Iran threatening USA carrier group

[Countdown]

Apache said:

I see where you're coming from but can't agree, I fail to see what on earth NK has to do with it as it is an entirely different scenario. Iraq? yes that might have got his attention but I don't think the west has made any overt threat to Iran prior to them gaining potential nuclear capability and even DJ can see that there simply isn't the will or capacity in the west to take on another major conflict

NK wasn't invaded because they had nuclear weapons. Iraq was (because they didn't). It's highly unlikely that we would have interfered with Libya if they had had nukes. And it's probably the reason that Pakistan hasn't been invaded either (or given a kicking).

Whilst there wasn't any overt reason to invade Iran the same applied to Iraq and that didn't stop the US. No competent leader will wait for a threat before developing a defense so its patently obvious why Ahmedinajad is doing what he's doing.

[Apache]

Countdown said:

Apache said:

I see where you're coming from but can't agree, I fail to see what on earth NK has to do with it as it is an entirely different scenario. Iraq? yes that might have got his attention but I don't think the west has made any overt threat to Iran prior to them gaining potential nuclear capability and even DJ can see that there simply isn't the will or capacity in the west to take on another major conflict

NK wasn't invaded because they had nuclear weapons. Iraq was (because they didn't). It's highly unlikely that we would have interfered with Libya if they had had nukes. And it's probably the reason that Pakistan hasn't been invaded either (or given a kicking).

Whilst there wasn't any overt reason to invade Iran the same applied to Iraq and that didn't stop the US. No competent leader will wait for a threat before developing a defense so its patently obvious why Ahmedinajad is doing what he's doing.

We'll have to agree to differ on that then CD, I think you're over simplifying things and NK is utterly irrelevant, SK has never showed any interest in expansion

[TheHeretic]

Has Iran shown an interest in expansion?

[Apache]

TheHeretic said:

Has Iran shown an interest in expansion?

not as far as I know......which ain't far admittedly

[Countdown]

Apache said:

We'll have to agree to differ on that then CD, I think you're over simplifying things and NK is utterly irrelevant, SK has never showed any interest in expansion

fairy nuff

I agree that SK wasn't likely to invade NK, it was more the extreme paranoia of the NK leadership that would have made them develop nukes.

[MX7]

Countdown said:

NK wasn't invaded because they had nuclear weapons.

They have only had nuclear weapons for 3 or 4 years. How come it wasn't invaded in the 50 years previous to that?

[TheHeretic]

MX7 said:

They have only had nuclear weapons for 3 or 4 years. How come it wasn't invaded in the 50 years previous to that?

People were pre-occupied with Vietnam, Cambodia, et al?

[Wills2]

Countdown said:

Apache said:

We'll have to agree to differ on that then CD, I think you're over simplifying things and NK is utterly irrelevant, SK has never showed any interest in expansion

fairy nuff

I agree that SK wasn't likely to invade NK, it was more the extreme paranoia of the NK leadership that would have made them develop nukes.

Yes, Subjecting your people to a life time of misery and starvation would tend to make you feel paranoid about the world reaction, wouldn't it.

[s1962a]

Countdown said:

..and it's probably the reason that Pakistan hasn't been invaded either (or given a kicking).

I've wondered why Pakistan seems to get away with it time and time and doesn't get invaded. What else could it be other than the fact they are nuclear capable?

[Apache]

Anyhoo.....to bring things back from the far to the middle east

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/02/2...

let's hope this is the point where those who disagree with DJ make their voices heard

[Countdown]

s1962a said:

Countdown said:

..and it's probably the reason that Pakistan hasn't been invaded either (or given a kicking).

I've wondered why Pakistan seems to get away with it time and time and doesn't get invaded. What else could it be other than the fact they are nuclear capable?

I think in the past the West has had the benefit of very compliant Pakistani leadership. They would have hoped for more of the same with Zardari (my understanding is that Benazir offered to give up nukes if the US could "assist" with returning her to power). Unfortunately the Army weren't too keen on that so Bye bye Benazir. Mr 10% is too busy lining his own pockets and there's nobody strong enough to challenge the Army.

[drivin_me_nuts]

Apache said:

Anyhoo.....to bring things back from the far to the middle east

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/02/2...

let's hope this is the point where those who disagree with DJ make their voices heard

The timing of this is interesting Nowrouz is the 21st March and there will be a two week holiday to encapsulate this principal national holiday. Family time in one respect, but young people off and unoccupied, it could be potentially a challenging start to the New Year. I wonder.. the timing of the Syrian news today adds a little extra frisson to the mix.

[TheHeretic]

Well, as long as the Ayatolleh doesn't get a puppet in. Even Dinnerjacket is considered a moderate.

[Apache]

TheHeretic said:

Well, as long as the Ayatolleh doesn't get a puppet in. Even Dinnerjacket is considered a moderate.

I thought DJ was the Supreme Leaders puppet?

[TheHeretic]

Apache said:

I thought DJ was the Supreme Leaders puppet?

What makes you say that? The Ayatollah is the guy in charge in Iran, not the president, granted, but Dinner is not quite the puppet he is made out to be. There are far more 'extreme' candidates in the recent past, and could well be in the future. Dinnerjacket and the ruling clerics have clashed on several issues.

[Jimbeaux]

TheHeretic said:

Apache said:

I thought DJ was the Supreme Leaders puppet?

What makes you say that? The Ayatollah is the guy in charge in Iran, not the president, granted, but Dinner is not quite the puppet he is made out to be. There are far more 'extreme' candidates in the recent past, and could well be in the future. Dinnerjacket and the ruling clerics have clashed on several issues.

You are aware that the Bearded ones choose who can be a candidate, are you not? That was a gripe in the last "election", that the candidates were all approved to run.

[TheHeretic]

Jimbeaux said:

You are aware that the Bearded ones choose who can be a candidate, are you not? That was a gripe in the last "election", that the candidates were all approved to run.

Yup... I know that. That does not mean that you cannot have moderate, or conservative runners.

[Jimbeaux]

TheHeretic said:

Jimbeaux said:

You are aware that the Bearded ones choose who can be a candidate, are you not? That was a gripe in the last "election", that the candidates were all approved to run.

Yup... I know that. That does not mean that you cannot have moderate, or conservative runners.

It stands to reason that the "approved list" would only reflect candidates that hold to the Supreme Ruler's views. Why would those types even chance otherwise?

[TheHeretic]

Jimbeaux said:

It stands to reason that the "approved list" would only reflect candidates that hold to the Supreme Ruler's views. Why would those types even chance otherwise?

Because there are varying degrees of agreeing. So why the nano mostly towards Dinnerjacket in the US, if the clerics are the real power? Why not move against them, and ignore the 'puppet'? The clerics and DinnerJ are by no means best buddies.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/06/2...

[Jimbeaux]

TheHeretic said:

Jimbeaux said:

It stands to reason that the "approved list" would only reflect candidates that hold to the Supreme Ruler's views. Why would those types even chance otherwise?

Because there are varying degrees of agreeing. So why the nano mostly towards Dinnerjacket in the US, if the clerics are the real power? Why not move against them, and ignore the 'puppet'? The clerics and DinnerJ are by no means best buddies.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/06/2...

They may have "grown apart" or it is a show for people who believe it (like you). I am certain someone is "moving" against them in a clandestine manner behind whatever (plentiful) opposition group there is.