This Story is Archived
Iran says will help U.S. if it quits Iraq »
Posted by: GregD 1 year, 9 months agoIranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday Iran was ready to help the United States and Britain in Iraq but only if they pledged to change their attitude and withdraw their troops.
Read Full Story at today.reuters.com »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 161
-
-
Maui
Nov. 27, 2006, 4:33 a.m.did you know that the top 3 benefactor nations that have a proven track record of helping (providing safe havens) and even actively protecting Jews from warring nations, persecution, etc, if you check history records:
1. Iran
2. USA (thou slow to act in WW2)
3. Japan
-
-
edgeindianews
Nov. 26, 2006, 1:44 p.m.In this war of negative nd positive forces compromise nd bargaining reflects surrender of positive forces.Thus no compromise on tool of terrorism that must be crushed ruthlessly, else negatives will keep flourishing under the shades of positives.
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 2:56 p.m.Actually, clinton sold light water reactors to Korea. If you want to talk weapons, check out the company that sold this stuff to Korea. It was Asea Brown Boveri, and guess who their executive director was, Donald Rumsfeld. Yep, he's the guy who sold the warheads to Korea. This was also done while he was director of the weapons proliferation board. Before you start with the clinton did this crap again, check out your facts. Clintons deal did not include weapons or the manufacture of nuclear weapons. That was Rumsfeld's doing. Bush increased the money given to korea for these 2 reactors by 95 million as "it was vital to the national security interests of the united states" in 2002. Don't look at clinton for this problem, look at Bush and Rumsfeld, they say one thing and do another. Oh yeah, rumsfeld remark about this is, "I don't remember"--again When clinton did this deal, it was wrongly believed that LWR could not produce weapons grade uranium, they were wrong.
-
GeneralPatton
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:01 p.m.Heavy water reactors, not light water, developed by the Canadians in the 1970s. Iran was sold them too, the key with them, is you do not need any enriched uranium to run them. Unfortunetly both Korea and Iran are enriching uranium...hint hint.
-
TemplarScribe
Nov. 26, 2006, 10:52 p.m.Thanks for the excellent background, Sandman. It helps to offset the **ahem** "fair and balanced" reporting that seems parroted by too many Republicans. People, Clinton's been out of office for six years. Let's deal with the here and now, and not shift blame away from the horrid job done by the Knucklehead in Chief.
BTW: As hard as it is to trust any Iranian leader (or N. Korean spokesman, for that matter), it's imperative that we find a true coalition of Middle East countries willing to replace our ground troops. Ahmadinejad may be an inveterate liar and part-time loony, but until we smarten up and use Arabs to patrol Arab streets, we will continue be seen as unwelcome 'crusaders. '
Hey, Dubya, feel free to use that term in your next speech! (:^D)
-
-
LordyLordy
Nov. 26, 2006, 6 p.m.You definitely hit the nail on the head!
Of course there will be morons here that believe it too...
...no common sense. You think the North Koreans developed that technology while Bush was President. Egad, man they were developing it the entire time Clinton was El Presidente. He was more concerned about about where to put his cigar than the nuclear threat in Iran or North Korea. Although I do remember smoking Mississippi River Crooks....they were soaked in rum, but were they ever tasty.
-
kctrixter
Nov. 26, 2006, 6:29 p.m.you guys should google A Q Khan, see what part he played, then next time this comes up you'll seem much better informed.
-
Lurch
Nov. 26, 2006, 9:45 p.m.takes at least ten years to get weapons grade stuff. That`s after the years of studying, years of desiging, years of building, and years of testing.
You clinton-bashers have any clue how long he was in office?
What`s happened in NK since Clinton left? Gotten any better?
Remember that nuke treaty with NK, the one where they give up their nuclear weapons program in return for our LWR tech and recognition of their gov`t? Remember that one? Remember how the Republican Congress fought against that and refused to recognize NK?
Of course you have all the answers to the above, you guys are regular geniuses, right?
