Iran is next ?

[AndrewJ]

And if someone didnt try to clean up the world, what would Iran do?? I mean yes I see the well why do we have to do it...but who else will do it. And by doing it I mean clean up these countries who are making powerful weapons like Iran, and those countries who are making alot of money, yet abusing there people like Iraq.

Sure we may have made a balls up in Iraq but in the end I am sure we shall get there, as for Iran its a known factor they have WMD, and are almost of not already got Nuclear and Biological Intercontinental ballisitic missiles. I know I feel better knowing things are going on rather then knowing a country run by MR someone who knows nothing, has Nuclear and Biological weapons or suicide bombs and does not like the UK for some weird reason.

Originally Posted by Bifta

America won't go for North Korea because North Korea put's the wind up Bush. America is not the big kid in the playground, it's the bully. Bush thinks he's picking countries that in comparison can only offer up a feeble defense.

Oh come on. 'Picking on countries that have a feeble defense'? Iran is a danger, they are (by their own admission) trying to make (or already have made) WMD. America isnt going out to find weak countrys for the sake of a war.

[AndrewJ]

No offense but I think N korea are okay and not a issue ( yet ) as for Iran its likely that it is in 2005 the single most likely threat to the West.

Originally Posted by AndrewJames

No offense but I think N korea are okay and not a issue ( yet ) as for Iran its likely that it is in 2005 the single most likely threat to the West.

How do you come to that conclusion? The fact that more and more nations are pushing to join the 'not so exclusive' nuclear club, really isnt much of a worry. If some nutter in Iran decided to throw a nuke at America (and I dont believe for a second they have the technology for ICBM's), the yanks would detect the launch in very quickly, and then respond in kind. Lets face it, every country knows the yanks would drop the 'big one' again in responce to and nuclear attack. Theres nothing like having to live underground for 250,000 years to make political leaders pause for thought these days.

IMHO, the country that poses the greatest threat to global stability is China. They are a nuclear wild-card, who believe the rest of the world to be uncivilised barbarians, especially 'us' white folks in the west. They hate the west for addicting hugh numbers of chinese people to opiates, and then ripping of their country.

[AndrewJ]

China a threat...knowing what I have had of there stuff ,the bomb will explode on launch.

I take China as a okay country personally I would be more worried about Japan after Hiroshima, they may have a excuse to retaliate even all these years later.

[markmarkymark]

personally Israel worries me more but is not often mentioned. They have the most developed system of them all - and if push comes to shove .........???

[BBKing]

There seems to be so much public dissent in the country, that it only needs minor outside support for it to work. They have overthrown themselves before without much help.

Ahem - this would be the same Iran in which moderate, democratic voices (viz. ones who don't want to establish Islamic theocracies everywhere) were beginning to be heard until a certain theocratic fundamentalist in the White House started banging on about Axes of Evil, at which point the moderates in Tehran no longer had a leg to stand on and got drowned out by those who now had evidence to support their previously nonsensical claim that the US were bent on restarting the Crusades.

It's instructive to note that the population of Iran voted (as in democratically voted, which isn't mentioned much by Bush as he tries to force democracy down the throats of the Iraqis with generous helpings of lead) overwhelmingly for the moderate Khatami as President (twice, in 1997 and 2001). He's been effectively on our side, he wants reform, democracy, better rights for women and less power for the mad mullahs, who are putting up a hell of a fight. We're not making his job any easier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Khatami

as for Iran its likely that it is in 2005 the single most likely threat to the West.

I think we're a far bigger threat to Iran than Iran is to us. Are you so short-memoried that you've forgotten about al-Qaeda, who after all have had rather a good 2004 and show no signs of going away? What do you base this bald assertion on, anyway? The same sources that gave you the inside gen on the North Korean car industry?

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by AndrewJames

as for Iran its a known factor they have WMD, and are almost of not already got Nuclear and Biological Intercontinental ballisitic missiles.

Is it???

AFAIK, there is still no evidence that they actually have any nuclear weapons (the only true WMD), although they probably are trying to develop them.

As for missiles, I very much doubt they already have N/B/C ICBMs. Probably have missiles which could reach their neighbours (but whether they have anything non-conventional to tip them with though)...., but ICBMs?

Originally Posted by AndrewJames

I know I feel better knowing things are going on rather then knowing a country run by MR someone who knows nothing, has Nuclear and Biological weapons or suicide bombs and does not like the UK for some weird reason.

In their position, wouldn't you want nukes? Look around the area....Israel has nukes, plus you've got Iraq & Afghanistan either side of you - full of US forces, etc etc.

And one lesson which could be learnt from the action on Iraq & the non-action on N Korea is that the US only attack if you *don't* have anything to threaten them with.


