View Full Version : Iran Trained 40,000 Suicide Bombers
Trudy
04-17-2006, 02:23 PM
Well this is just great news, and to no surprise it comes from Iran:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/706257.html (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/706257.html)
Quote:
The Sunday Times of London, quoting unnamed Iranian officials, reported Sunday that Iran has 40,000 trained suicide bombers prepared to strike at British and American targets if Iranian nuclear sites are attacked.
It quoted Dr Hassan Abbasi, head of the Centre for Doctrinal Strategic Studies in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, as having said in a speech that 29 western targets had been identified:
"We are ready to attack American and British sensitive points if they attack Iran's nuclear facilities." Abbasi was quoted as saying, adding that some of them were "quite close" to the Iranian border in Iraq.
The newspaper said it had heard a recording in which Abbasi warned would-be bombers to "pay close attention to wily England" and vowed that "Britain's demise is on our agenda."
"At a recruiting station in Tehran recently, volunteers for the force had to show their birth certificates, give proof of their address and tick a box stating whether they would prefer to attack American targets in Iraq, or Israeli targets," the report said.
It's good to know that Iran has ennough suicide bombers to make up a small country... http://forum.ebaumsworld.com/images/smilies/uhoh.gif
__________________
Rainbow Dash
04-17-2006, 02:27 PM
But.... why? What is wrong with guns?
Qween B
04-17-2006, 03:00 PM
yeah for real, guns kill people these days not suicide >.>;
The Deity
04-17-2006, 03:21 PM
Actually I basically commend their strategy. I mean, they can't beat the U.S. and Britain in a fair war so they have to resort to this. Its a game of numbers and if they can kill 3 of their men to kill 500 of ours, its obviously a win for them.
Not that I find it good news or anything...they just don't have any other way to fight back.
[PhiberOpticks]
04-17-2006, 04:05 PM
Israel probably should bomb those nuclear facilities again. And they should. I mean, Iran can't hate Israel anymore than they already do.
40k sounds about the amount of people that live in my town. Jihad, anyone?
Rainbow Dash
04-17-2006, 04:09 PM
You know, I would suggest dropping an atom bomb on 'em, but Israel would probably beat us to it. And they should. I mean, Iran can't hate Israel anymore than they already do.
40k sounds about the amount of people that live in my town. Jihad, anyone?
Didn't you condemn me for saying something just like that?
[PhiberOpticks]
04-17-2006, 04:13 PM
Woah, I said I would suggest. But that doesn't mean that would be my final decision. Plus, Israel's done it before. It's not like we're bombing a holy city. Besides I just meant the nuclear facilities. Perhaps I wen't a bit too far on that. Lemme just edit that out...sorry.
But if they still attack us for keeping them from killing us with nukes, then my final decision might change...I mean, that's a lot of suicide bombers.
Get the sniper rifle and the rocket launcher!
Dark Luther
04-18-2006, 11:15 AM
I sincerely doubt that this is a realistic number..
or that even half of those real suicide bombers will go ahead with their mission...,
but they do have a very real international sleeper force, who live normal lives but have every intention of causing disruption if a western nation ever began a war with Iran.
It's believed that Iran is not the only country ( North Korea, China, and select other countries as well ), but Iran has had immense more expirience with the matter as they aided palestine in their war of independance against Israel...
It's nothing the Irish or Israelis didn't do back before the 60s...
Dark Marmosett
04-18-2006, 11:21 AM
yeah for real, guns kill people these days not suicide >.>;
No...guys with moustaches kill people. Anyway....blame it all on the holy crusade wars for terrorism.
Seraph Zero
04-18-2006, 01:18 PM
This brings up the question... Why Iran? What is it with our focus on the Middle East? If anyone, we should be going after North Korea... We have verifiable proof that they already have nukes, and pose a much bigger threat than a country that could develop nuclear weaponry. You must seriously question the motives of the US and the double standard the Bush regime applies to its foreign policy...
As for Iran's suicide bombers... They're blowing smoke. I highly doubt that they have that many people simply waiting for the order to go and kill themselves in the name of Alllah. I don't question the dedication of the Muslims to their religion, mind you, just how far they will go. The only reason Iran is strutting around at this point is because the US military is so bogged down in Iraq that they cannot afford to turn their focus to yet another country... And as for the US, if that idiot president of ours decides to go after Iran, we'd probably get our asses handed to us, on both the battlefront and in terms of international relations. At this point, it already appears that we are reestablishing a policy of imperialism, starting with the entire Middle East. Even our allies are beginning to grow weary of our constant warmongering...
~Seraph
No...guys with moustaches kill people.
Level up! Add skill points to 'stache!
No one gets it? No one plays Mario and Luigi? DAMMIT!
The Deity
04-18-2006, 03:34 PM
Get the sniper rifle and the rocket launcher!
No...guys with moustaches kill people. Anyway....blame it all on the holy crusade wars for terrorism.
Level up! Add skill points to 'stache!
No one gets it? No one plays Mario and Luigi? DAMMIT!
This is the Discussion Table with a "zero tolerance" on spam. If I see any other posts like that again from either of you, I'll warn Cracker and I'll make sure Lancet warns you Gundam.
I'm sending a pm to both of them with this message as well.
Pinkie Pie
04-18-2006, 03:40 PM
Woah, I said I would suggest. But that doesn't mean that would be my final decision.
How is that not essentially the same thing?
Plus, Israel's done it before. It's not like we're bombing a holy city. Besides I just meant the nuclear facilities.
I doubt Iran would go any easier on Israel than they're claiming they'd go on the US or Britain. But hey, better them than us, at least according to you, huh?
You did condemn Yvl for saying this exact same stuff. I defended you getting angry over it then, but if you're going to turn around and say more or less the same thing...
Lancet Jades
04-18-2006, 03:43 PM
This is the Discussion Table with a "zero tolerance" on spam. If I see any other posts like that again from either of you, I'll warn Cracker and I'll make sure Lancet warns you Gundam.
I'm sending a pm to both of them with this message as well.
What Deity said. Consider yourselves warned for spam. This is a place for intelligent discussion, not for posts better suited to the rec room, or even spammyland.
PS: Deity, you DO have the authority to warn other mods for spam in here, so yeah >.>
Rainbow Dash
04-18-2006, 03:49 PM
How is that not essentially the same thing?
I doubt Iran would go any easier on Israel than they're claiming they'd go on the US or Britain. But hey, better them than us, at least according to you, huh?
You did condemn Yvl for saying this exact same stuff. I defended you getting angry over it then, but if you're going to turn around and say more or less the same thing...
No, no, its not a problem. He apologized. Plus my intentions were the destruction of an entire society, his weren't nearly as bad.
Anyway, gotta give bush credit... he was only off by half a letter >.>;;
Pinkie Pie
04-18-2006, 03:52 PM
No, no, its not a problem. He apologized. Plus my intentions were the destruction of an entire society, his weren't nearly as bad.
Who said it was a problem? This is a discussion, I'm addressing his points. He basically suggested the using of Israel as scapegoat as an alternative to America attacking Iran, or not attacking Iran at all. I don't find that to be an applicable alternative.
Anyway, gotta give bush credit... he was only off by half a letter >.>;;
Whats this about? Explain
Pinkie Pie
04-18-2006, 04:06 PM
Whats this about? Explain
I'm assuming that she means that Bush should have gone after Iran and not Iraq. Though I'm not too clear on how that's half a letter.
Quite honestly, attacking Iran is a bad idea regardless, and with the majority of our soldiers still in Iraq, it's an even worse one.
Dark Marmosett
04-18-2006, 04:08 PM
But I still have a point about terrorism all starting because of the holy wars. Didn't anyone learn about this or was I taught wrong? It all started when we tried to take back the holy city. And the people that were living in those towns. Set themselves on fire or something like that. Ran at the other people killing the warriors sent to take back the holy land.
Pinkie Pie
04-18-2006, 04:10 PM
But I still have a point about terrorism all starting because of the holy wars. Didn't anyone learn about this or was I taught wrong? It all started when we tried to take back the holy city. And the people that were living in those towns. Set themselves on fire or something like that. Ran at the other people killing the warriors sent to take back the holy land.
If by "we" you mean the church, then I see your point. Though I seriously doubt that terroristic tactics were unheard of prior to that.
Dark Marmosett
04-18-2006, 04:22 PM
Yes...the church...what ever made them think to start a war for holy reasons is beyond me. Just because they wanted back land where supposedly our great first ruler of our religion ruled from and started our religion there. Where he made it as an official religion if I remember correctly.
