Turn on thread page Beta

USA threatens Iran? watch

  • View Poll Results: Is this likely/do you believe the report?
    definatly
    0
    0%
    seems credible but need more info
    28.57%
    un-decided
    21.43%
    seems incredible but need more info
    7.14%
    definatly NOT
    28.57%
    educational comment/abstain
    14.29%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    This story has recieved a lot of media coverage and I wondered what you would make of it:-

    Key links


    http://www.newyorker.com/fact/conten.../060417fa_fact (The article)

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4893126.stm (British
    statement)

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4897570.stm (USA's statement)

    [Edit] Removed references to reporters respectability (cheers for the info China.)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Italy will be watching this situation closely but as of yet can see no reason to attack Iran.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Uzbekistan hopes that this report is not credible, and that the US representative disavow it as soon as possible. Threatening to use military force again another state is a clear violation of the UN Charter and international law, and threatening to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear signatory to the NPT is a clear violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty that the United States is claiming to uphold.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    My President has said all that needs to be said and has publically dismissed the reports. The US has nothing further to add to these well-publicised remarks.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    China believes in a diplomatic solution to the Iranian issue.

    The reporter in question is not that credible at all. he is the one that said

    "Sometimes I change events, dates, and places in a certain way to protect people...I can’t fudge what I write. But I can certainly fudge what I say."
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Singapore also firmly believes that all parties involved will strive to resolve the issue diplomatically, and that a war strike will only be used as a last resort, during imminent immediate danger to global security.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Germany hardly believes it possible that the US will attack Iran, especially using nuclear weapons. The US is currently leaning towards dimplomacy and is seems unlikely that it will attack Iran. At this moment, it cannot even justify an attack under Article 51 of the UN charter. The complications of using nuclear weapons, both political and humanitarian, are so immense, that it is impossible that the US attack with nuclear arms.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    India hopes and believes that this situation can be resolved peacefully, with no need for force or armed attack. We will be keeping a close eye on the situation, as we have no wish to see two of our major trading partners enter a war that will most certainly turn nuclear.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Israel doesn't believe that the USA will attack Iran, at least not until it has exhausted negotiations in a diplomatic and peaceful way. However, the matter must be taken seriously. Iran is a threat to world peace.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gemgems89)
    Israel doesn't believe that the USA will attack Iran, at least not until it has exhausted negotiations in a diplomatic and peaceful way. However, the matter must be taken seriously. Iran is a threat to world peace.
    Isn't it a huge double standard to call Iran a threat to world peace for implying that it wants to attack one country while at the same time threatening to attack Iran?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Given that the US had an emergency plan for nuclear attack on Britain and Canada at one stage, Russia sees no point in preventing planning, so long as threats are not carried out.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    But would nukes be the way to solve the Iran problem? Common sense suggests: Er, no. The uncertain credibility of the reports, coupled with the international repercussions that would result from a hypothetical nuclear attack, speak for themselves.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    There is a grave misunderstanding regarding the apparent weaponry that would be deployed. The article does not suggest the US would use full-on nuclear weaponry that obliterates all, these would be targeted, so-called "bunker busters" with limited ranges of effectiveness and targeted against precise sites. No-one has suggested the US is going to level Tehran.
    Offline

    13
    Serbia wishes peace in the region and will support diplomatic moves made by China.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Italy would also like to insist that the USA works towards a diplomatic solution to promote peace in the region.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Spain maintains that it expects the USA to exhaust all possible diplomatic alternatives before considering military action, and believes the political and humanitarian repercussions of an armed strike against the Islamic Republic of Iran too severe for such action to be considered in the current climate.

    Spain reminds the USA that it will not contribute to any military advance against Iran. It also reminds all nations that such a military strike may be illegal without full UN approval and broader support from the international community.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Spain: Get your terrorist-whipped ass outta here.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonathanH)
    There is a grave misunderstanding regarding the apparent weaponry that would be deployed. The article does not suggest the US would use full-on nuclear weaponry that obliterates all, these would be targeted, so-called "bunker busters" with limited ranges of effectiveness and targeted against precise sites. No-one has suggested the US is going to level Tehran.
    Are the bunker-busters based on nuclear charges? If so, that would provide the link between these sensationalist articles and the truth.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonathanH)
    Spain: Get your terrorist-whipped ass outta here.
    Terrorist whipped? Hah, the US can talk!

    Sorry...
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by brimstone)
    Terrorist whipped? Hah, the US can talk!

    Sorry...
    Hehe dont even mention Iraq casualties
 
 
 
Poll
Favourite type of bread
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.