-
-
-
-
TIGERTRAINER
Nov. 26, 2006, 1:50 p.m.YES, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IRAN WOULD LOVE TO HAVE HAPPEN. GET THE UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN OUT OF IRAQ SO THAT THEY CAN FINALLY DO WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR YEARS... TAKE OVER IRAQ. EVEN MOST OF THE UNITED STATES POPULATION HAS NO IDEA WHAT WOULD REALLY HAPPEN IF WE PULL OUT OF IRAQ WITH IT IN THE STATE ITS IN NOW. ALL THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE MADE COMMENTS ON THIS SITE ABOUT IRAQ STATING, "WEVE DONE WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE AND NOW WE NEED TO LEAVE". WRONG! IF WE DO THAT IT WOULD MEAN THAT ALL THE BLOOD OF U.S. SOLDIERS SPILLED ON FOREIGN SOIL WILL HAVE ALL BEEN FOR NOTHING AND WE WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO GO BACK IN TO IRAQ TO STOP IRAN FROM TAKING OVER THE COUNTRY AND OIL SUPPLIES....
-
-
Ratskii
Nov. 27, 2006, 12:46 a.m.Actually, all of the Kurds and Sunnis and most of the Shias would consider the Iranians invaders. I don't think the Iranians are really stupid enough to put themselves in the position that the U.S. is in now. They will simply provide weapons and guidence to the Shia majority to use against the Sunni minority.
If I'm wrong, and they did invade then the U.S. would be in the enviable position of being able to provide the Iraqi insurgents with funds and weapons -- lol.
-
-
tchef
Nov. 26, 2006, 2:10 p.m.I'm afraid that at this point it may have been all for nothing.
We should still talk to Iran and Syria, maybe a compramise can be reached. I don't see how anything possitive can happen at this point without some type of cooperation from all sides.
-
LordyLordy
Nov. 26, 2006, 6:05 p.m.When you compromise with terrorists, like those in Iran, Syria, and Irag you've basically shown weakness and they have no intention of every honoring any agreement. Iraq did not since the first were made. You're basically an infidel and they can tell you anything they want, while furtively figuring out a way to kill you, women and children first! They have already proven this several times. Wake up and smell the flowers....they ain't roses but they are covered with horsemanure!
-
-
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:02 p.m.I believe that Iran would be vital to securing a lasting peace in Iraq. And to date, I see no threat from Iran toward the USA. Iran stands a better chance at quieting the region, than we do. It is a positive step for the USA and perhaps the only chance Iraq has at regaining any peace. At least it will stop our soldiers from dying for some obscure reason that does not benefit anyone. And if they take Iraq, good. Iran is much more stable than Iraq ever was. And the Government is better equipped to handle the Iraqi people and rebuilding the country. This won't please Israel tho,,but who cares.
-
Lurch
Nov. 26, 2006, 10 p.m.The Iranians ain`t dumb.
Iraq posed zero threat to America, yet Bush invaded and is responsible for several hundreds of thousands of dead.
Under Bush`s pre-emptive war doctrine, half the world has the right to attack us. Nevermind arm themselves.
True. Iranians can be helpful and useful in saving GI lives and helping get America out of there quicker. There`s no question about that. A partner like Iran could also be very useful in helping to broker an-Arab deal where Arab countries contribute security forces to protect Iraq`s fledling government. Once the GIs are out and the Arab security forces are in, plus the Iraqis still have their own democratic government, the insurgency will starve and die. The security forces will still have a hard time dealing with the civil war, but it won`t be as hard for them as for the GIs cause they will be `Arab brothers`.
-
-
-
Lurch
Nov. 26, 2006, 10:06 p.m.Didn`t you get the memo?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2984547.stm
The United States has said that virtually all its troops, except some training personnel, are to be pulled out of Saudi Arabia.
OBL kept his promise. He said he would continue attacking America til America withdrew its troops from Saudi Arabia. Too bad Bush had to cave in to a terrorist`s wishes and hurt our credibility even further, but that`s another board discussion.
-
Flash287
Dec. 12, 2006, 11:07 a.m.Lift the moratoriums on Atlantic and pacific oil drilling and Haliburton would have so much competion they will dissappear.
