BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Dec 05 - 05:11 AM

Good post Lepus,

I worked out in Azebaijan for a while, on the initial collapse of the USSR, the place got it's independence. Russia immediately regretted letting this happen, as you stated in their post the Russians are extremely sensitive about what occurs in that region. In the lead up to the final withdrawal of Soviet rule from Azerbaijan the KGB suppression of riots and civil unrest was brutal in the extreme. The founder of " The Aliyev Dynasty" mentioned by Lepus was the officer commanding the KGB in Azerbaijan at the time. He has since died and his son has taken over, having just "won" election in a vote that has been vigorously contested by the opposition.

There is an ongoing dispute between all the Caspian countries regarding offshore oil and gas exploration and extraction.

Initial fears of foreign investors related to something mentioned by Lepus, there are many times more Azeri's in Iran than there are in Azerbaijan, the fear was that fundamentalist Iran would win over the Azeri population of Azerbaijan. In fact as things turned out, all indications were that the reverse would be true, that secular and rapidly developing Azerbaijan would act as a magnet to repressed and frustrated Azeri's in Iran.

I agree with Lepus, Azerbaijan is in no danger of attack by the US. The main threat to the secular state of Azerbaijan comes from how quickly it's own rulers can downstream the developing wealth of the country to benefit the general population.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 22 Dec 05 - 05:59 PM

We won't attack anybody because we no longer have the resources to do so. I guess that is one thing we can thank Bush for.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 05:51 PM

TEHRAN, Iran -    Iran removed U.N. seals on uranium enrichment equipment and resumed nuclear research Tuesday, defying demands it maintain a two-year freeze on its nuclear program and sparking an outcry from the United States and Europe

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060110/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 06:16 PM

I saw an article a few days ago that said Iran had permission from the IAEA to break those seals. I'll see if I can find it.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 06:49 PM

Clinton Hammond is next. Mark my words. The man is intolerant, insufferable, intolerable, and simply detestable...and he kills innocent skunks. A surgical strike will be required, using some device such as...a stink bomb loaded with skunk oil, strapped to the nose of an MX missile tipped with a 700 megaton bag of shit. That oughta do it fine. Avoid his next few gigs. In fact, avoid downtown Windsor altogether, I'd say...but I always say that. ;-)

Other than that, my next best guess is still Iran at this point.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 07:22 PM

CarolC,

"German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier questioned whether European-led negotiations had any future and said Iran had "crossed lines which it knew would not remain without consequences." He said he had asked ElBaradei to quickly evaluate the dangers of Iran's move.

Britain warned the international community was "running out of patience," and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Tehran had breached IAEA resolutions. "There was no good reason why Iran should have taken this step if its intentions are truly peaceful," Straw said.

Japan said the decision was "a matter of deep regret" and the Foreign Ministry called on Iran "to immediately cease the resumption of the research and development activities."

Iran's decision to freeze some nuclear activities in October 2003 was voluntary, so the IAEA said it had no option but to remove the seals at Iran's request.

The move further erodes the suspension of nuclear activities that has been the centerpiece of Iran's negotiations with the West since the freeze was put in place as a confidence-building measure.

In August, Iran removed seals at another nuclear plant outside the city of Isfahan and resumed uranium reprocessing — a step before enrichment in the nuclear fuel process.

That move prompted Europe to break off its negotiations temporarily. The talks that resumed in December made no progress but were to continue later this month.

French    President Jacques Chirac on Tuesday warned Iran it would commit a serious mistake if it ignored the international community."

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 07:34 PM

Scary stuff. Sounds like a great prelude to another war that was wanted all along anyway by certain key players. (the big ones, I mean) But it will be difficult to arrange with unfinished business in Iraq and Afghanistan still on the front burner.

Is it the last straw yet for Jack? Don't touch that dial! Will Iran see reason, disarm, and become a liberal (oops!) democracy in the nick of time to head this one off? Please, God, no! That would be the very worst thing that could possibly happen here. Let's hope their crazy president says some really AWFUL stuff ASAP. Something quotable and totally insane. We need a new deadly threat to the World. We really do. Saddam just doesn't cut it anymore. He's soooo old. Yesterday's bad guy.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 07:54 PM

So Iran it is then.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 07:57 PM

No way, LH. Nothing will stop the Western imperialist juggernaut. Not even if Iran was as meek as a kitten ( ...I suspect that would only hasten its demise).

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: number 6
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 08:00 PM

China.

or China will attack the U.S.


sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 08:17 PM

If that happens, say goodby to your suburban lifestyle and your 2 car garage.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 08:28 PM

I noticed that right after Baghdad fell there was all this bravado about "Syria is next" All that has died out and I haven't heard a squeek about starting another war.

I think the UN might do their job this time. Let's hope so.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 08:41 PM

I'm with you on that one, OG. The last thing we want is a second front in the deserts.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 09:18 PM

Let's hope so indeed.

My feeling is, though, that expanding empires normally start new wars when they have successfully concluded old ones...except when the empire is run by a lunatic or a fool... (as in the case of Hitler, who attacked Russia in '41 with Great Britain still fully engaged...and then declared war on the USA after Pearl Harbour, as his armies were being driven back from in front of Moscow! He was out to lunch.)

Is the USA run by people with judgement that bad? Possibly.

The war in Iraq has not been concluded successfully to this date...nor has Afghanistan, in truth, unless you consider enabling the re-creation of the World's biggest Asian drug trading business to be a worthy accomplishent.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: jaze
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 12:43 PM

The only way they could pull it off would be to restart the draft. There currently aren't enough soldiers. Somehow I have a terrible fear if anything is done to Iran. I think it would escalate into a global conflict and life as we know it would drastically change. Would Bush do it? My blood runs cold at the thought of what crazy people do when they're desparate.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 02:34 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/11/iran.nuclear/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/09/iran.nuclear/index.html

""The first thing to do is to secure agreement for a reference to the Security Council, that is indeed what the allies jointly decide as I think seems likely," Blair told the British parliament on Wednesday.

"Then ... we have to decide what measures to take and we obviously don't rule out any measures at all." "

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 02:40 PM

"TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- The international community has reacted with outrage to the announcement by Iran that it would resume its nuclear research program, saying Tehran would face consequences if it carried through its plan.

"I am running out of patience, the international community is running out of patience," Mohammed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told Sky News.

"The credibility of the verification process is at stake."

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, whose country has joined Britain and France in trying to reach a deal with Iran on its nuclear program, said that there were "very, very ominous signals" from Tehran and that a move by Iran to resume uranium enrichment would violate the agreement it reached with the three countries, known as the EU3.

"That cannot remain without consequences," Steinmeier said.

Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik, whose country currently holds the rotating EU presidency, said Iran's decision to resume nuclear research was "the wrong step in the wrong direction and a cause of very serious concern." "

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 02:50 PM

I seem to have lost a post. Here it is again...

They don't need to restart the draft in the US to accomplish their agenda. They (those who are agitating for aggression against Iran) are just itching to use their new toys (tactical nuclear weapons) against someone. Iran appears to be the target they have selected.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060111/ts_nm/nuclear_iran_usa_dc

Iran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful. The U.N. nuclear watchdog has found no firm proof to the contrary.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 02:51 PM

and we obviously don't rule out any measures at all

I rest my case.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 02:53 PM

from your article:

"He said the international community had given Iran a chance to negotiate in good faith, but instead Tehran "is showing yet again that they are going to ignore the demands of the international community, and I think that's a serious miscalculation."

"We believe that if the negotiations have run their course and Iran is not going to negotiate in good faith, then there's no other option but to refer the matter to the Security Council," McClellan said. "If that happens then we would talk about what actions need to be taken at that time."

Asked by reporters about Washington's aims in seeking to get Iran referred to the Security Council, the State Department's McCormack said "we still seek to change Iranian behavior through diplomatic channels." "


So, in spite of 18 years of lies and violations by the Iranians, you would rather trust them then let the UN act?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 02:57 PM

I don't trust the motives of the people who are strong-arming the UN into acting. These people have been lying to us for quite a long time as well. And they are already responsible for the unnecessary deaths of many tens of thousands of civilians as well as many thousands of US military people.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 03:01 PM

Unnecassary because there would have been NO INVASION if SADDAM had been held to account earlier.


I listen to what the IRANIAN President says, and wonder why there is so much support for him. His words, and ACTIONS, have given me no confidence that he would not nuke the PALESTINIANS just to show how serious he is- Have you looked at the fallout patterns for strikes on Israel? ANY support for Iran in developing nuclear weapons is, in fact, support for the genocide of the Palestinian people.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 03:03 PM

Unnecessary because we never should have propped him up and assisted him in his crimes against humanity in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,Crowbar
Date: 12 Jan 06 - 12:19 AM

Maybe Israel will nuke Iran for us.

I saw Tony Blair being asked what he is going to do about Iran. He gave a typical blah blah answer.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Jan 06 - 01:47 AM

If I were Iranian, I would certainly want to defend myself from both Israel and the U.S.

At least this time, the U.S. is seeking a resolution through the U.N.

I hope Iran listens and I hope the U.S. doesn't make the first strike.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Jan 06 - 01:48 PM

""Our talks with Iran have reached a dead end," German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier told reporters after meeting with his British and French counterparts, Jack Straw and Philippe Douste-Blazy, and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana.

Straw said the group decided to call for an emergency session of the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to vote on referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council.

The ministers did not say exactly what action should be taken by the Security Council, which could impose sanctions.

The decision by the EU3 marks the end of more than two years of diplomatic efforts to convince Iran to abandon its nuclear program."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/12/iran.nuclear/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Jan 06 - 02:45 PM

"IRAN'S RESUMPTION of uranium enrichment dramatically narrows the options of Western governments that hope to prevent its Islamic regime from acquiring nuclear weapons. The breaking of seals at its Natanz plant Tuesday directly violated an agreement Tehran struck with Britain, France and Germany in 2004 to suspend its enrichment program; that should end European hopes that economic favors could be exchanged for a permanent freeze. A Russian offer to enrich Iranian uranium has no greater prospect of success: Tehran announced its new, supposedly experimental work before it had responded to Moscow. Notions of a broader "grand bargain" between Iran and the West have been rendered ludicrous by the rantings of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has denied the Holocaust more vigorously than he has Iran's plans to become a nuclear power. And thanks to better footwork by the Bush administration, European governments no longer have the option of blaming the United States for the failure of diplomacy.

That leaves the strategy that the United States has been pressing all along, which is referring Iran's case to the U.N. Security Council. Such a referral, which must come from the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, probably won't change Iranian behavior or lead to Security Council action; North Korea has been before the council for three years without result. But having promised that consequence in the event of a resumption of enrichment, European governments must now move forward. To shrink from referring Iran to the Security Council now would strip the West of its remaining credibility in Tehran and all but eliminate the possibility of a peaceful solution."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/11/AR2006011101999.html

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jan 06 - 12:00 PM

"The Islamic Republic, based on its principles, without being scared of the fuss created, will continue on its path of scientific developments and the world cannot influence the Iranian nation's will," state television quoted him as saying.

"The International Atomic Energy Agency has accepted that we are now part of the atomic club," said Khamenei."


http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/18/iran.nuclear.reut/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jan 06 - 06:57 AM

""It's the Iranians who walked away from negotiations, who broke the moratorium," Rice said. "As that condition exists, I am sensing from the Europeans that there's not much to talk about." (Watch whether Iran presents a nuclear threat -- 2:41)

During her Wednesday remarks at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, she said Iran's history with the International Atomic Energy Agency makes it difficult for the international community to trust the nation.

"The Iranians want to make this about their rights. This is not about their rights," Rice said. "It's about the ability of the international system to trust them with capabilities and technologies that could lead to a nuclear weapon. And they have a history with the IAEA of not disclosing, of covering their activities. And so no one does trust them with those technologies." "

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/18/iran.nuclear/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jan 06 - 12:02 AM

I don't trust any nation with nuclear capabilities, especially the U.S. and Israel.

I do think that Iran has the right to develop nuclear power to fuel their nation. Why should some nations have that right and not others?

From the article linked above, "On Wednesday, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, condemned the manufacture of nuclear arms as contrary to the tenets of Islam, according to Iran's state-run news agency, IRNA."

What more do you want? Its certainly not a reason for invasion.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: woodsie
Date: 20 Jan 06 - 09:59 PM

Yanks would be too shit scared to pick on Korea!

Try some little backward out of the way low tech country like say ... England!

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Jan 06 - 10:28 PM

Well, well, well...

Seems that Bush the Chickenhawk Warrior has epent up all his political capital at the wrong time...

Sould I remind folks that there were alot of us telling him not to go into Iraq... But so much for the "I told you so's"....

But, bottom line, he got his war and screwed it up royally and mow eh an Americasn president should have some political capital, he's bankrupt...

Makes one think of the $100M he blew to beat McCain in the South Caroline primary in the 2000 election...

I'm seein' a pattern here...

At any rate, Bsh is stuck betweeen a testesterone driven foreign policy that has brought him Iraq-mire and having to do the "girly boy" thing of actually talkin' with folks????

Oh, what to do????

I'd enter into some serious talkin' myself....

But Bush, the Cowboy Chichkenhawk Warrior, prefers more of that good-'ol'boy NASCAR stuff.....

Fine...

Let the historians write it down that the mighty United Sates was brought down by a president appeasing NASCAR and TV wrestling constituants....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Alba
Date: 20 Jan 06 - 11:05 PM

I hope they don't pick anywhere close to Greenville, Maine...I mean we are right on Moosehead Lake and very close to Canada!!!!
I have an oil tank in my Backyard with 150 gallons in it...damn and I have used Google to ask questions about this administration....
:)

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jan 06 - 11:47 PM

Don't goad us please, woodsie. We may be too scared, but you can't count on us not being too stupid.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jan 06 - 05:58 PM

why dont you yanks mind your own business

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Troll
Date: 21 Jan 06 - 10:42 PM

I'd say Iran.

I think we went into Iraq in order to secure bases from which to be able to strike Iran if necessary without the necesity of having to deal with flying over Turkey, Jordan, or Syria.

We cannot count on Saudi Arabia to allow us to have bases there and Dubai is too far away.

Removing Saddam was a good excuse and a valid one. Since we created him, we should remove him. The man is truly a monster. It's a shame the UN mandate for Gulf War I didn't allow us to go on and do the job then.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 06 - 10:56 PM

Interesting theory, troll. I think you are at least partially right in what you say. The USA has been trying to "take out" Iran ever since the Iran hostage crisis in Jimmy Carter's term of office. The first plan was to get Iraq to do it, in the 80's...but Saddam failed. His attack on Iran turned into a bloody stalemate. He then, in effect, became a liability from the American point of view.

The USA and Iran have been out to get each other for a very long time. It's an old grudge match. The USA interfered in Iran (way back in the 50's was it?) and set up the Shah. The Shah became hugely unpopular and was finally overthrown. The Mullahs who took over kidnapped a bunch of Americans and held the USA to ransom. Reagan arrived at an agreement with them (they may have been scared of what he might do...he had a reputation of sorts...). The USA then armed Iraq to destroy Iran. It didn't work. And so it goes...

There really are no good guys in this sordid little story of power politics, except for the ordinary people on all sides who suffer and die as the big game is played out.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Jan 06 - 11:14 PM

Now...being positioned in Afghanistan and Iraq gives the USA and the UK a position to launch a 2-pronged assault on Iran from both east and west. Sounds like the perfect setup, doesn't it? But will the west have enough soldiers to do it? Iran could be a very tough nut to crack. And will Russia and China stand aside and let it happen? Perhaps not.

An invasion of Iran may risk a Third World War.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 08:09 AM

Invasion of Iran? Most unlikely in my eyes. But a series of airstrikes is a possibility.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Jan 06 - 09:15 AM

LH,

"Iran could be a very tough nut to crack. And will Russia and China stand aside and let it happen? Perhaps not.

An invasion of Iran may risk a Third World War. "

And failure to invade MAY risk a third world war, as well. But it does NOT take troops to negate Iran. A few 100KT bombs, and the oilfields would be burning for the next 50-150 years. Please note that the way to put out a firestorm caused by a nuclear bomb is to let it burn itself out... Nothing else works.

I think the goal should be to AVOID the use of nuclear weapons, by ANY side, even if the cost is a greater number of casualties (on the attacking side)

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Mar 06 - 10:49 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/03/19/un.iran.nuclear.ap/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 20 Mar 06 - 12:11 PM

Ahmadinejad is begging for an attack since months. The discontent in Iran with the government and the rule of religious hardliners is growing. What he needs most to unite the whole country behind him and to stabilize the mullahs' rule is a serious threat or an outright attack on Iran.

That's what he's begging for. A ground attack threatening his power is extremely unlikely under the present circumstances. A series of airstrikes does not really damage but a small part of the Iranian infrastructure but will help to silence internal critique.

Maybe he finds someone stupid enough to do him a favour? Or someone with growing internal critique looking for a good foe too?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Mar 06 - 03:10 PM

Wolfgang,
"A series of airstrikes does not really damage but a small part of the Iranian infrastructure but will help to silence internal critique."

The problem is that with nuclear weapons involved, that "A series of airstrikes " may just destroy the entire country of Iran... Not that
Ahmadinejad cares about his people, but he is miscalculating the reaction. Israel has too much at risk to presume that he is not serious: And the EU should be aware of the 2500 km range of Iran's PRESENT missiles.

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Mar 06 - 04:25 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060320/wl_mideast_afp/irannuclearpolitics_060320175124;_ylt=Akw.kaA.csfKDH6asB0G8WZSw60A;_ylu=X3oD

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Mar 06 - 10:52 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060321/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_iran_nuclear

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 10:11 AM

BERLIN - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned Iran on Thursday the "international community is united" in the dispute over its nuclear program, but a Tehran envoy defiantly rejected a U.N. call to reimpose a freeze on uranium enrichment. Rice spoke after a meeting in Berlin among diplomats from the five veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany over ways to press Iran to stop enriching uranium, which can be used for weapons. Iran says its program is peaceful.

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/World/Iran

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Mar 06 - 06:27 AM

Laxey Wheel, Isle of Man

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,01756
Date: 31 Mar 06 - 06:28 AM

wot?

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,sorry
Date: 31 Mar 06 - 06:29 AM

sorry that was me - wrong thread

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: GUEST,01756
Date: 31 Mar 06 - 06:30 AM

Apology accepted.
Thanks