Attacks on Iran is coming very soon..

Gorbachioo

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
1,250
Britain won WW2, America, like usual, was caught with its pants down. All the hard work was done in the Battle of Britain by the RAF, the rest was done by those lovely boys in Russia!

Well not exactly. When Berlin was first entered the british/american ratio was 1/3. And you're completely ignoring Japan.
 

Azurus

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
1,263
Britain won WW2, America, like usual, was caught with its pants down. All the hard work was done in the Battle of Britain by the RAF, the rest was done by those lovely boys in Russia!

I would say most of the hard work was done in places like Stalingrad....
 

Lamp

Gold Star Holder!!
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
22,950
The US really fucked up in Vietnam. Can't beat a guerilla war. Specially if you make yourself seen by lighting ciggies and wearing bucket loads of aftershave,
 

Platin

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
450
Britain won WW2, America, like usual, was caught with its pants down. All the hard work was done in the Battle of Britain by the RAF, the rest was done by those lovely boys in Russia!

Aren't you being a slight ingrateful? Considering USA death toll was about as high as the United Kingdoms.

By the way, you have heard about Japan's roll right, and what they did?
 

Thadius

Part of the furniture
Joined
Sep 5, 2004
Messages
8,824
Aren't you being a slight ingrateful? Considering USA death toll was about as high as the United Kingdoms.

By the way, you have heard about Japan's roll right, and what they did?

Yea I know. The Japanese were right horrible bastards, kinda puts Nazi Germany to shame. Im just annoyed that everyone thinks the USA saved everyone in WW2.
 

tierk

Part of the furniture
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
2,884
To listen to some of the people posting on this thread talking about stuff which quite frankly they have no clue about is just funny but at the same time is scary. Why scary? Because it shows just how easy people are to manipulate and lead down the garden path so to speak.

People with far greater knowledge then any on this forum have been visiting and inspecting Irans facilities for a number of years. Hundreds if not thousands of visits to sites and facilities all over Iran, people who are proffesionals in the field of Nuclear Technology. Not some bunch of dirty politicians (by definition they are all dirty lying scum bags) who lie for a living.

Try reading what the head of the IAEA says about the possibilty of Iran going nuclear while the IAEA is on the ground keeping tabs on the programme. this is a direct quote from bbc web site "He also said that Iran would not be able to produce the highly enriched uranium needed for a nuclear bomb as long as it remained under the supervision of IAEA inspectors" But what the heck what does he know seeing as he only inspects the damn place on a regular basis.

Seeing as they (the USA and its allies) refuse to sit at a negotiating table with Iran. Tell me what exactly people are against with regards to Irans nuclear programme? People say that they are building a bomb, without any evidence off course. The impression i get is that people are against Iran having any nuclear programme but what gives anyone or any goverment the right to decide what another soveriegn nation chooses to do with their resources?

Iran has fully suspended enrichment once already, voluntarly, in the recent past but received nothing but threats in return, so why exactly should they cooperate now?

Oh and for those people that will automatically say well if it is a peaceful programme why all the secrecy and why bury stuff so far underground? Very simple, the USA and its allies (read Israel) have a tendency to bomb things into oblivion regardless of the legality of there actions.
 

Gamah

Banned
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
13,042
I think why you annoy me Thadius is you make statements like you know what your talking about, but you just talk bollocks, nothing you ever say is ever backed up by hard facts, it's all opinion.

ofc Britain would have won the world war without the Americans help lol! The Nazi's would have crushed us if that were the case. Sure the war would have been won a lot faster if Monty kept control of both the American and British forces due to the fact Eisenhower was a poor tactician. But we would have never have won had it not been for the US soldiers and equipment, saying so is just blindly ignorant.

Yes some Americans can be annoying saying they won the war but those Americans are like the yank version of you...making assumptions from a poor base of knowledge.

At one point the RAF was near total collapse in the battle of Britain, we were just lucky Hitler decided to re-direct his Luftwaffe elsewhere.
 

aika

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Aug 13, 2004
Messages
4,300
Britain won WW2, America, like usual, was caught with its pants down. All the hard work was done in the Battle of Britain by the RAF, the rest was done by those lovely boys in Russia!

Britain won ww2? You do realise that over 70% of Germany's army was on the Eastern Front, which was the bloodiest front of all times?
 

tierk

Part of the furniture
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
2,884
Britain won ww2? You do realise that over 70% of Germany's army was on the Eastern Front, which was the bloodiest front of all times?


From reading a few of his other posts on this thread i would advise you to ignore this guy as he is either a) a wind up merchant, b) seriously deluded
c) not informed.

Well with regards to this thread at least anyway.
 

Hawkwind

FH is my second home
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,541
ofc Britain would have won the world war without the Americans help lol! The Nazi's would have crushed us if that were the case. Sure the war would have been won a lot faster if Monty kept control of both the American and British forces due to the fact Eisenhower was a poor tactician. But we would have never have won had it not been for the US soldiers and equipment, saying so is just blindly ignorant.

Yes some Americans can be annoying saying they won the war but those Americans are like the yank version of you...making assumptions from a poor base of knowledge.

At one point the RAF was near total collapse in the battle of Britain, we were just lucky Hitler decided to re-direct his Luftwaffe elsewhere.


To be honest we can thank Hitler for us winning the WWII. Against his Generals advice he started the Eastern Front Campaign which stretched their huge resources. The Russian tactics were excellent, they sucked the Nazi's deep into Russia and stretched their supply lines. Then let them starve in the bleak frozen winter. before finishing them off.

It's not fair to say we (UK) would not have won without the US help. Although the tide was turning when the US really committed it would have been a long hard fight and lasted many more years than it did. Was not just US either, help from Commonwealth countries like Australia, Canada and South Africa helped out.

As for US equipment. You do know Britain paid for that? We paid about 1/3 of our countries wealth to the US for armaments. It was not goodwill it was business.
 

Mojo

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Feb 27, 2004
Messages
1,940
As for US equipment. You do know Britain paid for that? We paid about 1/3 of our countries wealth to the US for armaments. It was not goodwill it was business.

I believe we also gave them a shed load of our Secrets and Technologies?
 

Raven

Happy Shopper Ray Mears
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
44,617
Well thats why its called a world war and not just the German-Anglo war :)
 

Hawkwind

FH is my second home
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,541
Try reading what the head of the IAEA says about the possibilty of Iran going nuclear while the IAEA is on the ground keeping tabs on the programme. this is a direct quote from bbc web site "He also said that Iran would not be able to produce the highly enriched uranium needed for a nuclear bomb as long as it remained under the supervision of IAEA inspectors" But what the heck what does he know seeing as he only inspects the damn place on a regular basis.

The problem is that the enrichment is not fully under IAEA supervision. That is what the whole argument is about. The nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) allows for any country to enrich fuels but only under the strict supervision of the IAEA.

One thing you fail to mention is that Iran kept secrete the enrichment programme for over 18 years. In direct contravention of the NPT. That is the main reason why the West does not trust the current regime in Tehran.

tierk said:
Iran has fully suspended enrichment once already, voluntarly, in the recent past but received nothing but threats in return, so why exactly should they cooperate now?

Are you suprised given they hid it for so long. Why hide something that under supervision your entitled to do. If it were meant for only peaceful means this would have been done. The fact they kept it secrete casts a big shadow over their intentions.
 

tierk

Part of the furniture
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
2,884
The problem is that the enrichment is not fully under IAEA supervision. That is what the whole argument is about. The nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) allows for any country to enrich fuels but only under the strict supervision of the IAEA..

It cannot be under much more supervison then it currently is. There are cameras installed at the sites monitoring all the actual enrichment and every single gram of material has to be accounted for. What Iran refuses to do is to allow unrestricted access to other sites, which are not enrichment related, for example the heavy water plant in Arak and rightly so why should they? So as to allow the Western allies to have all the information they need so as to be able to carry out a full on bombing of everyone of their facilities, as was the case in Iraq?


One thing you fail to mention is that Iran kept secrete the enrichment programme for over 18 years. In direct contravention of the NPT. That is the main reason why the West does not trust the current regime in Tehran.

Iran on 22nd November 2004 voluntarly suspended all Uranuim Enrichment as a confidence building measure. Note it was done volutarily and they agreed to sign a additional protocal with regards to enrichment. However, going by the total refusal to engage Iran in any sort of meaningful talks on the part of the USA with regards to concerns that Iran has and the illegal basis of the invasion of Iraq, its totally understandable why Iran doesnt trust the West. This is just recent history and if we want to talk past events that cause Iranians to distrust the West this post would be a mile long.


Are you suprised given they hid it for so long. Why hide something that under supervision your entitled to do. If it were meant for only peaceful means this would have been done. The fact they kept it secrete casts a big shadow over their intentions.

This is a direct result of actions of western countries. Iranians dont trust the west to deal with them in a reasonable and just way. Not after the west has supplied Iraq with weapons, money and even WMD's which they actively encouraged them to use in a wide spread and systematic manner in the First Gulf War against Iranians. When they were confronted with the clear evidence of the use of weapons that are illegal, they turn a blind eye and continue to support it in secret. Then when they decide that Saddam is no longer useful he is turned into a monster and they cite WMD's as there main concern and bomb the crap out of Iraq and finally invade. Is this the actions of someone that can be trusted to deal with you in a fair manner??


Another factor that causes things to be done in secret is the illegal actions carried out either by the USA itself or its allies for example the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear plant in 1980 (ossirak). You cannot expect everyone to be so naive and stupid twice surely? In life you learn from other peoples mistakes not just go ahead and make the same mistakes again and again.
 

Gamah

Banned
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
13,042
To be honest we can thank Hitler for us winning the WWII. Against his Generals advice he started the Eastern Front Campaign which stretched their huge resources. The Russian tactics were excellent, they sucked the Nazi's deep into Russia and stretched their supply lines. Then let them starve in the bleak frozen winter. before finishing them off.

It's not fair to say we (UK) would not have won without the US help. Although the tide was turning when the US really committed it would have been a long hard fight and lasted many more years than it did. Was not just US either, help from Commonwealth countries like Australia, Canada and South Africa helped out.

As for US equipment. You do know Britain paid for that? We paid about 1/3 of our countries wealth to the US for armaments. It was not goodwill it was business.

I meant equipment that the US brought with them to use, I know that the UK paid for the US stuff that we used etc.

Hitler’s tactics were flawed for example refusing to let Rommel make tactical retreats, he ordered that the soldiers must fight for every bit of land, this ofc with Allied Air power controlling the skies above France was a foolish and ignorant tactic due to the fact that the German supply lines were smashed by our air craft and soldiers and equipment being lost.

However Eisenhower also made mistakes, perusing a wide line of attack across a huge front against a well trained, efficient army, rather than a pinpoint massive attack to smash through and surround the German lines as Monty suggested. The allies didn't have the man power to pursue such a wide front and the war could have been over much quicker had Monty been allowed to run the show all the way through.

That said, I don't think we would have won the war without US help, however, we would have been involved in a very long war. I think D-day would have failed/not happened as it was close to failing at points even with US involvement. I don't think they Germans would of been able to land on the British Isles for ages though, which would only be possible when air power was gained over the channel. As I mentioned previously the RAF were a wisker away from collapse in the Battle of Britian, it was only that Hitler decided to re-direct thier efforts that we managed to cling on.
 

Hawkwind

FH is my second home
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,541
tierk said:
What Iran refuses to do is to allow unrestricted access to other sites, which are not enrichment related, for example the heavy water plant in Arak and rightly so why should they? So as to allow the Western allies to have all the information they need so as to be able to carry out a full on bombing of everyone of their facilities, as was the case in Iraq?

