Iran Supplying Weapons to Iraq?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I meant to Afghanistan around 1980. That was about the time when the Russians were occupying Afghanistan.

Are you saying that we should not have helped AFghanistan ( in providing weapons) when fighting Russa and communism?

[Monkeydad]

What we SHOULD do is send a strong message to Iran now...enough of this U.N. diplomacy thathas proven to not only fail, but actually helps strengthen the enemies by giving them more time to stock up and prepare. We should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, which will:

1. Say "we're serious...if you help kill Americans, we'll kill you."
2. Take away their ability to retaliate or go after Israel with nukes, which is something they would defiinately do.
3. Prevent terrorists anywhere from getting nukes.
4. Reinforce the fact that we are the world's military superpower, not a "paper tiger" like bin Laden called us during the Clinton years.

[Daseal]

Is anyone looking at this from their point of view? In the 9/11 attacks we lose 2,819 people (New York Magazine. In Iraq, over the course of this war they've lost between 56,023 and 61,736 civilians. I'm sorry if this sounds brash, but we've been damn lucky that a) 9/11 only killed 2,819 people, and that attacks like that don't happen on a more regular basis. 9/11 happens in these countries every couple months, and often we're involved in some way. I don't think it takes rocket science to see why these people hate us. Most of them were living their lives, and yes Saddam wasn't a great ruler by any stretch, but most families weren't losing children, mothers, and fathers from a bomb that goes off course or the escalated violence in the area, this is why they hate us. Their towns are in ruins, many of their family members are dead, and we are directly responsible.

How would you guys support it if, lets say... France, decided that George W. Bush was a dictator and not fit to run the country. The first thing they do is bomb the shit out of our infrastructure. Goodbye power grid, goodbye bridges, cut the fiber-optic backbones going into the country (much like we did in Iraq), kill the telephone lines. Then bomb military outposts. You'd be enraged, a violation of our 'civil rights'. I guess at some point, we need to stop forcing our ways on others. We're the world's Jehovah's witnesses, going door to door, uninvited, and pushing our agenda on someone else.

Then people bitch about car bombs, etc. It's how you win when you're undermanned. They can't just gear up and fight us, they'd get crushed. If we want to go rolling into war, especially with groups instead of sovereign states, we need to expect guerrilla warfare. It's the only effective means for people to fight back, and we can't start a war and expect everyone to drop their weapons and convert to us.

This isn't meant to offend anyone, I'm just asking you to step back from being an American, and put yourself in someone else's shoes. 9/11 was a tragedy, but the loss of human life wasn't near what many countries see on a regular basis. We've been extremely lucky with thwarting such attacks, and in my opinion, pissing more people off isn't the best way to stop them. Many experts say that the Iraq war has done little but breed more terrorists.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Are you saying that we should not have helped AFghanistan ( in providing weapons) when fighting Russa and communism?

At the time, it was the right move. The USSR was our biggest threat and they had vowed to take over the world, INCLUDING us with Communism. That's why there are so many South and Central American nations with Communist governments, they were working their way up to us. At the time, our only Arab enemy was Iran (hostages during Carter administration) and we were trying to prevent the growth of our main enemy, the USSR.

In hindsight, hey, nothing is perfect. Saying we shouldn't have helped them in the 80s would be the same as rejecting all help from the British, Japanese or Germans today...because circumstances made them our enemies once upon a time.

The world situation constantly changes and we must do what's right in the current situations without holding grudges about the past or making predictions about the future.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Buster

What we SHOULD do is send a strong message to Iran now...enough of this U.N. diplomacy thathas proven to not only fail, but actually helps strengthen the enemies by giving them more time to stock up and prepare. We should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, which will:

1. Say "we're serious...if you help kill Americans, we'll kill you."
2. Take away their ability to retaliate or go after Israel with nukes, which is something they would defiinately do.
3. Prevent terrorists anywhere from getting nukes.
4. Reinforce the fact that we are the world's military superpower, not a "paper tiger" like bin Laden called us during the Clinton years.

Buster, two years ago I would have agreed with you. But we've emboldened terrorists around the globe. Every day this war in Iraq lingers, more terrorists come out of the woodwork.

Our miscalculation in Iraq has caused us to lose a lot of credibilty within the international community, and it's damn near impossible to prevent terrorists from getting their hands on nukes these days.

Next on deck, North Korea?

