On day 10 of the Iranian revolution, the Ayatollah has fled

RambleTamble said:
It's spelled "strait" -- not "straight." It can't be "straight" since it has a big curve. If it was, it would be a curved straight, which doesn't make sense. :cool:
Click to expand...
There are many things now that don't make sense anymore. One of them is how politicians act (if this is not too political for SF).
 
Last edited:
VaughanJB said:
Without the likes of the BBC, we'd be left with only privately owned, or traded companies. Do you think such companies ever speak out against their share holders? How is the publicly owned companies any different?
Click to expand...

NPR in the USA just picked up well over 100 million dollars in donations. Not bad for a non profit.
 
Last edited:
VaughanJB said:
Just to be completely truthful - the problem in the Straight right now mostly comes from Lloyds of London. Lloyds insures a lot of shipping, and right now they won't insure anything going through the Straight. So no-one can afford to go through.
Click to expand...
Refusal to insure shipping or other things happening in a war zone is a symptom not the cause of the disease.
 
Brookswood said:
Refusal to insure shipping or other things happening in a war zone is a symptom not the cause of the disease.
Click to expand...

Sure. But the US claim the Strait is open to shipping, and they will protect it. Still, without insurance coverage it's merely a gesture.

I think I know what the disease is, but I'm well aware that many think it's something else entirely. Such is life.
 
Last edited:
The ayatollah finally left the building, women are still wearing hijabs, hardliners are in charge, US weapons stocks depleted, military personnel are exhausted as well as their families, the Strait of Hormuz is a huge problem (everyone except China and Russia are suffering), and Iran has more nuke material enriched to a higher level that ever before.

Were we better off before the war or after the war?
 
I'm personally not as well off financially. Outside of the dent in my finances, I don't know if me or anyone else is in a better place or not. Has any good come of the war? I don't know. On the surface, I can't see it.
 
JustDave said:
I'm personally not as well off financially. Outside of the dent in my finances, I don't know if me or anyone else is in a better place or not. Has any good come of the war? I don't know. On the surface, I can't see it.
Click to expand...
There for sure are a lot more losers than winners, but at 1 billion $USD PER DAY somebody is hugely profiting off the war.
 
Last edited:
If Iran manufactures even just 3 nuclear bombs. Israel could cease to exist. Israel must continue this war until the entire Iranian government is changed and will cooperate with Israel.

The USA SHOULD USE its nukes to crush Iran if required. Iran is now an existential threat to Israel.
 
againstthegrain said:
The ayatollah finally left the building, women are still wearing hijabs, hardliners are in charge, US weapons stocks depleted, military personnel are exhausted as well as their families, the Strait of Hormuz is a huge problem (everyone except China and Russia are suffering), and Iran has more nuke material enriched to a higher level that ever before.

Were we better off before the war or after the war?
Click to expand...

A previous President signed an agreement with Iran regarding the development of nuclear weapons. The then leader of the country issued a fatwa that the country did not want such weapons, and it explicitly made the production and use of nuclear weapons forbidden (haram) under Islamic law.

This agreement was torn up for no good reason that can be discerned. At the moment, at best, the old agreement might be resurrected under a different name and victory will be claimed when, in reality, we've stood still.

As for the proliferation of nuclear weapons, there is only one country with nuclear weapons that refuses to sign the Treaty for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. It also refuses inspection of its weapons. Finally, they have failed to sign the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. In other words, we have a country at war over forcing another nation to sign and be compliant with agreements it won't sign itself. That alone ought to be of concern.
 
Mitch86 said:
If Iran manufactures even just 3 nuclear bombs. Israel could cease to exist. Israel must continue this war until the entire Iranian government is changed and will cooperate with Israel.

The USA SHOULD USE its nukes to crush Iran if required. Iran is now an existential threat to Israel.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I wholeheartedly disagree.

Why do you think one sovereign nation - Israel - should hold sway over other sovereign nations? Why does Israel have a right to survive and defend itself, but not the likes of Iran? For me, your suggestions are part of the madness that has led us here. ANY use of nuclear weapons in this war would be a horrendous, heinous act. It was destabilize the entire globe - and for what?
 
againstthegrain said:
The ayatollah finally left the building, women are still wearing hijabs, hardliners are in charge, US weapons stocks depleted, military personnel are exhausted as well as their families, the Strait of Hormuz is a huge problem (everyone except China and Russia are suffering), and Iran has more nuke material enriched to a higher level that ever before.

Were we better off before the war or after the war?
Click to expand...
You sort of left out the part where Iran has suffered a lot of material and personal losses also.

War is hell. If this war is to be ended and not just delayed into the future, both sides need to face reality. Are they seriously doing that? I am not sure.
 
Brookswood said:
You sort of left out the part where Iran has suffered a lot of material and personal losses also.

War is hell. If this war is to be ended and not just delayed into the future, both sides need to face reality. Are they seriously doing that? I am not sure.
Click to expand...

I am 100% sure one of the parties is not open to either diplomacy or "reality".
 
The status of the peace talks today is... CANCELLED. The two real estate moguls who have been negotiating with Iran are no longer going to Pakistan for the scheduled peace-talks. The problem is, neither side can be trusted, so what good are the talks in the first place?
 
RambleTamble said:
The status of the peace talks today is... CANCELLED. The two real estate moguls who have been negotiating with Iran are no longer going to Pakistan for the scheduled peace-talks. The problem is, neither side can be trusted, so what good are the talks in the first place?
Click to expand...

It's difficult to understand what is going on, because not enough information is publicly available. From what I can understand, Israel/US have a set of demands that Iran and not willing meet, Iran has a set of requirements Israel/US are not willing to meet. There is no "meeting in the middle", or diplomacy. Just compliance. Since that's not on the menu............

Apart from anything else, I personally think this whole thing is embarrassing. I mean seriously.
 
VaughanJB said:
It's difficult to understand what is going on, because not enough information is publicly available. From what I can understand, Israel/US have a set of demands that Iran and not willing meet, Iran has a set of requirements Israel/US are not willing to meet. There is no "meeting in the middle", or diplomacy. Just compliance. Since that's not on the menu............

Apart from anything else, I personally think this whole thing is embarrassing. I mean seriously.
Click to expand...
Yep, the entire strategy of the U.S. was/is that we can bully Iran into doing what we want them to do. Apparently, that doesn't work with Iran or with most countries.

It often works in business. Some people's business plans are made up almost entirely of bullying people and businesses into submission. That works when one side has more money and power than the other, and that's how some people made their fortunes over the years.

But doing so to a country emasculates them, which isn't going to work with a country like Iran where men are taught to be strong and aggressive.
 
Hostilities will probably end, but I don't see any resolution to the conflict coming. I think Iran will be more determined than ever to bring about "Death to America." Unconditional surrender would be the way to stop that. But that's not the way we score a victory anymore. It will be interesting to see how the country will paint this conflict to create a sense of victory.
 
Last edited:
JustDave said:
Hostilities will probably end, but I don't see any resolution to the conflict coming. I think Iran will be more determined than ever to bring about "Death to America." Unconditional surrender would be the way to stop that. But that's not the way we score a victory anymore. It will be interesting to see how the country will paint this conflict to create a sense of victory.
Click to expand...
Yep, I think before too long, we'll just declare victory and then move on and create more chaos somewhere else.
 
RambleTamble said:
Yep, the entire strategy of the U.S. was/is that we can bully Iran into doing what we want them to do. Apparently, that doesn't work with Iran or with most countries.
Click to expand...

The US was pressured into a war. It should have stood tall and deployed diplomacy. Instead, it jumped into an anticipated conclusion. A conclusion that proved to be false. Now it is committed to a war that by most accounts, cannot be won.

Here is a relevant quote that displays the lie:

"Claims that Iran was seeking or developing nuclear weapons first emerged in the late 1970s during the final years of the Shah’s rule, with intelligence reports suggesting a clandestine program."

We've been hearing that Iran is close to having nuclear weapons for decades, and it's never been true. No more than it's true now. This is a religious war. It is built on sand. The enemy is on the side of the US, and that's the problem.

Hey, we're not talking about Epstein, so there's that.
 
RambleTamble said:
Yep, I think before too long, we'll just declare victory and then move on and create more chaos somewhere else.
Click to expand...

At best, an "agreement" will be made that is no better than the one that was torn up. This will be used as propaganda to suggest it was all worthwhile, and victory has been achieved. That is despite nothing having been changed. That is, at best.

At worse, as suggested in this thread, nuclear weapons will deployed. Millions will die. But not simply millions in Iran - the winds don't honor borders. In fact, people will suffer for decades, long after the reasons for this war have been forgotten. It will normalize the use of nuclear weapons - I mean, if they can be used in Iran, why not Ukraine? And so, we spiral to mutual destruction. US allies will shun the nation. More nations will seek the capability.

How can that be right, or just? If hating another country was reason enough for nuclear Armageddon, then we'd not be writing back and forth. We'd be living in caves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top