Right, so its ok not to allow IAEA access to all sites for inspection because someone might use the information they get to bomb them later. Think about it mate, they already know where the sites are. They want access to everything nuclear in Iran to meet with the NPT. Failure on this item is not negotiable by the UN.

tierk said:
Another factor that causes things to be done in secret is the illegal actions carried out either by the USA itself or its allies for example the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear plant in 1980 (ossirak). You cannot expect everyone to be so naive and stupid twice surely? In life you learn from other peoples mistakes not just go ahead and make the same mistakes again and again.

Who bombed the site? Israel!! albeit with aircraft and weapons provided by the US or made with US funding. But, since when does Israel = 'The West'. US involvement, possibly.

It does makes me laugh, The founder of your Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Ayatullah Khomeini lived in bloody France. Under its protection for many years when he was exiled under threat of the death penalty. Then on his triumphant return denounces the West for its evils.

I don't agree with the US foreign poilicy in this region or the way they try to police the world. However, I do believe Iran has to comply with the UN and IAEA. Iran has too many links to some of the more scarey radicals. Some these even given a small amount of material could fashion a dirty bomb and they are stupid and deluded enough to use it. The consequencies of which would be unthinkable.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
Whilst we dont know for sure, if the axies or allies would of won the war, if it didnt end when it did. One thing is for certain, it would of been a hell of a struggle if we didnt have the industrial might of America helping us. Many war veterans, and WW2 experts, put this down as being the main reason we won the war.
 

Hawkwind

FH is my second home
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,541
I believe we also gave them a shed load of our Secrets and Technologies?


Still do, they were severely pissed off about our laser weapons on board RN ships during the Falklands. They only found out when the CIA got hold of the flight reports of the Argie pilots and noticed the many occurences of pilots being blinded for short periods. :worthy:
 

crispy

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
2,706
Hawkwind and tierk:

You can be even more up to date if you read this here on wiki
 

Hawkwind

FH is my second home
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,541
Hawkwind and tierk:

You can be even more up to date if you read this here on wiki

They seem to have pulled facts from lots of places for this which is good. One small point is that the IISS reassessed the situation given Iran's stated 3000 Centrifuges. Alot of so called experts now suggest they would have enough material for a conventional yield Warhead (25kg) in as little as 3 years, whilst others say 8. All very confusing.

Lets hope they do comply, build their nuclear energy plants with peaceful intentions and allows the IAEA to do its job. Then the US will get no support whatsoever for any action it might wish to take.
 

tierk

Part of the furniture
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
2,884
Right, so its ok not to allow IAEA access to all sites for inspection because someone might use the information they get to bomb them later. Think about it mate, they already know where the sites are. They want access to everything nuclear in Iran to meet with the NPT. Failure on this item is not negotiable by the UN..

Ok let me clear this up for you. The heavy water plant in Arak isnt part of the enrichment process, it is a heavy water reactor that, as a by product of the nuclear chain reaction, produces plutonuim. This is the main concern, however, seeing as the only countries that manufacture reactors that dont produce plutonuim (lightwater reactors) are Western countires, the same western countries that refuse to trade in nuclear technology with Iran, then Iran is left no choice but to build this reactor.

Another fact that you are failing to understand with regards to the NPT agreement is that Iran is already within its legal rights as set down in the NPT. Iran is entitled to build a enrichment industry as per the treaty, all the things that is being discussed is clearly outside the remit of the NPT agreement.

In addition i would also like to add that the Western countries, as signatories of the NPT themselves have certain obligations themselves to comply with. For example the eventual removal of there own nuclear arsenals. We dont see much of that happening infact quite the opposite is happening with massive amounts of money been spent on the development of new types of nuclear weapons in the USA amongest others.


Who bombed the site? Israel!! albeit with aircraft and weapons provided by the US or made with US funding. But, since when does Israel = 'The West'. US involvement, possibly.

Please note ......
Another factor that causes things to be done in secret is the illegal actions carried out either by the USA itself or its allies for example the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear plant in 1980 (ossirak).......
At no point am i just talking about Israel but rather this is just one example in a long list of illegal actions.



It does makes me laugh, The founder of your Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Ayatullah Khomeini lived in bloody France. Under its protection for many years when he was exiled under threat of the death penalty. Then on his triumphant return denounces the West for its evils..

This is neither here nor there and has no bearing whatsover on the topic we are discussing. The fact that Ronald Reagan had dealings with Iran from the American embassy hostages to the Iran Contra scandal doesnt mean anything with regards to Iran and nuclear energy its just a historical fact. Ayatollah Khomieni has been dead and buried a long time almost twenty years now and at no point does he come into this discussion.


I don't agree with the US foreign poilicy in this region or the way they try to police the world. However, I do believe Iran has to comply with the UN and IAEA. Iran has too many links to some of the more scarey radicals. Some these even given a small amount of material could fashion a dirty bomb and they are stupid and deluded enough to use it. The consequencies of which would be unthinkable.

I would ask you please to tell me what these links are and too whom you are refering to with regards "scarey radicals" as i have found in many years of reading and keeping myself abreast of current affairs that these scarey radicals are invariably groups or oragnisations that have either been created, funded, backed or sold out by the USA and /or its allies.
 

dub

One of Freddy's beloved
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
700
under the current US administration its very risky to trust in international law , to comply to UN sanctions and IAEA regulations is by no means a guarantee of not being "liberated"

its not easy believing in the NPT when US starts non UN sanctioned wars.

we are making it hard for ourselfs by not playing fair :/
 

Platin

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
450
Yea I know. The Japanese were right horrible bastards, kinda puts Nazi Germany to shame. Im just annoyed that everyone thinks the USA saved everyone in WW2.

I don't think that's what people mean. They are saying that USA got involved in a war, in which it didn't have to fight (and the help they gave through supplies mainly, was vital). I mean, Britain was forced, the US wasn't. Having said that, not saying that Britains roll wasn't as important or more important, which imo it was. But without the US, Russia would have fallen in a two front war, while without Britain, all of Europe would have fallen and most likely Russia too.
 

Hawkwind

FH is my second home
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,541
tierk said:
Ok let me clear this up for you. The heavy water plant in Arak isnt part of the enrichment process, it is a heavy water reactor that, as a by product of the nuclear chain reaction, produces plutonuim. This is the main concern, however, seeing as the only countries that manufacture reactors that dont produce plutonuim (lightwater reactors) are Western countires, the same western countries that refuse to trade in nuclear technology with Iran, then Iran is left no choice but to build this reactor.

Stated earlier that it should be allowed as it is their right with the framework of the NPT and IAEA. Small point the same Light Water Reactors that were offerred recently by Russia to end this and Iran refused!

tierk said:
Another fact that you are failing to understand with regards to the NPT agreement is that Iran is already within its legal rights as set down in the NPT. Iran is entitled to build a enrichment industry as per the treaty, all the things that is being discussed is clearly outside the remit of the NPT agreement.

As stated previously they hid it for 18 years! Why hide something that is perfectly acceptable within NPT and IAEA. They kept it a secrete from IAEA. So clearly not within the NPT. This is why there is mistrust now. If it had been an open developement with IAEA inspectors from the start then we would not even be having this conversation.

tierk said:
In addition i would also like to add that the Western countries, as signatories of the NPT themselves have certain obligations themselves to comply with. For example the eventual removal of there own nuclear arsenals. We dont see much of that happening infact quite the opposite is happening with massive amounts of money been spent on the development of new types of nuclear weapons in the USA amongest others.

Thousands of missles have been dismantled and destroyed by those 'Western countries'. Can't be arsed to look up how many, or how many are left. You really think the rest will go all the time countries like Iran, N Korea, whose politians spout vile hatred and threats, try to keep secrete nuclear enrichment programmes.

tierk said:
Please note ...... At no point am i just talking about Israel but rather this is just one example in a long list of illegal actions.