And would Iran really use anything against us? Doubt it. The UK & Europe have been trying to engage the Iranian government, & had been doing fairly well. We're not friends, but I can't see them attacking us, especially as if they did nuke the UK etc., they would be utterly & completely wiped from the face of the Earth in retaliation (standard US & UK policy for any WMD attack on US/UK soil, or bases, or allies, is to respond with nuclear weapons).


I would be more worried about India & Pakistan kick starting a nuclear war.


I'd also be more worried about just who else Abdul Qadeer Khan sold info & technology to (he's the father of Pakistan's nuke programme, & was also head of the biggest international nuclear technology smuggling scheme ever). If he sold stuff to Iran...OK, not great, but I don't really think they're a major threat to us. If he sold stuff to Al Qaeda or other terrorists....not so good, to put it mildly (& remember the origins of Al Qaeda, or who used to strongly support it? Pakistan....)

Originally Posted by Damien

Oh come on. 'Picking on countries that have a feeble defense'?

Iraq

Originally Posted by Damien

America isnt going out to find weak countrys for the sake of a war.

Iraq

Originally Posted by AndrewJames

No offense but I think N korea are okay and not a issue ( yet ) as for Iran its likely that it is in 2005 the single most likely threat to the West.

N Korea are OK? Why?

It is probably the most repressive regime in the world, it's run by an utter nut-job, it has biological & chemical weapons & the means to launch them at S Korea & Japan, it is thought (well, by the CIA...) to already have material for at least a few nukes, & it has missiles which could reach some parts of the US.

Although hopefully Kim Jong-il isn't so stupid that he'd ever attack the US etc, as he must surely know that he wouldn't last long if he did.


Iran is a threat to the West? Why?


As EoB said, if Iran nuked the West, the US et al would respond in kind...several times. And as BBK said, surely Al Qaeda are more of a threat than Iran or anyone else at the moment.

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze

IMHO, the country that poses the greatest threat to global stability is China. They are a nuclear wild-card, who believe the rest of the world to be uncivilised barbarians, especially 'us' white folks in the west. They hate the west for addicting hugh numbers of chinese people to opiates, and then ripping of their country.

I see your point.


IIRC, Wolfowitz & co see China as the real threat. Think it was even mentioned in the PNAC document.

[paulyoung666]

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze

IMHO, the country that poses the greatest threat to global stability is China. They are a nuclear wild-card, who believe the rest of the world to be uncivilised barbarians, especially 'us' white folks in the west. They hate the west for addicting hugh numbers of chinese people to opiates, and then ripping of their country.

, you only have to look at the way they are growing in stature , why is the price of steel going thru the roof ????????? , the chinese are buying it and raw materials up like there is no tomorrow

Originally Posted by paulyoung666

, you only have to look at the way they are growing in stature , why is the price of steel going thru the roof ????????? , the chinese are buying it and raw materials up like there is no tomorrow

good job we don't make much steel, anymore, then

you know, if we could all sit down & plan for the next 50 years, instead of just tomorrow & 'the devil take the hindmost', then I am sure a lot of our problems could be solved.

- not all of them, but 'a lot' would be a good start

Originally Posted by homealone

good job we don't make much steel, anymore, then

you know, if we could all sit down & plan for the next 50 years, instead of just tomorrow & 'the devil take the hindmost', then I am sure a lot of our problems could be solved.

- not all of them, but 'a lot' would be a good start

To be honest, I think the 50 year view on global geo-politics is gonna disapear along with large tracts of low-lying costal land.

@ Russ - Funnily I dont see India and Pakistan kicking of a nuclear exchange. I remember reading an article about China, and who it considers possible aggressors in the 21st centurary, and India topped the list. Weird.

[Bifta]

The biggest threat to the western world is whichever one George Bush picks at the time. They've not even finished the job in Iraq (or Afghanistan) properly yet (typical Americans, no change there, leave the Brits to mop their mess up yet again) and there's already rumours of them invading yet ANOTHER country. Like I said, they won't invade someone who can put up a reasonable fight, The N. Koreans might kick their asses just like the Vietcong and the Japanese did

Originally Posted by Bifta

The biggest threat to the western world is whichever one George Bush picks at the time.

I think you put a few too many words in there. Shouldn't it read "The biggest threat to the western world is George Bush"?!

[BBKing]

I remember reading an article about China, and who it considers possible aggressors in the 21st centurary, and India topped the list. Weird.

Having an Indian in the team (we insource from India round our way) I've been having a crash course in Indian politics, and there was a little known war between India and China in the eastern part of India in 1962. China has territorial claims over bits of India and vice versa and as each side still has hundreds of thousands troops on the ground, so it's not surprising that they're fairly high up the list. India is of course the only realistic military and economic rival to China in the area, being the only other country in the world with > 10^9 people living there.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...o-prc_1962.htm

[zoombini]

As if the US didn't have thier own hidden WMD labs & hidden nuclear weapon silo's etc.... I think they'd soon get peed off if someone insisted on searching through thier country for them.