We have so much oil here! The moratoriums started with the CA spill of a rig. Then the Valdez spill woke up all the environmentalists. Now it's time for the environmentalists to go back to sleep. They (while supporting/lobbying the democrats) caused our high gas prices and the existence of supertankers; forcing the oil comapnies to become distributors. That's the only reason why we need to purchase mideast oil. Duh? It's so easy!
-
heliogunner
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:12 p.m.We should not trust Iran at all. They are only willing to help us out because they want us out of Iraq so they can take over the country. If they want to help us they need to secure their border and stop letting terrorist through to iraq.
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:24 p.m.Once this is done, the terrorist problem will start to diminish with no major enemy in the region (us). Let Iran handle the remaining terrorist problems, this was never our fight anyway. All we've done is mess it up, lose soldiers and go broke financing a war we couldn't win, everybody is a potential enemy and unless you're willing to kill every living thing over there, we can never be secure in the region. So bail.
-
Lurch
Nov. 26, 2006, 10:14 p.m.Uh, the Iranians offered to give us all their intel on AQ including known AQ personnel in Iran immediately after the invasion.
This would have been exponentially more important in the war on terror than capturing Saddam, but the Bushies said `no, you peope are evil`.
Iran wants to be recognized as a legitimate member of the world community and to be respected. Same in pre-WWII Japan and in pre-Nam Vietnam. Iran had an eight-year war with Iraq that killed millions. Iran has seen what an occupation can cost the occupier. You`ve got to be a moron to believe they actually want to repeat those mistakes again.
Give them some credit. Don`t wait for Hannity, BO, or Rush to break it down for you, think, on your own. Why would Iran want to help...what can they possibly gain by brokering a peace deal? [hint, it starts with legitimac... ]
-
-
studentambassador
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:15 p.m.how can he help us in iraq if our troops are gone? by taking it over?
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:21 p.m.If you think there will ever be peace with a Kurdish government running Iraq, you're nuts. The people would favor the Iranians over the Kurds any day. The Kurds are the primary reason for the threatened civil war that exists right now. The Iraqis do not want a kurdish governing body in control. Iran is one of them and they would cooperate better for peace. We don't want Iran in there because they would control the majority of the oil and we are afraid we might be cut out of any oil deals if Iran gets upset with us. So we help and get along without trying to take over. Friendly types
-
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:16 p.m.rich4810:Did I say something wrong? We have no business sticking our fingers in this region, I think we've helped to "fix" it enough. Iran can undo some of what we've done and we can maintain an allie in the region with Iran. The ayatollah is more favorable toward the united states than we would think. I think they would prefer a relationship with us, and we might benefit with oil trade, as it does not belong to us and we have no right to steal it unless we take the region under our control, and that means ending all conflicts, especially the Israeli one.
-
Natureboy
Nov. 26, 2006, 4:35 p.m.OK, Obama is a hawk and has advocated for bombing Iran, maybe you missed that.
And as previously pointed out, the hysteria over Iran's nuclear program is smoke and mirrors brought to you by the same PNAC slimers who sold us on Saddam's WMDs.
But beyond that, Iran arguably DOES need a nuke to protect itself. Israel, the most aggressive rogue state in the region, has an estimated 200 nukes. That ******ant little nation ranks fifth among the world's nuclear powers.
-
Lurch
Nov. 26, 2006, 9:47 p.m.Education hurts them. Keep hurting them Natureboy.
It`s good entertainment and good for our country to force them to see the truth.
-
-
-
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:41 p.m.Ruff1111: It's time to move onward and upward. We could waste another 10 years kicking this dead horse, but he's still not gonna get up. How about we start making some progress and get past all the crap. It's time. This nastiness is filtering its way into our daily lives now, and it needs to end. This country has never been this divided in my lifetime. We have chances to bring OUR people back together and making progress toward a better world. I think we should take the lead in starting a world wide promotion to get rid of every nuclear warhead in the world, so no one needs to face that horror again. Does it really matter democrat or republican? I don't think it does.
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:54 p.m.Maybe you don't know this, so I'll inform you. This little guy called the president of Iran, is not the ruler of Iran, and makes no decisions for Iran. He has NO power. The ayatollah and his council run things there, and they seem america friendly by everything they've said. Iran is searching for world economic stability by using their resources as a trade commodity for other types of enterprise. They want nuclear energy to dedicate their oil to a trade commodity for that reason. We can help them do that and make better relations at the same time. And help the economies of both countries. How is that bad? This BS about radical Muslims is just that, BS. No such animal. Quite believeing everything you watch on tv.
-
-
greenmac
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:47 p.m.Gordon...how are you...I liked Sandmn posts....it is a way out. Usless you think you could actualy make change over there. If so tell me how it would be done...and what do you think the long term result would be
-
greenmac
Nov. 26, 2006, 4:01 p.m.Then my question is why do we do this...for the oil...or for the betterment of the people. If we persue mass destrution of their country, it cant be for the good of the people. This will also cause terrorists to be created throughout the world, as the Muslim faith is wide spread.
-
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:49 p.m.No, not satire. Just a hope. It seems the only way to save face to the world and get started doing something right for a change. You got a better way?
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 4:16 p.m.Ok, I've considered your plan. Now, apply it to this country and see if you're willing to swallow it. The UN comes to the USA. Divides it into Jewish regions, christian regions, baptist regions, catholic regions etc. And starts dealing out our resources as they think we need. Could you tolerate that? No American I know would, and neither will they. It's better served to let them rule themselves. Saddam held this crap down through killings, I think Iran can do it through need. Right now the Hizbollah and hamas have power because they help the people rebuild and get food. Iran can do the same thing without rockets. I'm not afraid to let them have their chance, why are you?
And you're comment about oil running out is exactly the reason this president cited for seeking nuclear energy now and not waiting. They have no other real commodity to build a future on. They can use their oil for trade instead of using it up, and develope some other commerce. He has said this several times.
-
-
Sandmn
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:48 p.m.Ruff1111:Have you ever listened to John Lennon? I think the events of the last few years have chanaged the thinking and normal attitudes of too many of us. We seem too angry at everything out there, and too ready to start a fight. Look at yourself. You weren't always angry, were you? We all need to back up and take a break from the continued fear and politics running this country, and get our heads back in the right place. Keeping you or I angry at each other is the real plan. As long as we fight, they can continue to carry on with their own little agendas behind the smokescreens of civil unrest and discord. We're smarter than that, aren't we?
-
Illuminate
Dec. 4, 2006, 7:33 p.m.John Lennon was a crack, opium, heroin and dope smoking LUNATIC who dumped a good wife and marriage for some sczhitzo druggie
Smoke Dope take a stance
Love the one who wants us dead
Give peace a chance
Iran with chop off your head
If America turns it glance
Give peace a chance
-
-
DRK1
Nov. 26, 2006, 3:53 p.m.RUFF111
Now tou`re on the right track.Carter and the Democrats.See,anger management does help.
-
Dsb2k6
Nov. 26, 2006, 4:37 p.m.We dont exactly have a choice in the matter. We can either participate in the process of rebuilding Iraq with the help of Iran, or "stay the course" and as soon as we leave Iran can come in and undo our inserted democracy in an instant. Iran understands the Iraqi people far more than we do. They are neighbors after all. The republican war-mongers would have us take over the entire middle east if given the chance. Iran and Syria will be the ones who clean up our mess, not us. We are incapable of finishing the job, because of the hard headed stubborn attitude that no matter what the cost, no matter how many lives we lose, no matter how much sense it doesnt make, no matter how badly the war is going, we are somehow doing the right thing. Were doing the "rights" thing, but it is far from moral and far from conservative, so I dont really understand why the republicans keep eating it up. Its time we admit we effed up and let someone help.
-
-
greenmac
Nov. 26, 2006, 4:46 p.m.thats the way it should be...we all lose it once in a while...thats ok to
-
-
-
DRK1
Nov. 26, 2006, 7:56 p.m.gordon;
Sorry-I`m a slow typer.My post was in response to a much earlier post by Ruff where he made an out of contex statement about Carter and the Democrates.15.33 was the time of the post I was responding to.
The first 69 comments are shown. Show all 161 comments »
Submitted By:
GregD
My name is Greg and I'm a Propeller Scout.
You can usually find me imbibing coffee in copious amounts, playing with my kids (I ...
Also submitted:
