pap Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 There has been a fair bit of sabre-rattling between the US and Iran over the last couple of days, over US claims that they foiled an Iran-led terrorist attack. Although the US has said it won't take military action over this particular plot, the incident is just another episode in a long-running series of heated diplomatic exchanges. The US has also claimed that Iran is trying to build the atomic bomb, a claim which Iran strenously denies. My view is that the US will go bundling into Iran within 2 years. First, Iran probably is developing the bomb, and who could blame them? Getting the bomb is like joining the "don't fu.ck with me club". Western nations voiced their indignation when India and Pakistan got the bomb, but we won't fu.ck with them; they've got the bomb. Second, Iran has an absolute feckton of oil and gas, second largest reserves in the world after Russia. Next, we've got the fact that the US Government really doesn't like Iran's government, and hasn't since the Shah was bounced in the late 70s. Add Iran's own sabre-rattling on the topic of Israel, or the claims that it is supporting insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Finally, the US happens to have a military materiel and personnel on either side of Iran. It's geographically convenient. What about the rest of you? Is war with Iran inevitable? Would we be along for the ride if it came to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 getting the bomb (illegally in their case) is like asking to get ****ed....not joining the don't **** with me club.and no, it is not inevitable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 If Iran get the bomb and have someone mad enough to push the big red button without thinking of the consequences to its neighbouring states, then it's goodbye Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I suggest that if the US kept out of foerign countries, and kept its armed forces as just a threat, the world would be a better place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 12 October, 2011 getting the bomb (illegally in their case) is like asking to get ****ed....not joining the don't **** with me club.and no, it is not inevitable Dunno, India and Pakistan both got the bomb illegally too, as did Israel (if they do indeed have nukes). What about North Korea, who are rumoured to have it? Anyone messing around with them? In fact, there hasn't been a single member of the "Don't f**k with me club" that has ever been invaded by another nation state. At the moment, history would suggest I'm right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Dunno, India and Pakistan both got the bomb illegally too, as did Israel (if they do indeed have nukes). What about North Korea, who are rumoured to have it? Anyone messing around with them? In fact, there hasn't been a single member of the "Don't f**k with me club" that has ever been invaded by another nation state. At the moment, history would suggest I'm right. last time I checked, we were regularly sending in drones, forces and bombing parts of pakistan..last time I checked, north korea lives under the cloud of huge sanctionsIran will not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon...either way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baj Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I suggest that if the US kept out of foerign countries, and kept its armed forces as just a threat, the world would be a better place. Im sure Israel would disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I suggest that if the US kept out of foerign countries, and kept its armed forces as just a threat, the world would be a better place. You live in a dream world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 You live in a dream world. Oh no, I live in a real world. I can see what goes on, and that is the US and its friends bullying the world in a totally unjustified way. If you like your hard earned money going on tax to pay for all this violent nonsense then that is your call...in my real world its time for this to stop. We support the whole cycle. Back Saddam, turn Saddam into a demon, invade, set up new government to arm, etc etc.Just look at the awful regimes we arm year after year. not my dream world.. the real nightmare world they have given us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Oh no, I live in a real world. I can see what goes on, and that is the US and its friends bullying the world in a totally unjustified way. If you like your hard earned money going on tax to pay for all this violent nonsense then that is your call...in my real world its time for this to stop. We support the whole cycle. Back Saddam, turn Saddam into a demon, invade, set up new government to arm, etc etc.Just look at the awful regimes we arm year after year. not my dream world.. the real nightmare world they have given us. It's not just the US, check out any 'foreign' influence on a nation. The fall out from the end of the old British Empire is just as good an example as any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Can someone give me a sensible explanation as to why some country's bomb is 'illegal' but other countries' bombs aren't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Is it inevitable? I don't know. I hope not, we are not in a fit state to enter into yet another conflict. Only last week I heard on the news that the Falklands