The original closing of the straits was a stated response to the hypothetical 'if Israel or America attack us'. Of course trigger happy diplomats, newspapermen and government officials have blown it all out of proportion, but the original and key point still stands.(Original post by MxSK)
wtf? "annihilated", for closing the straits? are you insane? the most extreme thing that would happen is they would re-open the straits and then take out the capability to do it again... what kind of bull**** talk is "annihilated"?
The regime isn't going to pick a fight it knows it going to lose... This has been a consistant fact throughout its whole lifetime. Otherwise it wouldn't exist today.
Look in January when there was last talk of "closing the straits", WaPo reported that US sent a blunt message to Iran through various channels and literally the next day the foreign ministry basically apologised.
And look again this time, just a few days ago after reports of the US increasing persian gulf presence with the introduction "floating military launchpad base" thing. Look at how the foreign ministry panics and wimpers in response:
here's link to the US warning this time
And as you saw above, IRI wimpers helplessly "ok sorry".
Which poses more of a threat? - Iran's Nukes or the Strait of Hormuz?
|Did you have a flippin good pancake day, or was it pretty crepe? Share your pancake photos, videos and stories for a chance to win a £20 Amazon voucher!||05-03-2014|
View Poll Results: The Strait or The Nukes - - - Which is the larger threat?The Strait1456.00%The Nukes1144.00%
OfflineReputation:(Original post by t0ffee)
Well you haven't listed any sources for all the facts you've included. And tbh the various Zionist and Israeli motifs on your profile suggest that you are most likely bias, and consequently making facts fit beliefs rather than vis versa.
And I know a good amount about the issue lol.
As for my statements about Iran's funding of terrorism, they are all above. (See this post)
OfflineReputation:(Original post by thisisnew)
Regarding that map of US military bases, I remember checking a few of the 'bases' and they ended up being past-used refueling stations etc with few troops stationed - how many of those bases can actually be considered a good and proper military base of the kind that matches up with the message behind the graphic?
If you look at this map, most of the 'bases' on the right of Iran fall under the 'use of national facilities' category.
The US has a rich history of bullying threatening behaviour, the biggest case being the stationing of nuclear weapons in Turkey, howver the soviets brought the US to its senss by stationing nuclear weapons in Cuba, it shows you have to fight bullies and Iran will do exactly that should the US make the suicidal attempt of striking Iran because those chemical weapons in Syria will be launched at US bases in the region, make no mistake, Iran is no Iraq and unlike Iraq, Iran has regional allies in Iraq, China, Russia, Pakistan, India and Syria, which prob renders all US threats of striking Iran, quite frankly bull.
In addition, can we also discuss how the US pressed head with sanctions in 2010 despite Iran reaching an agreement to ship 1200kg of pure Uranium 235 in return for 120kg of isotope.
The US has always hated Uran since its attempt in 53 to nationalise its oil industry.
The US overthrew Irans denocracy and installed a brutal dictator who danced to America's tunes'
The US till this day hates that their propped up dictator the Shah was thrown out by Iran, the US hates how Iran managed to get all of its reserves in America back despite sanctions by taking over the US embassy (to force America's arm and humiliate the US )to return Irans wealth in America which the Shah stole.
Till this day the US has not apologised to Iran for murdering 200+ civilians in the blowing up of a civilian plane in Iranian airspace, in what can only be described as openly declared government terrorist attack (which went unpunished by the whole world) yet has the nerve to point fingers at Iran.
The US sold Saddam chemical weapons during the gulf war so that Iranians could be butchered.
The US has always hated Iran ever since it declared a neutral position in WW2 and did not want Iranian blood to be spilt.
And today the US is playing the same game it tried to play with Iraq, WMDs, sorry not going to fall for US lies again.
OfflineReputation:(Original post by Rhadamanthus)
So you give me an example of one of the least aggressive occupations to exist as an argument that Israel are more aggressive than the Iranians, despite the fact that the Iranian regime has killed more Iranians since 1979 than Israel has Palestinians since the 1940s?
Neither of them pose a threat to us, chavs and drunk drivers pose more of a threat
OfflineReputation:(Original post by pshewitt1)
you seem to speak as though you know a lot about Iran considering you aren't Iranian. that's coming from an Iranian... you get brainwashed just as easily as the wests bias media and Iran's...
Keep going to wars, West. Future belongs to Asia anyway.
having lived and studied in USA and UK, i do feel sorry for most of the people here. They have no idea that putting food on the table is going to be a tough call compared to Iran, in the near future.
Step 1: Reply
Step 2: RegisterThanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post Already a member? Sign in
Oops, something wasn't right
please check the following: