Support NeoGAF

[Lagspike_exe]

I can't believe Isreali intelligence hasn't stopped leaks as huge as this... If this is the truth, this is a flat out disaster for Isreali surprise attack.

Trying to hide forces from Russia and then the news get broken out by a website. :lol

 

[Roude Leiw]

I can't believe Isreali intelligence hasn't stopped leaks as huge as this... If this is the truth, this is a flat out disaster for Isreali surprise attack.

Trying to hide forces from Russia and then the news get broken out by a website. :lol

yeah thats why i think that the report might not be true.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

yeah thats why i think that the report might not be true.

The entire plan is stupid... Station forces in Georgia? That means that the entire plan would be revealed by Russians in matter of hours... Makes no sense to me.

 

[Darackutny]

Oh, there is also the matter of the US and Israeli battleships crossing the Suez Canal.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6715412.ece

Edit: Someone please make a new thread about this.

 

[PoliceCop]

India should never sign the NPT.

We are surrounded by two aggressive nations who have on their own initiated Wars against us.

Even go back and look at the Kargil conflict, India didn't start it, Pakistan did. In this case, Nuclear capability really does act as a deterrent.

Oh, and India, just like US has a no first use policy.

Hutta, hutta, hutta, BUD-DY.

 

[Rur0ni]

Oh, there is also the matter of the US and Israeli battleships crossing the Suez Canal.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6715412.ece

Edit: Someone please make a new thread about this.

The exercises come at a time when Western diplomats are offering support for an Israeli strike on Iran in return for Israeli concessions on the formation of a Palestinian state.

If agreed it would make an Israeli strike on Iran realistic “within the year” said one British official.

“Israel has chosen to place the Iranian threat over its settlements,” said a senior European diplomat.

Reckon it just depends on Iranian progress. Seems like it's been years folks have been saying it's gonna happen in the next couple years.

 

[Walshicus]

Hutta, hutta, hutta, BUD-DY.

I'd imagine he's referring both to Pakistan and China.

Oh, there is also the matter of the US and Israeli battleships crossing the Suez Canal.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6715412.ece

Edit: Someone please make a new thread about this.

July 16th, 2009?

 

[paranoidfortean]

World relations are a terrible thing. It all comes down to controlling who you can and killing(not always literally of course) who you can't. Why? People will kill or dominate you so you have to do the same? I don't know.

 

[Chairman Yang]

I trust India a lot more than I do Iran or Pakistan.

Same here. I don't know why people pretend the countries are all equivalent.

 

[Slavik81]

Same here. I don't know why people pretend the countries are all equivalent.

Because showing respect for the rules even when they're not in the favour of people you like is important.

 

[pakkit]

I trust India a lot more than I do Iran or Pakistan.

May I ask why? They're all corrupt as hell.

 

[Instigator]

May I ask why? They're all corrupt as hell.

India is not on the verge of revolution/takeover/collapse like the other two countries. I think that matters when it comes to nuclear arsenals.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

so how come an attack on Iran is not considered an all out war? Iran cannot fight back or something?

 

[joseph1594]

Didn't think they had anything to do with the war between China and the Taiping Kingdom.

I'm pretty sure that World War II had more deaths. The Taiping Rebellion had around 20 million deaths while World War II had around 60 million I believe.

Anyways, I wouldn't be too concerned about the whole Israeli warplanes in the Caucasus. Israel has done this thing before in the past, I will be very surprised if a war breaks out. It is just Israel's form of saber rattling.

 

[Darackutny]

July 16th, 2009?

Whaa? Oops... I read something similar a few days ago about them crossing the Suez Canal.

 

[Pimpwerx]

Same here. I don't know why people pretend the countries are all equivalent.

No, but of the 4 mentioned, the only 1 not engaged in open conflict is Iran. India is fighting Pakistan. Pakistan is fighting India and itself. Israel is oppressing Palestine and fighting Syria and anyone else it feels like attacking. Why trust any of them? PEACE.

 

[Jeels]

India is not on the verge of revolution/takeover/collapse like the other two countries. I think that matters when it comes to nuclear arsenals.

Neither is Pakistan.

