Iran Super Thread- Merged

[true canadian]

What the hell is wrong with these nuclear power countries.  Whats so good about having them they only bring massive death and destruction to the citizens of the country.  Why don't they do old fashion bombing on military factories and dive bombing on enemy forces.  Nukes are stupid if your going to defend your country by using them and use it on a country then its just going to send one back and the country that you tried to save and the attacking country are both inielated by these bombing.  So in my eyes nukes are just world enders not country protectors. Also what are the US doing, attacking countries with nukes, there the ones with like 13000 of them so lets all attack them. :threat:  If the cold war actually happened the Nuke part then north America and northern Asia and Europe would of been completely destroyed because of back and forth bombings.  :-\

 

[aesop081]

What the hell is wrong with these nuclear power countries.  Whats so good about having them they only bring massive death and destruction to the citizens of the country.  Why don't they do old fashion bombing on military factories and dive bombing on enemy forces.  Nukes are stupid if your going to defend your country by using them and use it on a country then its just going to send one back and the country that you tried to save and the attacking country are both inielated by these bombing.  So in my eyes nukes are just world enders not country protectors. Also what are the US doing, attacking countries with nukes, there the ones with like 13000 of them so lets all attack them. :threat:  If the cold war actually happened the Nuke part then north America and northern Asia and Europe would of been completely destroyed because of back and forth bombings.  :-\

Wow !!  what an intelligent and well thought out post  :

 

[derael]

Not only that...his alias is "true canadian"...time to hang our heads in shame I guess  :crybaby:

 

[regulator12]

We even landed men on the Moon.

That is debatable, i wont start here but i am sure there are skeptics of whether that happend or not...i for one am skeptical......

 

[a_majoor]

No need to debate, the Apollo astronauts left a laser reflector on the moon. Illuminating it and seeing the reflection is a bit of a challenge, but it hasn't stopped some people: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/laser_moon_010810-1.html

 

[regulator12]

Ill take my foot out of my mouth now...... :-[

 

[Navy_Blue]

Dude the cold war did happened.  WWIII did not.  No matter how illogical it sounds MAD (Mutually Assured Distruction)  saved our asses.  We came close I think and probably more times than we know.  Through just blind luck and the thought of wiping all life out on earth we didn't press the red button.  

These people acquire nukes b/c it buys them clout weather they can hit North America or not.  That clout makes the US play fair some times.  We have all seen how much clout this country has (soft wood, beef, etc).  These days there are people who would love to "find" a briefcase sized weapon and place it as close to us infidels as possible.  Iran hints at sharing some of the same views as the people looking for small nukes.  Tends to make life worrysum for world leaders.

As far as my pessimistic views go.  The Asian culture has persisted for thousands of years longer than us or even the people we have inherited our "intellectual and cultural tradition"  They have been through just as many hardships conquests and victories as we have.  The simple fact is they are poised to take the lead on the this planet.  In no way should taking the lead economically be considered a threat to our culture beliefs or freedom.  We're talking about billions vs hundreds on millions who will be expecting to consume goods as quickly as the western people they in some cases have looked on with envy.  

The problem is that this level of consumerism could very well break the planet as whole.  Solution. have a vision of what our future looks like and not a vision of four years down the road when the next leader can bribe us with lower taxes or better healthcare.  Our politicians don't try and bribe us with big dreams because we don't dream that way anymore.  Our culture doesn't look at our children and wonder or care what they will have to deal with.  We care about our next pay check our next vacation our next night out.  No one wants to think about the future because no one sees one.
We our culture would have to make big sacrifices to make things turn around and we are not willing to do so.   Respected PHD's in every field relentlessly tell the media how bad it is and it all comes out as white noise to us.  How do you make us hear the screams??

I'm on for the ride now.  I look to the stars and I still dream.  I bring my kids up to look to the future, to care about the planet and to care about our country as much as I do.  I only wish other people would do the same.  Most people I know don't see past next week.  If you point it out, they shrug and say "it not my problem."

 

[regulator12]

People wont care till they need to care.

 

[nULL]

I find it curious that many in this thead are debating the merits of going to war with Iran. While naturally this is expected on a website entitled army.ca, I couldn't help but feel that the article's underlying theme - the apparent collapse of our financial system - has been underplayed. I did a little snooping on google, and wow - just wow.

I'm starting to wonder if I should be heavily investing in commodities; is a return to the gold standard inevitable? I question whether or not the article's warning of a transition to the euro is likely; like our current system, it's a fiat currency. Wouldn't it therefore share the same weaknesses and uncertainties as our current system?

 

 

[Cannonfodder]

You said it Null , the days of the US dollar are numbered , the new standard global currency will be the euro . Gold and other commodities are fairly sound investments with the current and future global situation . Soaring trade deficit , high consumer debt , a housing bubble , erosion of  American domestic industry , and ever increasing expensive military adventures will bring the US economy to its knees . The old solution was to print more currency in the form of bonds , the majority of these bonds are held by foreign investors [Chinese] when they decide to flush the dollar and go to the Euro it will be a rapid process . There are more imminent dangers to the security of the US than some other country acquiring nuclear capibility . Way to go  W , half a trillion on military adventures since 911  , out of control spending  , and neglecting the real threats to US security . I dont think your daddy will be able to bail you out of this one .

 

[Glorified Ape]

???

So you've got the neighbourhood gangbanger blustering and threatening to shoot people....but because we know he's just "boasting", we shouldn't bother trying to stop him from getting a gun.  We'll just send Glorified Ape to go around the neighbourhood telling people "don't worry, he probably won't use it".

Iran isn't a "gangbanger" - it's a sovereign state which knows that its own obliteration (along with its leadership) lies in waging any type of military aggression - nuclear or not. The repercussions of the former are 100x the latter. There's an argument to be made that nuclear weapons actually pacify a state's foreign behaviour towards other nuclear states insofar as the repercussions of agressive posturing or action are exponentially greater than what they would be if the offending state was non-nuclear. India and Pakistan's situation has actually improved since both came into possession of nuclear weapons. Conventional warfare between nuclear states becomes a very risky, high-cost avenue when the possibility of nuclear war is factored into the equation.

As I said before, I think Iran's pursuit of nuclear technology (assuming it's intended for weapons, which I would guess is probably so) stems from a need for deterrence - primarily against the US, but I suppose against Israel as well. Given the recent incursions into the Middle East by the US and other states, combined with the fact that Iran is now almost literally surrounded by the US (Iraq, Afghanistan) and its [quasi-]allies (Turkey, Pakistan), it's hardly surprising that they would want to possess a viable deterrent to disuade an invasion or attack. The deterrent value is compounded when one considers that the states acting as staging points or allies to any action by the US are the ones that will suffer the most from any nuclear backlash due to their proximity. Iranian aggression would be suicide, and they know it - it would be doubly so if it was nuclear aggression. As loud, obnoxious, and extreme as Iran is, I don't think their leadership is suicidal.

There are no competitors to the US just  wannabe's. The economic system of the US is superior to those
so called competing states, in fact no other economy in the world even come's close. None of us in our lifetime will see a US in decline. I dont see Russia, China or India's economy coming close to overtaking the US they have too many weaknesses. My comments might appear jingoistic but I think are realistic. The recent US unemployment number was 4.7%, any other country match that ? Military power I think its unquestioned.
The US has progressed beyond a post industrial economy while our potential rivals are stuck in an industrial economic model. I would recomend Alvin Toffler's Third Wave printed in 1980 as time has proven his thinking out.

European economic volume (IE trade) dwarfs that of the NAFTA, let alone the US. The EU is the largest economy on Earth. European trade is disproportionately internal and thus subject to a lesser degree of external influence while US trade (and NAFTA) is far more externalised. More than just a competitor, the EU is now the dominant economy. Individually, the US still trumps everyone else but the old state-centric, individualist political-economic model is dying at the hands of regionalisation - just look at developments along these lines in Asia (ASEAN/APEC) and South America (MERCOSUR). If the US were dealing on a one-on-one basis with Europe, your statement would be correct. As it stands, it's the level at which governance takes place (especially economic governance) that determines a unit's scope and for Europe, that governance is regional. The same might be said of North America if NAFTA expands/deepens into a customs union or beyond, but the US (especially the present administration) doesn't seem particularly fond of the idea as it necessarily means the degredation of sovereignty.

God knows what will happen if Asia ever decides to move anywhere near the level of integration that Europe now has.

 

[tomahawk6]

You said it Null , the days of the US dollar are numbered , the new standard global currency will be the euro . Gold and other commodities are fairly sound investments with the current and future global situation . Soaring trade deficit , high consumer debt , a housing bubble , erosion of  American domestic industry , and ever increasing expensive military adventures will bring the US economy to its knees . The old solution was to print more currency in the form of bonds , the majority of these bonds are held by foreign investors [Chinese] when they decide to flush the dollar and go to the Euro it will be a rapid process . There are more imminent dangers to the security of the US than some other country acquiring nuclear capibility . Way to go  W , half a trillion on military adventures since 911  , out of control spending  , and neglecting the real threats to US security . I dont think your daddy will be able to bail you out of this one .

For the Euro to replace the dollar the EU better have a dranatic economic overhaul because until that happens the Euro is second place. Compare Europe's unemployment to that of the US. Their combined economies are being strangled by their national welfare programs - healthcare, doll, ect.

 

[a_majoor]

Thinking that Iran is somehow constrained by "Realpolitik" WRT nuclear weapons is a pipe dream. When their President openly calls for the destruction of Israel, and claims the arrival of the Mahdi is immanent (in Islamic theology, this is similar the Christians proclaiming the return of Jesus Christ and the day of Judgement), the thought of nuclear weapons in the hands of people who are proclaiming the Apocalypse is more than just "scary". A military "head shot" against their nuclear facilities, government institutions and revolutionary guard is probably the best possible solution we have now, unless the Iranian population can rise up en mass and overthrow their opressors.

Lenin proclaimed "World Revolution",  Hitler wrote extensively about what he planned for Europe, and Imperial Japanese policy was fairly well known in the first half of the 20th century, and surprise!, they did their best to carry out their stated intentions. Intelligence commonly looks at capabilities rather than intentions, which may be one of the traps we have fallen into, in any "rational" universe, Iran is completely unable to carry out any of its stated intentions. Indeed Osama Bin Laden stated the reason for the 9/11 attacks was explicitly to provoke the United States into war, while not a rational act by any means, this played directly into his belief system (based on observed American behavior in the 1990s, he felt America was a "paper tiger", and he believed US interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and so on would not only be slow, grinding and unsuccessful, but would also lead to an uprising throughout the Islamic world.)

WRT economics, there are large challenges facing the West (not just the United States), but adversary often unleashes creative solutions and allows merit to come forward when the status quo fails. Statist solutions to the economic problems haven't worked, but given the limited challenges we have faced so far, the system has been able to continue to function. Place a large shock and innovative solutions like President Bush's proposed reworking of Social Security or the privatization of Canada's health care system become not only desirable but absolutely necessary.

For those people who are arguing the primacy of Asian or other non-European/Western cultures, just read your history. The Chinese invented paper currency, gunpowder, sailed huge armadas in the Indian Ocean and so on, but who actually took over the world? These other cultures are internally focused, and while this gives them a certain longevity and internal stability, this does not tranlate into their long term advantage. One might ask why these Chinese fleets did not establish colonies in India, the Arabian Peninsula, the east coast of Africa, or Indonesia, when there is unambiguous evidence they had actually visited these places?

 

[RCD]

It is only a matter of time.

 

[BKells]

This sort of accounting ignores the over 51 Trillion dollars of assets in the hands of US citizens. In fact, by the reasoning above, Canada should have landed in the toilet a long time ago given our vast debt and deficits. (Even today, I would wonder what exactly Canada's budgetary position is given Paul Martin's Enron like accounting since 1993.....). The US debt and deficits have been growing for DECADES, many economists see no direct connection between debt, deficits and economic growth. After all, the Great Depression occured while the United States balanced its budget, and the "New Deal" which eventually helped end the depression was explicitly financed by debt and deficit spending.

As for their "desired" economy, an annual @ 4% growth rate in the GDP and an unemployment of 4.7% dosn't sound too shabby to me.

4% growth rate in Real GDP or nominal? Where are your figures coming frmo?

"Many economists see no direct connection between debt, deficits, and economic growth"

You must be making this up. Please supply some sources. My source, Gregory Mankiw (former Bush economic advisor who resigned in disgust and is a professor at Harvard university, PH.D. in macroeconomics) begs to differ.

"Deficits reduce the supply of loanable funds, increase interest rates, discourage invetsment, and result in slower economic growth. Slower economic growth leads to lower tax revenue and higher spending on income-support programs, and the result is even higher budget deficits. A vicious cycle."

"When the government reduces national saving by running a budget deficit, the interest rate rises, and investment falls." It's called the crowding out effect. The government sucks up all the supply of loanable funds and leaves none left over for private firms to borrow for investment.

And as for your comment about Paul Martin.. he got us out of our vicious cycle of budget deficits that stretched from 1975 - 1993. It took enormous political courage. And where do we stand now? The only country in the G8 that is running a surplus and paying down our debt.

 

[Long in the tooth]

I propose that WW 3 was fought and won by the democratic/capitalistic west.  I was fought in Korea, Germany, Viet Nam, Afghanistan, the Horn of Africa, South Africa, Namibia, Central and South America and all the oceans.  The major powers could not fight head to head because they knew it would result in mutual destruction; so the war was waged 'at the margins'.  Proxies and economic resources as well as media and entertainment were employed.  Nike and Levis were the anvils of victory for this battle, but all had modern militaries in order to avoid direct conflict.

Not all battles were succesful for the west of course, but with superior economic resources Reagan eventually beggered the communists.

Now we're in the middle of WW 4.

 

[Rodders]

OKAY gents, how 'bout we keep this on topic and quit the USA bashing.

As far as the USA falling anytime soon?  Don't think so, we still have a lot of technology from the Roswell crash.....

I don't think analysis or observations in which the United States is portrayed as anything but superior or infallible implies "USA bashing". All things have negative aspects or downsides. Me, you, Canada and the United States are all imperfect. To note these imperfections is a necessary part of analysis. To ignore them is naive at best, negligent at worst.

BTW when will some of that Roswell technology be implemented into the mainstream so I no longer have to reset my digital clock after a power outage?

This is my first post on this board. I don't wish to sound argumentative in anyway. I have found this thread both interesting and educational and I want to see it continue in a constructive direction.

Thanks

Rodders

 

[regulator12]

That is true when will they solve the problem with those dam power outages affected digital watches. It really is annoying you know.... ;D
Likewise Rodders is correct, analysing the United States and pointing out obvious flaws is not bashing but mere analysis. It could be for the better if these types of debates were held in government offices to bring up new solutions to problems.

 

[Navy_Blue]

"World War" "Cold War" It no longer true encompasses what we are dealing with in the 21st century.  I think its just the beginning of a global state of flux that will consume all aspects of our lives.  It will take years for this all to cool off.

To get back on topic a bit Iran....

They have the power now to bring our economy to its knees.  One WWII era mine placed on a Dow could quietly cross the straights of Hormuz or just the mouth of the gulf.  Let it off in the very thin shipping lane and boom!  Now repeat step one; 6 or 7 times the same night.  Drop a few in the red sea and the Suez closes.  One tanker sinks in those straights and the oil tapes shut off.  IMO insurance rates would sore and oil prices would sky rocket like in the 70's.   The question is why hasn't our friends or enemies in the middle east done this recently.  Al-Qaeda could do this on a whim.  A mine is a pretty simple divice you don't need allot of people to organize a strike like that.  It wouldn't be the first time either; is it not in the intrest of there cause?

I spent 6 months going up and down the gulf and the straights there are little crappy wooden Dow's everywhere.  There are warships everywhere too but you can only check so many of these ships.  For the hundred or so boats the ship  boarded there were a thousand more.

I think most of the negative press (granted they are crazy! crazy! people running that country) we here about Iran now is because of the oil exchange expected to open in under a month.  If things go bad we need an excuse as to why we need to overthrow invade or disrupt Iranian leadership.  Reading that Saddam opened one of these exchanges a year before the war, starts to makes you think.  Everyone laughed at him till it started making real money.  The public needed to here about all the bad things Saddam was doing a year in advance of the invasion to get them in the mind frame and to think it was truly necessary.  Then negative media flooded the air waves quite literally.  All talk was on terrorists and WMD's in Iraq.

Afghanistan I think was the only legitimate target the US had the right to say enough! and go in.  Iraq was a step to far; a step the toothless UN should have been dealing with (someone needs to buy them dentures).  The Al-Qaeda strong hold was in Afghanistan not Iraq.  Saddam supported there cause with words of encouragement but that was more to thumb his nose at old Georgie.    

There is allot more to all this.  Things happening in the shadows from both sides.  If the bad guys really wanted too they could be doing much more damage to us.  Maybe that is what they want though, just prick the sleeping dragon and make it restless.  If you stab it in the butt and it wakes up...your gonna get burned.  They aren't getting burned yet, 911 no matter how awful was just a pin prick like Madrid and London.  Its still early and we've been at it now since 911.  

 

[a_majoor]

4% growth rate in Real GDP or nominal? Where are your figures coming frmo?

The US Treasury and Congressional Budget Office

"Many economists see no direct connection between debt, deficits, and economic growth"

You must be making this up. Please supply some sources. My source, Gregory Mankiw (former Bush economic advisor who resigned in disgust and is a professor at Harvard university, PH.D. in macroeconomics) begs to differ.

Since this isn't a popular or even intuative position, I am not going to play pin the tail on the URL (look up Larry Kudlow for some fairly easy to understand primers). Instead, I am going to put your powers of observation to work: create a chart or graph with yearly debt, deficit, interest rates tax rates and GDP. Plug in the figures from as far back as you can, and look for corellations. The only one you will find is the inverse ratio of taxation to GDP. The United States was working on a balanced the budget through tax and tarrif increases in 1929, which hastened the onset of the Great Depression.

"Deficits reduce the supply of loanable funds, increase interest rates, discourage invetsment, and result in slower economic growth. Slower economic growth leads to lower tax revenue and higher spending on income-support programs, and the result is even higher budget deficits. A vicious cycle."

See above. You should be able to prove this easily if it was the case. Oh, by the way, what is the current prime interest rate? What is the current deficit? GDP?

And as for your comment about Paul Martin.. he got us out of our vicious cycle of budget deficits that stretched from 1975 - 1993. It took enormous political courage. And where do we stand now? The only country in the G8 that is running a surplus and paying down our debt.

Like I said, their Enron like accounting makes this subect to question. The "surplus" rose and fell with the political winds, but oddly seemed to vanish at budget time; no tax relief for the likes of you and I. Oh, and the Debt has remained fairly static at $576.8 billion over the same time period, and the unfunded liabilities (CPP, government pensions) is also steady at @ $500 billion. Yes, Paul Martin managed to keep us One Trillion dollars in debt for a decade, "surplus" be damned......