Is 44% true?!

[yz89]

Let me tell you this as a German: The American invasion on Germany 1945 was the best thing that ever happened to my country. The Americans did not enslave us, and they did not take away our right to decide our fate. On the contrary, they liberated Germany from the worst tyranny that ever existed here. They brought back our freedom, for that we can vote in fair and free elections. And they allowed us to become as wealthy and prosperous as never before. Thanks to the Americans, I live in a free country now.

I agree with you that we are not completely democratic and also I know the other problems...
But we wish to solve these ourslef not a foreign force because Iran has enough experience with US Government in Shah's years.
I myself can trust Germany more than US.

I have another question. What about Arabic Saudia?! They have kingdom still. Does US have any plan to get them rid of the kingdom and leberate them too? Or also, United Kingdom? They spend alot of money from the tax to marriage their daughters. Goshin, could you please ask your government to liberate them too? I'm sure that there are more which I cannot remember now. US has alot of works to do.

 

[German guy]

I agree with you that we are not completely democratic and also I know the other problems...
But we wish to solve these ourslef not a foreign force because Iran has enough experience with US Government in Shah's years.

I am glad you say that. And I hope you will get the chance to solve these problems yourself. That would be better for all sides involved.

I don't want war against Iran. It would be horrible, for everybody, for the Iranian people, for Israel and for the USA and its allies. So I wish it can be avoided.

But you have to understand the USA. Iran has threatened Israel and Israel is an ally of the US. If Iran gets nuclear weapons, that would make the regime capable of hurting the USA and its allies. So the USA will do everything necessary to keep Iran from gaining nukes.

So you better hurry up solving these problems. Because your government seems to be willing to go to war.

I have another question. What about Arabic Saudia?! They have kingdom still. Does US have any plan to get them rid of the kingdom and leberate them too? Or also, United Kingdom? They spend alot of money from the tax to marriage their daughters. Goshin, could you please ask your government to liberate them too? I'm sure that there are more which I cannot remember now. US has alot of works to do.

You have a point when you criticize the USA for cooperating with Saudi Arabia, although it violates many human rights on a regular basis. But the point is, the Saudi government does not threaten the USA, but cooperates. Invading would be a waste of resources, although it's not impossible that in the future, Saudi Arabia might turn against the US. Personally, I'd prefer less cooperation with Saudi Arabia until they stop violating human rights excessively.

And we need the oil from Saudi Arabia, so we turn a blind eye on their human right violations. That's not fair, but that's how it is.

Britain is a different matter. They have a queen, but the queen has only very few power. The real power has the parliament and the Prime Minister, and they are elected by the people in free elections, so it's no problem.

 

[German guy]

And yz89, another thing you should keep in mind:

The Iranian government supports terrorists in other countries, such as Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon or Hamas in the Palestinian territories.

America was deeply hurt on 9/11/2001 by islamist terrorists. Americans have sworn that they will never let such an attack happen again.

If the Iranian regime gets nuclear weapons, they might provide terrorist islamist groups with such a nuke, which will attempt to detonate it in America.

You will understand that after the traumatic events on 9/11/2001, the USA will take no risk and rather take out the Iranian regime by force, before they get their hands on nuclear weapons.

Would your reaction be really any different, if you were in their position?

 

[yz89]

Britain is a different matter. They have a queen, but the queen has only very few power. The real power has the parliament and the Prime Minister, and they are elected by the people in free elections, so it's no problem.

But I have seen UK protests against the queen and her family because of their prodigal from people taxes.

 

[German guy]

But I have seen UK protests against the queen and her family because of their prodigal from people taxs.

Yes sure, you will always see people in Western countries protesting against all kinds of things. That's part of our freedom here. You are free to protest and the police is not allowed to arrest and torture peaceful protestors.

But the point is, there are free elections about these topics. If enough British people feel the monarchy should be abolished, they can vote for a party that demands the same and it will be abolished by peaceful means. The British who hate the monarchy are few, so no party has won an election with that demand.

In Iran, you don't have that freedom. You can vote for candidates who support Ahmadinejad or you can vote for candidates who support Chamenei -- but you cannot vote for candidates who want to abolish the vice squads, you cannot vote for candidates who want to take the power from the Ayatollahs. You cannot vote for parties which demand that women must no longer wear the scarf, you cannot vote for candidates who want to make dancing and Western music legal.

I believe many Iranians are not happy with their government. Many feel they have too few freedom. Many women don't want to wear a headscarf (and does not Quran say: ""There is no compulsion in religion." Sura 2:256). Many young people want to dance and listen to the music they like. And religious minorities, such as Jews, Christians and Baha'i want to be allowed to pray and celebrate their religious holidays, which they are currently not allowed to.

I hope and pray the day will come when Iranian people no longer have to prove to the police, the politicians or vice squads that they are good Muslims, but when it will come voluntarily, from within, as it is written: "And don't speak to the one offering you peace: You are not a believer!" (Sura 4:94).

 

[yz89]

Yes sure, you will always see people in Western countries protesting against all kinds of things. That's part of our freedom here. You are free to protest and the police is not allowed to arrest and torture peaceful protestors.

But the point is, there are free elections about these topics. If enough British people feel the monarchy should be abolished, they can vote for a party that demands the same and it will be abolished by peaceful means. The British who hate the monarchy are few, so no party has won an election with that demand.

In Iran, you don't have that freedom. You can vote for candidates who support Ahmadinejad or you can vote for candidates who support Chamenei -- but you cannot vote for candidates who want to abolish the vice squads, you cannot vote for candidates who want to take the power from the Ayatollahs. You cannot vote for parties which demand that woman must no longer wear the scarf, you cannot vote for candidates who want to make dancing and Western music legal.

I believe many Iranians are not happy with their government. Many feel they have too few freedom. Many women don't want to wear a headscarf (and does not Quran say: ""There is no compulsion in religion." Sura 2:256). Many young people want to dance and listen to the music they like. And religious minorities, such as Jews, Christians and Baha'i want to be allowed to pray and celebrate their religious holidays, which they are currently not allowed to.

I hope and pray the day will come when Iranian people no longer have to prove to the police, the politicians or vice squads that they are good Muslims, but when it will come voluntarily, from within, as it is written: "And don't speak to the one offering you peace: You are not a believer!" (Sura 4:94).

You are German and also a Gentleman. I completely understand what do you mean and I also don't like these which you don't like too. But a 100% democracy is not any where even in US. If so, what's this:

 

[Wake]

You're right! Actually we never afraid from the United States. not in 1979 nor now. Unfortunately, you, 44%, never knew us. We don't afraid your air-planes and army.

Maybe their physical life is better than before but what about their heart?! Are they alive forever?! Will the history pride them when see their cemetery?!
Yes, their physical life but what about the hell awaiting for them?!

As you, 44%, did not knew us well as we are, I myself too can not understand you well as you are! How you can think and talk about attacking or not attacking to another country just simple?!! Do you think that war is like a weekend trip?! I'm sorry for you and the 20th centery humanity:doh

Are you from Iran?

I honestly want everyone who supported the war in Iraq to realize that they are idiots, and refuse to vote in any elections ever again.

Furthermore, I want the 44% of people who still want to invade Iran knowing the fiasco that was the Iraq war to simply DIE.

Wow, that's not creepy in the slightest.

 

[German guy]

You are German and also a Gentleman. I completely understand what do you mean and I also don't like these which you don't like too. But a 100% democracy is not any where even in US. If so, what's this:View attachment 67123295

You are right, we have problems in the West too. Protests are allowed, as long as they are not violent. Sometimes, the police and the protestors disagree what "violence" means, and there is a huge debate if the police was too strict.

Also, we in the West sometimes violate human rights. We too are not perfect.

But I believe there is a difference to Iran. When the police gets violent here, you see it on the news, and soon, there are solidarity protests for the harassed people. If there is proof a policeman violated the law, he gets on court and can be convicted. And it will be all over the news.

In Iran, on the other side, the news on tv and newspapers are censored by the government and Ayatollah's. The human right violations are much more extreme and fundamental. The government didn't allow, for example, the "Green" protestors in 2009 to go on tv to explain their demands. And the police could brutalize them as they pleased. Many were thrown into prison and tortured. Many didn't even survive. And no victim could sue the policeman who did that and bring him on court.

That we have freedom of speech, free elections and free media doesn't mean we are perfect. You see many one-sided comments on tv, there is crime, sometimes the government goes too far. But thanks to free media and freedom of speech, the people who are hurt are free to complain and to win sympathies. So our system is correcting itself. Our freedom is a strength, because it allows us to solve problems.

 

[UppityProle]

I doubt whether you know anything about South Korea, from the looks of your posts

In other words, you don't have a coherent argument to make, so you're just going to sling mud.

If you think quantity beats quality, then :doh
The Chinese army is a joke

The Soviet Army wasn't Chinese, and almost singlehandedly won the biggest military conflict in history. All of America's military escapades are small potatoes compared with the Eastern Front. The Soviet Army most definitely had quality as well as quantity. As for the Chinese...military power is kind of besides the point, but technology isn't. As the Chinese rapidly gain the upper-hand in engineering and science, there's every reason to expect that one day they will be ahead in technology as well as raw numbers. America was lucky enough to be the epicentre of the information revolution (Europeans invented most of the technology, but America had the best salesmen), but the next revolution could very well be spearheaded by the Chinese.

None of this matters. I'm just trying to deflate the unjustified, irrational sense of superiority of some Americans here. It's exactly that kind of unthinking talk about "whupping" that gets these wars started.

 

[MarineTpartier]

Recently I heart that 44% of Americans agree with attack to Iran. Is this true?! If so, OK, no problem! but I would like to write a few notes:

1. Even, if you, 44%, defeated Iran, then what will do you, next?! Did Japan nuclear bombing make your life quality better, before?! Did your before wars make you happier really or not?! Did not learn that the earth is wide enough and God will punish sinners?!
2. In next war, our heart is fill of pride but yours, 44%, is fill of fear, because we're true but you're false. Althout we're poor physically but you, sinners, are poor spiritual. We love death on our true opinion because we believe heaven, but you, 44%, the hell is waiting for you, because you kill peoples on false opinion.
3. Althout I myself don't agree with alot of things in Iran and I myself know that there are problems with us and I myself know that the United States is better than us in some fields, but I'll forget these when I smelt a foreign attack and many Iranians are like me. They will be together all and will forget other problems when they reach a bigger problem.

I think it's simple to guess who is the winner of the war.

If anything, invading your country would give us the opportunity to teach you guys proper English. After all, it is the language of civilized people Persian. You can believe all you want that your ideology would guide you through a war with us. But rest assured, if a war with you was not classified as nation building, you would suffer the same fate as your Iraqi neighbors when we invaded in 2003. That didn't go to well for them. We all know you guys are poor, that you fight with cold war era equipment, and your soldiers are not well trained or well treated. We also know your Air Force (lol) is well below the level of ours. Yeah, you would be motivated because we would be invading your country but that motivation would quickly crumble at the sound of our bombers laying waste to your defenses. You also forget, we (the US military) have been chomping at the bit to get at you guys for about 9 years. Your government's cowardly practices of providing IED's and intelligence to terrorists has left a bad taste in our mouths. We would love a chance to pay you back. If the reins are taken off, our military is unstoppable. The fact that Islamic countries think that their fanaticism will guide them through a war has been proven wrong time and time again. Please, feel free to make the same mistake. A similar result will be the consequence.

 

[yz89]

You are right, we have problems in the West too. Protests are allowed, as long as they are not violent. Sometimes, the police and the protestors disagree what "violence" means, and there is a huge debate if the police was too strict.

Also, we in the West sometimes violate human rights. We too are not perfect.

But I believe there is a difference to Iran. When the police gets violent here, you see it on the news, and soon, there are solidarity protests for the harassed people. If there is proof a policeman violated the law, he gets on court and can be convicted. And it will be all over the news.

In Iran, on the other side, the news on tv and newspapers are censored by the government and Ayatollah's. The human right violations are much more extreme and fundamental. The government didn't allow, for example, the "Green" protestors in 2009 to go on tv to explain their demands. And the police could brutalize them as they pleased. Many were thrown into prison and tortured. Many didn't even survive. And no victim could sue the policeman who did that and bring him on court.

That we have freedom of speech, free elections and free media doesn't mean we are perfect. You see many one-sided comments on tv, there is crime, sometimes the government goes too far. But thanks to free media and freedom of speech, the people who are hurt are free to complain and to win sympathies. So our system is correcting itself. Our freedom is a strength, because it allows us to solve problems.

How is it possible to implement this system here, in Iran, without foreign slavery? I agree with you that we should improve our system but with peace and not slavery. What's your idea? could Germany can help? Thanks

 

[MarineTpartier]

None of this matters. I'm just trying to deflate the unjustified, irrational sense of superiority of some Americans here. It's exactly that kind of unthinking talk about "whupping" that gets these wars started.

Well, you failed at this. I, for one, am just as cocky and superior as I was before your posts. Nice try though.

 

[German guy]

How is it possible to implement this system here, in Iran, without foreign slavery? I agree with you that we should improve our system but with peace and not slavery. What's your idea? could Germany can help? Thanks

Well, you see what happened in Tunesia, in Egypt and in Libya. A similar thing happened in East Germany in 1989. When the people is determined and willing to remove those from power who take their freedom, when you all together go out on the street protesting, you can change your government. You don't even need guns and bullets -- when you are many. No government can rule against the will of the masses, the millions who disagree.

I read there are many opposition people in Iran critical of the government. They use the internet to communicate. They are posting blogs and videos in special sites. They are building networks.

If you really want to change your system, then try to get in touch with these people, build networks with them and support them. Then, one day, your time will come and you can remove your politicians peacefully -- so I hope.

 

[UppityProle]

It's hardly controversial that the Chinese are intellectually superior to the Americans already. They have an engineer as President, which is unthinkable in America. Like the British, the Americans are living on the success of their betters from previous generations. The generations that completely revolutionized civilization from ground up (as opposed to bringing out a slightly better smartphone and pretending that that's a revolution). It won't be long before the Chinese overtake them even in terms of what matters to them most -- money.

 

[yz89]

Well, you see what happened in Tunesia, in Egypt and in Libya. A similar thing happened in East Germany in 1989. When the people is determined and willing to remove those from power who take their freedom, when you all together go out on the street protesting, you can change your government. You don't even need guns and bullets -- when you are many. No government can rule against the will of the masses, the millions who disagree.

I read there are many opposition people in Iran critical of the government. They use the internet to communicate. They are posting blogs and videos in special sites. They are building networks.

If you really want to change your system, then try to get in touch with these people, build networks with them and support them. Then, one day, your time will come and you can remove your politicians peacefully -- so I hope.

Well gentleman, but do you know from which I afraid? I afraid that during this peaceful change and in not stable politic position, the US attack us and fetch the power from us then we have to return to something like Shah's years. How Germany avoid this in 1989?

 

[alexa]

Well, you see what happened in Tunesia, in Egypt and in Libya. A similar thing happened in East Germany in 1989. When the people is determined and willing to remove those from power who take their freedom, when you all together go out on the street protesting, you can change your government. You don't even need guns and bullets -- when you are many. No government can rule against the will of the masses, the millions who disagree.

I read there are many opposition people in Iran critical of the government. They use the internet to communicate. They are posting blogs and videos in special sites. They are building networks.

If you really want to change your system, then try to get in touch with these people, build networks with them and support them. Then, one day, your time will come and you can remove your politicians peacefully -- so I hope.

and Syria? Libya? I think it happens when the time is right. With East Germany Gorbachev thought it was right to let people have their freedom. The people of Iran tried protests but from the information we got they just ended up in jail or dead. I think it takes the time being right, the right people being there and things like that. Often when people protest they end up dead. Tienanmen Square and so on. The time that is the least likely to get something like this is of course when the people feel under collective threat which they do now. In that way the threats to Iran subdue regime protest. Protest and different vision is there but like I say outside threats at the moment more likely to bring people together for first need, survival.

 

[German guy]

Well gentleman, but do you know from which I afraid? I afraid that during this peaceful change and in not stable politic position, the US attack us and fetch the power from us then we have to return to something like Shah's years. How Germany avoid this in 1989?

I don't think you need to be so afraid of America. You see in this thread that Americans are proud and ready to fight if necessary. But if they have a choice and feel war is not necessary, they will rather not fight, because war is a bloody mess and very expensive (and they don't have so much money at the moment). So sure, if they feel they have no choice, they will fight -- but when they see you can take care of the problem yourself, they will save their blood and money.

Also, I believe Americans have learnt from the past. In the past, they sometimes toppled more or less democratic governments and replaced them with puppets (especially in the Cold War, when they were afraid the Soviets would get a foot into these countries). But now, they know better. They will support those groups which are in favor of democracy. They have learnt that supporting tyrannic thugs will backfire.

Look at Libya: The USA supported the opposition and helped it toppling Gaddafi. But they did not go into the country. They just used their air force, nothing more.

And they don't stay in Iraq, but are planning to leave. The only reason they stayed so long was because they wanted to make sure there is no chaos when they leave. Once the Americans are gone, the Iraqis are entirely free and can decide about their fate.

In 1989, America was on Germany's side. They did not send their troops, because they were confident Germany can handle the situation alone.

 

[German guy]

and Syria? Libya? I think it happens when the time is right. With East Germany Gorbachev thought it was right to let people have their freedom. The people of Iran tried protests but from the information we got they just ended up in jail or dead. I think it takes the time being right, the right people being there and things like that. Often when people protest they end up dead. Tienanmen Square and so on. The time that is the least likely to get something like this is of course when the people feel under collective threat which they do now. In that way the threats to Iran subdue regime protest. Protest and different vision is there but like I say outside threats at the moment more likely to bring people together for first need, survival.

Yes, you're right. And that may be one reason for the Iranian government to rattle with their sabors: They hope that as long as war is an option, the people will not rebel against them.

 

[alexa]

Yes, you're right. And that may be one reason for the Iranian government to rattle with their sabors: They hope that as long as war is an option, the people will not rebel against them.

That could be true but I am not sure it is the Iranians who are doing it at the moment. There seems to be a long time American disagreement with Iran. They have been complaining about them being about to produce a nuclear weapon for about ten years and had reports suggesting it too but these have now been shown to give false information.

I do not understand it at all.

 

[German guy]

That could be true but I am not sure it is the Iranians who are doing it at the moment. There seems to be a long time American disagreement with Iran. They have been complaining about them being about to produce a nuclear weapon for about ten years and had reports suggesting it too but these have now been shown to give false information.

I do not understand it at all.

Who has given false information to whom?

 

[alexa]

Who has given false information to whom?

Masses of misinformation have been given. I read all this one day but unfortunately did not take notes. Iran's Nuclear Program by Muhammad Sahimi Now your own country does have some involvement in this if I remember correctly. I think they had bought some things from you when under the Shah and then you never delivered - possibly under pressure from the US but it is in that link.

Then I did some more looking. Heck Even Obama's office said a couple of weeks ago they knew that Iran had not made the decision to build nukes as of yet. Why have sabre rattling and sanctions which have halved the value of Iran's currency in a couple of months if they have not even decided they want to build the things. Furthermore David Milliband warned us before Christmas that we are sleepwalking into a war with Iran. He said we were well up on what they were up to and had destroyed sufficient anyway through cyber war and other things that the best thing to do was to get into conversation with Iran, not threaten war. He believed as so many people do, that if an attack happens on Iran, then and only then, will she decide to build nukes because it is against Islam and they still believe that.

Finally last week I was watching an Al Jazeera video. One of the people whose name I don't remember had previously worked in Bush's or Obama's, office. She believes Israel wants war with Iran and so does the United States. However she didn't believe the US wanted war because Iran had nukes because she knew they knew she didn't have nukes. She believed that the US wanted war with Iran simply because she was building domestic nuclear fuel and that gave Iran too prominent a position. However she felt the US, for political reasons did not want war with Iran until November. Up until November the US would try and keep Israel quiet, then god help Iran, if we don't have a change in our thinking.

So that is what I have found out. At the same time the video showed how untrue propaganda is being given to the US. For instance like I said the Obama admin said a couple of weeks ago that they know Iran has not made the decision to make nukes and also David Miliband has said they are well keyed in to what is going on and would know well in advance but nonetheless Iran is being portrayed as if she actually was building the things.

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

In other words, you don't have a coherent argument to make, so you're just going to sling mud.

The Soviet Army wasn't Chinese, and almost singlehandedly won the biggest military conflict in history. All of America's military escapades are small potatoes compared with the Eastern Front. The Soviet Army most definitely had quality as well as quantity. As for the Chinese...military power is kind of besides the point, but technology isn't. As the Chinese rapidly gain the upper-hand in engineering and science, there's every reason to expect that one day they will be ahead in technology as well as raw numbers. America was lucky enough to be the epicentre of the information revolution (Europeans invented most of the technology, but America had the best salesmen), but the next revolution could very well be spearheaded by the Chinese.

None of this matters. I'm just trying to deflate the unjustified, irrational sense of superiority of some Americans here. It's exactly that kind of unthinking talk about "whupping" that gets these wars started.

You aren't the one to lecture about WWII history. I'm da pre-eminent WWII historian here. You're talking about a conflict more than half a century ago, when the Soviets had more than 200 million Russians, let alone the Ukrainians and the Byelorussians. As for the Soviets having quality, :lamo. You do know that the Soviets lost an average of 6~7 tanks for each German tank, and how many divisions were shattered and destroyed before the Soviets pulled their act together.

The Chinese is at least decades way from the US. It finally tested its first stealth aircraft, but the US has hundreds, if not thousands of them already. The Chinese is now finally building (technically, fixing) an obsolete aircraft carrier from the Soviet Navy for Christ's sake. You're only repeating talking points from the media. Typical.

As for the phrase "Middle East South Korea", I am actually curious as to how you are going to defend that notion, of a Middle Eastern country being like South Korea. To do that, you require an acute knowledge of South Korean contemporary history in both economics and politics, as well as its geography and foreign relations, which I doubt you know much about it, hence my dismissal

 

[LaughAtTheWorld]

I doubt whether yz89 is actually an Iranian. There are plenty of obvious reasons

 

[UppityProle]

You aren't the one to lecture about WWII history. I'm da pre-eminent WWII historian here. You're talking about a conflict more than half a century ago, when the Soviets had more than 200 million Russians, let alone the Ukrainians and the Byelorussians. As for the Soviets having quality, :lamo. You do know that the Soviets lost an average of 6~7 tanks for each German tank, and how many divisions were shattered and destroyed before the Soviets pulled their act together.

If you really do know anything about WW2, you'll know that the Germans launched a sneak attack on the Russians when the Russians had just purged virtually the entire command structure for their armed forces. The Russians weren't ready for war, whereas the Germans were and had been planning it for years. Not to mention that the Germans operated by a depraved, animal-like code of ruthlessness all the way through that war, which wasn't reciprocated by the Russians. By the end of the war, the Soviet military was pre-eminent and it was generally accepted that only the threat of nuclear bombs could hold them at bay if they attacked Western Europe. Exactly the conclusion of the report on "Operational Unthinkable" commissioned by Churchill.

The Chinese is at least decades way from the US. It finally tested its first stealth aircraft, but the US has hundreds, if not thousands of them already. The Chinese is now finally building (technically, fixing) an obsolete aircraft carrier from the Soviet Navy for Christ's sake.

Hardly interesting, because the Chinese have nothing to gain by fighting WW3. Not being knuckle-dragging, Rapture-ready, evangelicalist idiots, they understand that quite well. I wasn't referring to military technology, but technology in general. Here the Chinese aren't a decade behind. They already surpass the Americans in industrial strength.

As for the phrase "Middle East South Korea", I am actually curious as to how you are going to defend that notion, of a Middle Eastern country being like South Korea. To do that, you require an acute knowledge of South Korean contemporary history in both economics and politics, as well as its geography and foreign relations, which I doubt you know much about it, hence my dismissal

No, I don't require anything of the sort. What I was referring to was a Westernized, liberal democracy which was allowed to flourish by American intervention. Come back when you're serious.

 

[alexa]

Masses of misinformation have been given. I read all this one day but unfortunately did not take notes. Iran's Nuclear Program by Muhammad Sahimi Now your own country does have some involvement in this if I remember correctly. I think they had bought some things from you when under the Shah and then you never delivered - possibly under pressure from the US but it is in that link.

Then I did some more looking. Heck Even Obama's office said a couple of weeks ago they knew that Iran had not made the decision to build nukes as of yet. Why have sabre rattling and sanctions which have halved the value of Iran's currency in a couple of months if they have not even decided they want to build the things. Furthermore David Milliband warned us before Christmas that we are sleepwalking into a war with Iran. He said we were well up on what they were up to and had destroyed sufficient anyway through cyber war and other things that the best thing to do was to get into conversation with Iran, not threaten war. He believed as so many people do, that if an attack happens on Iran, then and only then, will she decide to build nukes because it is against Islam and they still believe that.

Finally last week I was watching an Al Jazeera video. One of the people whose name I don't remember had previously worked in Bush's or Obama's, office. She believes Israel wants war with Iran and so does the United States. However she didn't believe the US wanted war because Iran had nukes because she knew they knew she didn't have nukes. She believed that the US wanted war with Iran simply because she was building domestic nuclear fuel and that gave Iran too prominent a position. However she felt the US, for political reasons did not want war with Iran until November. Up until November the US would try and keep Israel quiet, then god help Iran, if we don't have a change in our thinking.

So that is what I have found out. At the same time the video showed how untrue propaganda is being given to the US. For instance like I said the Obama admin said a couple of weeks ago that they know Iran has not made the decision to make nukes and also David Miliband has said they are well keyed in to what is going on and would know well in advance but nonetheless Iran is being portrayed as if she actually was building the things.

Just to back up some of what I said in this post

Here is the interview when the US Leon Panetta says Iran has not yet decided to build nukes



came from this article Panetta: Iran undecided over nuclear bomb - Americas - Al Jazeera English


Here you can if you wish also listen to the interview I mentioned where one of the participants is concerned the US does want war - but not till November

- Inside Story Americas - Al Jazeera English

There is also an interesting new report (23 Feb) by the International Crisis Group which illustrates how dangerous and unpredictable the current narrative is and suggests it might be wise to take the more diplomatic approach of Turkey.


In Heavy Waters: Iran