.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Pedzie
-
Posts
312 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Pedzie
-
-
Do you have contacts within the Iranian military services that tell you what will or will not happen in their camp?
chukd
Agreed +1
Pedzie
You write some interesting arguments but you don't really have to have contacts in the Chinese military to know if they are expanding due to fear of the US or not. The same could then be said of you in order to support your stance/opinion. Military analysts all over the world have opinions on this and write up those opinions on the net amongst other places. The problem is of course they are a bit like economists, get 10 military analysts and you will get 10 different opinions.
Yeah I understand that Jim, I think China is expanding simply due to the US, who else is a threat to them in their territorial/military quests? No-one that I can think of.
Except perhaps Japan and South Korea.
Japan and South Korea pose no threat at all to China, major Chinese military expansion is to counter US influence in the region, also Russia and China are co-operating with each other on military issues, doing joint ventures etc. Why? To counter the US. Also there is a lot of interest in central Asia's natural resources, Russia, China, US are all involved in the region.
-
Since when do the voters in the US have a say on when and whom the US goes to war with ? But anyway I sincerely hope you are right in that no-one has the stomach for a war.
The voters are always the determining factor. If it isn't popular with the voters, the politicians won't chance it. Prior to the Iraq and Afghan wars, public opinion was highly in favor. Getting in is much easier than getting in. Once involved in the war, one big event can sway public opinion but by that time it is too late as forces have already been committed. However smaller operations like in Somolia 20 years ago or Lebanon 30 years ago can be ended quickly when the voters (public opinion) want out.
Things are maybe different when it comes to war and middle east, all it takes is for a pre-emptive strike on Iran from Israel and then the US is involved in a war overnight if Iran strikes back at Israel, the war would be in the national interest of Israel and the US voters would have zero say on US defence of Israel.
When it comes to full scale invasions like Iraq and Afgan then yes the voters need to accept such action.
-
Makes you wonder what is out there in the universe tho...50 billion galaxies each containing 50 billion stars! if 0.01 of any planets orbiting any of these stars had life then that makes for a lot if life out there
-
Do what I say, but don't do what I do.
Well they are one of the biggest arms dealers in the world, it worth billions of dollars to them and no one will stand in their way. If you have the money they will supply what ever you want and to who ever wants it.
+1
-
koheesti
China IS NOT expanding their military out of fear of the USA. They have their own regional territorial objectives they want to achieve and need to expand regardless what the USA's policy towards Iran is. They want Taiwan and total control over the South China Sea to name a couple of those objectives. Maybe later they'll decide that Australia is much too big for just 30 million people. Roughly the same size as China but with over 1.3 billion less people? That won't last forever.IF Iran have nuclear weapons, China will be overjoyed because that is one more distraction and thorn in the side for the USA. Just like North Korea. China could fix that situation in one day except that it likes the problems it causes the USA.
Do you have contacts within the Chinese military to know that they are not expanding out fear from the US ? Yes China has It's own interests in the region, not all of them military, but both territorial and military objectives will involve competing with the might of the US, Taiwan is backed by the US and has been for decades, with the capability of defending itself from a Chinese attack! All US military hardware... the US has a vested interest in the South China Sea (like every other sea)
Australia...Why do you think Barack Obama has just very recently sent US marines to be based in the country? With the promise of more AU&US co-operation! I wonder..
Iran will not be allowed a nuke, there will be a war in the middle east before that happens and indeed the possibility of WW3.
I know I have a better grasp of why China is building up their military more than those who think it is because they are afraid of the USA.
I think Iran WILL be "allowed" nukes because no one will go to war to stop them. The voters in the USA will have no interest in another war in the Middle East (or elsewhere) - at least for a couple decades. Plenty of time for even the Iranians to figure it out.
I think Israel will never allow Iran to have nukes.
Since when do the voters in the US have a say on when and whom the US goes to war with ? But anyway I sincerely hope you are right in that no-one has the stomach for a war.
-
Do you have contacts within the Chinese military to know that they are not expanding out fear from the US ? Yes China has It's own interests in the region, not all of them military, but both territorial and military objectives will involve competing with the might of the US, Taiwan is backed by the US and has been for decades, with the capability of defending itself from a Chinese attack! All US military hardware... the US has a vested interest in the South China Sea (like every other sea)
Australia...Why do you think Barack Obama has just very recently sent US marines to be based in the country? With the promise of more AU&US co-operation! I wonder..
Iran will not be allowed a nuke, there will be a war in the middle east before that happens and indeed the possibility of WW3.
Do you have contacts within the Iranian military services that tell you what will or will not happen in their camp?
chukd
Agreed +1
Pedzie
You write some interesting arguments but you don't really have to have contacts in the Chinese military to know if they are expanding due to fear of the US or not. The same could then be said of you in order to support your stance/opinion. Military analysts all over the world have opinions on this and write up those opinions on the net amongst other places. The problem is of course they are a bit like economists, get 10 military analysts and you will get 10 different opinions.
Yeah I understand that Jim, I think China is expanding simply due to the US, who else is a threat to them in their territorial/military quests? No-one that I can think of.
-
What would be more surprising was if Iran didn't have a nuclear weapons program.
They are in a very volatile part of the world and their three biggest neighbours are Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. There is also another regional nuclear power that they are not on the best terms with.
Though nuclear weapons can be used as offensive weapons, their greatest 'strength' is as a detterent which is probably why there has not been a major global conflict for some time - it is a whole new ball game to attack a country that has the ability to wipe you out of they lose.
The only way through this is if Iran can be made to feel secure within its own borders and therefore sees no need to develop a nuclear defence which needs to be acheived through dialogue coupled with some sort of 'guarantee' of safety.
I see the role of China being crucial to this as they are probably the only player that has both the military power and positive relationship with Iran to provide the commitments for their safety that they would believe. Since China has already stated they would be prepared to defend Iran if they were attacked they are part way there already, what we need to see now is for them to make their commitment conditional on Iran ceasing its weapons program.
I agree, Iran does need some security, we only see the sabre rattling side of the Iranian regime and that is through the corrupt western media outlets. It goes back to nukes in the middle east in general, we all know the cause of this.
The problems with Pakistan is also very serious I believe, much more so than the prospect of Iran obtaining a nuke. We have a country which partly is lawless in its border with Afganistan plus coupled with a corrupt ISI intelligence service in bed with the Taliban.
It doesn't look good at all, I will be amazed if there is not some sort of serious conflict within 1 year in the middle east.
-
Your argument here is what?
My argument is that your implication that China is expanding its military because the US wants to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons is fallacious.
Sorry your comprehension/understanding of my argument is wrong.
I never implied China was expanding due to Iran ....China is expanding due to US aggressive global military prescience.
Not the US prevention of Iran's nuclear capability for defense.
Iran is expanding due to the same reason + Israel.....That much is obvious to most.
Lastly you cut out from my post which addressed your treaty concerns the important/glaring contradiction of the US ignoring treaties they signed...Not to mention some nuclear capable threats/neighbors of Iran who do not even take part in such treaties.
So for anyone to claim Iran is in breech of that which they themselves do not honor...well you know...it is a bit odd at best......
More of what I call situational ethics.
+1
When the US spends more on defence than the rest of the world combined then It's only natural other nations will seek to further their military capabilities.
-
Lastly the constant expansion & beating of war drums that have occurred recently by the US has caused even countries like China to resume military expansion.
Come on. China is expanding their military because they have the money to do it. Stopping Iran from prodcing a nuclear weapon has little do do with it.
Your argument here is what?
That Iran does not have the money?
Because other than that the root of any expansion of defense capabilities remain the same *right* for all countries.
The sad fact & underlying common thread is that certain aggressive countries cause the need to go defensive.
One does not spend money they have or not on defense unless a need is perceived.
Aggressive countries like the US maybe!
-
Time to start building the ships for the global warming escape of the species trip.
Not sure about escaping the global warming thing JT, we defo need another few planets in the future to sustain ourselves tho :-)
I wish NASA would finally make the announcement that we are not alone in the universe!
-
Can someone tell me when there wont be many Brits left in Thailand? Because i will throw a party.
(Good Brits are welcome to stay)
Looks like you won't be throwing a party for a long time! I dunno, maybe round up the 'good Brits' and have a party with them.
-
I stick by what I said, It's hard to imagine the Iranian leadership making a pre-emptive strike against anyone, assuming Iran is indeed striving towards a weapon, which they say they aren't !
The middle east would be a safer place devoid of nukes but we know this is not the case, if the west was to attack Iran it would be a prelude to WW3 and people may forget that Iran has the ability to severely disrupt oil shipments to the west due to It's geographical location!
How can you possibly reconcile Iran;s claim that they are not seeking nuclear weapons in light of their obvious and very visible ballistic missile tests in conjunction with them actively moving their nuclear facilities deep underground? You don't do this and you also would allow the IAEA inspection teams in if your nuclear program was completely peaceful, that's unless you enjoy facing economic sanctions that is.
They have a right to develop nuclear to energy to which they have stated, wether they are developing a bomb is anyone's guess, as I said before I think Iran should NOT have a nuclear bomb and no nukes in the middle east in general.
If the Iranians are developing a bomb then you can't really blame them with the rhetoric that's coming out of Washington&London at the moment, As I mentioned Iran has signed the NPT unlike another country in the middle east! Why should Iran accept that a neighbour can have 100's of unchecked nukes, whilst Tehran is being hounded for a perceived weapons program!
It's my belief that we are not being told everything and that Iran's nuclear program is being used as an excuse for a strike or indeed full blown war. The reasons for this is anyone's guess, I have my own opinion but here is not the place to share it, even the thought of war with Iran is scary for everyone, especially with western economies teetering on the blink of collapse.
-
I stick by what I said, It's hard to imagine the Iranian leadership making a pre-emptive strike against anyone, assuming Iran is indeed striving towards a weapon, which they say they aren't !
The middle east would be a safer place devoid of nukes but we know this is not the case, if the west was to attack Iran it would be a prelude to WW3 and people may forget that Iran has the ability to severely disrupt oil shipments to the west due to It's geographical location!
-
OK, I withdraw for now. What's the point of talking to people who spout propaganda like the whole problem in the region is Israel?
Fair enough JT..
I'll re-phrase what I said ok.
The whole nuke problem in the middle east is because Israel has them, other countries like Iran don't.
Iran is signed up to the NPT Israel hasn't!
Away off topic now so I'll close with this one.
-
I don't see the Iranian dictators as rational players. Neither does much of the world. Sense has little to do with it.
Rational players or not the leaders of Iran would not start a nuclear war with the guarantee of the complete destruction of Iran and it's 3000 year history! All for the sake for a strike on Israel ??
You're not thinking straight, dude. Iran gets them. Then Saudi gets them. Then Turkey. Then Egypt. Then Syria. The US doesn't even have relations with Iran. Consider the communication issues. Under JFK the USA and Russia almost nuked each other over communication problems because they both thought the other was shooting first. Nuke proliferation in the region makes nuke war inevitable in the region. Don't even bother saying Israel has them. Duh. That isn't the point. Once a country has them, they never give them up. Israel alone having them is the OPPOSITE of proliferation in that region. Yes, I know it pisses off Iran, but Saudi is very happy with the situation.
JT, I agree with you on this one, in my opinion Iran should not have nukes, but if Israel can have them whist defying the IAEA numerous times then why can't Iran have them? The whole problem in the region lies with Israel ok, they should not have nukes, they are backed 100% by the US!
Look at the manner in which Israel has nukes, they don't listen to the UN or IAEA, but when Iran defies the IAEA... different set of rules huh ?? As I have said, Israel has every right to defend itself, they were the 1st country in the middle east to get nukes, you can't blame the rest for wanting to follow suit.
-
I don't see the Iranian dictators as rational players. Neither does much of the world. Sense has little to do with it.
Rational players or not the leaders of Iran would not start a nuclear war with the guarantee of the complete destruction of Iran and it's 3000 year history! All for the sake for a strike on Israel ??
-
Despite the Iranian leader once saying he would wipe Israel from the face of the planet, I highly doubt Iran would attack Israel.
Easy for you to say not living in Tel Aviv as I'm sure you don't. Israelis have to live in their real world and the decisions they make are theirs to make, not yours.
JT, You can't honestly believe Iran would make a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Israel! The consequences would be a nuke going off in Israel and the complete annihilation of Iran, the Iranian leaders certainly know this, it doesn't make sense.
-
That chick needs some professional help. Does she take drugs or does she just drink?
My àss....
I think maybe both from the sound of it
Interesting feedback. Deja Vu all over again. Sheep just like yourselves had the EXACT same opinion when it was proposed that the sub-prime mortgage market would cause a Global Financial Crisis.
Consider the size of the exposure that just U.S. banks have to derivatives. It is over 250 Trillion dollars. Then consider that the European banks are in an infinitely worse position.
I understand what you are saying, the ' whole' of Europe does not need bailed out at this time, Euro banks are not as heavily involved in derivatives as US banks, especially German banks whom mostly rely on traditional banking practices.
With the coming EU summit on Friday and 'Merkozy' announcing further fiscal integration I'm sure the euro will see beyond Christmas.
-
From an Iranian perspective, why should they listen to the IAEA when another country can ignore the IAEA and get away with it.
-
Despite the Iranian leader once saying he would wipe Israel from the face of the planet, I highly doubt Iran would attack Israel.
Easy for you to say not living in Tel Aviv as I'm sure you don't. Israelis have to live in their real world and the decisions they make are theirs to make, not yours.
Yes I can agree with that and indeed Israel has every dam right to defend themselves, at least do it legally and abide by UN law!
-
I can understand why Iran would want a nuke, living next to an unchecked Israeli nuclear arsenal, 1 rule for Iran another for Israel ??
Despite the Iranian leader once saying he would wipe Israel from the face of the planet, I highly doubt Iran would attack Israel.
-
That chick needs some professional help. Does she take drugs or does she just drink?
My àss....
I think maybe both from the sound of it
-
I'm not a fan of life sentences of children, I do however look at the case of the 2 kids who killed James Bulger on Merseyside in the UK back in the early 90's...One of the the culprits (John Venables) was given every chance whilst he was locked up in a secure facility, he was even given a new identity upon his release only to get caught downloading child porn!! People like this do deserve to be locked up until they prove they are no longer a risk to society, a sentence was handed out to Thompson and the authorities were powerless to detain him further once the sentence was served.
-
Correct,
It's also interesting to note that the politicians such as Delors and Kohl who were the main drivers of European integration and the Euro were the among the last of the War generation.
The main thrust of European integration was fear of War, the French were fed up of getting done in every few years, and the Germans were a combination of mortified by their behaviour during the last War and distrustful of their own scorpion nature.
So once again fear was the driving factor behind the Euro, and the European project. Fear has a lot to do with the conduct of history.
IMHO the concept of European integration is a fabulous thing, and I don't have a problem with the concept of the Euro with one simple proviso. Every country that joined should have been forced to stick to the original rules. Even Germany started to manipulate the terms of the original treaty when short termism suited them. I bet they are regretting that now.
Earlier I alluded to the historical fear factor that has permeated throughout Europe, European societies have long memories, ( every society does ), and the greatest single mistake made by these worthy gentleman who drove the European project forward was...............it was far too quick.
Peoples need at least a lifetime to get used to these ideas, not a couple of decades. There would have been nothing wrong with the French, Germans and Benelux countries starting the Euro process, and allowing other countries to join later, even decades later.
They were in too much of a rush to pull off a grandiose scheme and in the rush they snake bit the entire project, and now the poison has reached the heart.
A folly born of fear.
So what does the future hold for the Euro and indeed the EU, if the currency is to work then all countries must adhere to strict fiscal policy dictated by Germany, somehow I don't think the people of Europe will like this one bit, as you mention societies have long memories.
Personally I detest the whole EU idea, all countries are to different in many ways to be able to work in unison. In this day of austerity and cost cutting etc I think it's a disgrace countries like the UK pumping 18 billion pounds into the EU (in 2010)..What we pay the EU every year could drastically reduce our national debt.
One thing I have learned about European governments is that they don't listen to their people, my French,German,Dutch friends all HATE the euro and have done since day one.
As mentioned above the whole idea was pushed thru to quick, and now it's the ordinary people of Europe who will have to pay, I pity the German taxpayer.
The whole EU should be scrapped, we all sign free trade agreements ( is this not what the whole idea was about in the first place!!)
And the EU is ILLEGAL under UK law.
Who votes for people like Van rompuy and Barroso ?? Certainly not the people of Europe!
IAEA board adopts resolution voicing 'increasing concern' about Iran's nuclear work
in World News
Posted
Any future war in the middle east involving Iran would be a ' video game war' The Muslim world would be enraged if the US put boots on the ground on yet another Muslim country! War is war and I'm sure the US public would get worked up even if it was 'just a video game war' .