If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   The Pentagon wants to "lower the temperature" when it comes to Iran. Preferably to absolute zero   (thehill.com) divider line 72
    More: Obvious, Iran, George Little, deputy press secretary, military strikes, Pentagon wants, Straight of Hormuz, International Atomic Energy Agency  
•       •       •

1887 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jan 2012 at 10:33 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-12 08:53:41 AM  
Lost Thought 00; So saber rattling forces the US to act, so the US should respond by saber rattling, which in turn forces Iran to act on its original threats? Not sure I'm following your logic.

Okay, here's how it's supposed to go:

The U.S. and Israel constantly threaten Iran (Israel far more often) with regime change or invasion. Israel far more brazenly, and the USA more backhandedly, saying things like "all options are on the table".

If Iran responds in any way to these threats by getting angry, or saying "Oh yeah, if you dare, we'll beat your asses", then they are seen to be the aggressor. Much the same way that if they try to help the Iraqis rebuild their country in any way, shape or form, they are seen to be "destabilizing the region".

If the IAEA, despite decades of access to Iran's facilities, cannot unilaterally declare that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon (they have never found anything but remain "suspicious"), then it's ignored, and politicians get to tell the facts as they see them (...the gathering storm... mushroom clouds on the horizon... etc).

I mean, it takes conscious effort to actively demonize a country that hasn't invaded any of her neighbours in 250 years and that is surrounded by aggressors on all sides (US troops, Israel, and the Saudis), but hey, I guess it's still technically using your brain.
 
2012-01-12 09:06:04 AM  
The message here is, "We have a lot of crazy circus clowns vying for the GOP nomination, and in case one of them gets elected, we're trying to make it clear ahead of time that a military conflict with Iran will be an unmitigated disaster. We are simply not prepared for it."

Probably also saying, "Plus we're not convinced that the reasons being bruited for a military conflict are valid."

They will probably be about as effective in this case as they were at forestalling an invasion of Iraq.

USA! USA! USA!
 
2012-01-12 09:08:38 AM  

UNC_Samurai: robotpirateninja: karmaceutical: You'd think there would be a way the GOP candidates could pander to both the Likudniks and the Fundamentalist Christians without inching us towards WWIII. When the Pentagon has to reign in your rhetoric... you know your crazy train is off the rails. Seriously GOP morons, relax.

This one here.

And I'm sure this sort of non-brinksmanship is what the presidential candidates have in mind when they spit out the phrase "defer to the generals".


I can see Santorum now. "Here ya go Generals, I've shaken this hornet nest up real good. Now go ahead and honey-up your pecker and drive it right in there!"
 
2012-01-12 09:09:11 AM  
As RON PAUL says, given how we've treated Iran in recent history it shouldn't be a surprise that they want to develop nukes.

And don't pretend Obama's sanctions aren't an escalation. Like most awful things, this is something done by both parties.
 
2012-01-12 09:24:25 AM  
Translation:

"Hey you looney political hack chicken hawks----Are you farking crazy? You want to start ANOTHER fricking war? Do you know how much that's going to cost? Do you know how many people are going to get killed? Do you know what its going to do to the price of oil and foreign relations? GTFOH and GBTW"
 
2012-01-12 09:48:16 AM  

Phil Moskowitz: Alphax: Good for the Pentagon.. the rhetoric has been all kinds of crazy lately. And per the thread a day or two ago, Iran is NOT building nuclear weapons.

Wait until Panetta marches a vial of this shiat down to the UN. Buy scared idiot futures.

[img513.imageshack.us image 320x268]


I don't see why they would be terrified, most other cultures actually like curry powder.
 
2012-01-12 09:48:51 AM  
Why is it that both Iran and the U.S. media "round up the usual suspects" when nuclear scientists get offed or a missile site blows up?
Seems to me that Saudi Arabia has just as much a motive and much more capability to operate covertly inside Iran.
 
2012-01-12 09:52:06 AM  

JAYoung: Why is it that both Iran and the U.S. media "round up the usual suspects" when nuclear scientists get offed or a missile site blows up?


Because authoritarianism is the same no matter what flag you're doing it for.
 
2012-01-12 09:55:17 AM  

Dictatorial_Flair: King Something: And it's not exactly a different scale than Celsius, it's just offset by 273.15. Conversion from one to the other is just a simple matter of addition or subtraction, depending on which way you're going:

xºC = (x + 273.15)K
and
xK = (x - 273.15)ºC

/there's also a fourth system, Rankine, which is the same thing but with degrees Fahrenheit -- xR = (x + 459.67)ºF and xºF = (x-459.67)R
//it's less popular than anchovy-and-broccoli pizza, though
///Chicago-style anchovy-and-broccoli pizza


What is up with engineers insisting on using units of measure that nobody else uses? They too good for SI or something?


