![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 10 of 10. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Sobriquet Style on March 8, 2006, at 20:03:16
Theres 8 countries in the world who pocess Nuclear Weapons.
Iran holds 10% of the worlds oil reserves.
As far as I know, theres only 1 country in the world who has a history of using Nuclear Weapons against another country.
Iran also has the second largest gas reserves in the world.
Did I mention, Iran has lots of oil?
Iran is very similar to Iraq, the n seperates the q, apart from that they're pretty similar.
~
Posted by teejay on March 8, 2006, at 20:24:43
In reply to Nuclear Weapons, posted by Sobriquet Style on March 8, 2006, at 20:03:16
Darn it, I replied to this post once and my reply vanished into the ether!
Has anyone yet explained to you which part of the NNPT Iran has actually broken? The whole crux of the argument is that the US accuses Iran of lying despite the fact it has no proof. In effect it has broken no part of any agreement.
You could of course be forgiven for comparing this scenario to Israel who officially dont have any nukes despite it being widely accepted that they do have them. Also of course they are not signatories to the NNPT and neither do they allow inspections by the IAEA. Its the usual one rule for them and one rule for us scenario. Its hardly surprising the rest of the world now views the US as the biggest threat to world peace and not some of the tiny tinpot dictatorships it seeks to depose.
Someone please remind me how many countries Iran has invaded in past couple of decades and then compare it to the number the US/UK has invaded inthe same timeframe. While we are on that subject, someone remind me which side the US was on during the iran/iraq war and how many millions died in that conflict.
Bottom line IMO is if MAD (mutually assured destruction) is good enough for the americans and the russians (its also worth noting how the relations between india and pakistan have improved since they both became nuclear capable) then surely its good enough to make israel and iran start talking to each other like they exist?
TJ (who is happy to send his CV to the US state department)
Posted by Sobriquet Style on March 9, 2006, at 7:44:28
In reply to Re: Nuclear Weapons, posted by teejay on March 8, 2006, at 20:24:43
>Has anyone yet explained to you which part of the NNPT Iran has actually broken? The whole crux of the argument is that the US accuses Iran of lying despite the fact it has no proof. In effect it has broken no part of any agreement.
This is why I think Iran is very similar to Iraq. It was said Iraq had weapons of mass desruction for the basis of the western countries declaring war on the country. It then turns out no weapons of mass descruction were found. That said, the war continued. Its interesting that back in the 80's Donald Rumsfeld is said to have supplied Iraq with biological and chemical weapons. A loan was given for the weapons too, so it might have been seen as 'good business' at the time. I understand alot of defense companies has profited from the war.
But big money, or should I say large amounts of oil is in Iraq, the most in the middle-east and the second largest reserve in the world. Who will be profiting from all this oil with what has happened in Iraq? I heard it will be the privatization of American companies, that will be a factor.
I think Iran is similar to Iraq because of the amount of oil and gas there. I also think that a 'reason' is being put forward today with a fear factor involved. That is, "hey Iran is going to build a Nuclear Weapon!!!!!" What are they going to do with it, even if they was? I mean the worst could be that they would do what America has already done. But, the relgious scholars of Iran, say what their using nuclear means for - energy. They also say that to use a Nuclear wepaon, even for 'defense' purposes would be against the teachings of the Koran. They also say something about trading oil in Euro's as opposed to Dollars.
I just see this all very similar pattern, a reason is put forward, and as history has taught us with Iraq, in/directly a financial reward is utimately a major factor in the outcome. Unfortunately the middle part was a war last time, will this happen again?
President Bush has said that he wants diplomacy to solve this, but that nothing is ruled out.
Another thing, it was said in January 2001, how the Bush administration, alot of them have financial intersts in oil. 5 years on, and they appear very interested in countries with lots of oil..or is it weapons they don't exist, or could possibly?
~
Posted by tealady on March 10, 2006, at 2:25:58
In reply to Nuclear Weapons, posted by Sobriquet Style on March 8, 2006, at 20:03:16
similar from a US perspective..
but DON't please utter that to someone from Iraq or Iran :-)
Posted by tealady on March 10, 2006, at 2:33:58
In reply to Re: Nuclear Weapons, posted by teejay on March 8, 2006, at 20:24:43
While we are on that subject, someone remind me which side the US was on during the iran/iraq war and how many millions died in that conflict.
Don't know.. its' too confusing for me.. does it make any dfference?.. I think maybe the question is how much oil and money did the US get out of it..via oil for food, oil for weapons. How many weapons did the US manage to sell.. was it to both sides? Most wars are profitable to weapon manufacturing countries?
I get lost.. really! I decided to give up at the time.
If you ever figure it out ...and how profitable the war was.. let me know?
Posted by tealady on March 10, 2006, at 2:49:06
In reply to Nuclear Weapons, posted by Sobriquet Style on March 8, 2006, at 20:03:16
> Theres 8 countries in the world who pocess Nuclear Weapons.
>
> Iran holds 10% of the worlds oil reserves.
>
> As far as I know, theres only 1 country in the world who has a history of using Nuclear Weapons against another country.
>
and more than once and more than one country..
one country will never recover..too damaged environmentally for eternity, and they were on the same side!But ya forgot the other weapons of mass destruction .. like the chemicals this nation has used against opther countries civilians and manufactures too?
> Iran also has the second largest gas reserves in the world.
>
> Did I mention, Iran has lots of oil?
>
> Iran is very similar to Iraq, the n seperates the q, apart from that they're pretty similar.
>
> ~
>
LOL
I did mention something similar to an Iranian once..
ya see Iranians do not consider themselves to be Arab at all.. and some don't even like the muslim bit...but don't have much choice there;-)Since ancient times, Persians (Iranians) used the term Aryan to describe their lineage and their language, and this tradition has continued into the present day amongst modern Iranians. In fact, the name Iran is a cognate of Aryan and means "Land of the Aryans."
They were an advanced culturally in ancient times.Darius the Great, King of Persia (521–486 BC), in an inscription in Naksh-i Rustam (near Shiraz in present-day Iran), proclaims: "I am Darius the great King… A Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage...". He also calls his language the "Aryan language," commonly known today as Old Persian.
The word has become a technical term in the theologies of Zoroastrianism, but has always been used by Iranians in the ethnic sense as well.
Zoroastrian is quite an impressive religion if you look at it...just to switch onto a more pleasant topic.
there are followers today even.. mostly I suspect in those who have emigrated from Iran, but I don't really know.Recall Hitler and Aryan descent stuff?
ome of them don't exactly appreciate being grouped with those in Iraq I think
Posted by Sobriquet Style on March 12, 2006, at 6:56:48
In reply to Re: Nuclear Weapons » Sobriquet Style, posted by tealady on March 10, 2006, at 2:25:58
Posted by Sobriquet Style on March 12, 2006, at 6:59:32
In reply to Re: Nuclear Weapons » Sobriquet Style, posted by tealady on March 10, 2006, at 2:49:06
>and more than once and more than one country..
I never knew it was more than one...
>Since ancient times, Persians (Iranians) used the term Aryan to describe their lineage and their language, and this tradition has continued into the present day amongst modern Iranians. In fact, the name Iran is a cognate of Aryan and means "Land of the Aryans."
They were an advanced culturally in ancient times.>Darius the Great, King of Persia (521–486 BC), in an inscription in Naksh-i Rustam (near Shiraz in present-day Iran), proclaims: "I am Darius the great King… A Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage...". He also calls his language the "Aryan language," commonly known today as Old Persian.
>The word has become a technical term in the theologies of Zoroastrianism, but has always been used by Iranians in the ethnic sense as well.
>Zoroastrian is quite an impressive religion if you look at it...just to switch onto a more pleasant topic.
there are followers today even.. mostly I suspect in those who have emigrated from Iran, but I don't really know.Thank you for that inforamtion - very interesting :-)
~
Posted by Declan on March 18, 2006, at 19:21:48
In reply to Re: Nuclear Weapons, posted by Sobriquet Style on March 9, 2006, at 7:44:28
There may be a fundamental shift in the Sunni/Shia divide in the Middle East, or there may be civil war along that divide. The USA is not in a position to convincingly declare victory and leave Iraq. The Iranians can influence the outcome there, and any attack on Iran will inflame the situation. The Iranian regime believes it is in its best interests to acquire nuclear weapons. Then there's Afghanistan. Very sticky and interesting.
Declan
Posted by Sobriquet Style on March 19, 2006, at 6:49:30
In reply to Middle East, posted by Declan on March 18, 2006, at 19:21:48
>Very sticky and interesting.
It sure is..
~
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.