Iran may be biggest threat to Iraq - U.S. general

[grandpa]

Iran may be biggest threat to Iraq - U.S. general WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran may pose the greatest long-term threat to Iraq's stability, a U.S. general said Tuesday, the day after Iran's president wrapped up a visit to Baghdad. Army Lt. Gen Ray Odierno, who recently ended a 15-month assignment as the No. 2 U.S. commander in Iraq, said Iran continued to train extremist militia groups in Iraq.

The implication here is this:
"We need to do a better job of identifying such nutjobs in Iraq and at the same
time make it harder for them to get their hands on weapons."

But notice how this logic is not being applied regarding the US and its allies who often engage in outrageous behavior in Iraq. That would obviously involve looking in a mirror.

It makes me wonder if there's a law that all leading politicians must be incredibly hypocritical.

Grandpa h.

[J. Askiloupos]

It makes me wonder if there's a law that all leading politicians must be incredibly hypocritical.

I'm sure there's something in a subsection of Murphy's Law regarding this.

[Rainbow]

Iran may pose the greatest long-term threat to Iraq's stability, a U.S. general said Tuesday, the day after Iran's president wrapped up a visit to Baghdad.

I do not think Iran may become a (potential) threat to Iraq's stability but Iran Is the one, in reality.
Within few years we have the answer to Iranian governning body's peaceful intentions, regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions.
If Iran really wants to build nuclear reactors for energy-related purposes, why Iran does not want inspectors and/or supervisors to monitor that project ?
It looks Iran is becoming a brand new Saddam the Second - made by Iran (this time) - within the whole Middle-East region.

[Ibn_Sina]

Iran is a peaceful, sovereign nation and it only wants peace.

[D Sretenovic]

f Iran really wants to build nuclear reactors for energy-related purposes, why Iran does not want inspectors and/or supervisors to monitor that project ?

Basically what you are asking is: Why one sovereign country doesn`t allow another to send their people to control what they`re doing? Do you allow other people to come in to your apartment and watch what you`re doing? Don`t think so.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: D Sretenovic Basically what you are asking is: Why one sovereign country doesn`t allow another to send their people to control what they`re doing? Do you allow other people to come in to your apartment and watch what you`re doing? Don`t think so.

There are the following reasons :
- Iran does not exist somewhere out there, beyond planet Earth
- Iran has enough energy-related resources

P.S.
Iran is not in a size of an apartment, with no influence on others.

[D Sretenovic]

Quote by: Rainbow There are the following reasons : - Iran does not exist somewhere out there, beyond planet Earth - Iran has enough energy-related resources P.S. Iran is not in a size of an apartment, with no influence on others.

There are other countries using nuclear power although they already posses enough energy-related resources; they build nuclear power plant to collect that kind of energy because it is ``sustainable`` energy source- these sources are not expected to be depleted in a time frame relevant to the human race...

Iran is located on Earth, has influence on others, so? USA is also located on Earth, has huge influence on other countries, and correct me if I`m wrong- it has bigger proportions than a standard apartment. Would you accept international control of your domestic affairs on these grounds?

Iran is a potential nuclear force. Iran is potentially hostile. But, that`s not enough for USA, or any other country to violate their sovereignty. Although it seems that forcing Iran to accept international control is a more secure option, on the long run, the situation is quiet opposite. Sovereignty of independent countries must be respected.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Ibn_Sina Iran is a peaceful, sovereign nation and it only wants peace.

Yet it desires the death of every Jew in the world!
It will be peaceful when Alamanutjob leaves office and the reformers take over!

[Chaossaber314]

Yeah if the Ayatollah allows it.

[Ghumanto]

Quote by: GHook93 Yet it desires the death of every Jew in the world! It will be peaceful when Alamanutjob leaves office and the reformers take over!

Iran didn't said they want the death of every Jew. They want to dismantle the den called " Israel ".
What Isarel is doing is killing , killing ........

I don't support Iran or the Mullah's . But perhaps what they are doing now is for the best of their future ! They know it better than us .

Finally , if Israel can posses so many Nukes - why can't others ???

Shame on those double standard bullyists !

[Century 25]

After Prometheus' theft of the secret of fire, Zeus ordered Hephaestus to create the woman Pandora as part of the punishment for mankind. Pandora was given many seductive gifts from Aphrodite, Hermes, Charites, and Horae...

For fear of additional reprisals, Prometheus warned his brother Epimetheus not to accept any gifts from Zeus, but Epimetheus did not listen, and married Pandora. Pandora had been given a jar and instructed by Zeus to keep it closed, but she had also been given the gift of curiousity, and ultimately opened it. When she did, all of the evils of mankind escaped from the jar, although Pandora was quick enough to close it again and keep one value inside, and that was.. "Hope" - lol

...Then along came Bush..

[Ibn_Sina]

Quote by: GHook93 Yet it desires the death of every Jew in the world! It will be peaceful when Alamanutjob leaves office and the reformers take over!

Just as Jews not only desire but actually kills defenceless Arab women and children. Obviously, it will take some guts to touch a Persian.

^^^ Ghumanto said it better.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Ibn_Sina Just as Jews not only desire but actually kills defenceless Arab women and children. Obviously, it will take some guts to touch a Persian. ^^^ Ghumanto said it better.

Arabs in Israel are treated better than Arabs in Iran. Israel wants nothing more than to live in peace with her neighbors which includes Palestine. Israel doesn't want to rule over 4-5 million angry Palestinians.

Israel doesn't target Arab women and children. They take retalitory actions against terrorist who use Palestinian women and children as PR means of collateral damage. And it works for the sheeple!

[GHook93]

Quote by: Ghumanto Iran didn't said they want the death of every Jew. They want to dismantle the den called " Israel ".

Yep another way of stating they want to kill every Jew! Just wording it differently, obviously you can determine the difference because you hold the same genocidial views!

What Isarel is doing is killing , killing ........

Please stop the BS propaganda machine. What Israel is doing is protecting herself. If the DAILY missile attacks didn't happen then Israel would not attack the MILITANTS!

What Hamas is doing is committing acts of terror, terror...
What Israel is doing is defending, defending...

I don't support Iran or the Mullah's .

Don't be bashful, yes you do! All the leftest do!

But perhaps what they are doing now is for the best of their future ! They know it better than us .

They have never done what is in the countries best interest!


Hey isn't this thread about Iran and Iraq! Can Israel be left out of at least one thread?

[grandpa]

Quote by: GHook93 Yep another way of stating they want to kill every Jew! Just wording it differently, obviously you can determine the difference because you hold the same genocidial views!

That's not necessarily a "genocidal view" any more than saying "I want to dismantle Saddam's government." It depends on exactly what is meant. I'm not saying all such statements are equal, but let's not pretend everyone expressing them is of genocidal intent.

Of course, Ghumanto may have great hatred toward Jews for all I know. He hasn't spit out enough venom in that regard, though (at least in this thread).

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

By the way, it's questionable that Iran can be considered as the source of most al-Qaeda operatives, most of whom can largely be considered "non-state operatives" anyway.

For instance, in the most recent attack al-Qaeda was implicated rather than the government of Iran, which seems reasonable enough:

BAGHDAD, March 7 (Reuters) - Iraqi police on Friday raised to 68 the death toll in coordinated bombings in a packed shopping area in central Baghdad on Thursday, making it the deadliest attack in the capital for nine months. The bombs wounded 120 people, making it the worst attack in Baghdad since 87 were killed in a car bombing at a mosque last June. U.S. and Iraqi officials blamed the attack on al Qaeda. IRAQ WRAPUP 2-Baghdad blast toll rises, deadliest for months

Grandpa h.

[Morality Games]

Don't be bashful, yes you do! All the leftest do!

His is not a position taken by even a majority of persons on the left. Most liberals (who comprise the majority of the left) are more supportive of Israel than not, although, in a less hostile and more reserved manner than you.

I guess it would be fair of me to say that all people on the right support imperialism. It's alright if you actually don't, because saying that persons / groups take positions that they don't is okay (but only if you don't like them).

[GHook93]

Quote by: grandpa The implication here is this: "We need to do a better job of identifying such nutjobs in Iraq and at the same time make it harder for them to get their hands on weapons." But notice how this logic is not being applied regarding the US and its allies who often engage in outrageous behavior in Iraq. That would obviously involve looking in a mirror. It makes me wonder if there's a law that all leading politicians must be incredibly hypocritical. Grandpa h.

I think a better way to paraphrase what he is stating is that Iran is the biggest threat to American interests in Iraq. The great unintended consequences of Bush's bone-head war in Iraq is that he brought Iraq and Iran closer. Sadam's Sunni Iraq lead government was a polarizing force to the Shia Iranian lead government. I think its in Iraq's best interest to have friendly relationships with its neighbors, but its not in Americans best interest to have Iran and Iraq as friends.

[Ibn_Sina]

Ghook and Zionists Co. don't know that literal translation from Persian to English (or between any two languages) may often mean something quite different to what was originally said.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was calling for the replacement of the brutal and racist regime with a friendlier one (he wasn't that obvious, thinking people are intelligent enough to understand what he implied). Alas, the Zionists weren't.

No, I am wrong! Zionists did understand it. However, they pretend to not to know in order to portray Ahmadinejad in a negative light. Ghook you can only 'label' Ahmadinejad as "anti-semitic" or "genocidal". Nonetheless, Olmert's practical demonstration of being genocidal is something even a rational Israeli should be human enough to condemn.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Ibn_Sina Ghook and Zionists Co. don't know that literal translation from Persian to English (or between any two languages) may often mean something quite different to what was originally said. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was calling for the replacement of the brutal and racist regime with a friendlier one (he wasn't that obvious, thinking people are intelligent enough to understand what he implied). Alas, the Zionists weren't. No, I am wrong! Zionists did understand it. However, they pretend to not to know in order to portray Ahmadinejad in a negative light. Ghook you can only 'label' Ahmadinejad as "anti-semitic" or "genocidal". Nonetheless, Olmert's practical demonstration of being genocidal is something even a rational Israeli should be human enough to condemn.

Sorry I brought Israel into the thread, but this is thread is rather about your home country and Iraq. Do you have any views on that?


I think Alamanutjob's actions speak for themselves. However, I still believe his bark is louder than his bite.