Bin Laden to taunt US again in video marking 9/11

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by Raven, Sep 7, 2007.

Tags:
  1. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    The thing is they wouldn't even have to invade.
    Send in special forces to destroy the sole remaining oil refinery Iran has. Pass off the attack as rebel minority groups, and sit back to watch the Iranian government scramble.
    Iran is already rationing oil to its citizens, if it loses that refinery it's not going to be able to transport 90% of the goods within Iran, and civilian traffic stops dead.
    The Iranian government will be so busy dealing with keeping the peace within its borders, rebuilding its obsolete oil infrastructure, and suddenly having to deal with even more debt as it buys more gas from outside the country, that they won't have time to work on their nuclear program or do much of anything outside their borders.

    As for saying this video is being produced by the government, why wouldn't they do something like this during the last election. Having Bin Laden calling for death and destruction, or saying yes he is finally dead, would probably have pushed the Republicans ahead just enough to keep control of the Senate.
    And after reading New York Times, ABC News, and a lot of smaller newspapers, I really don't think the current government is supported by the majority of the media. Otherwise they'd be getting a much easier ride.
     
  2. Frost

    Frost Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Australia
    Please. There's no need to get caught up in conspiracy theories and smoke screens. The video was released through media outlets that the US Government simply does not have control over. It's as simple as that. However, other organisations that fall under the governments that act independently might, though this is highly unlikely. That is the only way I can see the government having any hand in it.

    Besides that, its far more likely the terrorists released that as an enticement to recruits and muslim extremists, not to scare away the Americans.

    Invade was perhaps the wrong word.
    Ok, so we destroy their oil fields and decide that we'll try and pin it on minority groups. No matter what, the truth will come out, or at least rumours of the truth. I guarantee it, simply because the idea of America making an attack on an oilfield that will plummet the country into chaos is a selling story man! The aftermath of the media onslaught that follows would be massive, and the tensions between the two countries highly strained to say the least. A wrong move from either side could result in conflict. No, I definately don't believe that violence is the answer in this situation.
     
  3. Banzai

    Banzai One-time Mod, but on the road to recovery Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    12,834
    Likes Received:
    151
    Location:
    Reading, UK
    No terror, ergo no war on terror :)
     
  4. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    The US can survive rumours.
    And they don't even need to pin it on the minority groups. A number of Iranian forces have been attacked in the last year in areas with large minority populations. Iran has already accused the US of supplying and supporting these attacks.
    So the US gives one of these groups weapons and training to attack the oil refinery (they don't need to worry about the oil fields themselves).
    This will leave Iran with lots of oil but only in its crudest least usable form. Iran won't have enough gas to fuel its trucks, generators or any else that is used for civilian purposes.
    How much trouble will the Iranian government be in if farmers can't get their food into the cities because they can't afford gas, or simply can't get it. Already civilians are only getting about 2 tanks of gas a month due to rationing.
    The military will have to start transporting food. This takes their vehicles and men away from the provinces that are unsettled due to angry minorities, Kurds and Pushtans being the biggest two on opposites sides of Iran.
    It might not be a civil war, but Iran will be left scrambling for a while.
     
  5. Frost

    Frost Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Australia
    And then when they recover? Im not ruling out the course of action all together, just trying to make all points clear and make sure all facets are covered. By doing this, we also put an entire country into ruin, full of more or less completely innocent people, in the name of putting a slightly troublesome dictator to rest. This hardly seems fair; the ruckus in Iraq disadvanted it's entire population, as we know. But are they more disadvantaged now than under Hussains reign? The moral questions, the questions it poses to our self beliefs is probably the biggest problem behind the entire issue.
     
  6. The Freshmaker

    The Freshmaker <insert obscure pop culture reference> Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,783
    Likes Received:
    79
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, FL
    I find it rather hard to believe that the Bush administration wouldn't widely publicize the death of Bin Laden if it had really happened. I mean, with everyone who has a brain being vehemently opposed to the war, you'd think they would come out with, "Hey, Bin Laden is probably dead! Love us again!"
     
  7. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    If they can't find the body, its perfectly reasonable to keep believing he's alive, even if 99% of the evidence says he's dead.
    Imagine the disaster if Bush said Bin Ladens dead, and the next day Bin Laden holds a live internet meeting with Al Jazera.
     
  8. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    If Iran gets nuclear weapons, we're screwed.
    I'd be more then willing to say Iran isn't a big threat if they got rid of the current president, and stopped trying to make nuclear weapons.
    I really don't care what Syria does, Venezuela is only a minor concern, even North Korea after their nuclear program failed isn't a a big concern. But Iran has got a lot of the necessary equipment to make nuclear weapons. And the president has threatened Israel and the non-Muslim world enough that it is very plausible he'd push the button without hesitation.
    If the US sows some chaos in Iran that keeps them scrambling for the next year or two, and makes the government look weaker, it could cause enough of a swing that Iran remains only a slightly troublesome dictatorship. I'd rather see a little bit of violence now, then bloody massacres in two years.
     
  9. Frost

    Frost Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Australia
    If violence is the only path, then I'd have no opposition to it. I'm not some irrational hippie. Im just saying, if the matter can be resolved democratically, in a manner that will not provoke any nation in any way, it'd be far more favourable (especially in this day and age) than to violence.

    Unfortunately, this is highly unlikely.
     
  10. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    I will agree with you there.
    We still have a bit of time before I think the US or Israel "needs" to pull the trigger. If Iran has a change of heart, great.
    But like you I think violence is becoming very likely. And probably very soon.
     
  11. Banzai

    Banzai One-time Mod, but on the road to recovery Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    12,834
    Likes Received:
    151
    Location:
    Reading, UK
    The only thing that will start a war is if one side thinks the other side is about to. It's kind of like the cold war, in that respect, except without nukes. Yet.
     
  12. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    The bad thing about Iran is its leaders are showing a fanatical side to the world. They seem to care more for hurting the Infidel then protecting their own people.
    So a lot of people in Israel, the US and other places believe once they get a nuke they will attack. With the US, Russia, and the current nuclear powers (Pakistan is borderline right now considering its on the edge of civil war), everyone is sure that they'll only use nukes as a last resort. Everyone has a decent idea where the line is. Iran is an extreme unknown in this respect.
    So unless Iran changes its stance by 2009, someone is going to pull the trigger.
     
  13. Frost

    Frost Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Australia
    Effectively ladies and gentlemen, it's quite possible we only have two years to live :D
    Party on!
     
  14. Banzai

    Banzai One-time Mod, but on the road to recovery Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    12,834
    Likes Received:
    151
    Location:
    Reading, UK
    Yeah, if the world doesn't end in 2009 now, I'm going to be heartily disappointed :p
     
  15. Frost

    Frost Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Australia
    On a serious note though, I actually don't believe it'll be that simple. The UN will want to avoid a war at all costs; the world can't afford another one, especially in the already disrupted middle-east. I think the US government (depending on who's elected) will be smarter than to barge into a war without UN sanction twice.
    At the same time, where will Iran get enough uranium to make enough nukes to make it a threat? Not from any of the super powers - we all have too much to lose. So off of a smaller country, already in poverty. Iran could take that opportunity to forge a few of it's own allies amongst other anti-western governments and dictatorships.
    It's all a bit worrying really. Hard to predict what will happen though.
     
  16. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    Russia is still supplying nuclear reactor parts to Iran, as long as Iran pays the bills. And Iran has bought Uranium from several small African countries. Never large amounts, but bits from all over.
    As for who will actually pull the trigger. If the US doesn't Israel will.
    Israel is the country in the direct line of fire from Iran, and Israel is already vilified by the UN. So most likely they'll see it as a kill or be killed situation.
    If Israel goes to war with Syria, or Hezbollah again before 2009 (likely in the current atmosphere of brinksmanship), expect them to strike against Iran. If not all out war, at least striking key areas, like they did to Iraq in the 80's.
     
  17. Banzai

    Banzai One-time Mod, but on the road to recovery Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    12,834
    Likes Received:
    151
    Location:
    Reading, UK
    To be honest, if Russia's newfound aggression continues to grow, I can quite easily see Putin supplying Iran with weapons to fight the US and its allies. The whole situation does seem to be sliding back into a cold war situation.


    EDIT: Ah, damn. Dom beat me to that point.
     
  18. Frost

    Frost Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Australia
    Who beats who to which point is somewhat irrelevant compared to the chance of another cold war.
     
  19. Banzai

    Banzai One-time Mod, but on the road to recovery Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    12,834
    Likes Received:
    151
    Location:
    Reading, UK
    Agreed, naturally. The real problem is that the leaders of all these countries seem incapable of seeing this...
     
  20. Domoviye

    Domoviye New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Proud Canadian. Currently teaching in Nanjing, Chi
    This is particularly confusing in Putins case. Russia has a high Muslim population that will in a decade I believe equal half the Russian population. A fair number of these Muslims come from the more extremist sects and areas.
    So by supporting the Iranian leadership, Russia is helping to bolster the hard core extremists who pose the largest threat to the government. But since the US opposes Iran, Putin doesn't see a problem with it.
    It's a classic cutting off the nose to spite the face situation.
     
  21. Banzai

    Banzai One-time Mod, but on the road to recovery Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    12,834
    Likes Received:
    151
    Location:
    Reading, UK
    The US and Russia are like two schoolkids, who just find it impossible to get on, and so should be isolated. It's really ridiculous, that one government is prepared to encourage activity that is potentially internationally dangerous, just to spite another country (and that could work for either the US or Russia. They both have a tendency to be as bad as each other with this).
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice