Will US Attack Iran?

[melo]

It's true that the Bush Administration's FY2008 budget calls for enhancing U.S. broadcasting to countries that are some of the worst violators of human rights and press freedom: North Korea, Iran and Cuba. But the BBG again failed to convince the budget planners at the White House that media freedom is also under severe threat in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Tibet and China.


Who says Iran and Cuba are human rights violaters? What proof do they have? :? I think it is because the US government is improving relations with the other countries and want them as allies. They don't care what they do with human rights or press freedom. Like I said before it is all about politics.

[MUHLIS]

Who says Iran and Cuba are human rights violaters?
I think this Human Rights issue is more complicated than we can imagine especially in our days, when all kinds of political groups are trying to manipulate it for their own benefits. If we apply the full concept, it will be very hard to find a country that is not violating Human Rights. But the degree, scope, frequency, and other aspects of violations vary from one country to another. So, when we say "HR violating countries we should mean those countries which are violating human rights more severly, routinely, and en masse.....

[melo]

I think this Human Rights issue is more complicated than we can imagine, especially today, when all kinds of political groups are trying to manipulate it for their own bebefits. If we apply the full concept, it will be very hard to find a country that is not violating Human Rights. But the degree, scope, frequency, and other aspects of violations vary from one country to another. So, when we say "HR violating countries we should mean those countries which are violating human rights more severly, routinely, and en masse.....

I agree but I don't understand how Cuba can be put on this list. Does it really committ more human rights violations than the US? :shock: It is only more evidence to me that this is more for political purposes than anything.

[UzLand]

Who says Iran and Cuba are human rights violaters? What proof do they have? :? I think it is because the US government is improving relations with the other countries and want them as allies. They don't care what they do with human rights or press freedom. Like I said before it is all about politics.

I think the situation around Iran is being pressured on purpose...a war is coming:)

[UzLand]

I don't think a war is possible. I think Iran will just be bombed intensely.

Yeah, this is not a war. It is a peaceful bombing, right?:) And Iran will sit and do nothing? Of course, it is going to be a war after that. Not on US soil, but against US interests.

[melo]

Yeah, this is not a war. It is a peaceful bombing, right?:) And Iran will sit and do nothing? Of course, it is going to be a war after that. Not on US soil, but against US interests.

I think a war would be clash of armies. I highly doubt any US troops will invade Iran. I don't think Iran takes credit for actions outside its borders. Those are terrorists I think. :lol:

[Arhimed]

I think a war would be clash of armies. I highly doubt any US troops will invade Iran. I don't think Iran takes credit for actions outside its borders. Those are terrorists I think. :lol:

America will use Azeri people and oil prices to destabalize situation in Iran. Separate and rule!

[UzLand]

I think a war would be clash of armies. I highly doubt any US troops will invade Iran. I don't think Iran takes credit for actions outside its borders. Those are terrorists I think. :lol:

America or Israel bombs Iran. Iran through its agents or supporters in other countries retaliates against Israel and US interests. What does US do? Send troops. This is a war.

[melo]

America or Israel bombs Iran. Iran through its agents or supporters in other countries retaliates against Israel and US interests. What does US do? Send troops. This is a war.

Which troops are these??????:shock: The US army is not that large and is already stretched too thin.

[UzLand]

Which troops are these??????:shock: The US army is not that large and is already stretched too thin.

They will pull them out of Iraq. Iran now seems a larger threat to US. Do not tell me that they won't pull out troops from Iraq because US would lose Iraq. I don't buy since the whole policy is short-sighted and short-term.

[Hopeful]

They will pull them out of Iraq. Iran now seems a larger threat to US. Do not tell me that they won't pull out troops from Iraq because US would lose Iraq. I don't buy since the whole policy is short-sighted and short-term.

US can't afford another war now. They have no money for this war. Don't forget Iran is not Iraq. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[UzLand]

US can't afford another war now. They have no money for this war. Don't forget Iran is not Iraq. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You think anyone in the administration thinks or cares about this?:) If they went against Iraq on fake allegations that the latter possessed nuclear weapons, then what can you expect against Iran that is definitely developing a nuclear bomb?:)

[EZOP]

Us O'zicha Inson Erkinligini Obormoqchi Iranga .iran Us Emas Hammanarsaga Demakratya (i Mean It's Impossible) Berish Mumkin Bo'lgan. Uni O'z Dunyoqarashi Bor Aholisini Ham.undan Keyin Us Borgan Joyda Inson Huquqlari Yo'qolmoqda .iroq Buga Misol,yana Kerakmi Vetnamni Eslaylar.
Us Osiyoda Hamisha Mag'lub Bo'lgan.

[Iqbol]

zzzz, why do you want to attack everyone in the world? can you explain us this little bit, pliiz!

[Uyyonli]

no, firstable Iran is way more destructieve than u think, they have much higher military Technology Mig 31's and Su 27 and 31s I like to American f22's get destroyed by those beasts, America doesnot want to face those, Iranian torpedo's missiles, Tanks are way bigger up to date and sophisticated with Russian Arms. secondly, America is hardly controling the situation Iraq! Third Bush will losse his job.
besides u never if Iran already has N.bombs

[bacha]

US is stuck in Iraq, can`t get enough money, can`t get enough troops. And knowing that anytime they harm Iran, the first thing those guys will do is hit Americans in Iraq, would they do anything against Iran?!

Iran is behind Hezbollah. The Hizbollah Israeli war was Iran`s response to israeli threat. Whether Israel, or USA attack iranian nuclear sites, Hezbollah attacks Israelis the same way they did already. UN troops will leave the country the fastest way they can, because their mission is a peacekeeping one.

Iran will, and note, it can block persian gulf. No oil tankers will go through that region.

IRI has rockets that can reach not only Israel, but some parts of Europe as well.

Even the sanctions US could got through UN were minimal.

Finally, Iran was not created by colonial powers. It always existed, always has been a power in the middle east. The patriotism within the country is immense. Note, not loyalty to the mullahs, but simple love of the country.

[MUHLIS]

I agree but I don't understand how Cuba can be put on this list. Does it really committ more human rights violations than the US? :shock: It is only more evidence to me that this is more for potical purposes than anything.
Honestly, I do not have much information about the state of human rights in Cuba, so I can't compare it with the US. Maybe it got into the list just because they have one of the most confrontational relations with the US government. If this is true, then it is very likely that the US politicians are manipulating the HR concept to exert pressure on Cuba.

Bacha,

It is no wonder that US got stuck in Iraq, Kerry had been warning the US government and citizens by claiming that Bush got into this war with no exit strategy.

[UzLand]

In stark contrast to predecessor Donald H. Rumsfeld, Gates also said there was no doubt the Army and Marine Corps needed to be larger if they are to deal with future wars and give troops enough rest between combat tours.

"We need the full range of military capabilities," including ground combat forces to battle large armies and nimble special operations troops to scout out terrorist threats, Gates told the House Armed Services Committee.

"We don't know what's going to develop in places like Russia and China, in North Korea, in Iran and elsewhere," he said.
(http://www.berkshireeagle.com/headlines/ci_5182157)

[melo]

zzzz, why do you want to attack everyone in the world? can you explain us this little bit, pliiz!

Wow- I don't even know that I started a thread. :shock:

[melo]

Iran will, and note, it can block persian gulf. No oil tankers will go through that region.



Iran can not block the gulf. They had tried that before and wer unsuccessful. Maybe it was before your time. :D

[Tabriz_Han]

U.S screwed up, they got rid of Iran's biggest enemy "Saddam", I mean we couldn't have asked for more :lol:

Now Saddam is gone, Iran sent a convoy of Mollah's who now run most of Iraq.

If U.S invade, they'll be swamped as Iran will extent its influence fully into Iraq making their task practically impossible.

The only way they could suceed would be some strategic well planned carpet-bombing, knocking out all Iran's capabilities in a night.

Iran has some pretty advanced weapon's, U.S can't take on Iraq when it comes to the ground war they should think about dealing with Iraq first the way things are going they may pull out soon.

[melo]

no, firstable Iran is way more destructieve than u think, they have much higher military Technology Mig 31's and Su 27 and 31s I like to American f22's get destroyed by those beasts, America doesnot want to face those, Iranian torpedo's missiles, Tanks are way bigger up to date and sophisticated with Russian Arms. secondly, America is hardly controling the situation Iraq! Third Bush will losse his job.
besides u never if Iran already has N.bombs

:lol: I am sure the US is not worried about the military technology of the Iranians. :lol: Interesting post. If the US wasn't buried in Iraq and Afghanistan the war would be very similar to the Iraq war where their entire army was destroyed in a week. You are kidding yourself if you think anything else. Just compare military budgets and you can see the difference.

[sarbador]

I personally think that the US is going to launch war against Iran.And in the not very distant future.People,open your eyes!!! This war isn't about politics,it isn't about human rights violations (if you come to think about it,the US itself is the biggest human rights violator and has committed and is still committing those violations.Shall I dare to call it crimes against humanity???hmmmm)and it is not about nuclear weapons.People,this war is about gaining control over World's remaining energy resources and those resources(well at least 70% of them)happen to be in the Middle East.

[Inspiredmind]

if war will be, kiyomatga yakin koldi diyaveringlar... just feelings.. and be prepared to the second life.:D

[afsharkizi]

Usa can Not....

[Iqbol]

Iran - Ready to attack
Dan Plesch (http://www.newstatesman.com/200702190014)

[Odildustov]

kompyuter "uyinlari" deymizu lekin uni ham programistlar ishlab chiqargan, agar "General" uyinlarini uynashda yahshi taktika olib bormasez yutqizasiz uyinda, bir uynab qolsalaring us taktikasini eslaringa olib undan foydalanib kurila uyindan yutib chiqasiz. lekin manga saviyasiz javob qaytarishdan oldin, uyinni yahshilab optionlarini missionlarini urganib chiqiyla va tadbiq etila. manimcha hozirgi holatda eron yutkazadi, chunki eron yoshlari hammasi demokratiya tarafdori, yoshlari aniq bir goyaga ega emaslar, islomdan uzoqlashganlar, giyohvandlik, geroin kuchaygan, shiya mashabi fohishalikka shariy hukm chiqarib quygan(astagfurilloh), iqtisodiy tanglik.
us da esa yutish imkoniyatlari juda yuqori. butta utirib iqtisodi zayiflashdi deyishimiz mumkin lekin "nisbatan" hali yuqori darajada. undan tashqari us urish ochishdan oldin 100% tayyorgarligini kuradi, kuzi yetadimi keyin hujumga utadi.

[stanford]

US is trying to isolate Iran economically and I think there is a likelihood of military actions in future, probably during the next administration .Because there is a disobedience by Iranian side and US will punish this action.Secondly, by invading Iran, US will take Middle East Oil Reserves for itself for its future economic position in the world. Middle East has world's proved 60% oil reserves and America consumes world's 25%.Thirdly, there is China as emerging world power which makes "US Think Tank" to make long-term strategy to confront China and to keep it's world dominance.As soon as US will take control of middle east and it's oil reserves that means China's emergence as a world power is blocked.This will be a huge victory for US in a long -term. Finally, Iran threatens to wipe Israel out of the map and AIPAC will do anything to destroy Iran's military.And it will be done by US and Israeli bunker-busters in the gulf.And people who think that the US is no longer capable of starting another war or has no enough military to wage a war should do more research about Pentagon's "Long-Term Defence Strategy" which was before the invasion of Iraq."Long -term defence" means "A plan to be able to invade more than 3 countries like Iraq,Iran,Syria and North Korea" in a case if they launch war against US and its interests.So when you look at these reasons and history of US foreign policy, you know that military action against Iran is enevitable.

[Innit]

if oil prices fall, then US wil attack Iran...

[Guardian]

Much of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by American spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, according to diplomatic sources in Vienna.

The claims, reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war, coincided with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran was defying a UN security council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear programme.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2019519,00.html

[Black]

Any U.S. strike might not destroy Iran nuclear sites (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070223/ts_nm/iran_usa_military_dc;_ylt=Ag7rDYq5ugqIq3htJdfipCdg .3QA)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Any U.S. attack against Iran could involve thousands of sorties and missile launches lasting weeks, but it still would not eliminate the country's nuclear program, U.S. military officials and analysts say.

A strike -- something the Pentagon insists is not planned -- would be hampered by lack of intelligence on the number and location of nuclear facilities dispersed throughout Iran, the analysts said.

And the most sophisticated U.S. "bunker-buster" bombs might be unable to dig deep enough to reach buried, hardened nuclear sites, according to analysts and defense officials.

"It is highly unlikely all the critical sites are known to U.S. and Western intelligence services, so parts of the program would doubtless survive, perhaps even the most critical elements," said Bruce Riedel, a former National Security Council and Defense Department official, and now a Brookings Institution analyst.

An air strike, raised as the most likely option if any military action were ordered, would at best set Iran's nuclear program back a few years.

"The people who are most optimistic favor it because they think it will delay, not derail, the Iranian nuclear program," said Justin Logan, a Cato Institute analyst in Washington.

Many officials and military analysts say a U.S. attack on Iran is unlikely. The U.S. military is stretched thin by wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and there is little international support for it.

U.S. officials consistently stress diplomacy as the best way to resolve the dispute over Iran's nuclear program, which the United States and others say Tehran is using to develop nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge, saying it seeks only peaceful nuclear energy.

Despite the Bush administration's focus on talks, military maneuvers and the rhetoric coming from Washington and Tehran have fostered speculation about an armed confrontation.

WEAK INTELLIGENCE HURTS OPTIONS

Defense officials who spoke on condition of anonymity in broad terms about military options, mentioned alternatives ranging from limited air strikes to a more sustained air campaign. Analysts offer more detail, but acknowledge their assessments are only an educated guess.

The officials say a U.S. strike would target Iran's known nuclear facilities and other military installations, including missile sites and anti-aircraft systems.

It would involve bomber aircraft dropping bunker-buster bombs to hit the underground nuclear sites, defense officials and analysts said. Another component would be cruise missiles launched from U.S. naval vessels in the Gulf, they added.

Some military officials have discussed a campaign that could involve hundreds of sorties over a few days. But some scenarios that expand targets to other government and weapons facilities could require thousands of sorties over many weeks, analysts said.

Analysts and military officials in Washington said neither option was considered likely to wipe out Iran's nuclear program.

The first problem is finding the targets. The Center for Strategic and International Studies analyst Anthony Cordesman has said that while international inspectors have identified at least 18 sites, there could be as many as 70.

Beyond intelligence, U.S. munitions might not be able to do the job. Cato's Logan said the most effective U.S. bunker-buster bomb could not drill deep enough through hardened concrete and rock to hit nuclear facilities believed to be buried at least 15 meters (50 feet) underground.

A series of sorties would be necessary with bombs guided repeatedly to the same site to inflict heavy damage.

"Those limitations would clearly affect us," said one defense official.

But Pentagon officials say the United States could damage Iran's nuclear program.

"Clearly the United States has tremendous capability, but it has no intent and is not planning to go to war with Iran," said spokesman Bryan Whitman.

[Destankutluhan]

I agree with Delf's position " sperate and rule".

In Iran there is two main group as ethnic, Azeri Turks and Kurds.
Azeri Turks in fact much loyal to the government, they are in everyfield of life and represent middle class in the country, especially in small and medium size business as well as intellectual area. However there is huge support from USA for sperative movement. And resent pressure of the government actually helping USA.

Kurds are, as allways favor for break up. They have military groups, like PEJAK who carry out terrorist attacks on government forces and civilians. They are openly supporting and looking forward a break up of war between US-Israel and Iran.
However, half autonomous region of Kurds in Northern Iraq may not like to see a war as it could demolish their aim of persuading independence ( I personally do not think Kurds would do that in the near future, it could be somehow like Taiwan and used as a pressure tools against Turkiye, Iraq, Suriye and Iran for economical and political benefits.

If Iran break up by Turks claiming North Part and Kurds Southwest ( a possibility of fight between Azeri Turks and Kurds also exist since Kurds claim territories up to the north) then I will have mixed feelings because it may also bring a historical turning point; Turkiye's direct connection with Central Asia. Currently North Iran and tiny Armenian land bordering to Iran sperating Turkiye's connection. And that is why Iran did not support Azeri Turks ( despite same religion) in their fight against the invasion of Karabag by Armenian army. On the other hand the war will bring disaster to the people regardless their origin and that is what I don't like to see.

All the preperations signs a military intervation, it could be by bombing some facilities first. Then they will watch the reaction, if Iran react sharply then they will take it as a chance to go further. Every one recognizes that Iran is not Iraq and much stronger, have much effective tools at its hand to make the life of Americans complicated. It could flare large scale of escalation of the war in the region. And everyone can find themselves just middle of the war.
Therefor, it is hard to say if US will attack on Iran in big scale.

[Alparslan]

Iran has enough weapons and population (patriots mostly) against u.s. Yes u.s cant control Iraq but because of Iran. Iran is using her power over the shia arabs in Iraq, so sunni-shia conflict is becoming a war, sadly. This is what u.s wants, cause if in the Iraq they contionue like this way, u.s will take the strongest party to his side. So if it will happen, Iran has a war threat. But logicly if u.s attack to Iran, it will loose Pakistan support and also Afganistan will b worse than Iraq for u.s. So i think u.s will make a big mistake and it will attack to Iran and start loosing its power in middle east. bush cannot stop this cause if he stop attacking or even 'pause' for a while, u.s citizens will se the whole figure and there will be an existing issue for u.s. they are attacking everybody just to stay alive, u.s is not hungry it is wounded and dont want to show this to whole world. So it keeps on attacking.

[Latino Chico]

Well I donno what to say about this subjest but there is a possiblity for US President to order his Army to atack Iran within next two years, sometime before he leaves the White House, that's really sad.

[lilbit]

otvechu na russkom!
V Blijayshie 5 let, a mojet i 10 US ne napadet na Iran.
V Srednesrochnoi perspektive, Kongress i Senat uje zanimayutsya peresmotrom razresheniya Bushu naezjat' na Irak v 2002 godu(recent news guys) i uje dumayut kak budut vivodit' voiska.
Vo vtorih, vnutrennie amerikanskie problemi i te problemi s kotorimi stolknulis' US v Irake i Afganistane zaderjut ih tam na dolgo. A s etim gemoroem naezjat' na Iran - samoubiystvo (tem bolee uchitivaya fanatichniy Iranskiy rejim)
V tret'ih, Rossiya i Kitay ne dadut hozyainichat' v Irane (recent conference in Munich).

[Abu Hurayra]

US citizens opened this site:
http://www.stopiranwar.com/


lilbit: I think you did lilbit mistake by labeling IRAN as "fanatics". They announced to improve nuclear technology for peace purposes. Indeed they have 200% right to protect themselves against Jews and Co (US & UK).
Please be more realistic and not biased. The real "Fanatics" could be Yankees. History has vitnesed many times the ignorance and buther behavoir of US (Japan,Vietnam,IRAQ, Bosnia, once more IRAQ).


PS: After every progression there is degression. A time for the US antihuman policy to collapce already aproaching. Sorry for US citizens with such maniac leaders that lead them to the endless problems...

[Pythagor]

menimcha, birinchi Israil boshlasa kerak urushni, keyin US qo'shiladi.

[melo]

Please be more realistic and not biased. The real "Fanatics" could be Yankees. History has vitnesed many times the ignorance and buther behavoir of US (Japan,Vietnam,IRAQ, Bosnia, once more IRAQ).

Please explain your opinion about the first Iraq war and Bosnia. Also please explain how you would have dealt with Japan during the 1930s and 1940s. :? You seem to be simplifying world events too much. I don't see how these can be compared to Vietnam or the second Iraq war by a rational person. :shock:

[Abu Hurayra]

Please explain your opinion about the first Iraq war and Bosnia. Also please explain how you would have dealt with Japan during the 1930s and 1940s. :? You seem to be simplifying world events too much.

Why did you skip VIETNAM??? :? ,
FIrst IRAQ was organized by US. (I wonder when USA wil get rid of such kind of dumb-maniac politic leaders like Bush family) as it was the same in Second one.
In Bosnia, There were many events had been vitnessed when US forces "by mistake" bombed Bosnian Civilians, even Hospitals. US did this kind of Genocide under the mask of UN, NATO etc, by supporting Serbian pigs.
In Japan I would not NUKE those people.

[melo]

Why did you skip VIETNAM??? :? ,
FIrst IRAQ was organized by US. (I wonder when USA wil get rid of such kind of dumb-maniac politic leaders like Bush family) as it was the same in Second one.
In Bosnia, There were many events had been vitnessed when US forces "by mistake" bombed Bosnian Civilians, even Hospitals. US did this kind of Genocide under the mask of UN, NATO etc, by supporting Serbian pigs.
In Japan I would not NUKE those people.

I did not skip Vietnam. I was considering it, along with the second Iraq War, a total waste of conflict. I was more upset you consider every conflict as evil and pointless as those.

The first Iraq war was supported by almost every nation in the world including most of the middle east. Do you think Iraq had the right to invade and occupy Kuwait? Please explain.

The UN performed peace keeping operations in Bosnia. So if they really wanted they could have just let the serbs destroy allthe Bosnians and nobody would have done anything about it (aka other muslims). So they may not have done a good job but it was better then nothing and eventualy Milosevic was captured and tried. You would have preferred the entire genocide of bosnian muslims from the earth?

Japan was crazy. Please explain how you would have pacified a nation that had already brainwashed its soldiers to die for its emperor. We had already seen countless examples in Okinawa and Iwo Jima that they were not willing to surender and would all die for stupid reasons (national pride). Obviously a nuclear weapon is terrible and I can't support its use but what could they have done? I think it is almost every persons to kill thier enemy instead of letting themsleves die. I think it is human nature.

[Abu Hurayra]

I did not skip Vietnam. I was considering it, along with the second Iraq War, a total waste of conflict. I was more upset you consider every conflict as evil and pointless as those.

The first Iraq war was supported by almost every nation in the world including most of the middle east. Do you think Iraq had the right to invade and occupy Kuwait? Please explain.

The UN performed peace keeping operations in Bosnia. So if they really wanted they could have just let the serbs destroy allthe Bosnians and nobody would have done anything about it (aka other muslims). So they may not have done a good job but it was better then nothing and eventualy Milosevic was captured and tried. You would have preferred the entire genocide of bosnian muslims from the earth?

Japan was crazy. Please explain how you would have pacified a nation that had already brainwashed its soldiers to die for its emperor. We had already seen countless examples in Okinawa and Iwo Jima that they were not willing to surender and would all die for stupid reasons (national pride). Obviously a nuclear weapon is terrible and I can't support its use but what could they have done? I think it is almost every persons to kill thier enemy instead of letting themsleves die. I think it is human nature.
I will not explain, because It will again turn to endless discussion. Please check the authenticy of your sources. US sources always claim that they were "angel", "peacemaker", "establisher of democracy" and bla bla. The most dangerous illness in USA among the people is not AIDS, CANSER or another one. The most dangerous illness and the most spread illness is "AMERICANISM".

sincerely Mazlum...

[melo]

I will not explain, because It will again turn to endless discussion. Please check the authenticy of your sources. US sources always claim that they were "angel", "peacemaker", "establisher of democracy" and bla bla. The most dangerous illness in USA among the people is not AIDS, CANSER or another one. The most dangerous illness and the most spread illness is "AMERICANISM".

sincerely Mazlum...

who is brainwashed? :rolleyes: I never used any of the terms listed above "angel" "peacemaker" or "establisher of democracy". You made stupid claims and now can not back them up. Either admit that or make a decent response. :rolleyes: Just answer me these questions: you favored Bosnians to all be killed? Kuwait was invaded for what reason? Who was going to step up and help in these situations? What did the US gain from either of these wars? It is easy to make claims of illegal wars for the second Iraq war and vietnam, but just because someone has done terrible things this does not mean everything they have ever done is bad. Your world view is too simplistic and biased. I am not for the spreading of Americanism or american industry more importantly, but that does not make me believe every military action ever done by the US was wrong. I always evaluate everything on an individual basis.

[zanjir]

I dont think that US will attack Iran:
*they have no money and support from own nation;
*noone will allow US to go bomb again, I believe EU will reject in case US asks for help;
*Iran is not like Irak or Afghanistan;

[Inspiredmind]

I dont think that US will attack Iran:
*they have no money and support from own nation;
*noone will allow US to go bomb again, I believe EU will reject in case US asks for help;
*Iran is not like Irak or Afghanistan;
y r interesting,,
1 , usa always has money, money is not essue, it is just tualet paper, sorry if i was rude.
2. who is noone? nation of usa? as for EU, EU is not important here, only UNN.
3. Iran is like afganistan for USA too. 3 raza bolshe tratit weapon i vce voyna zakonchena, iran will be out of its atom bomb dream,:D

i am not supporting USA, just telling my opinion, and what u said is not even in usa's qeustions, .

[Royal]

Political situations are switching...

let see..

[Royal]

y r interesting,,
1 , usa always has money, money is not essue, it is just tualet paper, sorry if i was rude..
Why that time they get loan from PRC ????
2. who is noone? nation of usa? as for EU, EU is not important here, only UNN..
First You should learn: about that paper money of any government.
3. Iran is like afganistan for USA too. 3 raza bolshe tratit weapon i vce voyna zakonchena, iran will be out of its atom bomb dream,:D .
qishlogda hecham bomagankansande a? Eshshak bilan otni farqi bor...

[lilbit]

US citizens opened this site:
http://www.stopiranwar.com/


lilbit: I think you did lilbit mistake by labeling IRAN as "fanatics". They announced to improve nuclear technology for peace purposes. Indeed they have 200% right to protect themselves against Jews and Co (US & UK).
Please be more realistic and not biased. The real "Fanatics" could be Yankees. History has vitnesed many times the ignorance and buther behavoir of US (Japan,Vietnam,IRAQ, Bosnia, once more IRAQ).


PS: After every progression there is degression. A time for the US antihuman policy to collapce already aproaching. Sorry for US citizens with such maniac leaders that lead them to the endless problems...

Mazlum!
I was considering here only Iran! US regime and police is real BS and that's why US will loose in longterm perspective. All the former secretary of defense noticed it already.
Why I mentioned "fanatic regime" of Iran. It was only based on what I heard from their president and Ayatolla. And they were talking not only against US, but also all the other countries. If you'll look back to late 70th you'll notice what Iran was in those times (I read some stuff about it and) and then compare it to what is going on now. Unwillingness of Iran to allow international organization to come over their nucleat plants to check what is going on their is another proof, that they probably doing something.

P.S. What they did with refugees in last 20 years only prooves that Iran is Fundamentalist fanatic regime.

[Inspiredmind]

Why that time they get loan from PRC ????

First You should learn: about that paper money of any government.

qishlogda hecham bomagankansande a? Eshshak bilan otni farqi bor...

shu so'zingiz oshikcha bolibdi royal bola, sal hurmatizi biling

[Royal]

shu so'zingiz oshikcha bolibdi royal bola, sal hurmatizi biling
Rahmat..

Iran biln Afghanni farqi shunchalikku, yoki boshqa bir fikr bormi ?

[SweetHeart]

There’s been a lot of speculation about whether or not the United States will attack Iran. Roughly equal numbers of people believe the U.S. will and will not attack. Disregarding the public blustering from both governments, I believe the U.S. will attack Iran in 2007. Here’s why.
The master plan of the United States is to control the oil in the Middle East. Only two countries stood in the way of that plan: Iraq and Iran. Iraq has been neutralized and will remain impotent for the next decade because of civil war. Iran alone now stands in the way of the U.S. master plan.

[Latino Chico]

As you all know that in the USA even Stupid can become a president, this one is the best example to the rest of the world. G.W.Bush

[Gareeb]

Given the utter stupidity of Bush adminstration no such option can be ruled out.

[tarafdor]

America will use Azeri people and oil prices to destabalize situation in Iran. Separate and rule!
Never such scenario will happen. Azerbaycan is surrounded by Armenia and Russia allies of Iran. And Azeris living in Iran that borders with Soviet Azerbaycan will serve as a buffer zone. Azerbaycan too weak and unable to host armies for Iran contra affairs.
Oil prices will never go down...for sure!!!

[tarafdor]

There’s been a lot of speculation about whether or not the United States will attack Iran. Roughly equal numbers of people believe the U.S. will and will not attack. Disregarding the public blustering from both governments, I believe the U.S. will attack Iran in 2007. Here’s why.
The master plan of the United States is to control the oil in the Middle East. Only two countries stood in the way of that plan: Iraq and Iran. Iraq has been neutralized and will remain impotent for the next decade because of civil war. Iran alone now stands in the way of the U.S. master plan.

Let's propose if Iran attacked,what means will be used from Iranian side??

1. All oil transportation routes in the Persian Gulf will be destrayed within a hours.
2. Israel will meet thousands of rockets from Iran and Lebanon.
3. Islamic groups affiliated to Iran will retaliate in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
4. US forces and interests in the Middle East will be a first target.
5. There's a possibility that Iranian rockets Shahab-4 could reach London.

For sure many other damages will face those forces standing against the sole democracy in the Middle East, and this is for sure Iran.

In the 34 days war in Lebanon last summer, we became witnesses how Israeli air forces fired laser bombs guided by satellite failed to reach their destinations. Iran not Iraq that suffered from it's bullshit presidents and not Afganistan.

[NifTy-Nix]

Istead of Don't care option there really should be Don't know. That's was my option, but since it is not there I could not vote ;)

[bacha]

If one has been following this crisis from the beginning, he would notice that there is a great bluffing going on.

Just one example:
At the beginning of the conflict, US wanted Iran to stop its nuclear program without promising open dialogue.

Condi, in her recent interview, promised that if Iran stops its program, she will meet with her iranian counterpart face to face.

US is desperately trying to play the usual carrot and stick game, yet there is not much ground to play the game effectively. Due to oil prices, Iran is pretty independant, and due to the old history of the conflict between the two states, all the other possible option of pressure by the US have already been in place.

[Aziz]

I live 300 km west of Bushahr Nuclear Reactor, closer to it than Tehran.
If anything happened there I will start up my car and go home...

[Demir Kağan]

You better do, brother. :)

[Seckjin Khan]

necessarily yes ...

[tarafdor]

necessarily yes ...

Payg'ambarimiz Muhammad (sav) hadislarida bizni farqimiz faqatgina iymonimizda, turkimisan, qora gurmisan,arabmi, ajammmi, habashmi-farqi yuq.
Millatimiz ham bitta- Millati Ibrohim, dinimiz ham bitta-dini Muhammadiya, bayrog'imiz ham bitta.

Necessarily yes-deganini o'zbekchaga qanday tarjima qilsa bo'ladi..rahmat.

[Black]

Iran fires first rocket into space (http://www.islamonline.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=13231)

Iran announced on Sunday that it successfully fired its first rocket into space, a move that comes amid growing tensions with the West over Tehran’s nuclear program.

"The first space rocket has been successfully launched into space," a state television anchor announced, without saying the rocket’s range or the date of the launch.

"The rocket was carrying material intended for research created by the ministries of science and defense," Mohsen Bahrami, the head of Iran's aerospace research centre, told state television.

...
“Israel seeking U.S. green light to attack Iran”
Israel is awaiting permission from the United States to fly its jets over Iraq to carry out air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, a British newspaper reported on Saturday, citing top Israeli defense officials.

A senior Israeli defense official told The Daily Telegraph that Israel demanded U.S. occupation forces in Iraq to provide an “air corridor” if the Jewish state decided to unilaterally attack Iran.

"We are planning for every eventuality, and sorting out issues such as these are crucial," the official said. "If we don't sort these issues out we could have a situation where American and Israeli war planes start shooting at each other.”

Another top Israeli officer involved in the military planning told the British newspaper: "The only way to do this (attack Iran) is to fly through U.S.-controlled air space in Iraq."

"The amount of effort we are putting into this single issue is unprecedented in the history of the State of Israel," said another Israeli security official who works on the strategic committee formed to deal with Iran, chaired by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

Israel's Deputy Defense Minister, Ephraim Sneh, dismissed The Daily Telegraph report as “baseless”.

"This is baseless information," Sneh said. "Maybe people like to divert (attention from) the need for immediate economic sanctions (with) stories about imminent Israeli action, which is not on the agenda,” Sneh told The Associate Press news agency.

Like the U.S., Israel refuses to rule out the use of force against Iran. In 1981, Israeli warplanes destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor near Baghdad after suspecting Iraq of aiming to build nuclear weapons.

Last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in a report that Iran failed to suspend its nuclear program, defying a UN Security Council deadline to do so.

[Dulkadiroglu]

Iran is dangerous for Usa's and especially for Israel's plans about Middle East so Usa wants to destroy to Iran...but i think they wont attack to Iran soon because Iran is strong now so Usa will use minorities in Iran especially the kurds...there are 8 millions kurds in Iran...

[tarafdor]

Iran is dangerous for Usa's and especially for Israel's plans about Middle East so Usa wants to destroy to Iran...but i think they wont attack to Iran soon because Iran is strong now so Usa will use minorities in Iran especially the kurds...there are 8 millions kurds in Iran...

The most powerful Kurdish groups in the Middle East are residing in Iraq, and during Saddam's repressive regime most of them found shelter in Iran, and still Iranian regime enjoys good relations with Iraqi Kurds, so Iran will press its local kurdish population through foreign groups, though Iranian Kurds more loyal to Iranian government then Iraqi Kurds.

[Pythagor]

НАТО готовится к удару

Америка рассматривает «все варианты возможных действий» по остановке ядерной программы исламской республики

США сделали первый шаг к началу войны с Ираном: НАТО попросила Турцию предоставить свое воздушное пространство для военной операции против Ирана. Тегеран это не испугало. «Мы готовы к войне. Мы получили технологию создания ядерного топлива и несемся вперед, как поезд, у которого нет тормозов», – заявил президент Махмуд Ахмадинежад. «Дерни стоп-кран», – ответила ему госсекретарь Кондолиза Райс.

link (http://www.vz.ru/politics/2007/2/27/70194.html)

[YangMingYi]

just some advices...

don't mess with persian people because they are really tough...

khoda iran dost darid...

peace out....

:DDDD

[bacha]

just some advices...

don't mess with persian people because they are really tough...

khoda iran dost darid...

peace out....

:DDDD
If they are tough or not, I don`t know. But what is obvious is that an attack by US alone, or NATO will only unite iranians.

Khoda har kaseki az U metarsad, dost dorad.

[YangMingYi]

If they are tough or not, I don`t know. But what is obvious is that an attack by US alone, or NATO will only unite iranians.

Khoda har kaseki az U metarsad, dost dorad.

wow, you are mongolian and you know some persian?? or is that tajik you are speaking???

really surprised...

esme shoma cheest? koja zendegie mikonide? aya shoma iran dost darid?

khoda khafiz

[bacha]

wow, you are mongolian and you know some persian?? or is that tajik you are speaking???

really surprised...

esme shoma cheest? koja zendegie mikonide? aya shoma iran dost darid?

khoda khafiz
No that was tajik. But, yes, I am the first mongol who speaks your language.

Iron dust doram, baroi onki Amriqo dust nadoram. :)


P.S.Hey, you are in Canada! Same here man. :)

[Abu-Hafiza]

Mongolian, speaking Farsi in Uzbek forum who lives in Canada :lool:
impressive

[YangMingYi]

No that was tajik. But, yes, I am the first mongol who speaks your language.

Iron dust doram, baroi onki Amriqo dust nadoram. :)


P.S.Hey, you are in Canada! Same here man. :)

salam aziz barada:

hale shoma chetor ast?

I am not from iran, i am chinese...shoma zendegie canada mikonide?
are you in toronto?

i don't know tajik, but i can speak some iranian persian...

take care barada...

khoda shoma ra barkat bedahad, khoda shoma dost darid...

[YangMingYi]

Mongolian, speaking Farsi in Uzbek forum who lives in Canada :lool:
impressive

oh jeedee(really)? then what do you think when a chinese person can speak arabic on ozbek forum and live in canada...??
are you also surprised or what?

[YangMingYi]

No that was tajik. But, yes, I am the first mongol who speaks your language.

Iron dust doram, baroi onki Amriqo dust nadoram. :)


P.S.Hey, you are in Canada! Same here man. :)

where did you learn this language? who taught you?

[Abu-Hafiza]

oh jeedee(really)? then what do you think when a chinese person can speak arabic on ozbek forum and live in canada...??
are you also surprised or what?
No I'm not impressed,I'm shocked :D When you say Chinese person you dont mean Uygur, do you?

[Demir Kağan]

Actually, we will support Azeri Turks in Iran.

[Dulkadiroglu]

Actually, we will support Azeri Turks in Iran.

How??......

[YangMingYi]

No I'm not impressed,I'm shocked :D When you say Chinese person you dont mean Uygur, do you?

I LOVE ARABS, i don't know anything about uyghurs...i heard some uyghurs calling themselve german/aryans... lol i am chinese i think uyghurs must hate me :DDDDDD

[YangMingYi]

how come this mongolian dude got banned??? Hey , i want to know where did he learn farsi, forum moderator please get him back to this site!!!

rahmat katta...

[Abu-Hafiza]

YangMingYi, he is either Tajik himself or from Smarkand or Bukhara, most of people there speak Tajik, which is close to Iranian.

Are you a muslim?

[Pythagor]

YangMingYi, he is either Tajik himself or from Smarkand or Bukhara, most of people there speak Tajik, which is close to Iranian.

Are you a muslim?
bachani ettizmi? u voxadanman divdu boshida.

[Abu-Hafiza]

bilmadim, o'zbekistonda kupchilik tojikcha biladi demoqchi edim, neto chiqdi :D

[YangMingYi]

YangMingYi, he is either Tajik himself or from Smarkand or Bukhara, most of people there speak Tajik, which is close to Iranian.

Are you a muslim?

no way, he is not tajik, he is mongolian, he even got mongolian flag under his name...

who taught him farsi? i am very interested to know about it.

i am NOT a muslim, i am a CHRISTIAN.

[YangMingYi]

I put madagaskar flag, does it mean I live there?:?

salam aziz barada:

qalesan? hudo sani yaxshi koradi. memnoon oldum...

if you click on his name, and you will see he put the word mongolia beside the country section...

that again proves this dude is a mongolian...

khosh cha kalin aka...

[YangMingYi]

duude, I see you joined this forum not long ago. As long as I have been here, I know him as tajik. He is a tajik, guy believe me. Or maybe tajik-uzbek, but no mongol. He just put that mongolia thing after he had some jokes with Turkish brothers. But still he is not a bad guy. (bacha sizni mahtavomman:P )

p.s. what does barada mean? :) birodar?

Barada is the iranian word for brother...aziz barada means dear brother...you can ask any persian man for it's meaning if you don't believe me...

ok, maybe but why is he so obsessed with those mongolia stuff??? is he lying about his true identity???????

[YangMingYi]

hey bacha hale chetorid??? you said you live in canada...are you in toronto or what??

mind if i be your friend? kheili-mamnoon...

how can i send you pm or something like that???

khoda khafiz for now

man shoma dost daram :DDDDDDDD

[YangMingYi]

americans better not messed with persians, cause persian people kick everybody's ass :D

if you are in toronto, you know persians fight with everybody, they fight with afghans they fight with russians they fight with arabs they fight with chinese they fight with africans, they fight with everybody...lol

i am only giving advices, that is don't mess with persian for every persian man is a valiant lion, don't you read shahnamah the book of persian kings??? don't you know how the lion of persia rostam defeated afrasiyab the leader of turan and how Persian army kicked turkmenistan's ass??? :DDDD

[UzLand]

Посольства в Тегеране пересматривают планы эвакуации
http://lenta.ru/news/2007/03/23/escape/

Азербайджан готовится к иранской войне
http://news.mail.ru/politics/1284953/

[zanjir]

Посольства в Тегеране пересматривают планы эвакуации
http://lenta.ru/news/2007/03/23/escape/

Азербайджан готовится к иранской войне
http://news.mail.ru/politics/1284953/

Bush has own problems to solve...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070323/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq
go fight with Iran? I dont think so...why?
watch the movie 300:)

[UzLand]

Bush has own problems to solve...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070323/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq
go fight with Iran? I dont think so...why?
watch the movie 300:)

You don't need soldiers for massive air strikes and you don't need a physical presence there. Besides Israel is there too. As for the US Congress, they want the troops out of Iraq soon so that they have enough for Iran:)

Enjoy the movie...still downloading:)

[melo]

You don't need soldiers for massive air strikes and you don't need a physical presence there. Besides Israel is there too. As for the US Congress, they want the troops out of Iraq soon so that they have enough for Iran:)

Enjoy the movie...still downloading:)

Even I don't think that is the idea behind pulling the troops. :lol: That might even casue a revolt in the US. :shock: But I doubt it, Americans aer easy to push around behind the disguise of patriotism and national defense. :(

[inDecision]

I liked this speech of Scott Ritter about US policy on Iran

part -1
YouTube - Scott Ritter - Target Iran - Part 1=

part - 2
YouTube - Scott Ritter Part II (Q&A)

[UzLand]

http://top.rbc.ru/index1.shtml

США не исключают военного решения "ядерной проблемы" Ирана