Zelphiel
04-18-2006, 04:25 PM
I'm assuming that she means that Bush should have gone after Iran and not Iraq. Though I'm not too clear on how that's half a letter.
yeah... I missed something there too. maybe it's because an n is like a q with some of it missing... or something. >.>
Quite honestly, attacking Iran is a bad idea regardless, and with the majority of our soldiers still in Iraq, it's an even worse one.
an preemptive attack against Iran would be an extremely stupid move on anybody's part. but the situation is kinda strange right now... since the vast majority of Iranians are Shi'ite Muslims and the Shi'ites are the only group in Iraq that has shown any support for the US so far. So, it's really touchy. If we do something to piss off the Shi'ite community and make them resent us even more there's no telling what would happen to the situation in Iraq.
Chicken Little
04-18-2006, 09:41 PM
If by "we" you mean the church, then I see your point. Though I seriously doubt that terroristic tactics were unheard of prior to that.
It evolved with civilization, the main front of terror tactics was pretty much impaling, most war at times deals with trying to at least terrorise yoru opponents through any form of propaganda or bombardment it simply depends on the moralistic view of what people deem as terrorist actions.
And yes Yvl meant Iran rather then Iraq since i believe wmds still havent been found and it was found that Iraq had dismantled and adhered to the base minimum UN charter. It was most likely a play on the joke 'Iran, Iraq whats the diff' as noted in southpark also. The overall point could have been that everyone knows Nth Korea have touted nuclear capabilities, everyone knew that Iran wanted enriched uranium for a nuclear reactor yet no one could come up with definitive proof that Iraq had what they claimed it did.
Iran however are merely trying to protect themselves as it was stated they trained them only IF the USA and Britain attacked them first, and quite frankly i dont blame them considering the amount of speculation which concerned the Iraq war. They wouldnt have a chance in ground combat from sheer weight of numbers and the amount of fronts that theyd have to fight on.
Pinkie Pie
04-18-2006, 09:55 PM
And yes Yvl meant Iran rather then Iraq since i believe wmds still havent been found and it was found that Iraq had dismantled and adhered to the base minimum UN charter. It was most likely a play on the joke 'Iran, Iraq whats the diff' as noted in southpark also. The overall point could have been that everyone knows Nth Korea have touted nuclear capabilities, everyone knew that Iran wanted enriched uranium for a nuclear reactor yet no one could come up with definitive proof that Iraq had what they claimed it did.
Yes, I got that part, and I wasn't arguing against it. It was n being half of a letter of q that I wasn't quite sure I understood.
Laggy
04-18-2006, 10:18 PM
tjhats kind of scary to me, not the fact that they would die for what they believe in, I knew that, and not the number of people... but if they DO do this, we could have a world war on our hands... and to tell the truth I dont think that they are worth a world war...
Oh crap... This IS the discussion table... Whoops.
Okay, now in all seriousness... People are just pissing me off about now. I just don't get why someone is really just about to blow themselves up to kill someone... Like I said(My first post was actually serious >.>), use freakin' big guns, you know? You could probably get away with something like that.
Now the number of people actually doing this shit amazes me, really. But you know... Shit is different for some people then it is for me, I guess. *Shrug*
Miles
04-19-2006, 06:32 AM
It's pretty bad that they can't think of anything else to do but kill innocent people. It makes me so mad! And they started this whole ruddy thing!! Ooh...Sometimes I wish I could go give someone in charge good beating for stuff like this!!
Chicken Little
04-19-2006, 08:03 AM
Oh crap... This IS the discussion table... Whoops.
Okay, now in all seriousness... People are just pissing me off about now. I just don't get why someone is really just about to blow themselves up to kill someone... Like I said(My first post was actually serious >.>), use freakin' big guns, you know? You could probably get away with something like that.
Now the number of people actually doing this shit amazes me, really. But you know... Shit is different for some people then it is for me, I guess. *Shrug*
UN sanctions prohibit certain countries from attaining any form military weapons that could lead to a catastrophe, there are also treaties governing the would be super powers to limit their standing counts. It is why tension is building up because Iran is a nation which is prohibited to have its own enriching procress for Uranium but it is free to buy it so it can be regulated.
As of yet the 5 nations with veto powers in the UN (Britain, China, Russia, Germany, USA i believe) only the USA supports military action in Iran, the only action the UN have taken has been via the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) who asked Iran to cease attempting to enrich uranium while they validate Irans activities. 'Right now its still only a but they could..' scenario.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.