 

[sweetvar26]

We need the total count of Nuclear bombs/weapons in the world to get to ZERO.

 

[dschalter]

Didn't think they had anything to do with the war between China and the Taiping Kingdom.

Death tolls for wars involving non-industrialized countries (or at least the "upper estimates" you often see) tend to be massively overstated, because the wars were accompanied by a massive decline in administrative presence, which caused a sharp decline in the ability of the government to count the population. And there this is the issue of people simply moving to a different region and not being counted (that is relevant in 20th century wars, but not to nearly the same extent).

As for World War II casualties, Germany and Japan were responsible for the most, as they committed the most atrocities against the nations they invaded.

ok, but that was over 60 years ago. I mean don't they give the 2ed or 3rd highest amount to the UN. They play just a big of a role, if not bigger, then France in foreign affairs now

Some things aren't easily forgotten. Perhaps in 40 years, when there are no people who experienced WWII alive, Germany will be able to get a permanent SC seat.

As for the thread itself: India happens to be a functioning democracy while Iran is an extremely repressive dictatorship. Makes sense that it's better for India to have nukes.

 

[Instigator]

Neither is Pakistan.

Someone didn't follow Pakistan's war with its own Taliban (when the country finally 'woke up'), the (legal) battles with military strongman Musharaf, successionj of ineffective elected leaders and vast regions of the country still lawless and not under government control.

Pakistan is a mess, quite frankly. The significantly bigger India is much more stable in comparison.

 

[Deku]

As for the thread itself: India happens to be a functioning democracy while Iran is an extremely repressive dictatorship. Makes sense that it's better for India to have nukes.

Extremists and apologists tend not to think in those terms. They like to equivocate, and muddy the debate by pretending North Korea is actually the 'Democratic Republic' of such and such. Or the Islamic Republic of Iran has a 'unique' democracy. Just as I suppose the third reich was democratic or Tojo was really just a prime minister in a democratically elected Diet.


And why this this thread get necrobumped anyway?

 

[leroy hacker]

Extremists and apologists tend not to think in those terms. They like to equivocate, and muddy the debate by pretending North Korea is actually the 'Democratic Republic' of such and such.

Can you give a single example of a person outside of North Korea that does this in current times?

 

[Deku]

Can you give a single example of a person outside of North Korea that does this?

OP does this.

To answer your question though. There was a campus group at SFU here in Vancouver who had a booth explicitly saying the DPRK had the right to nuclear weapons. So there is most definately at least 3 people outside of the DPRK who thinks like that.

But that's neither here nor there.

I was merely agreeing with the poster who makes a valid point. Democratic country with Nukes is not the same as a repressive hermit state, or a state ruled by a theocratic regime whose supreme leader is a Cleric and not a politician.

Complaint that India gets away with this or that is largely irrelevant. Beside India isn't even in the NPT, Iran is.

 

[leroy hacker]

OP does this.

Where? You're the one that brought up the notion of any defense of Korea's nukes in this thread and he pointed that what you said was a strawman belief absurd to attribute to him.

 

[Deku]

Where? You're the one that brought up Korea in this thread and he pointed that what you said was a strawman belief absurd to attribute to him.

So you're issue with me mentioning North Korea? I also mentioned Iran. Are you that offended?

It's the same thing. Stop being daft to score cheap argument points.

 

[leroy hacker]

So you're issue with me mentioning North Korea?

If you read my post the answer to your question is obvious. However, including Iran wouldn't help your arguments at all since the OP didn't defend Iran as a democracy either(in this thread at least-if he did it somewhere else then you would be right about something).

I also highly doubt you will find many people outside of Iran or Iran funded groups in the current day defending Iran as a democracy, though I admit that before last year you might have found a few on this board.

 

[hukasmokincaterpillar]

so how come an attack on Iran is not considered an all out war? Iran cannot fight back or something?

A nation's actions tend to be semantically categorized by the current hegemony. Or another way to put it, phrases like "terrorism" or "aggressive act of war" or "defense" or "national interest" are given their Platonic essence (precious fluid?) via the Hegemon. Phenomenological operations may seem quite dissonant from perceived realities, but the hegemon adjusts elegantly and accordingly. (there have been a few creaks as of late)

For example, bombed back to the stone age is a popular phrase in global politics. "Iran will be bombed back to the stone age unless ____". I'm sure we'll hear that soon enough. If you'll allow me the segue here's an interesting etymology..

LeMay, however, had cribbed it from a June 1967 column by humorist Art Buchwald, who used the phrase to caricature the Goldwater Republican attitude toward Vietnam... the joke came from Buchwald’s association of bombing with time travel.

The ability to help friendly countries skip ahead in time by dispensing technology and foreign aid gave Washington a valuable weapon for winning allies. Its controlling vote in the World Bank and multilateral agencies allowed it to decide which countries advanced, and how fast. In Pakistan, the United States built hydroelectric dams, steel mills, airports, and a small atomic reactor.

But there was another strategy deployed in Asia,.. Nations could be wound back like clocks. Twentieth century accoutrements headed the list of bombing targets, and American reconnaissance planes flew regularly and visibly over Pakistan. When the prime minister visited Washington in 1966, Johnson presented him a framed color photograph of his country taken from the window of a Saturn rocket.

Leaders of Musharraf’s generation grew up identifying the United States with the excitement, speed, and energy of modern technology, while also being conscious that America felt it owned modernity, that it had a right to decide who lived in the future, and who in the past. Armitage may never have said anything about the stone age, but when he phoned in September 2001 to ask if Pakistan was on our side, Musharraf heard the assertion of an old prerogative. Washington was calling to tell him what time it was.
http://hnn.us/articles/30347.html

Those who control time control the space. Iran has neighbors who want to wind back their clock. The leadership is desperate to "catch up" in time. Before its too late.

From the perspective of the US Government, Iran's leadership seems irrational and crazy, and thus must be attacked. Before its too late.

A phenomenological take on Iran:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/06/gonzalo-lira-a-thought-experiment-–-iran.html

 

[Baron Doggystyle von Woof]

How many wars did Iran start since 1900?

How many did the USA start? And Israel since 1950?

Isn't it possible that Iran wants those nukes for defense?

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

A nation's actions tend to be semantically categorized by the current hegemony. Or another way to put it, phrases like "terrorism" or "aggressive act of war" or "defense" or "national interest" are given their Platonic essence (precious fluid?) via the Hegemon. Phenomenological operations may seem quite dissonant from perceived realities, but the hegemon adjusts elegantly and accordingly. (there have been a few creaks as of late)

For example, bombed back to the stone age is a popular phrase in global politics. "Iran will be bombed back to the stone age unless ____". I'm sure we'll hear that soon enough. If you'll allow me the segue here's an interesting etymology..









Those who control time control the space. Iran has neighbors who want to wind back their clock. The leadership is desperate to "catch up" in time. Before its too late.

From the perspective of the US Government, Iran's leadership seems irrational and crazy, and thus must be attacked. Before its too late.

A phenomenological take on Iran:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/06/gonzalo-lira-a-thought-experiment-–-iran.html

The author was quite convincing until here:

For now, Iran’s strategy of quietly but steadily fomenting insurgents in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine is the only sensible approach Iran can take. It has to keep America pinned down in those two quagmires while it develops nuclear weapons.

Iran sponsors terrorism to buy itself time? Even though such activities hasten US and Israeli aggression and numb international support for their situation?

 

[thetrin]

It's cool guys. India is a country of brown people, so they're bad, right?

 

[Sh1ner]

I feel sorry for the Iranian civilians, it looks to me Israel is going to take a large shit on Iran, the US and other countries are watching eagerly.

 

[hukasmokincaterpillar]

Iran sponsors terrorism to buy itself time?

This is one of those phrases I mentioned. It does not seem to have a rational currency in terms of meaning anything essential. Violence to achieve political realities? MLK (days before his cap split) contextualized US foreign policy as the most violent state actor on the planet. Is that any less accurate in '68 than it is in '10?

Even though such activities hasten US and Israeli aggression and numb international support for their situation?

Pakistan, India, Turkey, Israel. Turned out pretty fucking good for them. Its a home run dinger. There's your arms race. Risk of escalation? C'mon now.