the Middle East.

I hate to say this (I honestly do, that's not a wishy-washy figure of speech), but the for the United States to complain about erstwhile allies, is like 28 year old woman who's been riding the cock carousel complaining about how the badboy she's dating won't commit.

Israel's out for their own interests (as every country *should* be), and they consider the Americans to be fair-weather friends at best, and I have trouble blaming them. American foreign policy is so obsessed with spreading Democracy ™ that they're willing to shoot themselves in the foot over it, not to mention their allies.

The current POTUS is friendly with the Muslim Brotherhood, fer crying out loud - and he got elected twice. If you were part of a country surrounded by Muslim states with genocidal ambitions, would you trust the American government?

[Darius]

(04-05-2015 04:36 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

Israel's out for their own interests (as every country *should* be), and they consider the Americans to be fair-weather friends at best, and I have trouble blaming them. American foreign policy is so obsessed with spreading Democracy ™ that they're willing to shoot themselves in the foot over it, not to mention their allies.

Spreading Democracy is to keep the masses placated. American foreign policy couldn't give a shit about democracy at home or abroad. It's about making sure that those countries resources are in their sphere of control and that those countries do what they are told.

America is more than happy to overthrow a democratically elected government and replace it with a dictatorship that does what it's told.

[zayfran]

(04-05-2015 04:36 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

American foreign policy is so obsessed with spreading Democracy ™ that they're willing to shoot themselves in the foot over it, not to mention their allies.

I wish this were true. It would be easier to understand then. Unfortunately American foreign policy in too many cases has been short sighted selfish interest which then leaves us scrambling to fix it a couple of decades later.

Iran , Congo , Nicaragua etc. The list is endless.

[8ball]

Israel is the only bangable woman at a bar full of obese, hairy, loudmouth cunts. She has room to be unpleasant and vile at times since the competition is non-existent.

The bar is the middle east.

[Orion]

(04-05-2015 05:52 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  

I don't know what to make of the Iran deal.

On the one hand, the Iranians/Persian are a far more natural ally than the Arabs, who lie, cheat and backstab. Had we any sense, we would've annihilated their bedouin asses long ago.

On the other hand, it is not clear where the sympathies of those who have real power in Iran lie. The Iranians attacked the embassy in 1979 (an act of war), they support Hezbollah (mortal enemy), hate Israel (the Jews are the only really trustworthy allies of the West in the Near East). The Revolutionary Guard supported militias that attacked American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In general, we should've toppled the regime in Tehran long ago.

For the West, it seems, as horrible as it sounds, that it is to all our advantage that the Arabs, Turks and Persians keep each other busy slaughtering each other. Compartmentalizing their conflicts prevents them from directing their aggression towards us.

But can we effectively monitor the Iranians if those calling the shots in Tehran renege on the deal?

If they do renege, what is our insurance policy? Is the missile shield fully operational yet?

Yes, Israel is very valuable American ally, it took part in 0 wars waged by US

[Old Fritz]

I honestly don't think the US should be too concerned. Iran threatens US interest in the region and indirectly threatens us. Israel and Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt are the ones who are directly threatened and should be concerned... which they are.

Regarding the nuke, there is too much disinformation on that situation to draw a conclusion. It's best that Iran does not have a nuke because that would mean an arms race in that region. Pakistan has been responsible but we really don't need anymore of those countries getting that kind of weaponry.

[Old Fritz]

(04-05-2015 05:41 PM)Orion Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 05:52 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  

I don't know what to make of the Iran deal.

On the one hand, the Iranians/Persian are a far more natural ally than the Arabs, who lie, cheat and backstab. Had we any sense, we would've annihilated their bedouin asses long ago.

On the other hand, it is not clear where the sympathies of those who have real power in Iran lie. The Iranians attacked the embassy in 1979 (an act of war), they support Hezbollah (mortal enemy), hate Israel (the Jews are the only really trustworthy allies of the West in the Near East). The Revolutionary Guard supported militias that attacked American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In general, we should've toppled the regime in Tehran long ago.

For the West, it seems, as horrible as it sounds, that it is to all our advantage that the Arabs, Turks and Persians keep each other busy slaughtering each other. Compartmentalizing their conflicts prevents them from directing their aggression towards us.

But can we effectively monitor the Iranians if those calling the shots in Tehran renege on the deal?

If they do renege, what is our insurance policy? Is the missile shield fully operational yet?

Yes, Israel is very valuable American ally, it took part in 0 wars waged by US

Why would Israel participate in any of the US wars?

[Paracelsus]

(04-05-2015 05:47 PM)Old Fritz Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 05:41 PM)Orion Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 05:52 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  

I don't know what to make of the Iran deal.

On the one hand, the Iranians/Persian are a far more natural ally than the Arabs, who lie, cheat and backstab. Had we any sense, we would've annihilated their bedouin asses long ago.

On the other hand, it is not clear where the sympathies of those who have real power in Iran lie. The Iranians attacked the embassy in 1979 (an act of war), they support Hezbollah (mortal enemy), hate Israel (the Jews are the only really trustworthy allies of the West in the Near East). The Revolutionary Guard supported militias that attacked American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In general, we should've toppled the regime in Tehran long ago.

For the West, it seems, as horrible as it sounds, that it is to all our advantage that the Arabs, Turks and Persians keep each other busy slaughtering each other. Compartmentalizing their conflicts prevents them from directing their aggression towards us.

But can we effectively monitor the Iranians if those calling the shots in Tehran renege on the deal?

If they do renege, what is our insurance policy? Is the missile shield fully operational yet?

Yes, Israel is very valuable American ally, it took part in 0 wars waged by US

Why would Israel participate in any of the US wars?

For the same reason countries like Australia and the UK participate in the US's wars: because the US indirectly subsidises your defence spending by being a major ally with nuclear weapons such that you don't have to develop or stockpile your own.

[Old Fritz]

(04-05-2015 06:50 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 05:47 PM)Old Fritz Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 05:41 PM)Orion Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 05:52 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  

I don't know what to make of the Iran deal.

On the one hand, the Iranians/Persian are a far more natural ally than the Arabs, who lie, cheat and backstab. Had we any sense, we would've annihilated their bedouin asses long ago.

On the other hand, it is not clear where the sympathies of those who have real power in Iran lie. The Iranians attacked the embassy in 1979 (an act of war), they support Hezbollah (mortal enemy), hate Israel (the Jews are the only really trustworthy allies of the West in the Near East). The Revolutionary Guard supported militias that attacked American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In general, we should've toppled the regime in Tehran long ago.

For the West, it seems, as horrible as it sounds, that it is to all our advantage that the Arabs, Turks and Persians keep each other busy slaughtering each other. Compartmentalizing their conflicts prevents them from directing their aggression towards us.

But can we effectively monitor the Iranians if those calling the shots in Tehran renege on the deal?

If they do renege, what is our insurance policy? Is the missile shield fully operational yet?

Yes, Israel is very valuable American ally, it took part in 0 wars waged by US

Why would Israel participate in any of the US wars?

For the same reason countries like Australia and the UK participate in the US's wars: because the US indirectly subsidises your defence spending by being a major ally with nuclear weapons such that you don't have to develop or stockpile your own.

We didn't give Israel any of our troops in their wars. At least I don't recall. Besides, Israeli troops in a place like Iraq or Afghanistan? That would be a potential diplomatic incident.

[speakeasy]

(04-05-2015 09:45 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

Regarding the '53 Coup, I actually don't have much of a problem with the US and Britain overthrowing the government of a country after it steals the property of US and British citizens.

You sure? Think about that. You are basically saying that our soldiers should be called on to defend corporate interests. Not the United States. If a private company gets its assets and property seized, that's a risk of doing business in potentially unstable countries and that risk should be built into their profit model. We shouldn't be sending our boys to die to protect private businesses. Let them hire mercenaries and pay for it with their own dime.

Quote:

Your government is supposed to be there to protect your property rights after all.

Yes, on US territory. Once you are doing business on someone else's soil, that becomes the risk of the company.