Tony Blair calls for regime change in Iran and Syria

[peristalsiso]

Wise people learn from their mistakes (iraq) stupid ones like bliar dont

I post on a US-republican forum as well, and i'll never let them forget the mistake of the handling of the aftermath of the toppling of Saddam.

I work both sides, but the line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere. Nuke proliferation is a good line to hold, imo.

---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 PM ----------

I think there needs to be regime change in Britain. Workers of Britain, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!

ok, why does there need to be regime change in Britain?

 

[dawud123]

Syria supports the hamas and hizbollah. and this is problem for America

 

[peristalsiso]

Tony Blair has no right to speak crap like this. This is a guy that walked into Iraq and used the fact there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. None were found. He should be put on trial for being a liar. He should also be held responsible for the mysterious death of Doctor Kelly who confirmed there was no weapons in Iraq. It is frustrating that a guy who has such a poor record is being paid millions for being a useless tool in the middle east

True, our western leaders were wrong to invade Iraq the way they did.

But that doesn't mean they're not right about stopping nuke proliferation into Iran with force.

---------- Post added at 09:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:08 PM ----------

Syria supports the hamas and hizbollah. and this is problem for America

Many dictatorial or very-corrupt regimes in the middle east and asia support terrorism as a military tactic.

It'll take time for them to learn the futility of such tactics.

 

[lem34]

I do believe the West is getting rid of the ties with dictators and truely starting to foster ((semi-)democratic) self-rule in the Muslim world..
Please don't hold the past against us Westerners in securing all our futures. Criticize us for our current efforts as much as you like though, I for one will take such criticism seriously.

What about Saudies and bahrain why dont you extend your help there. Its your double standards that we abhor

 

[dawud123]

yes but there are different views . for one it is freedom fighter group and for other it is terrorist

 

[peristalsiso]

What about Saudies and bahrain why dont you extend your help there. Its your double standards that we abhor

In order to be able to project any force at all into the middle east region, we need the support of some dictatorial leaderships. Specifically, we need fly-over-rights and the ability to make military bases in the middle east.

You could say that this tendency to meddle in the middle east has caused "all the problems", but you could also say that these activities will (over a long time) teach middle eastern and asian leaderships the futility of terrorism as a tactic to gain influence over others.

To put it short: we can do it right, or we can do it wrong and shoot ourselves in the balls.

Iraq was a mistake.

Premature invasion of Iran would be a mistake too, a big one.

Invasion of Iran _after_ they acquire a working nuke (and the missiles to deliver them), is not a mistake I believe. But we'd be wise to find a way to keep Iran nuke-free without an invasion. I'm going to give that some thought and possibly feed my thoughts to the republicans in the states if I come up with a better solution.
If you have a better solution to keep Iran nuke-free, please let me know.

---------- Post added at 09:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:16 PM ----------

yes but there are different views . for one it is freedom fighter group and for other it is terrorist

I don't mind calling some terrorists freedom fighters.

But the thing is: usually terrorists do not support freedom. They support a religious dictatorship of their own people and other peoples.

And the major point is: terrorism is a futile tactic that will just invoke the wrath of a military machine that is practically speaking impossible to defeat.

Even the tactic to draw the West into wars it cannot afford and thus bankrupt the Western enemies, has proven not to work, so far. Time will tell if this tactic prevails (I hope not), but somehow I don't see it happening.

 

[lem34]

In order to be able to project any force at all into the middle east region, we need the support of some dictatorial leaderships. Specifically, we need fly-over-rights and the ability to make military bases in the middle east.

You could say that this tendency to meddle in the middle east has caused "all the problems", but you could also say that these activities will (over a long time) teach middle eastern and asian leaderships the futility of terrorism as a tactic to gain influence over others.

To put it short: we can do it right, or we can do it wrong and shoot ourselves in the balls.

Iraq was a mistake.

Premature invasion of Iran would be a mistake too, a big one.

Invasion of Iran _after_ they acquire a working nuke (and the missiles to deliver them), is not a mistake I believe. But we'd be wise to find a way to keep Iran nuke-free without an invasion. I'm going to give that some thought and possibly feed my thoughts to the republicans in the states if I come up with a better solution.
If you have a better solution to keep Iran nuke-free, please let me know.

Yea make all countries voluntarily give up Nukes. i am sure if israel was to give her nukes all the countries around there would be happy to declare a nuke free zone. It the western hypocracy that israel can have but iran cant that stinks

 

[peristalsiso]

Yea make all countries voluntarily give up Nukes. i am sure if israel was to give her nukes all the countries around there would be happy to declare a nuke free zone. It the western hypocracy that israel can have but iran cant that stinks

The whole point about the West holding "the nuke rights" is that the West will not start a war without clear provocation (Iraq excepted, and i'll remind the Americans about that at every turn).

