Iran, Radical Islam, and the Nuclear Deal

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Stewba, Jul 29, 2015.

  1. #1 Stewba, Jul 29, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 29, 2015

    This lady goes on a rant and doesn't actually answer the question of "how to fight ideology." She disrespects the nice Muslim lady pretty ignorantly. But it's still a pretty good view of the issue. Radical minorities are often very motivated and influential.

    http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf
    If you don't believe that about 20% of the Muslim population is radical, read this PDF. This PDF has pretty good statistics to go off of. The questions they ask are important and very relevant to determining the Muslim view of the US.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kesb0h7Ct40
    Death to America!


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_7J0hgx364
    There are people in Iran who want peace, and they aren't silenced, but I don't think they're a majority. I've read about 60% of them are fundamentalists (a fundamentalist Muslim is basically a radical) We really should try not to do anything that could radicalize this generation of more liberal young people. Too bad we might have to, to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuke. Maybe these young people will understand why we would bomb their nuclear facilities though. They know the anti-western sentiment of the majority of their countrymen.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT1i1L0lqD4
    I sympathize with their sentiment but obviously they cannot be allowed to have nukes lol

    I think fundamentalist islam would have died out just like fundamentalist christianity has died out in the west if we didn't fuck with the middle east so much.
    We play right into the hands of fundamentalist islamic radicals, they need infidels to hate and we oblige. TBH I believe it's a huge fucked up and twisted conspiracy to keep us at war.
    That said, with the attitude of middle easterners at present, they can't be allowed to have nukes and we need to make sure they aren't allowed to carry out large killings.
    So we're basically fucked at this point, the military industrial complex is celebrating this, we've dug ourselves in deep and we can't just walk away from the middle east to make peace.

    The nuclear deal, I think, is a bunch of bullshit. As are the sanctions we've put on Iran for the last while or so. We don't need sanctions, we don't need Iran to stop mining uranium, or to get rid of it's uranium stockpile. We need unfettered access to any facility in the country we believe could be a nuclear site. As long as we can inspect any site we want, we're golden. So I understand why Al Khamenei (or whatever the fuck his name is) says we are a disrespectful and arrogant nation. Our deal sucks balls for them and is a bunch of bullshit, in my opinion it is designed to keep the winds of radicalization blowing in the middle east, to keep an enemy for us to fight alive.

    That said, if they refuse access to any site we deem suspicious, we should probably just bomb the fuck out of it. These people are mad as fuck and can't be trusted. We're in that kind of fucked if you do, fucked if you don't position.
    This is all coming from someone who believes, ideally, everyone should be allowed to own a nuke. But the risks are just too real.

    Btw, fuck Israel. They could be the bigger man and just emigrate to the West en masse. They're idiots and are quite culpable for their problems. It would be a huge blow to radical Islam for them to just cede the land and leave.











     
  2. lol

     
  3. #4 forty winks, Jul 29, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 29, 2015
    NVM.

     
  4. #5 Stewba, Jul 29, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 29, 2015
    Thx for bumping the thread with some good ole shit posts lol.


    What do you guys think of this dudes opinion about UK attitudes towards Muslim immigration?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB6zMIrIx-g&feature=youtu.be

     
  5. sorry dude, i couldn't help myself.
     
  6. They'll develop their nuclear program whether you like it or not
    This deal is more of an economic one than a matter of safety


    I support the deal and I don't fear Iran as they've made it pretty clear tht they don't want to wage war. Proxy wars tho - tht's a whole different story

     
  7. Iran can't wage a conventional war against Israel or the Sunni states, therefore it arms and bankrolls Islamic fundamentalist proxy groups like Hezbollah and the Houthi rebels to do their dirty work while they play the victim card.


    This deal will only exacerbate the amount of funding such groups will receive.








    As I've said before, the only way to know if this will end up a good or bad deal is to wait and see how the first round of inspections will turn out (although its beginning to appear as though the deal has more holes than a slice of swiss cheese)....










    Oh, and death to America!
     
  8. I highly doubt we will just let them have the potential to enrich weapons grade uranium. So no, they won't just develop their nuclear program. In the end, we are more powerful and we will control them. The question is what means we will use. Full scale invasion? Only target nuclear facilities? More severe sanctions and no military action?


    The deal is more of an economic punishment than an ensuring of our safety, you are correct. That is why it is bad. We insult Iran with economic sanctions and limit their uranium mining and stockpiling, and limit their centrifuges. These are all things you need for a legitimate, peaceful, nuclear program that will benefit the Iranian people. We focus on these aspects of the deal, when in reality, to ensure safety, the only thing we need to know is what level they are enriching their uranium to. Inspections and surveillance are the only thing that provides us safety. Sanctions do not provide that. The sanctions simply cause the growth of anti-western sentiment. I believe that is why we impose them. The government is corrupt? You don't say!


    Why do you believe Iran will not wage war? Is a proxy war not a war? Al Khamenei and his people have shown us their true colors time and time again. The vast majority of these people are led by their religion. We are the Great Satan and we are to be destroyed. Iran knows nuking us, even through a proxy group, would be suicide. But that's what martyrdom is. I personally think they would take more of a cunning approach. Stockpile nukes, once you have enough, say 100, destroy the entire west. They aren't stupid, they can make good winning strategies.


    I think this is going to become the issue that defines the next election. When Iran defies the deal (I think they will, even if just out of spite) Obama has a big decision to make. Destroy nuclear facilities, or only impose even harsher sanctions. I think he will take the "weak" route and only impose sanctions. This is going to leave the door wide open for warmongers like Ben Carson, who want to re-invade Iraq and basically jam a giant dick up the middle east's ass. The war loving right will be the most rallied base in America and they will elect a full retard. idk lol. IMO it's a conspiracy. We'll see what happens.


    I think the proper course of action is to destroy any facility we aren't allowed to inspect, and leave it solely at that. No sanctions, no bullshit. I could care less if Iranians who chant "Death to America" during prayers with their supreme leader are offended that we don't trust them with weapons grade uranium. Fuck them. Threats are not tolerated. At the same time, the ~30% or so moderate Muslims in Iran might understand our actions. If we do a full scale invasion, like Ben Carson most assuredly would, we will radicalize the moderate Muslims, no doubt.





     
  9. I think it was yuri who said tht if everyone had nukes then we'd achieve world peace. there is some truth to tht



    If you guys think isolation and world policing leads to any good then so be it. But history begs to differ
     
  10. that's not exactly what I said but its close.

    Yes mutually assured deacturction is the most effective deferential to conflict

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
    Differential? Wtf. Fucking smart phone.

    Mutually assured destruction is the most effective deterant to conflict

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
    They updated the mobile.app but we still can't edit posts...

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  11. MAD
    The deal is the only sane path forward.
    Yet, indeed, repercussions may be in the future.
    Let's allow that future, to be ... in the future.
    :smoke:
     
  12. Sunni and Shia hardliners are opposed, and will be until the end of time. Iran is the Shia superpower in the region, and the West needs Iran's cooperation in the war against ISIL, which is Sunni. In the end, a state is always a more stable and reliable partner than paramilitary organizations and stateless entities with unclear affiliation. This is why the West has been hesitant to fully commit to getting rid of Assad and arming the Kurds, respectively.


    It's very simplistic to blame Islamic "fundamentalists" without clarifying whether you're referring to Sunni Wahhabists or Shia.


    Also, Iran will never "nuke" Israel. They're not actually insane despite the Islamist pageantry.
     
  13. Quite a lot of people in the UK tend to hate Muslim immigration, but they also tend to be religious, poor and uneducated, which happens in most countries.
     
  14. what we need is a hero who knows his way around the art of deal-making


    [​IMG]
     
  15. He is no hero, more of a bloviating zero.
    :smoke:
     
  16. I don't know what you're talking about, like he says, he's great


    He's a great guy


    He's got a great company


    Everybody loves him, even the blacks


     
  17. I think if the US hadn't been fucking with Iran since the 50s that they'd be a lot more chill with us.


    They're tired of it and want a seat at the bully table. I don't blame them.
     
  18. This is what I'm thinking. Like maybe if we got rid of the sanctions and allowed them to prosper they would be more down with working with us.
     
  19. <blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Stewba" data-cid="21896771" data-time="1438578483">This is what I'm thinking. Like maybe if we got rid of the sanctions and allowed them to prosper they would be more down with working with us.

    </blockquote>

    I think we're beyond the point of no return honestly.
     

Share This Page