Like Iran is any better. Shooting of an innocent police woman outside the Iranian embassy in London during a public protest regarding the US hostages. At least we abided by the International treaties and let all the so called diplomats leave. Maybe we should have followed your example and mobbed the building killing several then holding the rest hostage.

Regarding Terhan incident: The fact that those hostages were taken from the US Embassy in Iran in the first place. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being one of the ring leaders of that little event. Iran is no beacon of light when it comes to illegal actions or breaking of international treaties.

tierk said:
Ayatollah Khomieni has been dead and buried a long time almost twenty years now and at no point does he come into this discussion.

Only reason I even mentioned Khomieni was that when it suited him he was protected by the West. As soon as he returned he started the verbal attacks on the West. Those attacks have never stopped since.

tierk said:
I would ask you please to tell me what these links are and too whom you are refering to with regards "scarey radicals" as i have found in many years of reading and keeping myself abreast of current affairs that these scarey radicals are invariably groups or oragnisations that have either been created, funded, backed or sold out by the USA and /or its allies.

Hezzbollah & Hamas! Never backed by the US. Funding and weapon support from Iran. Also Islamic Jihad.

Your President activity supports Martyrdom (suicide attacks).


Ahmadi-Nejad on the Art of Martyrdom
The following are excerpts from a speech by Iranian President-Elect Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, which aired July 25, 2005 on Iranian Channel 1. In it, he praises martyrdom operations and states that Islam will conquer the world.
Ahmadi-Nejad: "We want art that is on the offensive. Art on the offensive exalts and defends the noble principles, and attacks principles that are corrupt, vulgar, ungodly, and inhuman.
"Art reaches perfection when it portrays the best life and best death. After all, art tells you how to live. That is the essence of art. Is there art that is more beautiful, more divine, and more eternal than the art of martyrdom? A nation with martyrdom knows no captivity. Those who wish to undermine this principle undermine the foundations of our independence and national security. They undermine the foundation of our eternity.
"The message of the [Islamic] Revolution is global, and is not restricted to a specific place or time. It is a human message, and it will move forward. "Have no doubt... Allah willing, Islam will conquer what? It will conquer all the mountain tops of the world."

Tierk Seriously, groups created by the CIA. Yeah cos the Mujahadin which your obviously referring to (??) did not exist until the US started supplying them with anti tank/aircraft weapons in Afgahnistan. They were trying to destabalise Russia. The Mujahadin were getting slaughtered by tanks and helecopters.

You yourself keep using 'the west' but it is not just the western powers that are worrried about Iran's nuclear ambitions. Few quotes below from Arab leaders:

United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan:
"The Iranian nuclear program ... is worrisome not only for us, but for the entire world."

Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council Abdul Rahman ibn Hamad al-Attiya:

"The concern of the Gulf countries is real and justified."
"We are really worried; this worry is well-grounded, particularly in regard with the [region's] safety and security."

If you don't accept that Iran is not being totally honest and up front then fine. I know many Iranian people and they just like everyone else on this planet. Nice people who just want to get on with their lives. But most I talk to will accept that both Iran and the US are far from clean when it comes to Middle East Policy. You appear to be very one sided on this. Your perogotive and your perfectly entitled to your opinion. But don't expect me to swallow it. I've lived and worked in this region far too long to accept that Iran is innocent.

Wasted enough time on this tbh, last post from me on the subject.
 

Dukat

Resident Freddy
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
5,396
If you don't accept that Iran is not being totally honest and up front then fine. I know many Iranian people and they just like everyone else on this planet. Nice people who just want to get on with their lives. But most I talk to will accept that both Iran and the US are far from clean when it comes to Middle East Policy. You appear to be very one sided on this. Your perogotive and your perfectly entitled to your opinion. But don't expect me to swallow it. I've lived and worked in this region far too long to accept that Iran is innocent.

Wasted enough time on this tbh, last post from me on the subject.

Bloody well said that man!
 

Zede

Part of the furniture
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
3,584
Why does a country like Iran ( with more oil than Allah) need nuclear power ?

It aint to run the electricity grid ! /ponder
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom