Is it inevitable that Britain or the US will get attacked in the near future?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by I Persia I
Yes I know unmanned drones ARE carrying out strikes however you cannot deny the fact that the overthrow of the taliban was a main secondary objectives of the war
I really don't think the US cares. I think it came down to if we can get rid of them and instill democracy with out too bigger cost then sure, but they aren't going to stay there until the Taliban is defeated
Original post by Aj12
I really don't think the US cares. I think it came down to if we can get rid of them and instill democracy with out too bigger cost then sure, but they aren't going to stay there until the Taliban is defeated
But having sway over the current regime will benefit them much will it not, I don't know when they're gonna leave but it looks like we're staying for a while, I don't think by staying longer we can assure the international community we're helping out.
Original post by I Persia I
I read the first two paragraphs and noticed you're a complete retard. Afghanistan's oil reserves are next to nothing.
1) Why insult someone? it does your argument or debate no justice
2) Afghanistan has enough oil to be worth invading. Whilst it may not be anywhere near the number of reserves other countries have, its easier to invade. The UK would struggle to invade most of the countries that make the top 10, as I've pointed out. Then you have to factor in other resources such as opium.
http://www.businessinsider.com/afghanistan-may-have-disco-2010-8
If you look at the countries with the most oil, its obvious to see why the UK and USA are not invading them.
1. Russia (Russia would attack back)
2. Saudi Arabia (massive US/UK economic links)
3. USA (USA already has access to these oil reserves)
4. Iran (Russia and China have warned the USA)
5. China (China would attack back)
6. Mexico (Mexico would attack back with help from Southern American countries and cartels)
7. Canada (Canada would retaliate)
8. UAE (Same as Saudi)
9. Iraq ( Already Invaded)
10. Kuwait (Would cause tension with Iran which means tension with Russia & China)
Therefore, its obvious to see why the UK and USA would target a country like Afghanistan where they can go about their business without extreme retaliation or their own country being threatened and without the risk of outside interference from other countries. Its the most feasible option.
Original post by SatanIsAwesome
France & the Uk have an extremely close relationship, it doesn't mean we'd side with each other in a war against Europe. Plenty of countries have nice relationships, it doesn't matter, Germany & the UK have a nice relationship going anyway.
France and the UK will side with each other, everyone knows this.
You're a moron if you think that Germany wants to take over Europe, WW2 was basically the result of propaganda, not the will of the people and WW1 was the result of alliances, not Germany's desire to rule Europe. Germany is also a major part of NATO, their troops would be fighting for Europe....
Do you not read? I didn't say that Germany wants to take over Europe. I said, if Russia launch an attack against the UK and aim to take over Europe then Germany will side with them to avoid attack, especially if we get left in shatters by the initial Russian attack. NATO means nothing. Its just an agreement which can easily be broken. New things will affect other possible outcomes. Its the same for everything in life. Nothing is ever set in stone.
zzzz you paranoid idiot.
No im just having a debate. I don't need to resort to childish insults. I have a 1st in International Relations to back up my statements so I know exactly what im taking about.
Nobody says that they still hate each other, but just because they're friends it doesn't mean that they want to start wars with everyone.
Again, no one said they wanted to start wars. Where are you getting this from? I said, and I repeat, if Russia launch an attack its likely a lot of mainland countries in Europe will side with them to avoid getting obliterated. Its called surrendering or becoming an ally. A country like Bulgaria will probably surrender, a country like Germany will probably join forces with them and assist them to prove their allegiance.
Russia isn't going to start a war, I don't think that they want their population halved.
How do you know? No one knows the motives of a country or what is going on behind closed doors. The fact is, Russia and China's relations with the US and UK are becoming more strained because our governments won't stop meddling in International Affairs. Thats a fact. Anyone thinking they know the in's and out's of what is happening behind closed doors within certain governments are really naive.
Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x
1) Why insult someone? it does your argument or debate no justice
2) Afghanistan has enough oil to be worth invading. Whilst it may not be anywhere near the number of reserves other countries have, its easier to invade. The UK would struggle to invade most of the countries that make the top 10, as I've pointed out. Then you have to factor in other resources such as opium.
http://www.businessinsider.com/afghanistan-may-have-disco-2010-8
If you look at the countries with the most oil, its obvious to see why the UK and USA are not invading them.
