• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

I'm not so sure this will escalate with the USA. Iran are taking potshots but I don't think strategically the USA has much to gain from attacking Iran. Probably sanctions, strongly worded letters etc but I don't think much beyond that. Quite simply nobody in the USA wants to dedicate yet more resources to yet another middle eastern conflict with no idea as to what the final goal would be. If the USA hasn't yet learned that toppling regimes in the middle east without a proper rebuilding plan just makes things even worse (ISIS anyone?) then they really are stupid.

Iran is destabilising but a collapsed Iran would almost certainly be even worse.
 
Ragey Erasmus said:
I'm not so sure this will escalate with the USA. Iran are taking potshots but I don't think strategically the USA has much to gain from attacking Iran. Probably sanctions, strongly worded letters etc but I don't think much beyond that. Quite simply nobody in the USA wants to dedicate yet more resources to yet another middle eastern conflict with no idea as to what the final goal would be. If the USA hasn't yet learned that toppling regimes in the middle east without a proper rebuilding plan just makes things even worse (ISIS anyone?) then they really are stupid.

Iran is destabilising but a collapsed Iran would almost certainly be even worse.
Click to expand...

It'll be interesting to see what the response is. Toppling the regime in Iran would solve a few problems - make Israel more secure (no more talk of wiping them off the face of the earth). No further breaches of the nuclear deal. Would also cut off supplies to groups like Hezbollah, Hamas & Houthies etc. who seem to be causing a fair bit of trouble. It has the potential to make the region more secure but agree it's risky and a proper well thought out plan (with sufficient regional support) would be needed. Iran have done a good job of making the US and Israel despised in the middle east and so it'll be very hard to topple them without their being severe repercussions. As soon as there are civilian casualties then it's a major uphill battle.

I'm not sure if Iran's relatively young population are that supportive of their own strict regime who are essentially radical old men with long grey beards. I spoke to a couple of Iranians two weeks ago and they can't stand their own Govt (something a few of us on here can relate to!) and are desperate for things to be more liberal and progressive.
 
Last edited:
General Melchett said:
It'll be interesting to see what the response is. Toppling the regime in Iran would solve a few problems - make Israel more secure (no more talk of wiping them off the face of the earth). No further breaches of the nuclear deal. Would also cut off supplies to groups like Hezbollah, Hamas & Houthies etc. who seem to be causing a fair bit of trouble. It has the potential to make the region more secure but agree it's risky and a proper well thought out plan (with sufficient regional support) would be needed. Iran have done a good job of making the US and Israel despised in the middle east and so it'll be very hard to topple them without their being severe repercussions. As soon as there are civilian casualties then it's a major uphill battle.

I'm not sure if Iran's relatively young population are that supportive of their own strict regime who are essentially radical old men with long grey beards. I spoke to a couple of Iranians two weeks ago and they can't stand their own Govt (something a few of us on here can relate to!) and are desperate for things to be more liberal and progressive.
Click to expand...
This in particular is interesting. There are signs the young people of Iran may be turning on the leadership naturally. Nothing would do a better job of sabotaging that than having the USA coming in swinging and you can say hello to yet another generation of radicalised youth as opportunities in the country are destroyed and the regime can play victim to the invading imperialist power, as they will present it.

There is the chance, albeit remote, that Iran could get dragged to a more reasonable and liberal (by mid eastern standards) society less focused on destabilising everywhere and religious conflict. This would be a vastly preferable option to having it follow a similar path to Iraq.
 
Toppling regimes in Iran has been a favourite past time of the British and Americans since Truman and Churchill. My 'inlaws fled Iran at the fall of the Shah in the late 70's. The ill feeling towards American interference by older generations in Iran is still remarkabley strong. Some thing still played on by those in power in Iran.

Reading recent comments by Biden it appears they are 100% going to respond. Who against is anyone's guess.
 
Saintjay said:
Toppling regimes in Iran has been a favourite past time of the British and Americans since Truman and Churchill. My 'inlaws fled Iran at the fall of the Shah in the late 70's. The ill feeling towards American interference by older generations in Iran is still remarkabley strong. Some thing still played on by those in power in Iran.

Reading recent comments by Biden it appears they are 100% going to respond. Who against is anyone's guess.
Click to expand...
Iran in the 70s was actually doing really well. Problem is while the West might want democratic countries in the middle east, they also want them to be reliant on the west. It's a foreign policy that has resulted in so much conflict. There is no excuse for terrorism, but the west has done more than it's fair share to help create the situation where terrorists can flourish.
 
Reiser99 said:
Iran in the 70s was actually doing really well. Problem is while the West might want democratic countries in the middle east, they also want them to be reliant on the west. It's a foreign policy that has resulted in so much conflict. There is no excuse for terrorism, but the west has done more than it's fair share to help create the situation where terrorists can flourish.
Click to expand...

There were a lot of rumours that Iran was next on the list after Iraq when George W Bush was in power. They clearly thought they could steamroll their way in using the whole WMD as their justification and that the rest of the world wouldn't bat an eyelid. How wrong they were.

Clearly a lot of money to be made with oil & gas reserves not to mention juicy contracts being dished out rebuilding the country after everything has been flattened. Pretty sure Dick Cheney (Bush's VP and former boss of Halliburton) was complicit with the decision making re. Iraq.
 
You just know that whichever path Biden takes, Republicans will say the opposite. Don't invade and he is weak letting Americans be attacked without consequence. Invade and it is yet another unfunded military escapade without support at a time when the border is the real issue (an issue they voted not not do anything about because they are lying hypocrites). There is no action he can take that will please them so no point doing it. His best bet is to pre-emptively try to get support in Congress for action if he wants to do that and, if they refuse, he has justification for doing nothing. If they approve, it makes it much harder to then turn around and claim he acted without support.
 
Ragey Erasmus said:
Don't invade and he is weak letting Americans be attacked without consequence. Invade and it is yet another unfunded military escapade without support at a time when the border is the real issue
Click to expand...

I'm coming around to the idea of a B-2 dropping a JDAM through the Ayatollah's bedroom window. If coating said JDAM in bacon fat meant the prick thought he wouldn't get his 40 virgins or whatever batshit he believes, then I'd publicly announce that any munitions will have pork coatings on specifically for jihadists.

The "problem" within Iran is probably confined to less than a hundred people. Remove them and the regime would collapse.


[and I 100% agree with Reiser's point earlier - Iran was doing well till the West f**ked it up in the name of greed]
 
Bada-Bing! said:
Also shows the difference between libel laws in US compared to UK.

www.bbc.co.uk

Elon Musk wins defamation case over 'pedo guy' tweet about caver

Tesla's founder did not defame a UK caver who helped in the Thai cave rescue, a US jury finds.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Intersting used of Jdart as a defence. Particularly in regards to something said in the heat of the moment, or in an arguement. Or if someone makes a joke taken badly or is offended.

Or it's simply a case of the bigger your wallet the more likely you'll win your legal case.
 
Saintjay said:
Intersting used of Jdart as a defence. Particularly in regards to something said in the heat of the moment, or in an arguement. Or if someone makes a joke taken badly or is offended.

Or it's simply a case of the bigger your wallet the more likely you'll win your legal case.
Click to expand...
Just noticed the lawyer for that guy was Lin Wood, the maga lunatic who would end up surrendering his law license as he was about to be disbarred for the election lies he spread...
 

Similar threads

Bada-Bing!
Antisocial, societal issues thread
7 8 9
Replies
163
Views
7K
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
The Biking thread
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
5K
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
The Ukraine War thread
27 28 29
Replies
566
Views
24K
Which Tyler
Which Tyler
T
Is anyone using a club management system for their local club?
Replies
0
Views
887
Try-Hard Tackler
T
M
Had to stare someone down at a red light
Replies
6
Views
1K
The Seeker
The Seeker

Latest posts

Top