[Daseal]

Buster, does that mean America helped kill Americans? We dismantled our F-14 Tomcat jets. Guess where we ended up selling the parts to? Whoops? Maybe we should do our homework and stop selling fighter jets to Iran?
Lawmaker says Pentagon's suspension of F-14 part sales falls short - USATODAY.com

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Are you saying that we should not have helped AFghanistan ( in providing weapons) when fighting Russa and communism?

Sheesh. You're not following the conversation too well.

First, he said it's hypocritical that we provided help to Afghanistan against the Russians, and now we're pissed that Iran is doing it to us in Iraq.

Then, I said I don't care if it's hypocritical, I just want the US to do what's in the best interests of our citizens/troops' lives.

Then you asked how far back are you going?

Then I said in 1980 we gave help to Afghanistan against the Russians.

I'm glad we helped the Afghanis then. With the Cold War, Russia was a major threat to us.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Is anyone looking at this from their point of view? In the 9/11 attacks we lose 2,819 people (New York Magazine. In Iraq, over the course of this war they've lost between 56,023 and 61,736 civilians. I'm sorry if this sounds brash, but we've been damn lucky that a) 9/11 only killed 2,819 people, and that attacks like that don't happen on a more regular basis. 9/11 happens in these countries every couple months, and often we're involved in some way. I don't think it takes rocket science to see why these people hate us. Most of them were living their lives, and yes Saddam wasn't a great ruler by any stretch, but most families weren't losing children, mothers, and fathers from a bomb that goes off course or the escalated violence in the area, this is why they hate us. Their towns are in ruins, many of their family members are dead, and we are directly responsible.

How would you guys support it if, lets say... France, decided that George W. Bush was a dictator and not fit to run the country. The first thing they do is bomb the shit out of our infrastructure. Goodbye power grid, goodbye bridges, cut the fiber-optic backbones going into the country (much like we did in Iraq), kill the telephone lines. Then bomb military outposts. You'd be enraged, a violation of our 'civil rights'. I guess at some point, we need to stop forcing our ways on others. We're the world's Jehovah's witnesses, going door to door, uninvited, and pushing our agenda on someone else.

Then people bitch about car bombs, etc. It's how you win when you're undermanned. They can't just gear up and fight us, they'd get crushed. If we want to go rolling into war, especially with groups instead of sovereign states, we need to expect guerrilla warfare. It's the only effective means for people to fight back, and we can't start a war and expect everyone to drop their weapons and convert to us.

This isn't meant to offend anyone, I'm just asking you to step back from being an American, and put yourself in someone else's shoes. 9/11 was a tragedy, but the loss of human life wasn't near what many countries see on a regular basis. We've been extremely lucky with thwarting such attacks, and in my opinion, pissing more people off isn't the best way to stop them. Many experts say that the Iraq war has done little but breed more terrorists.

You make a good point about Sadaam. Although his leadership was questionable and to some intolerable, can we really say that Iraq is better of now that he's removed?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Buster, two years ago I would have agreed with you. But we've emboldened terrorists around the globe. Every day this war in Iraq lingers, more terrorists come out of the woodwork.

Our miscalculation in Iraq has caused us to lose a lot of credibilty within the international community, and it's damn near impossible to prevent terrorists from getting their hands on nukes these days.

Next on deck, North Korea?

Do you think backing out of Iraq would really un-embolden them??

No matter whether we stay or go, they're going to try to kill us. It's a war. Kill them, or kill us. It takes two sides to end a war. Just because we leave Iraq doesn't mean they'll stop the war.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Is anyone looking at this from their point of view? In the 9/11 attacks we lose 2,819 people (New York Magazine. In Iraq, over the course of this war they've lost between 56,023 and 61,736 civilians. I'm sorry if this sounds brash, but we've been damn lucky that a) 9/11 only killed 2,819 people, and that attacks like that don't happen on a more regular basis. 9/11 happens in these countries every couple months, and often we're involved in some way. I don't think it takes rocket science to see why these people hate us. Most of them were living their lives, and yes Saddam wasn't a great ruler by any stretch, but most families weren't losing children, mothers, and fathers from a bomb that goes off course or the escalated violence in the area, this is why they hate us. Their towns are in ruins, many of their family members are dead, and we are directly responsible.

How would you guys support it if, lets say... France, decided that George W. Bush was a dictator and not fit to run the country. The first thing they do is bomb the shit out of our infrastructure. Goodbye power grid, goodbye bridges, cut the fiber-optic backbones going into the country (much like we did in Iraq), kill the telephone lines. Then bomb military outposts. You'd be enraged, a violation of our 'civil rights'. I guess at some point, we need to stop forcing our ways on others. We're the world's Jehovah's witnesses, going door to door, uninvited, and pushing our agenda on someone else.