are being eyed up by the Argentinians still, and should there be a conflict, our prospects would not be all that good. We barely won last time, to my knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carljack Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 If Iran get the bomb and have someone mad enough to push the big red button without thinking of the consequences to its neighbouring states, then it's goodbye Israel. Israel has already bombed Iranian Nuclear Facilities on behalf of the Yanks.They will act again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Dunno, India and Pakistan both got the bomb illegally too, as did Israel (if they do indeed have nukes). What about North Korea, who are rumoured to have it? Anyone messing around with them? In fact, there hasn't been a single member of the "Don't f**k with me club" that has ever been invaded by another nation state. At the moment, history would suggest I'm right. There are no rumors with North Korea, they detonated one underground about 2 years ago, albeit a rather primitive version but nun the less..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Is it inevitable? I don't know. I hope not, we are not in a fit state to enter into yet another conflict. Only last week I heard on the news that the Falklands are being eyed up by the Argentinians still, and should there be a conflict, our prospects would not be all that good. We barely won last time, to my knowledge. we would win...far more easily than last time.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Too early to say. But the balance of power in the Middle East changed when the US dealt with Saddam. Iran is now the top dog, and they are going to cause serious grief if left to get on with it. Its hard to see how the US can stand by as the threat grows to Israel. The US really missed a trick before Iran got that reactor going. They should have goaded (or even supported) the Israelis in destroying it, like they did back in the 80s or 90s. This may turn out to be a colossal mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 we would win...far more easily than last time.. I'll take your word for it, given your profession and experience, but why is that? My knowledge of the Falklands conflict is limited, but from what I gather we were only about 24 hours from defeat at one point. Given that our numbers have been reduced, would it not be harder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Is it inevitable? I don't know. I hope not, we are not in a fit state to enter into yet another conflict. Only last week I heard on the news that the Falklands are being eyed up by the Argentinians still, and should there be a conflict, our prospects would not be all that good. We barely won last time, to my knowledge. I think you will find that the Falklands can be reinforced a lot f**king quicker this time round via Mount Pleasant airport, and nothing the Argies have can stand its ground against Typhoons. Without air superiority, an invasion fleet would be on the bottom in no time. Excluding the fact that since the oil announcement a submarine capable of knocking out half their Navy in a couple of hours has been on station round-the-clock, a point probably made clear to the Argies by back door diplomatic channels. The reason they managed to get on the island in 1982 was because the UK government dozed off. A few years before during the previous round of sabre-rattling, David Owen sent two frigates and a sub down there and the Argies shat themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I'll take your word for it, given your profession and experience, but why is that? My knowledge of the Falklands conflict is limited, but from what I gather we were only about 24 hours from defeat at one point. Given that our numbers have been reduced, would it not be harder? prior to the falklands, the only war we had properly seen was what..? WW2..? our training, preparation, hardware was not adequate and we got lucky... as a result of the falklands our training was completely overhauled and as a result, we train countless armed forces from all over the world.. our hardware is far more multi-rolled than every before..just think, countless RN ships in the conflict did not even have a 4.5 inch gun on the front...crucial for landing operations. throw in the fact a warship is always in the south atlantic.....there is a garrison based there and RAF tornados based there. throw in cruise missiles, we could probably bomb them off the face of their earth without having to land many troops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 prior to the falklands, the only war we had properly seen was what..? WW2..? our training, preparation, hardware was not adequate and we got lucky... as a result of the falklands our training was completely overhauled and as a result, we train countless armed forces from all over the world.. our hardware is far more multi-rolled than every before..just think, countless RN ships in the conflict did not even have a 4.5 inch gun on the front...crucial for landing operations. throw in the fact a warship is always in the south atlantic.....there is a garrison based there and RAF tornados based there. throw in cruise missiles, we could probably bomb them off the face of their earth without having to land many troops Last time I checked it was Typhoons now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Last time I checked it was Typhoons now. either, or