Dunno. Maybe those same engineers wonder what's the deal with airline food.
 
2012-01-12 10:07:55 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: "champing at the bit"


^
 
2012-01-12 10:23:14 AM  
Perhaps we should just not invade Iran? I know that not invading countries goes against the
American military mindset, but it may work out for us in the long run.
 
2012-01-12 10:25:28 AM  
IMO preventing a nation from acquiring a 60+ year old technology is not only futile, but downright stupid.

For comparison, a computer anno 1946:

upload.wikimedia.org

A telephone anno 1945:

upload.wikimedia.org

Music, 1947:

upload.wikimedia.org

And because this is fark, women, 1944:

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-01-12 10:29:05 AM  

YixilTesiphon: As RON PAUL says, given how we've treated Iran in recent history it shouldn't be a surprise that they want to develop nukes.


This guy might have agreed with you:

upload.wikimedia.org

/58(?) years of democracy
//*pfft*
///just like that
 
2012-01-12 10:48:30 AM  
The Republicans are desperate to get us into another war so they can preserve the Pentagon budget, while shifting all the cuts to the domestic budget.
 
2012-01-12 10:51:06 AM  

Kibbler: The message here is, "We have a lot of crazy circus clowns vying for the GOP nomination, and in case one of them gets elected, we're trying to make it clear ahead of time that a military conflict with Iran will be an unmitigated disaster. We are simply not prepared for it."

Probably also saying, "Plus we're not convinced that the reasons being bruited for a military conflict are valid."

They will probably be about as effective in this case as they were at forestalling an invasion of Iraq.

USA! USA! USA!


As a red-blooded American, am I the only one that gets a chubby when I think of sending our troops in to invade Iran? I mean, I stopped surfing internet porn with women in it and just started using the videos of us "shock and awe" bombing Baghdad, but I've been using those for years now. So the thought of bald eagles flying in dropping cluster bombs on those brownies is really getting me going. Besides, 9/11, mushroom cloud, sharia law, gays and evolution.

/never served, won't ever be forced to
//love the bravery that comes from being out of range and uninvolved
///If you don't like it, you can get the ... hellllll out.
 
2012-01-12 11:02:24 AM  

sprawl15: JAYoung: Why is it that both Iran and the U.S. media "round up the usual suspects" when nuclear scientists get offed or a missile site blows up?

Because authoritarianism is the same no matter what flag you're doing it for.


That and because the Jews did it.
 
2012-01-12 12:11:46 PM  

Uakronkid: So, like a kind of "cold" war? With a nation actively developing their nuclear capability? Nah. What kind of dumbass idea is that?


It's prevented world war 3 for almost 70 years.
 
2012-01-12 12:14:34 PM  

Hobodeluxe: that won't slow down the neocon bullshiat factory. they're working overtime putting out propaganda trying to push us into another war. everyone from the media has offered up their "we have no choice" editorials.


All they need to do is frighten enough morons into voting for them, then they can ban porn!
 
2012-01-12 12:16:25 PM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: way south: Especially if they intend to make good on their threat to close the strait and send the world into an energy crisis.

In a climate where presidential contestants openly advocate for attacking them, and they have been the victim of multiple acts which the United States considers acts of war, it's not inappropriate for them to point out that if they are attacked, they can virtually stop 20% of the world's supply of oil, as a way of saying "this isn't going to be a cakewalk and have fun explaining $7/gallon gas to your constituents."

If we turned on the news every day to hear politicians talking openly about wanting to attack the US, that country would look like a set from Mad Max so fast, Friedman wouldn't have time to write an asinine column about it. Appropriate action should be taken to make sure Iran doesn't get a nuke and go all crazy, but they have just as much right to defend themselves from a crazy regime, like a Gingrich administration, as we do.


Feh, we're the only true sovereign nation. No one has a right to defend themselves from our awesomeness!
 
2012-01-12 01:06:20 PM  
The Pentagon wants to "lower the temperature" when it comes to Iran. Preferably to absolute zero

Unless, of course, more Republicans get elected to Congress, in which the heat will be turned up.

So far I haven't determined whether America's stupid enough to vote in another Republican President to the White House.
 
2012-01-12 01:19:04 PM  
i5.photobucket.com

THEN STOP SUPPORTING INSURRECTIONS IN THEIR COUNTRY, ASSHOLE!
 
2012-01-12 05:16:01 PM  

whidbey: The Pentagon wants to "lower the temperature" when it comes to Iran. Preferably to absolute zero

Unless, of course, more Republicans get elected to Congress, in which the heat will be turned up.

So far I haven't determined whether when America's going to be stupid enough to vote in another Republican President to the White House.


FTFM
 
Displayed 22 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report