If Iran Was a Bollinger Band

Do you anticipate the US to attack Iran

  • Yes, within 12-24 months,

    Votes: 11 52.4%

  • No, Sanctions for a few years yet. Then we'll see.

    Votes: 10 47.6%
  • Total voters
    21
Crap Buddist

Crap Buddist

Senior member
Messages
2,458
Likes
289
Rice and Poulson have just been on Telly, restricting 3 of Irans banks against doin trnsaction with any US citizen or Biz etc... Rice quoted Irans threat to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, and Irans ambition of developing WMD's (nukes) etc...

Also we had Putin shore up defence contracts for Iran , so if Iran be bollinger Band by Golly its contracting ?

Just seemed like the US was sending out the next move...

Good luck everybody...
 
Last edited:
Crap Buddist said:
Rice and Poulson have just been on Telly, restricting 3 of Irans banks against doin trnsaction with any US citizen or Biz etc... Rice quoted Irans threat to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, and Irans ambition of developing WMD's (nukes) etc...

Also we had Putin sure up defence contracts for Iran , so if Iran be bollinger Band by Golly its contracting ?

Just seemed like the US was sending out the next move...

Good luck everybody...
Click to expand...

...no need to worry when we've got this

http://www.ki4u.com/products1.php

scroll to bottom of page

I love the key ring LOL

and the VHS set "Nuclear War Survival skills" where it lists the content

Actions in the Face of Nuclear Attack - The Main Point is Not to Panic

:LOL:
 
rols said:
...no need to worry when we've got this

http://www.ki4u.com/products1.php

scroll to bottom of page

I love the key ring LOL
Click to expand...

:LOL: handy link that Rols cheers, Dont think my Paypal will stretch to a Nuke Shelter.


Watching Rice and Poulson, they just came across as sedated normalised bringers of doom. I didnt fall the tag on bit, "listen everyone we want peace" Diplomacy first, hmmm why dont they wait for an incoming first? Seems like they are scared of taking a punch, worrying "what If " too much?

I dunno.. good health.
 
The US has been ‘preparing’ Iran, or more correctly preparing us all for Iran, for some time now. Putin was always a Player, he adds some spice to the mix. We just now need the raison d'importance under which the banner will be hoisted. At least it’s not too far for ‘our lads’ to hike on over to…

Never one to miss the chance for attempting to make a point, these are the times when you get to show that everything you need to know about the price (of commodities in this instance) are already IN the price. Most fundamentalists (market, not religious, actually, probably them too) will only start work now.

If these things didn’t happen, we’d have to invent them. Well, we do, sort of…
 
 
Can't they make some space available in Guantanamo for Dubya...

I'm honestly flabbergasted at the degree of sheer and utter lunacy that's really the only thing the world sees coming out of Washington ever since 9-11, how can anyone there even contemplate another war of terror promoting aggression after the great successes in Iraq, with an army at it's disposal that's already totally overstretched to the point of breaking point in just one self made mess in just one third world country let alone two, or in view of the overflowing money coffers that Washington currently has at it's free spending disposal ?

Or is the desperate situation the exact reason for ever greater acts of counterproductive madness ?

Eternal war the only face saving exit ?

That sort of thing ?

goering-quote.jpe
 
If it happens it will not involve any armies in my view as it will all be by relentless air attack and I agree that we seem to have entered a new age that lacks any reason. Our leaders seem to ignore history which they would do well to take note of and Iraq being a case in point. Last time we were involved there it took (I think), 22 years before we could leave.


Paul
 
Paul, agree with that, it's all unbelievably crazy stuff, if someone had told me a mere ten years ago about the mess that one crazed US President would be able to effortlessly slide all of us into I would have suggested he switch his recreational drug of choice...

Now it's me who feels like I need a switch...

Maybe we should all emigrate to Iceland, eh.
 
BSD said:
Paul, agree with that, it's all unbelievably crazy stuff, if someone had told me a mere ten years ago about the mess that one crazed US President would be able to effortlessly slide all of us into I would have suggested he switch his recreational drug of choice...

Now it's me who feels like I need a switch...

Maybe we should all emigrate to Iceland, eh.
Click to expand...

Why do we put up with the way things are?

Because we are comfortable?

Michael Moore was interviewed on ITN last night and he said Gordon Brown should listen to what the British people want and pull the troops out asap.

He went onto say that the US probably wouldn't have gone into Iraq without Blair's support, so is Gordon going to repeat history and wade into Iran?

We could make a difference if we really cared.

Trouble is, I don't think enough of us do....
 
Good points rols. I sincerely hope sanity will prevail. Better things to do with life than having some paranoid cowards from Texas with some comfy bunkers who personally wouldn't have dreamed of ever exposing their backsides to danger while drumming up business for their buddies in Big Oil et al exposing us to eking out an existence under a mushroom cloud.

Lawdy lawdy Miss Clawdy.
 
There are too many vested interests in Iran - Russia, China, particularly - for the US to attack and remain unscathed economically (and politically). Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan - how long will US-friendly muslim countries (eg, Saudi) look the other way? Turkey isn't listening anymore.

If you're in a hole, stop digging.

Grant.
 
If Iran were a Bol Band, it would have a fair amount of deviation on it. The urge to return to mean with some speed is inevitable.

But possibly...

...the US Air Force will drop the newly developed Freedom Activation Gas, better known in Pentagon circles by its acronym F.A.G., on the Republican Guard, causing them all to engage in rampant man on man action, after the gas has worn off, they will all be racked with quilt and consumed by shame. They will then start stoning each other to death under Sharia law. The last man standing will simply swallow stones until he is dead.

Sponsors of terrorism must be punished severely.
 
zigglewigler said:
If Iran were a Bol Band, it would have a fair amount of deviation on it. The urge to return to mean with some speed is inevitable.

But possibly...

...the US Air Force will drop the newly developed Freedom Activation Gas, better known in Pentagon circles by its acronym F.A.G., on the Republican Guard, causing them all to engage in rampant man on man action, after the gas has worn off, they will all be racked with quilt and consumed by shame. They will then start stoning each other to death under Sharia law. The last man standing will simply swallow stones until he is dead.

Sponsors of terrorism must be punished severely.
Click to expand...

So basically same as what happens/happening in western societies, but speeded up via the deliverence of GAS. I like it.

hmmm, thinking about it though, How can the US attack Iran ? I cant see the UN backing them or joining in , What about Russian defence contracts protecting Iran ? Weird.. unless the US get Israel to launch and project it as a localised exchange of agression between those 2 ...

I dont think brits will back the US , and can see Europe starting to sidestep away from Uncle sam, sort of edging away.
 
The Neoconartists don't need no stinkin' badges, and they don't need no stinkin' UN.

I would hope that Washington realizes it has insufficient homeland security to stop the waves of retaliatory Iranian suicide bombers, so instead just carry on posturing.

Maybe Bush's hormone therapy has made him a little high on the testosterone, he'll be medicated with estrogen next month on Laura's request, and it'll all be forgotten about.

If they do something stupid, Brown would take the opportunity to distinguish himself from the pussy that was Blair.
 
grantx said:
There are too many vested interests in Iran - Russia, China, particularly - for the US to attack and remain unscathed economically (and politically). Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan - how long will US-friendly muslim countries (eg, Saudi) look the other way? Turkey isn't listening anymore.

If you're in a hole, stop digging.
Grant.
Click to expand...

Both Russia and China are interested in Iran. But at the same time the agiotage around Iran is profitable for Russia. Oil prices grow – and Russia gets additional incomes. War is unfavorable for no one, but unfavorable is the presence of nuclear weapon in the hands of country which is actually governed by spiritual leader.
Everyone knows that president in Iran is a simple cover?

Pakistan has a bomb and what? If the power changes into a hard Islam, it will be bad for the whole region.
Problem is that exactly because of possibility of aggression against Iran, he has thought over the nuclear weapon. The example of Iraq compels many to think over that region.

Turkey listens to the USA, the USA simply conducts such policy in Iraq and it is unprofitable to Turkey. If the autonomous Kurd state will be created on the territory of Iraq, the fight of Kurds for independence on territory of Turkey would harden.
And it is 4 million Kurds who permanently live in Turkey. Kurds will have money, because there is oil on their territory in Iraq.
And that is why Turkey met with Iran and Syria for consultations, because on their territories are also large ethnic groups of Kurds.
War is always expenses; in that region fight not pleasures, but necessities.
 
Mark,

But who will yield to the demand for an autonomous Kurdish state in northern Iraq with its oil wealth? Can’t see Turkey being too happy – increased wealth, consolidation and strengthening of the Kurdish border with Turkey would surely undermine further Turkey’s perception of internal and external security (and isn’t perception primary?)

Grant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BSD
Dcraig,

“the destruction of the UN as an effective entity”. The destructive of an ineffective entity is hardly a cause for concern.

Grant (not a neo-con).
 
grantx said:
Dcraig,

“the destruction of the UN as an effective entity”. The destructive of an ineffective entity is hardly a cause for concern.

Grant (not a neo-con).
Click to expand...

Yes, there is no denying some of the failings of the UN, but what is the alternative - unilateralism ? In this day and age the world is divided into nation states (it hasn't always been like this) and national sovereignty is probably the fundamental founding principal of the UN as a response to the horrors of the world wars. This principle is discarded at our peril.

It is worth observing that the neocons still would like a stamp of authority from the UN in persuing their imperial ambitions and devote no small effort to trying to achieve this.
 
dcraig1 said:
Yes, there is no denying some of the failings of the UN, but what is the alternative - unilateralism ? In this day and age the world is divided into nation states (it hasn't always been like this) and national sovereignty is probably the fundamental founding principal of the UN as a response to the horrors of the world wars. This principle is discarded at our peril.

It is worth observing that the neocons still would like a stamp of authority from the UN in persuing their imperial ambitions and devote no small effort to trying to achieve this.
Click to expand...

The Security Council, consisting of (how many, six? I'm not sure) is the only way to go, IMO, because we need the big players who, otherwise, would act unilaterally. U.S, China and Russia must get their acts together. It is no use asking hundreds of countries in the UN Council to reach a decision, the current UN mess is Darfur.

Split
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top