what is down there now is 50 times better than a handful of troops in 1982 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I'll take your word for it, given your profession and experience, but why is that? My knowledge of the Falklands conflict is limited, but from what I gather we were only about 24 hours from defeat at one point. Given that our numbers have been reduced, would it not be harder? I reckon that is utter garbage. Maybe the morale was bad around the time of Bluff Cove or when Atlantic Conveyor and Coventry were lost on the same day (Atlantic Conveyor and its Chinooks was about the worst knock-back during the entire campaign), but defeat ? No way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 either, or what is down there now is 50 times better than a handful of troops in 1982 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._1435_Flight_RAF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._1435_Flight_RAF nifty bits of kit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No._1435_Flight_RAF So we know things are bad when 'Desperation' takes off ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I reckon that is utter garbage. Maybe the morale was bad around the time of Bluff Cove or when Atlantic Conveyor and Coventry were lost on the same day (Atlantic Conveyor and its Chinooks was about the worst knock-back during the entire campaign), but defeat ? No way. I remember hearing in a documentary that we were a day or so away from defeat and we got lucky - as DellDays has said in a previous post. Interesting though and it all makes a lot of sense. Hopefully the Argentinians will have the sense not to try and take what is not theirs, again... As for nifty bits of kit, my personal favourite is the Blackbird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 The US is obviously after more oil, what is happening now is a carbon copy of the pre-Iraq years. Iran has every right to have nukes BECAUSE of countries like the US. If Iraq actually had WMDs the war would never have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I remember hearing in a documentary that we were a day or so away from defeat and we got lucky - as DellDays has said in a previous post. Interesting though and it all makes a lot of sense. Hopefully the Argentinians will have the sense not to try and take what is not theirs, again... As for nifty bits of kit, my personal favourite is the Blackbird. We were never close to defeat in '82. The only thing that would have f**ked us up was losing a carrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I don't think we are close to the US going in. Ahmadinejad is a pretty shrewd operator. He has political issues on the home front. The whole Arab spring movement must be unsettling as is the unrest iin Syria. What better way to unite a nation behind him than to square up toi the Great Satan. This is nothing but political manouvering and will amount to nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manji Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 If Iran get the bomb and have someone mad enough to push the big red button without thinking of the consequences to its neighbouring states, then it's goodbye Israel. Why shouldnt Iran have the bomb Israel have plenty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Oh no, I live in a real world. I can see what goes on, and that is the US and its friends bullying the world in a totally unjustified way. If you like your hard earned money going on tax to pay for all this violent nonsense then that is your call...in my real world its time for this to stop. We support the whole cycle. Back Saddam, turn Saddam into a demon, invade, set up new government to arm, etc etc.Just look at the awful regimes we arm year after year. not my dream world.. the real nightmare world they have given us. So the ones we bully, ie terrorists like al qaeda can carry out their atrocities against the hated west without fear of reprisals then, I'm so glad you are not in power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Why shouldnt Iran have the bomb Israel have plenty. Theres more chance of Iran using the bomb than Israel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 The US is obviously after more oil, what is happening now is a carbon copy of the pre-Iraq years. Iran has every right to have nukes BECAUSE of countries like the US. If Iraq actually had WMDs the war would never have happened. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 So the ones we bully, ie terrorists like al qaeda can carry out their atrocities against the hated west without fear of reprisals then, I'm so glad you are not in power. So you reckon the vietnamese deserved the arse raping the US gave them then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 We were never close to defeat in '82. The only thing that would have f**ked us up was losing a carrier. I'm now determined to find the documentary I saw and post the clip on here. I'll see if I can find it on YouTube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I'm now determined to find the documentary I saw and post the clip on here. I'll see if I can find it on YouTube. I think you might be referring to the documentary series (2007?) in which it was commented that logistics-wise some of the field guns were down to 3 or 4 shells each at the end of hostilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Theres more chance of Iran using the bomb than Israel How do you work that out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 So you reckon the vietnamese deserved the arse raping the US gave them then? Is there a comparison to what happened nearly 50 years ago and who won the vietnamese war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 (edited) Lol at some of the replies. Iran is not Iraq. Although unpopular with many, the regime came about through Iran's own Arab Spring when they over threw the "old way" Now there is a strong and educated Middle Class who are not happy with the totalitarianism of the regime, but they really do not want to have a McDonalds on every street corner. Iran "Hates" Saudi Arabia with a passion, they do not believe that the Wahibi's are to be trusted as Custodians of the Holy Places. This whole "thing going on with the Telly News channels" was never about an attack on AMERICA. It was about blowing up the SAUDI Ambassador.... Now will US have to go to war with Iran - pretty much always inevitable because one day the Gulf Staes would probably have had to do it themselves anyway. (It got lost in the Human Rights/Arab Spring thing but the trouble in Bahrain was actually (PARTLY) about this issue) Will it be easy? No. Would the US be able to invade and win? No. Could it go Nuke? Yes Should YOU worry? Feck yes. They do not need to Nuke London to make you all die slowly. Just hit Dharran a few hundred miles away. Lights out Europe. Power Cuts for 18 hours a day in EU? Guess who wins? Ain't the US At the end of the day, World War 3 started years ago, just nobody ever noticed and unfortunately if there is to ever be global peace then a more moderate Iranian regime needs to emerge from one MOFO of a mess of a 2nd revolution. As a good friend from Iran once said. If only Jimmy Carter had had a brain instead of a broken down helicopter... Edited 12 October, 2011 by dubai_phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Diamond Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I think you might be referring to the documentary series (2007?) in which it was commented that logistics-wise some of the field guns were down to 3 or 4 shells each at the end of hostilities. I think it was recent yeah, can't recall the shells bit though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Lol at some of the replies. Iran is not Iraq. Although unpopular with many, the regime came about through Iran's own Arab Spring when they over threw the "old way" Now there is a strong and educated Middle Class who are not happy with the totalitarianism of the regime, but they really do not want to have a McDonalds on every street corner. Iran "Hates" Saudi Arabia with a passion, they do not believe that the Wahibi's are to be trusted as Custodians of the Holy Places. This whole "thing going on with the Telly News channels" was never about an attack on AMERICA. It was about blowing up the SAUDI Ambassador.... Now will US have to go to war with Iran - pretty much always inevitable because one day the Gulf Staes would probably have had to do it themselves anyway. (It got lost in the Human Rights/Arab Spring thing but the trouble in Bahrain was actually (PARTLY) about this issue) Will it be easy? No. Would the US be able to invade and win? No. Could it go Nuke? Yes Should YOU worry? Feck yes. They do not need to Nuke London to make you all die slowly. Just hit Dharran a few hundred miles away. Lights out Europe. Power Cuts for 18 hours a day in EU? Guess who wins? Ain't the US At the end of the day, World War 3 started years ago, just nobody ever noticed and unfortunately if there is to ever be global peace then a more moderate Iranian regime needs to emerge from one MOFO of a mess of a 2nd revolution. As a good friend from Iran once said. If only Jimmy Carter had had a brain instead of a broken down helicopter... I know that the Iranians like to give it large, and they certainly don't have nice things to say about Israel. But the sort of thing they've been accused of what intelligence agencies do all the time. Certainly, the Israelis have never had a problem with assassinating people they don't like on foreign soil. And financing insurgents? You're not even a real intelligence agency until you've done that. I don't really think that the West can moan about this Saudi assassination plot with a straight face. Everyone's at it. That all being the case, Iran hasn't invaded anyone. Iraq, goaded on by the US, was the aggressor in the Iran-Iraq war - and I don't think they've had any wars since. Why is Iran, a country that might get the bomb, singled out for special attention? North Korea can fire missiles into the South China Sea, is further along the path to becoming a nuclear power and no-one bats an eyelid. Personally, I think Iran has been a long-term strategic objective for the US, a country that has much better form for starting wars than Iran. If there is to be a conflict, I'd expect the US to fire the first shots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 How do you work that out? Have Israel used any yet since having them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 I know that the Iranians like to give it large, and they certainly don't have nice things to say about Israel. But the sort of thing they've been accused of what intelligence agencies do all the time. Certainly, the Israelis have never had a problem with assassinating people they don't like on foreign soil. And financing insurgents? You're not even a real intelligence agency until you've done that. I don't really think that the West can moan about this Saudi assassination plot with a straight face. Everyone's at it. That all being the case, Iran hasn't invaded anyone. Iraq, goaded on by the US, was the aggressor in the Iran-Iraq war - and I don't think they've had any wars since. Why is Iran, a country that might get the bomb, singled out for special attention? North Korea can fire missiles into the South China Sea, is further along the path to becoming a nuclear power and no-one bats an eyelid. Personally, I think Iran has been a long-term strategic objective for the US, a country that has much better form for starting wars than Iran. If there is to be a conflict, I'd expect the US to fire the first shots. Uh nope - wrong They invaded the UAE The Tuns. Two Islands in the Gulf. Of no significance to anyone apart from the locals. Like I said in the middle of my post... WHO did they try to blow up? Forget the "other"nutters & the Yanks, the Iranians will continue to jerk tails, but the REAL issue is Saudi and if THAT ever happened, sanctions ain't gonna be the answer and the "Israeli" issue won't help because your oil will be screwed. BUT not one tater on Sky or Beeb has yet made that link because that doesn't make a story the story is the US getting angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Have Israel used any yet since having them? Nope, but that's not an argument. No-one uses nuclear weapons because the response would be devastating to their country. So why do you think Iran would be more likely to use them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Uh nope - wrong They invaded the UAE The Tuns. Two Islands in the Gulf. Of no significance to anyone apart from the locals. Like I said in the middle of my post... WHO did they try to blow up? Forget the "other"nutters & the Yanks, the Iranians will continue to jerk tails, but the REAL issue is Saudi and if THAT ever happened, sanctions ain't gonna be the answer and the "Israeli" issue won't help because your oil will be screwed. BUT not one tater on Sky or Beeb has yet made that link because that doesn't make a story the story is the US getting angry. Ah, c'mon phil - The Tunbs are what, 4sq miles of island estate off the south coast of Iran? We're not even talking the same ball-park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 12 October, 2011 Author Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Uh nope - wrong They invaded the UAE The Tuns. Two Islands in the Gulf. Of no significance to anyone apart from the locals. Like I said in the middle of my post... WHO did they try to blow up? Forget the "other"nutters & the Yanks, the Iranians will continue to jerk tails, but the REAL issue is Saudi and if THAT ever happened, sanctions ain't gonna be the answer and the "Israeli" issue won't help because your oil will be screwed. BUT not one tater on Sky or Beeb has yet made that link because that doesn't make a story the story is the US getting angry. And er, just checked on Wiki. The Tunbs islands were occupied in 1971, when the US-backed Shah was still running the show. All the current regime are guilty of is not giving them back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 12 October, 2011 Share Posted 12 October, 2011 Nope, but that's not an argument. No-one uses nuclear weapons because the response would be devastating to their country. So why do you think Iran would be more likely to use them? Mutually Assured Destruction... the problem with it is that it only takes one nutter, i.e the Taleban or Al-Qaeda types to get hold of one nuclear bomb(i.e some in Pakistan) to **** everything up. Better would be no Nuclear Weapons, but then I guess a country could create some and hold everyone to ransom, it's a hard choice. I'd prefer the second one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farawaysaint Posted 13 October, 2011 Share Posted 13 October, 2011 South Africa built 5 atomic bombs as a rogue state. Yes, there was no direct military intervention but massive political and economic sanctions were put in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 13 October, 2011 Share Posted 13 October, 2011 The US is obviously after more oil, what is happening now is a carbon copy of the pre-Iraq years. Not necessarily. One of the problems with Iran is that they don't sell their oil in USD. Without the petrodollar America is screwed. Iraq got invaded because they were selling their oil in Euros, or that was one of the reasons. Hans Blix (the UN weapons inspector) said he needed a week or two more to prove that there weren't any WMDs but USA/UK ignored that and ploughed straight on in. One of the first things USA did was to revert to selling oil in USD. As that is the case, I think that USA will at some stage want to bring Iran back into line and get them to sell in USD. Not surprised that the Saudis are involved in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 October, 2011 Share Posted 13 October, 2011 Those who are saying it's only "fair" that Iran should be allowed to build the bomb.... Wonder how fair you think it will be if they have it and one day you wake up and suddenly pay £3 per litre at the pump They will put massive pressure on the oil producing states and we all will be screwed... But hey, as long as it's fair And for pap. You keep saying people are ignoring n.Korea.....is that a wind up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now