Then people bitch about car bombs, etc. It's how you win when you're undermanned. They can't just gear up and fight us, they'd get crushed. If we want to go rolling into war, especially with groups instead of sovereign states, we need to expect guerrilla warfare. It's the only effective means for people to fight back, and we can't start a war and expect everyone to drop their weapons and convert to us.

This isn't meant to offend anyone, I'm just asking you to step back from being an American, and put yourself in someone else's shoes. 9/11 was a tragedy, but the loss of human life wasn't near what many countries see on a regular basis. We've been extremely lucky with thwarting such attacks, and in my opinion, pissing more people off isn't the best way to stop them. Many experts say that the Iraq war has done little but breed more terrorists.

And, I'm not offended by your post or opinion. However, I think much of what America thinks is what is delivered by the media spin. Our media would have you believe that the mainstream Iraqi does not want us there. We are not helping. They don't need us. That our troops do not think this war is just, they are ill-prepared, etc.
As far as I know to say Sadaam was not the greatest leader may a bit understated, as to how many of his own people is credited with killing?? 100,000+? Are you suggesting that US troops have killed 60k innocent civilians?
When you get outside the mainstream media party line, the story changes a bit. I have read (like many of you) many accounts from US troops, and Iraqi civilians that tell a story that not only do they want us there, that the large percentage of Iraqi's say they need us. That Sadaam was a satanical madman, and murderer who thought nothing of killing his own.
So to suggest that we invaded a country full of regular Joe's, and deposed a leader that was ???????? misunderstood, may not be an accurate description.
Frankly, I don't care what the radical forces that opposed us in that region think. They are the reason we are there

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

You make a good point about Sadaam. Although his leadership was questionable and to some intolerable, can we really say that Iraq is better of now that he's removed?

Who cares. The question is are WE better off.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by Buster

What we SHOULD do is send a strong message to Iran now...enough of this U.N. diplomacy thathas proven to not only fail, but actually helps strengthen the enemies by giving them more time to stock up and prepare. We should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, which will:

1. Say "we're serious...if you help kill Americans, we'll kill you."
2. Take away their ability to retaliate or go after Israel with nukes, which is something they would definitely do.
3. Prevent terrorists anywhere from getting nukes.
4. Reinforce the fact that we are the world's military superpower, not a "paper tiger" like bin Laden called us during the Clinton years.

are you living with your head in the sand? lets start with #4. i agree with becoming the worlds only super power. president bush had a chance to do this by bombing Afghanistan immediately following 9-11. how do you propose to accomplish #3? there was so mush uranium unaccounted for by Russia after it originally disbanded that makes this impossible.with #2, i think all nuclear power should be kept under close scrutiny, not just the middle east. and i agree with number one, but there isn't any administration willing to uphold this hardline stance. Iraq was what was going to be president Bush's legacy. now, with the miscalculations, it turned into his nightmare. just like the old saying goes, you step on the bees nest, you stir up the whole hive.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Is anyone looking at this from their point of view? In the 9/11 attacks we lose 2,819 people (New York Magazine. In Iraq, over the course of this war they've lost between 56,023 and 61,736 civilians. I'm sorry if this sounds brash, but we've been damn lucky that a) 9/11 only killed 2,819 people, and that attacks like that don't happen on a more regular basis. 9/11 happens in these countries every couple months, and often we're involved in some way. I don't think it takes rocket science to see why these people hate us. Most of them were living their lives, and yes Saddam wasn't a great ruler by any stretch, but most families weren't losing children, mothers, and fathers from a bomb that goes off course or the escalated violence in the area, this is why they hate us. Their towns are in ruins, many of their family members are dead, and we are directly responsible.

How would you guys support it if, lets say... France, decided that George W. Bush was a dictator and not fit to run the country. The first thing they do is bomb the shit out of our infrastructure. Goodbye power grid, goodbye bridges, cut the fiber-optic backbones going into the country (much like we did in Iraq), kill the telephone lines. Then bomb military outposts. You'd be enraged, a violation of our 'civil rights'. I guess at some point, we need to stop forcing our ways on others. We're the world's Jehovah's witnesses, going door to door, uninvited, and pushing our agenda on someone else.

Then people bitch about car bombs, etc. It's how you win when you're undermanned. They can't just gear up and fight us, they'd get crushed. If we want to go rolling into war, especially with groups instead of sovereign states, we need to expect guerrilla warfare. It's the only effective means for people to fight back, and we can't start a war and expect everyone to drop their weapons and convert to us.

This isn't meant to offend anyone, I'm just asking you to step back from being an American, and put yourself in someone else's shoes. 9/11 was a tragedy, but the loss of human life wasn't near what many countries see on a regular basis. We've been extremely lucky with thwarting such attacks, and in my opinion, pissing more people off isn't the best way to stop them. Many experts say that the Iraq war has done little but breed more terrorists.

Are you kidding? Iraqis WEREN'T losing their families under Saddam? Wow. He killed about half a million of his OWN people under his rule. We've found mass graves with 3,000 or more people thrown into one hole, much like Nazi Germany's burial and murder methods. He used chemical weapons on his own people. He had rape rooms and torture chambers that he would pick random people to give a horrible death to for doing nothing more than walking by one of his palaces at the wrong time or for saying something he didn't like. His sons would rape random women and send a video of it to the hushand/father/etc. He'd kill fathers while their families were forced to watch. We've found videos that compiled the way he murdered his citizens, by cutting off limbs, to burning them, to throwing them off of buildings with weight attached to them. He was AS BAD as Hitler, Stalin or Mussolini...he was just stopped before his death toll reached the millions. He even sent oil to Jacques Chirac and the UN in exchange for money for food to supply his people with. Good man, right? No, he used their food money to stock up warehouse upon warehouse with weapons. We've secured and destroyed most of these, but when we were on the way in to attack him, he removed guards and left these warehouses wide open, which is how these "insurgents" got most of their weapons and ammo to use on our troops. (from Gen. Tommy Franks' book)

If you listen to our troops and NON-BIASED sources, the far majority of Iraqi people are happy that our troops removed Saddam. They're thankful and run to the streets to thank them. Of the 19 provinces in Iraq, 16 are operating with no problems...the violence we hear about every day is in just 3 areas, one being Baghdad. We've set up infracstructures they've never had before like running water and electricity throughout the country. For the first time ever, Iraqi girls and women can attend school. We've build hospitals.

There is a giant difference between the USA and a lot of other nations who get involved in wars. We go to war for 2 main reasons:
1. In retaliation or self-defense. (ex: Pearl Harbor, 09/11/01)
2. To free those living under dictators or corrupt governments.

We never attack anyone without them doing something to deserve or and without it being neccessary. Sometimes I think we're TOO diplomatic and waste precious time. An example of that would be with Osama bin Laden. He attacked us throughout the 90s on a near-annual basis. We should've sent him to see his 72 virgins after the first attack in 1993.

Removing my American status and looking at it, I still could not come to understand people who kill their own people or kill their neighbors just because they don't attend the same mosque as me or don't have the same skin color. I could not take the side of a country who attacks other nations without being attacked first, no matter what economic or social conditions are present in my country.

You can't negotiate with people who want you dead and actually have a verse in their Quran that says you can lie to any non-Muslim in order to trick them into trusting you so that you can kill them.

Their news media (and gaining control of OUR media) will try to get you to be sympathetic towards them, but while you're standing back feeling sorry for you, they'll sneak up behind you and blow you up. It's exactly what they want, our general public to feel sorry for them and for our media to affect our politics...to weaken our government's ability to defeat them.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

You make a good point about Sadaam. Although his leadership was questionable and to some intolerable, can we really say that Iraq is better of now that he's removed?

Saddam Hussein killer file

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Buster, does that mean America helped kill Americans? We dismantled our F-14 Tomcat jets. Guess where we ended up selling the parts to? Whoops? Maybe we should do our homework and stop selling fighter jets to Iran?
Lawmaker says Pentagon's suspension of F-14 part sales falls short - USATODAY.com

You need to read the entire article they some how left the most important part for the very end of the article.

The U.S. military retired its F-14s last fall, and decided to destroy at least 10,000 parts it considers unique to the Tomcat.
It had planned to sell about 60% of the roughly 76,000 parts for the F-14, considering them general aircraft hardware it was safe to sell without restrictions.
The Pentagon says it has to balance national security concerns with its mandate to recoup costs by selling leftover gear when it can. It maintains it has followed proper procedures in selling surplus, including those instances where equipment was acquired by buyers for Iran and China.
Copyright
So its just general parts which some could purchase and then sell to Iran but again it sounds to me that they are parts that they could buy anyway from other sources.