Israel's nukes serve to prevent a conventional war between many Islamic states and Israel, a repeat of an earlier war as you recall.

If one cohesive party holds the nukes without using them to bully other states, then nukes are handled right.

If all parties (that hate eachother) hold nukes, then the chance for a large war with nuke usage increase exponentially.

So please don't get jealous of "our" western nukes. They serve to prevent ugly longlasting conventional wars.

 

[dawud123]

I don't mind calling some terrorists freedom fighters.

But the thing is: usually terrorists do not support freedom. They support a religious dictatorship of their own people and other peoples.

And the major point is: terrorism is a futile tactic that will just invoke the wrath of a military machine that is practically speaking impossible to defeat.

Even the tactic to draw the West into wars it cannot afford and thus bankrupt the Western enemies, has proven not to work, so far. Time will tell if this tactic prevails (I hope not), but somehow I don't see it happening.

Simple... Every oppressed should fight for his rights...

 

[lem34]

The whole point about the West holding "the nuke rights" is that the West will not start a war without clear provocation (Iraq excepted, and i'll remind the Americans about that at every turn).

Israel's nukes serve to prevent a conventional war between many Islamic states and Israel, a repeat of an earlier war as you recall.

If one cohesive party holds the nukes without using them to bully other states, then nukes are handled right.

If all parties (that hate eachother) hold nukes, then the chance for a large war with nuke usage increase exponentially.

So please don't get jealous of "our" western nukes. They serve to prevent ugly longlasting conventional wars.

Thats why we will never agree with you. and discussing anything with you in my opinion is a waste of space.

 

[peristalsiso]

Simple... Every oppressed should fight for his rights...

Ah, true.

But should they fight with weapons that are (being) proven to be counter-productive, or should they fight with peaceful-resistance tactics that'll actually get them where they want to go (self-determination, right?)

---------- Post added at 09:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 PM ----------

Thats why we will never agree with you. and discussing anything with you in my opinion is a waste of space.

Refusing to discuss the issues politely means we will have to show you the error of your ((nuke-)terrorism) tactics with force.

But thank you for allowing me to express my opinion here, I won't repeat it every day or even every month.

Eventually you'll see the error in your choice of tactics, I believe.

 

[lem34]

Ah, true.

But should they fight with weapons that are (being) proven to be useless, or should they fight with peaceful-resistance tactics that'll actually get them where they want to go (self-determination, right?)

You represent a bunch of nations that are bankrupt economically and have no principles, I love the fact that all your countries go to china with begging bowls. Why should some overweight person in the west earn more for doing the same job than someone in the third world thats what its is all about you and your kind want to live like parasites by stealing resourses from the third world and your time is up. back to thread Tony Blair is called a liar by his own people and should be tried for war crimes. Your time is up and you lot including your leaders like blair are on the way out

---------- Post added at 08:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:37 PM ----------

Ah, true.

But should they fight with weapons that are (being) proven to be counter-productive, or should they fight with peaceful-resistance tactics that'll actually get them where they want to go (self-determination, right?)

---------- Post added at 09:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 PM ----------


Refusing to discuss the issues politely means we will have to show you the error of your ((nuke-)terrorism) tactics with force.

But thank you for allowing me to express my opinion here, I won't repeat it every day or even every month.

Eventually you'll see the error in your choice of tactics, I believe.

Its all wind windbag we awit to see you attack iran. I have been hearing this crax for 10 years dont tell us do it.

 

[dawud123]

Ah, true.

But should they fight with weapons that are (being) proven to be useless, or should they fight with peaceful-resistance tactics that'll actually get them where they want to go (self-determination, right?)

---------- Post added at 09:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 PM ----------

If the peaceful tactics work, then ofcourse its better. and if they dont and you are on principle then you have the right to use weapons.

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

Syria supports the hamas and hizbollah. and this is problem for America

what about the syrians who donot want that regime and coming out every day and getting killed by this dictator even kids r getting shot at and on head u support it?

TARIQ

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

The whole point about the West holding "the nuke rights" is that the West will not start a war without clear provocation (Iraq excepted, and i'll remind the Americans about that at every turn).

Israel's nukes serve to prevent a conventional war between many Islamic states and Israel, a repeat of an earlier war as you recall.

If one cohesive party holds the nukes without using them to bully other states, then nukes are handled right.

If all parties (that hate eachother) hold nukes, then the chance for a large war with nuke usage increase exponentially.

So please don't get jealous of "our" western nukes. They serve to prevent ugly longlasting conventional wars.

in other words ur nukes r lovely lol

TARIQ