It could effect us due to the prices of oil (aka speculation) and the chance of war would drive prices up. So, I think a war with Iran (with or with out us) is going to happen in the next 5 years due to them wanting a nuclear bomb . So with a clear and present danger we should help Israel to stop Iran.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8879463/Why-Iran-wants-the-bomb.html - read that, Because Iran has shown agression before and will continue to do so. Having a nuclear bomb is like being in a club , and Iran is mad that it can't be in that club. For me it's not why they want it , it's if they get it , they could easily "lose it" and Al-Quada could get it. And Al-Quada (and drug lords) has shown, bring a nuclear bomb in the country is a easy task
How has Iran shown aggression? Now is the time for calm, rational discussion of fact rather than the misinformation and speculation spurred on by the media. I believe that any country is entitled to build or possess nuclear weapons so long as Britain, America, and Israel do. Thus the way forward is through non-proliferation treaties (which Israel has never signed), and diplomacy.
"So it is increasingly important to focus on facts on the ground. Iran has never discharged nuclear inspectors from its borders. You would imagine a country “illegally” producing nuclear weapons might do so. Iran has reportedly complied with IAEA protocol every year and has not diverted any uranium into a weapons program. It produces low-enriched uranium (LEU) under the supervision of IAEA, not suitably enriched for the production of weapons.
Meanwhile, we should remember that Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a nuclear arsenal, and a country whose recent history – with invasions and occupations in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine – suggests it would be more willing to launch an attack on Iran than vice versa. This is an uncomfortable – and barely mentioned – truth in Western discussions of Iran’s nuclear capability. Israel has already used terrorist tactics to damage Iran – including the much-lauded computer virus, Stuxnet. This will only push Iran further towards weaponization." (http://www.policymic.com/articles/2609/leave-a-non-nuclear-iran-alone)
"Iran represents a 2,700 year old civilization and except for a brief incursion against the Greeks in 545 B,C, under Cyrus the Great, Iran has never committed an act of aggression against Europe. The European Union has seven times the population, 50 times the GDP of Iran, and possesses hundreds of nuclear missiles while Iran has none. The EU is more than 1,000 miles away and does not share any borders with Iran, yet Washington, through NATO, continues to arbitrarily decide who Europe’s enemies are. To date no Iranians, who are 90 percent Shiite, have been implicated in any terror or suicide bombings in Europe or North America." (http://tech.mit.edu/V130/N6/maheshwari.html)
If Israel attack Iran, Iran will plan a attack right back on Israel. Knowing the US government, we are going to get into Israel's business and start another war on Iran which will make our economy weaker, and other international nations will look at us like a police state
Also, I think not doing anything, would be a grave mistake. If we look back at history , we did nothing about Hitler, and that almost lost us the war, But now with a war about to happen, it would put the region in a crisis.
I think if Israel attacked iran it would start another world war because we have Israelis back and iran has other countries at theirs and then we would just destroy iran and take everythin of value to them like wht we did to the germans in ww1
"Iran represents a 2,700 year old civilization and except for a brief incursion against the Greeks in 545 B,C, under Cyrus the Great, Iran has never committed an act of aggression against Europe. The European Union has seven times the population, 50 times the GDP of Iran, and possesses hundreds of nuclear missiles while Iran has none." (http://tech.mit.edu/V130/N6/maheshwari.html)
“The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has documented Iranian efforts to achieve the capacity to develop nuclear weapons at some point, but there is no hard evidence that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has yet made the final decision to develop them.” (http://ronconte.wordpress.com/2012/01/22/iran-nuclear-weapons-decision-and-timing/)
I think it is quite interesting that we are the ones who started the Nuclear program in Iran back in 1957: "The irony is, like Iraq and its WMDs, Iran has a nuclear program because the U.S. endorsed it, under President Eisenhower, in 1957, with the ironically named Atoms for Peace campaign." (http://www.policymic.com/articles/leave-a-non-nuclear-iran-alone)
I think we all need to take a closer look at the acts of terrorism: "The classic definition of “terrorism” is the use of violence against civilians to achieve a political goal. But the word ultimately has been transformed into a geopolitical insult. If “our” side is the target, it’s “terrorism,” even if it’s a case of local militants attacking an occupying military force. Yet, when “our” side is doing the killing, it is anything but “terrorism.” So, for instance, when Palestinians trapped in the open-air prison called Gaza fire small missiles at nearby Israeli settlements, that is decried as “terrorism” because the missiles are indiscriminant. But in 1983, when the Reagan administration lobbed artillery shells from the USS New Jersey into Lebanese villages (in support of the Israeli occupation of Lebanon), that was not “terrorism.” (http://consortiumnews.com/2011/07/27/who-commits-terrorism/)
I think we need to take a closer look at our intervention overseas. It proves to be very disastrous and we should be expecting blowback (undesirable consequences of covert operations) anytime soon.