1. Russia (Russia would attack back)
2. Saudi Arabia (massive US/UK economic links)
3. USA (USA already has access to these oil reserves)
4. Iran (Russia and China have warned the USA)
5. China (China would attack back)
6. Mexico (Mexico would attack back with help from Southern American countries and cartels)
7. Canada (Canada would retaliate)
8. UAE (Same as Saudi)
9. Iraq ( Already Invaded)
10. Kuwait (Would cause tension with Iran which means tension with Russia & China)
Therefore, its obvious to see why the UK and USA would target a country like Afghanistan where they can go about their business without extreme retaliation or their own country being threatened and without the risk of outside interference from other countries. Its the most feasible option.
2) Afghanistan has enough oil to be worth invading. Whilst it may not be anywhere near the number of reserves other countries have, its easier to invade. The UK would struggle to invade most of the countries that make the top 10, as I've pointed out. Then you have to factor in other resources such as opium.
http://www.businessinsider.com/afghanistan-may-have-disco-2010-8
If you look at the countries with the most oil, its obvious to see why the UK and USA are not invading them.
1. Russia (Russia would attack back)
2. Saudi Arabia (massive US/UK economic links)
3. USA (USA already has access to these oil reserves)
4. Iran (Russia and China have warned the USA)
5. China (China would attack back)
6. Mexico (Mexico would attack back with help from Southern American countries and cartels)
7. Canada (Canada would retaliate)
8. UAE (Same as Saudi)
9. Iraq ( Already Invaded)
10. Kuwait (Would cause tension with Iran which means tension with Russia & China)
Therefore, its obvious to see why the UK and USA would target a country like Afghanistan where they can go about their business without extreme retaliation or their own country being threatened and without the risk of outside interference from other countries. Its the most feasible option.
There is over 1 Trillion dollars worth of minerals in Afghanistan. However there is a simple reason why the invasion was not to get hold of these minerals. No outside investors will touch it. The Afgan government is finding it hard to get investors together as the companies have to train their own security forces and it is generally very dangerous to try to run an operation in the country.
Oh btw just so you know China would not be able to support Iran in a war as they would find it difficult to project forces anywhere past their own borders. Their military is just not ready for it yet.
Original post by Aj12
There is over 1 Trillion dollars worth of minerals in Afghanistan. However there is a simple reason why the invasion was not to get hold of these minerals. No outside investors will touch it. The Afgan government is finding it hard to get investors together as the companies have to train their own security forces and it is generally very dangerous to try to run an operation in the country.
Oh btw just so you know China would not be able to support Iran in a war as they would find it difficult to project forces anywhere past their own borders. Their military is just not ready for it yet.
Oh btw just so you know China would not be able to support Iran in a war as they would find it difficult to project forces anywhere past their own borders. Their military is just not ready for it yet.
Regardless of whether China could or couldn't, they, along with Russia, still warned America as well as other countries to not invade Iran. So far, America hasn't invaded Iran. Obviously, it makes sense for America to invade countries where there is no risk of outside interference, even if that means getting less resources. They know fully well outside interference can turn an invasion very nasty.
Would you invade Iran knowing other countries could get involved or would you invade a country where there is no threat from other countries? You'd go for the second option. Its the most sensible root without further straining relations with certain countries.
Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x
Regardless of whether China could or couldn't, they, along with Russia, still warned America as well as other countries to not invade Iran. So far, America hasn't invaded Iran. Obviously, it makes sense for America to invade countries where there is no risk of outside interference, even if that means getting less resources. They know fully well outside interference can turn an invasion very nasty.
Would you invade Iran knowing other countries could get involved or would you invade a country where there is no threat from other countries? You'd go for the second option. Its the most sensible root without further straining relations with certain countries.
Would you invade Iran knowing other countries could get involved or would you invade a country where there is no threat from other countries? You'd go for the second option. Its the most sensible root without further straining relations with certain countries.
Of course they did, they have also been warning about the campaign in Libya too. Calling it a crusade.
An invasion of Iran for oil is just not practical. For the same reasons as an invasion of Afghanistan for minerals and oil is not practical due to the guerilla war you have to fight against whilst trying to extract.
If it comes down to it and Iran is proven to be developing nuclear weapons a few warnings from China and Russia will do nothing to stop the US, Israel and maybe even Saudi Arabia.
Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x
1) Why insult someone? it does your argument or debate no justice
2) Afghanistan has enough oil to be worth invading. Whilst it may not be anywhere near the number of reserves other countries have, its easier to invade. The UK would struggle to invade most of the countries that make the top 10, as I've pointed out. Then you have to factor in other resources such as opium.
http://www.businessinsider.com/afghanistan-may-have-disco-2010-8
If you look at the countries with the most oil, its obvious to see why the UK and USA are not invading them.
1. Russia (Russia would attack back)
2. Saudi Arabia (massive US/UK economic links)
3. USA (USA already has access to these oil reserves)
4. Iran (Russia and China have warned the USA)
5. China (China would attack back)
6. Mexico (Mexico would attack back with help from Southern American countries and cartels)
7. Canada (Canada would retaliate)
8. UAE (Same as Saudi)
9. Iraq ( Already Invaded)
10. Kuwait (Would cause tension with Iran which means tension with Russia & China)
Therefore, its obvious to see why the UK and USA would target a country like Afghanistan where they can go about their business without extreme retaliation or their own country being threatened and without the risk of outside interference from other countries. Its the most feasible option.
2) Afghanistan has enough oil to be worth invading. Whilst it may not be anywhere near the number of reserves other countries have, its easier to invade. The UK would struggle to invade most of the countries that make the top 10, as I've pointed out. Then you have to factor in other resources such as opium.
http://www.businessinsider.com/afghanistan-may-have-disco-2010-8
If you look at the countries with the most oil, its obvious to see why the UK and USA are not invading them.
1. Russia (Russia would attack back)
2. Saudi Arabia (massive US/UK economic links)
3. USA (USA already has access to these oil reserves)
4. Iran (Russia and China have warned the USA)
5. China (China would attack back)
6. Mexico (Mexico would attack back with help from Southern American countries and cartels)
7. Canada (Canada would retaliate)
8. UAE (Same as Saudi)
9. Iraq ( Already Invaded)
10. Kuwait (Would cause tension with Iran which means tension with Russia & China)
Therefore, its obvious to see why the UK and USA would target a country like Afghanistan where they can go about their business without extreme retaliation or their own country being threatened and without the risk of outside interference from other countries. Its the most feasible option.
Your knowledge of Middle-Eastern alliances is very stereotypical. Russia and China will never help Iran in the case of an invasion; they don't support an invasion, but will never in a million years will they side with Iran militarily, why on EARTH would invading Kuwait anger Iran? It would anger the Arab Persian Gulf countries but not Iran, Iran and Kuwait aren't exactly best friends as Kuwait's prime minister is on the verge deposition for being too soft on the Iranians and 2 Iranians were recently executed for spying.
Original post by Aj12
Of course they did, they have also been warning about the campaign in Libya too. Calling it a crusade.
An invasion of Iran for oil is just not practical. For the same reasons as an invasion of Afghanistan for minerals and oil is not practical due to the guerilla war you have to fight against whilst trying to extract.
If it comes down to it and Iran is proven to be developing nuclear weapons a few warnings from China and Russia will do nothing to stop the US, Israel and maybe even Saudi Arabia.
An invasion of Iran for oil is just not practical. For the same reasons as an invasion of Afghanistan for minerals and oil is not practical due to the guerilla war you have to fight against whilst trying to extract.
If it comes down to it and Iran is proven to be developing nuclear weapons a few warnings from China and Russia will do nothing to stop the US, Israel and maybe even Saudi Arabia.
If US do invade Iran it will most likely start a WW3.
Original post by I Persia I
Your knowledge of Middle-Eastern alliances is very stereotypical. Russia and China will never help Iran in the case of an invasion; they don't support an invasion, but will never in a million years will they side with Iran militarily, why on EARTH would invading Kuwait anger Iran? It would anger the Arab Persian Gulf countries but not Iran, Iran and Kuwait aren't exactly best friends as Kuwait's prime minister is on the verge deposition for being too soft on the Iranians and 2 Iranians were recently executed for spying.
Russia would not side with Iran? Im not sure about China, but im sure Russia will.
Original post by Swimmer
If US do invade Iran it will most likely start a WW3.
Explain?
Original post by Swimmer
Russia would not side with Iran? Im not sure about China, but im sure Russia will.
No they wouldn't, China and Russia are simply reliant on Iran for minor imports and exports, especially China for oil and Russia for it's nuclear engineers in Iran. They will simply denounce the invasion but won't do anything to help the Iranian regime.
Original post by Swimmer
If US do invade Iran it will most likely start a WW3.
Why would it exactly?
Original post by Swimmer
Russia would not side with Iran? Im not sure about China, but im sure Russia will.
Thank You.
Russia have already warned France firmly to stop the war talk regarding Iran or it'll get involved. Since then, the topic has been swept under the rug. Both Russia and China have told the countries thinking about military action against Iran to forget it.
Persia is only 15, he'll learn one day. Its nice to see a youngster actually taking an interest in the topic.
Why would China attack America? In doing so they would destroying their own economy, considering that they have the biggest dollar reserves of any foreign country - their own wealth is directly related to the dollar, they wouldn't attack America because doing so would weaken the dollar.
Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x
Regardless of whether China could or couldn't, they, along with Russia, still warned America as well as other countries to not invade Iran. So far, America hasn't invaded Iran. Obviously, it makes sense for America to invade countries where there is no risk of outside interference, even if that means getting less resources. They know fully well outside interference can turn an invasion very nasty.
No countries would side with Iran in any war, Iran has no major allies (military wise).
What's Russia gonna do? Nuke America for not listening to them?
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Aj12
Why would it exactly?
Russia and China have already warned countries about an Iran invasion. Both have also stated if Iran is invaded there is a strong chance WW3 could break out. You can't get a better source than from the horses mouth. France's foreign minister then back tracked on its war talk by saying 'military action should be avoided at all costs'.
You guys need to start reading and watching proper news not Ruperts controlled media!
You know what, im gona find you guys the link.
http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4p1kD8CZX8
You know what, im gona find you guys the link.
http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4p1kD8CZX8
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x
Russia and China have already warned countries about an Iran invasion. Both have also stated if Iran is invaded there is a strong chance WW3 could break out. You can't get a better source than from the horses mouth. France's foreign minister then back tracked on its war talk by saying 'military action should be avoided at all costs'.
I can't see Russia nuking America over Iran. MAD still applies. And the Russia military is not in any postion to fight a conventional war against the US.
Tbh if I was going to give my prediction for war in the future I would predict a Middle Eatern proxy war. Iran and Syria vs Saudi Arabia Bahrain and the UAE with Israel staying out of it as much as possible. Of course the Arab spring will have major effects on the region so its likely this idea may well be redundant in a matter of months
Original post by I Persia I
No countries would side with Iran in any war, Iran has no major allies (military wise).
What's Russia gonna do? Nuke America for not listening to them?
No countries would side with Iran in any war, Iran has no major allies (military wise).
What's Russia gonna do? Nuke America for not listening to them?
You do not understand, allies in military are based on resources and economic relations, nothing else. China and Russia both have interests in Iran that an invasion could harm, that would anger them and they would want to defend their interests and rightfully so.
Russia is obviously not going to nuke America for not listening to them, that would be a last resort tactic if a major war broke out, however, Russia could send an air force in to combat America when America was in the process of launching an air invasion. They could easily catch them off guard, its happened in the past and will happen in the future. Russia and China won't defend Iran for Iran's sake, they'll defend Iran for their own sake and to protect their own interests.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Is Israel winning
- I need ideas to reword my EPQ title.
- I can't get over him
- Galleries worth the visit in London for students
- My boyfriend shoved me while drunk, what should I do
- can i still do well in a levels?
- High paying job
- Getting into Medicine
- Antifa activist murdered in NYC
- Is the BMW series 1 a good first car?
- Is the UK's future in peril?
- Will World War 3 happen soon?
- Our tips for attending a Higher Education Fair.
- Cambridge Architecture Personal Statement and Portfolio
- ChatGpt
- My date showed up on a bicycle in central London
- AI Life Advice
- Which 2024 election will be most significant for the world?
- Is it just me or there are more and more people begging for money
- What do you think of HS2 only going to Birmingham
Latest
Last reply 5 minutes ago
Official University of St Andrews Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 10 minutes ago
Official University College London Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 10 minutes ago
Border Force National Campaign September 2023Last reply 11 minutes ago
Will I be invited to KPMG's Launch Pad?Last reply 12 minutes ago
AQA GCSE English Literature Paper 1 (8702/1) - 13th May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 12 minutes ago
yet to receive a woodhouse interviewLast reply 13 minutes ago
KPMG Audit Apprenticeship 2024Last reply 13 minutes ago
No hope for A Level OCR RSPosted 13 minutes ago
aqa a-level english language cla - only learn one?Last reply 14 minutes ago
UCL (University College London) Postgraduate Applicants 2024-25Last reply 14 minutes ago
Conditional offer from Henrietta Barnet and Parmiter’sLast reply 15 minutes ago
St dominics, henrietta barnett, RMS, parmiters or girls grammar??Last reply 17 minutes ago
Is 65% in lab report decent?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