You , do make legit points, but remeber doing nothing is also very disastrous and causes blow back (AKA WW2). I think this FDR line explains my point good "There are many among us who in the past closed our eyes to events abroad, because they believe what was taking place in Europe was none of our business and that we could maintain our physical safety by retiring to our continental boundaries, obviously defense policy based on that is merely to invite future attacks" (just replace Europe with the middle east and thats the exact thing people think)
You're assuming I would isolate myself from the rest of the world - I want free-open trade and to talk with foreign nations. I just don't agree with us intervening in the internal affairs of foreign nations. I believe the CIA is correct when it teaches blowback...
Blowback - "The unintended adverse results of a political action or situation." (dictionary.com)
and about the whole WW2 thing, sitting around and not doing anything didn't start WW2 - one of the main cause was the disasterous Treaty of Versailles.
War with Iran would definitely make oil prices higher and we are already involved in the middle east so this wouldn't be much different that Iraq or Afghanistan. We went into Iraq because we thought they had WMDs, what makes this different? We are allied with Israel so we would be more justified this time.
If Israel was to attack Iran it certainly have major effects in the United States. Not only would another war start because of US support to Israel, it would drive up the prices of oil a little. With a state of war existing between the US and Israel against Iran, Iran would go through with its threats to close the Strait of Hormuz. I have little fear that Iran's navy could match ours; on the another note the US buys Saudi oil not Iranian and the Saudi's have promised that if Iran closes the strait they would make up the slack (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/16/us-iran-idUSTRE80F0Z520120116).
Unfortunately a war with Iran would again be a major dent to America's reputation in the region. In protest to the Iranian nuclear program the European Union (EU) has already imposed oil embargoes on Iran. The varies economic sanctions imposed on Iran are starting just now to take effect. Personally I would hope avoid war at all cost but there is just to much bad blood between the US and Iran.
I agree with Andrew, yes it would make our oil prices a lot higher than they already are. also i would just like to comment and say that Israel is making attacks first. Just because they feel threatened by the nuclear weapons. I also think if out of Israel being scared they could maybe start to look into what we are doing because we have been involved with Iran and it may make them attack us. Who knows because the scientists were bombed because they just felt threatened. Also the fact that the Israeli went to Iran and bombed him, means if they feel threatened by them, they could be threatened by us and maybe attack us. I don't know. But it seems kinda scary to think about.
I agree with Corman. I think a war in Iran would have a bad result. It would effect the U.S. I think it would eventually cause the U.S. to send troops to Iran to help the Iran people. However we all want make sure the troops are safe and out of harms way.
If Israel does wind up attacking Iran the effects of the war would definitely have effects on the United States. A war between Israel and Iran would eventually suck the U.S. into it and unfortunately through various ties between different countries, a larger scaled war could and more than likely would begin. Iran closing off oil to America as well as other countries would wind up increasing oil prices (and as Cory stated earlier) even though Saudi promised to pick up the slack eventually hostility would rise and only lead to more conflict.
I agree with what most every one said. I think that it would make oil prices rise a lot. I feel like a war would break about and it would end really bad. I think that we would have to send out troops over to help also. I don't think anything good would come out of this.
I agree with Briana and Corman, it would eventually cause the US to send more troops to Iran to help their people, but I would rather all of our troops be back because it is causing people great pain. Herman Cain 2012
Sam - more substance with your comments - please read the source material before making statements. Its okay for everyone to agree or disagree - but base your information on facts!!
Since the US oil supply comes from the Middle East, specifically Iran, a war between the two Middle Eastern countries, Iran and Israel, would cause detriment to the US. The US will likely get dragged into their conflict, while Iran will close the oil supply to the US. This could be a possible sub-invitation to the US from Iran into the war; closing off US oil supply to get us to feel desperate enough to have to enter the war and ally with Iran.
It could effect us due to the prices of oil (aka speculation) and the chance of war would drive prices up. So, I think a war with Iran (with or with out us) is going to happen in the next 5 years due to them wanting a nuclear bomb . So with a clear and present danger we should help Israel to stop Iran.
ReplyDeleteIran doesn't want a nuclear bomb. They want to have nuclear capabilities to make a nuclear bomb so they can "have a better source of fuel"
Deletehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8879463/Why-Iran-wants-the-bomb.html - read that, Because Iran has shown agression before and will continue to do so. Having a nuclear bomb is like being in a club , and Iran is mad that it can't be in that club. For me it's not why they want it , it's if they get it , they could easily "lose it" and Al-Quada could get it. And Al-Quada (and drug lords) has shown, bring a nuclear bomb in the country is a easy task
DeleteHow has Iran shown aggression? Now is the time for calm, rational discussion of fact rather than the misinformation and speculation spurred on by the media. I believe that any country is entitled to build or possess nuclear weapons so long as Britain, America, and Israel do. Thus the way forward is through non-proliferation treaties (which Israel has never signed), and diplomacy.
Delete"So it is increasingly important to focus on facts on the ground. Iran has never discharged nuclear inspectors from its borders. You would imagine a country “illegally” producing nuclear weapons might do so. Iran has reportedly complied with IAEA protocol every year and has not diverted any uranium into a weapons program. It produces low-enriched uranium (LEU) under the supervision of IAEA, not suitably enriched for the production of weapons.
Meanwhile, we should remember that Israel is the only country in the Middle East with a nuclear arsenal, and a country whose recent history – with invasions and occupations in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine – suggests it would be more willing to launch an attack on Iran than vice versa. This is an uncomfortable – and barely mentioned – truth in Western discussions of Iran’s nuclear capability. Israel has already used terrorist tactics to damage Iran – including the much-lauded computer virus, Stuxnet. This will only push Iran further towards weaponization." (http://www.policymic.com/articles/2609/leave-a-non-nuclear-iran-alone)
"Iran represents a 2,700 year old civilization and except for a brief incursion against the Greeks in 545 B,C, under Cyrus the Great, Iran has never committed an act of aggression against Europe. The European Union has seven times the population, 50 times the GDP of Iran, and possesses hundreds of nuclear missiles while Iran has none. The EU is more than 1,000 miles away and does not share any borders with Iran, yet Washington, through NATO, continues to arbitrarily decide who Europe’s enemies are. To date no Iranians, who are 90 percent Shiite, have been implicated in any terror or suicide bombings in Europe or North America." (http://tech.mit.edu/V130/N6/maheshwari.html)
So how has Iran shown acts of aggression?
If Israel attack Iran, Iran will plan a attack right back on Israel. Knowing the US government, we are going to get into Israel's business and start another war on Iran which will make our economy weaker, and other international nations will look at us like a police state
ReplyDeleteyou do know , Israel or the US has never been in a war before. And how will that make us look like a police state?
Deletewith Iran-
DeleteIf it was up to me , we would already have token out the various nuclear reactors in Iran
DeleteAlso, I think not doing anything, would be a grave mistake. If we look back at history , we did nothing about Hitler, and that almost lost us the war, But now with a war about to happen, it would put the region in a crisis.
ReplyDeleteI think if Israel attacked iran it would start another world war because we have Israelis back and iran has other countries at theirs and then we would just destroy iran and take everythin of value to them like wht we did to the germans in ww1
ReplyDelete"Iran represents a 2,700 year old civilization and except for a brief incursion against the Greeks in 545 B,C, under Cyrus the Great, Iran has never committed an act of aggression against Europe. The European Union has seven times the population, 50 times the GDP of Iran, and possesses hundreds of nuclear missiles while Iran has none." (http://tech.mit.edu/V130/N6/maheshwari.html)
ReplyDelete“The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has documented Iranian efforts to achieve the capacity to develop nuclear weapons at some point, but there is no hard evidence that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has yet made the final decision to develop them.” (http://ronconte.wordpress.com/2012/01/22/iran-nuclear-weapons-decision-and-timing/)
I think it is quite interesting that we are the ones who started the Nuclear program in Iran back in 1957: "The irony is, like Iraq and its WMDs, Iran has a nuclear program because the U.S. endorsed it, under President Eisenhower, in 1957, with the ironically named Atoms for Peace campaign." (http://www.policymic.com/articles/leave-a-non-nuclear-iran-alone)
I think we all need to take a closer look at the acts of terrorism: "The classic definition of “terrorism” is the use of violence against civilians to achieve a political goal. But the word ultimately has been transformed into a geopolitical insult. If “our” side is the target, it’s “terrorism,” even if it’s a case of local militants attacking an occupying military force. Yet, when “our” side is doing the killing, it is anything but “terrorism.” So, for instance, when Palestinians trapped in the open-air prison called Gaza fire small missiles at nearby Israeli settlements, that is decried as “terrorism” because the missiles are indiscriminant. But in 1983, when the Reagan administration lobbed artillery shells from the USS New Jersey into Lebanese villages (in support of the Israeli occupation of Lebanon), that was not “terrorism.” (http://consortiumnews.com/2011/07/27/who-commits-terrorism/)
I think we need to take a closer look at our intervention overseas. It proves to be very disastrous and we should be expecting blowback (undesirable consequences of covert operations) anytime soon.
and where is the money coming from?
DeleteYou , do make legit points, but remeber doing nothing is also very disastrous and causes blow back (AKA WW2). I think this FDR line explains my point good "There are many among us who in the past closed our eyes to events abroad, because they believe what was taking place in Europe was none of our business and that we could maintain our physical safety by retiring to our continental boundaries, obviously defense policy based on that is merely to invite future attacks" (just replace Europe with the middle east and thats the exact thing people think)
DeleteYou're assuming I would isolate myself from the rest of the world - I want free-open trade and to talk with foreign nations. I just don't agree with us intervening in the internal affairs of foreign nations. I believe the CIA is correct when it teaches blowback...
DeleteBlowback - "The unintended adverse results of a political action or situation." (dictionary.com)
and about the whole WW2 thing, sitting around and not doing anything didn't start WW2 - one of the main cause was the disasterous Treaty of Versailles.
Deletethis could affect us because we buy oil from iran, and a war with them could make our oil prices go even higher.
ReplyDeleteWar with Iran would definitely make oil prices higher and we are already involved in the middle east so this wouldn't be much different that Iraq or Afghanistan. We went into Iraq because we thought they had WMDs, what makes this different? We are allied with Israel so we would be more justified this time.
ReplyDeleteIf Israel was to attack Iran it certainly have major effects in the United States. Not only would another war start because of US support to Israel, it would drive up the prices of oil a little. With a state of war existing between the US and Israel against Iran, Iran would go through with its threats to close the Strait of Hormuz. I have little fear that Iran's navy could match ours; on the another note the US buys Saudi oil not Iranian and the Saudi's have promised that if Iran closes the strait they would make up the slack (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/16/us-iran-idUSTRE80F0Z520120116).
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately a war with Iran would again be a major dent to America's reputation in the region. In protest to the Iranian nuclear program the European Union (EU) has already imposed oil embargoes on Iran. The varies economic sanctions imposed on Iran are starting just now to take effect. Personally I would hope avoid war at all cost but there is just to much bad blood between the US and Iran.
I agree with Andrew, yes it would make our oil prices a lot higher than they already are.
ReplyDeletealso i would just like to comment and say that Israel is making attacks first. Just because they feel threatened by the nuclear weapons. I also think if out of Israel being scared they could maybe start to look into what we are doing because we have been involved with Iran and it may make them attack us. Who knows because the scientists were bombed because they just felt threatened. Also the fact that the Israeli went to Iran and bombed him, means if they feel threatened by them, they could be threatened by us and maybe attack us. I don't know. But it seems kinda scary to think about.
I agree with Corman. I think a war in Iran would have a bad result. It would effect the U.S. I think it would eventually cause the U.S. to send troops to Iran to help the Iran people. However we all want make sure the troops are safe and out of harms way.
ReplyDeleteIf Israel does wind up attacking Iran the effects of the war would definitely have effects on the United States. A war between Israel and Iran would eventually suck the U.S. into it and unfortunately through various ties between different countries, a larger scaled war could and more than likely would begin. Iran closing off oil to America as well as other countries would wind up increasing oil prices (and as Cory stated earlier) even though Saudi promised to pick up the slack eventually hostility would rise and only lead to more conflict.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what most every one said. I think that it would make oil prices rise a lot. I feel like a war would break about and it would end really bad. I think that we would have to send out troops over to help also. I don't think anything good would come out of this.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Briana and Corman, it would eventually cause the US to send more troops to Iran to help their people, but I would rather all of our troops be back because it is causing people great pain. Herman Cain 2012
ReplyDeleteSam - more substance with your comments - please read the source material before making statements. Its okay for everyone to agree or disagree - but base your information on facts!!
DeleteSince the US oil supply comes from the Middle East, specifically Iran, a war between the two Middle Eastern countries, Iran and Israel, would cause detriment to the US. The US will likely get dragged into their conflict, while Iran will close the oil supply to the US. This could be a possible sub-invitation to the US from Iran into the war; closing off US oil supply to get us to feel desperate enough to have to enter the war and ally with Iran.
ReplyDelete