"If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place up.” Peter Schiff. A side I haven't seen before.

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
John99's picture
John99
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 27 2009
Posts: 490
"If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place up.” Peter Schiff. A side I haven't seen before.

I've been a fan of PS for quite some time, but this surprised and disappointed me.

A qoute from Peter from the youtube clip below (2 minutes in)....

"I might have gone into Iraq if I thought there was weapons of mass destruction there. If we had intelligence that we knew where they were I might have gone in to take them out, just like we think Iran might be building nuclear weapons. Well, if we really believe that, if we really think that, we tell the Iranians: ‘This is where we think those weapons are, you need to let our inspectors in there.’ If they don’t let us in, just blow the place up.”

Thoughts anyone?

james_knight_chaucer's picture
james_knight_chaucer
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 21 2009
Posts: 160
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

I think he meant to blow up the weapons plant if they would not let inspectors in, not the whole of Iran. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

John99's picture
John99
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 27 2009
Posts: 490
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

J-K-C wrote

I think he meant to blow up the weapons plant if they would not let inspectors in, not the whole of Iran. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

I thought the UN inspectors had already said they were not building nukes. Maybe I'm wrong will check that out.

And guess we shouldn't open the can of worms of debating if it is "perfectly reasonable" for a super power to blow up other countries, whatever the justification, like non-existent weapons of mass destruction..... :-)

 

SagerXX's picture
SagerXX
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 11 2009
Posts: 2219
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Oh, we should definitely spend our time & blood & money blowing up everyone we suspect has something we don't want them to have.  I mean, who do they think they are?!  And this policy has proven itself over and over and over...

Viva -- Sager

james_knight_chaucer's picture
james_knight_chaucer
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 21 2009
Posts: 160
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Hello? Guys, we're not talking about blowing up countries. We are talking about blowing up weapons plants. I thought I made that clear, or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

Gungnir's picture
Gungnir
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 2 2009
Posts: 643
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Yeah, damn right, guilty until proven innocent the 5th amendment doesn't apply to foreign countries, hell let's go bomb the damn French too, we KNOW they have the bomb, and the freakin' Russians and North Korea too and they're not even our friends. America F*ck Yeah!

I would have thought that the international debacle known as Operation Iraqi Freedom would have proven something to people. Allegations and suspicions of anything aren't enough to have a justifiable position to invade, bomb, or whatever a country. If we haven't learned this from our experience just ask Israel.Whether we believe there is a greater scheme in that action, or not, isn't relevant, the fact that we went to war on a lie (and it's been proven) has led the world to question our motivations, whether those questions are justified or not has yet to be determined.

More to the point, what gives us the right to assume the position of World Police? Do you think that just that assumption, post WW2, has led to the US metaphorically walking around with a target on it's chest saying shoot here? Sometimes proactive security can lead to the very thing that you're trying to avoid.

This is especially relevant when you consider the costs in taxpayers money, for mounting these kinds of operations, that we can ill afford. I'm all for defending the United States, but against real and proven threats, not smoke and mirror threats, when it's proven that Iran has nuclear capability, and the ability to deliver it then maybe we should consider taking pre-emptive action, until then, lets not get into another shooting match when we already have two going (that we know of).

SteveR's picture
SteveR
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 4 2008
Posts: 71
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

It's pretty clear that by "blow the place up" he meant the suspected weapons plant, not the whole country.

goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

I've been a fan of PS for quite some time, but this surprised and disappointed me.

A qoute from Peter from the youtube clip below (2 minutes in)....

"I might have gone into Iraq if I thought there was weapons of mass destruction there. If we had intelligence that we knew where they were I might have gone in to take them out, just like we think Iran might be building nuclear weapons. Well, if we really believe that, if we really think that, we tell the Iranians: ‘This is where we think those weapons are, you need to let our inspectors in there.’ If they don’t let us in, just blow the place up.”

Thoughts anyone?

I find it disappointing.  While I agree it would be a far better option than a full invasion, that is not saying much.  When you take a step back, it becomes hard to explain why us Americans feel that they get to tell everyone else how to run their countries.  I don't like the thought of Iran with nuclear weapons but it is really not our business unless they are planning upon using them against us.

America will eventually stop telling other countries how they must be run.  The only question is will that be done by our own free choice or will it be forced upon us by the collapse of our empire.

bluestone's picture
bluestone
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 29 2008
Posts: 263
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Clearly the US interest in the middle east is over access to oil.  I've listened to Mike Ruppert lectures and watched Collapse.  He makes the claim that nations (especially the US) are behaving as if they know peak oil is real.  Nations are jockeying to secure their access the world's remaining and easily accessible oil.  Iraq was the first step.  It really is a nice deal.  We teach you about democracy, and you give us your oil.  Iran and general control of the MIddle East region is America's next step.  We certainly aren't taking a whole lot of interest in North Korea's WMD program.  Guess what? no oil over there.

Ive been a fan of Peter Schiff for quite some time.  I think he's generally spot on when it comes to his economic analysis.  However, after listening to many of his videos and weekly talk shows, I don't think he really knows about peak oil.  He certainly doesn't strike me as a war hawk or a nationalist.

Brian

tigerlump's picture
tigerlump
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 18 2008
Posts: 5
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

I cant stress this enough,an attack against Iran will cause global economic collapse!

tigerlump's picture
tigerlump
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 18 2008
Posts: 5
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

I cant stress this enough,an attack against Iran will cause global economic collapse!

jhelge's picture
jhelge
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 7 2009
Posts: 43
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

He's going for the "Invasion of Iraq was a Great Idea" vote. Now that's a group of people not many politicians have been lining up to tap lately.

At best his statements on Iran are uneducated, at worst obsequious. Either way I am disappointed.

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

I think it is good to put this into some kind of context.

Iran is home to one of the oldest civilizations on the planet. Ii is home to the worlds oldest religion. The opinions about Iran most Americans have are shaped by the MSM. Ahmadinajad has been so mistranslated and misquoted you would think he is a mid east Dubya.

The context is OIL. Look at a map of the mid east and you see we control Iraq, We control Afghanistan and guess what sits between.

It is petro tic tac toe. Schiff knows this. He also knows the other Senator from Ct. Is Joe Lieberman who is about as big a hawk as you will find.

Now if Joe got selected I mean elected being a hawk I think Pete thinks it is ok for him. It is just politics.

I think the real questIon to be asking is does Pete get money from AIPAC?

After all our foriegn policy is determined by AIPAC and the CFR.

Empire is a bad idea. There are three stages of empire. The rise, the golden age and the fall.

Which one do you think we are in?

jneo's picture
jneo
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 7 2009
Posts: 742
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

 

We need to "Invade or Bomb" another country like we need a hole in the head.  

 

"WAR IS A RACKET"

John99's picture
John99
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 27 2009
Posts: 490
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

J-K-C wrote,

Hello? Guys, we're not talking about blowing up countries. We are talking about blowing up weapons plants. I thought I made that clear, or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

My apologies, james_knight_chaucer, I am not attempting to be deliberately obtuse that PS is most likely referring to bombing Iranian weapon sites verses the whole country.

What I am doing is taking issue that Schiff says he 'likely' would have gone into Iraq and Afghanistan, and perhaps will go into Iran, and these statements tell me he is not adversed to war, death and destruction, and that it can be justified, which has been all to easy to do.

Forgive me for not knowing, but does not the US Constitution state that the military's purpose is to defend America's borders - not to aggressively attack other countries? So, why over 700 military bases in over 130 countries?

I know the propaganda machine refers to this as the US being, 'the world's police force - bring democracy and human rights throughout the world', but I think here, on the CM site, we can agree this is pure unadulterated BS, that the reason for this global presence is to steal resources and to take over banking systems to enslave more bodies into the debt-based ponzi banking scheme (the entire banking systems of both Iraq and Afghanistan have been replaced by 'privately-owned central' banks).

Since the 2nd world war the US has attacked over 50 countries (bombed 30), on the pretext of spreading democracy, where many of these countries were active democracies before being attacked. I'm sorry, this is not being a good policeman. This is something far darker.

Within this site, we are focused on the economy and with mega-hits on climate change as well. With the US bankrupt, why do we allow trillions of new debt to be spent on multiple wars, and military infrastructure world-wide, further bankrupting the US? And reference climate destruction, why does the US-controlled United Nations forbid the 'carbon footprint' of war to be included in their pollution studies, when war is the biggest polluter of all? 4,000 tones of 'depleted uranium' weapons being dropped on Iraq and Afghanistan is killing the whole planet!

It seems so simple that the money being spent on global aggression could be better served within America's borders to provide the best health care system in the world, or from another website I read that this military budget could provide and construct a vast array of solar panels in the US sun-belt providing jobs and clean energy to the betterment of the citizens and the planet.

But the disconnect, the glaring reality, is that the vast majority of politicians are reelected each and every year to continue this rape and pillage, not only to the disadvantage of so many peoples of the globe, but to the American voter as well. This I can not understand, and Peter Schiff's comments have now placed a 'red flag' over his head, for me, and sadly he is starting to look and smell like a wolf in sheep's clothing.

 

Gungnir's picture
Gungnir
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 2 2009
Posts: 643
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...
V wrote:

Iran is home to one of the oldest civilizations on the planet. Ii is home to the worlds oldest religion.

Oh get a clue.

Iraq was the the home of the Sumerian Civilization dating back to 5000 BCE, there are also claims of Vedic Culture (a city sunken off the coast of Gujarat) in India dating back to 7500 BCE and the "Neolithic revolution" happened 8000 BCE in South East Asia Turkey also claims this with Çatalhöyük dating to 7500-5700 BCE there are Mesolithic building remains in Great Britain dating back to 7600 BCE, and of course the Stonehenge site dates back to 8000 BCE. Finally there are the Australian Aborigines, who have history going back an estimated 60,000 years.

As far as oldest religion and all this time, I thought that Sunni's and Shi'ites were muslims (600 CE), and not Hindu's Zoroastrians or Buddhists, Hinduism encapsulates Vedic tradition (which ceased to be a recognized religion in 500 BCE, although the Vedic Texts still survive in Hinduism today such as the Mahabharata) and certain aspects of Zoroastrianism (which enters recorded history at about 500 BCE, Zarathushtra is traditionally dated at 600 BCE, liguistically at 1000 BCE latest 100BCE and normally Azerbaijani, which at the time was part of Median Empire, which included modern day Iran, his birthplace may or may not be in modern day Iran, since there are several sites that are described as his home), Buddhism also dates from 600-500 BCE however only Zoroastrianism developed in the Greater Iran, which during the Achaemenid Empire Period encompasses Pakistan. Afghanistan, Uzbhekistan, Kazhakstan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Turkmenistan Egypt, Libya and parts of South East Macedonia and portions of Greece, which ended with by the conquest of Alexander III of Macedon. Of course Iran was a very different place then anyway since in 637-651 it was conquered and subjugated by Islamic arabs who went so far as to as to replace Persian with Arabic as the official language, to this day there is still a prejudice against Iran by Arab states who consider Iran still be Persian not Arabic. Both Hinduism and Buddhism developed in Modern Day India.

In the words of Hannibal Lecter "If you can't keep up with the conversation, best not try to join in."

Sorry we'll return to our usual programming now.

SagerXX's picture
SagerXX
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 11 2009
Posts: 2219
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...
james_knight_chaucer wrote:

Hello? Guys, we're not talking about blowing up countries. We are talking about blowing up weapons plants. I thought I made that clear, or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

I'm certain Iran will not only recognize but appreciate the hairsplitting difference between plants & country when they consider their options for reprisal.

Viva -- Sager

Johnny Oxygen's picture
Johnny Oxygen
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 9 2009
Posts: 1443
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Every since the development of nuclear weapons its been pretty clear that its just a matter of time before the 'wrong people' get them. The technology to build the bomb is pretty easy to get a hold of. Its the heavy metal (Uranium not Uriah Heep) thats the trick. At some point in history here some form of 'synthetic' heavy metal will be found and that will insure that just about anyone can have the bomb. My point is this, its folly to try and stop it. The genie is out of the bottle now we have to deal with what we created for better or for worse.

With regards to Iran. I think Obama's about-face on troops in the middle east is because he knows for a fact that Israel is going to attack Iran. What I mean by that is that a US/Israeli plan is in the works. I think we are seeing the beginning of US and company getting their foot holds in the middle east in preperation for the big showdown which is all about oil.

 

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

The "wrong people get them"

Yep the wrong people got them ok. The U.S and Israel certainly are the wrong people.

I would ask the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki if they think the right people have them.

This country is the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons on another people.

A civilian population to boot. 

As far as I know Obama has not said the Bush doctrine is off the table.

Which means a pre-emptive strike is a likely scenario.

As I said in a earlier post Iran is one of the oldest civilizations on the planet.

It has a rich culture far ahead of anything in the west. Americans opinions and beliefs 

are being manipulated by the mainstream media into a frenzy to justify whatever geopolitical 

goals the elite wish to carry out.

Iran has every right to consider us and Israel an enemy and a threat to its very survival.

The CIA has been involved in Iran for as long as I have ( over 6 decades) been alive.

Iran got to be a member of the axis of evil by deciding to start its own oil bourse.

This was a direct threat to J P Morgan, BP, Goldman Sachs etal who control the NYMEX and the ICE.

The only logical step for Iran to protect itself from the other axis of evil ( U.S. U.K. Israel and the international 

banking cartel is to develop weapons with which it has been threatened.

Never forget the banksters not only thrive on war they LOVE it

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 854
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Pakistan is chalk full of people within their own military who hate the U.S. The Pashtuns of Pakistan uniformly hate the U.S. as they have strong tribal and familial  ties to the Pashtuns of Afghanistan.

"The vast majority of Pashtuns are found in an area stretching from southeastern Afghanistan to northwestern Pakistan."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people

The Pashtun population of Pakistan has been identified by the American military as the major threat. The money and soldiers earmarked for Afghanistan will end up largely focussed on Pakistan, supporting a civil war they have curried in that part of the world

"A civil war is brewing in Pakistan. Thanks to President Barack Obama, who is shifting the American war from Iraq to “the real enemies” operating from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Cash-strapped Pakistan could not defy Obama persuasion and decided to wage a war against its own people, the Pashtuns inhabiting the Northern Province and the tribal areas of Waziristan."

http://aljazeera.com/news/articles/39/A_civil_war_Obamas_gift_to_Pakista...

Pakistan has nukes, a hostile military, a compliant but hostile govt. Why is all the fear of nukes, in the U.S. angled in the direction of Iran and not Pakistan? Probably because fear of a nuclear Pakistan is not required for geo strategic reasons that have NOTHING to do with actual risk of nuclear deployment.

Schiff has proven to be a weak political thinker and that should be carefully weighed against his economic conclusions. Anyone holding forth about economics, without a firm grasp of internationalpolitics could be responsible for a catastrophic economic meltdown occuring in the wallets of people who follow their advice. Beware.

 

Dogs_In_A_Pile's picture
Dogs_In_A_Pile
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 4 2009
Posts: 2606
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...
tigerlump wrote:

I cant stress this enough,an attack against Iran will cause global economic collapse!

I can't stress this enough.

A global economic collapse is going to happen anyway.

"Tis foolish to fear what cannot be avoided."  Publilius Syrus ~ 100 BC

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Just what we need...another crazy neocon running for office.

One would think that after killing 1,300,000 Iraqis over bogus claims of WMDs we might be a bit more humble.  Tony Blair and baby Bush faked the evidence as we all know now.  But hey, it was just muslims we knocked off and besides, we gave them a democracy as corrupt as ours so who are they to complain?

With nice folks like us ruling the world, I can't imagine why Iran would want nukes.

Larry 

 

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: "If they (Iran) don’t let us in, just blow the place ...

Hi Mr. Gung

I hope you are quite happy freezing in Alaska.

As for joining the converstion.

Read the following then get back to me.

"Iran is home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 7000 BC.["

This is from Wikipedia.

Also although there is still debate on the subject there are many who believe

India was invaded by the Aryans. That is people from Iran

There is also reason to believe that Zoroaster dates back over 5000 years.

Predating Krishna and Ram the Avatars of Hinduism. I don't really think you can use 

the Vedas as a religion though they are foundational to Hinduism.

If you wish to split hairs you could also say that the Native Americans who came over the land bridge

make up one of the oldest civilizations and religions.

And don't forget the bushmen of the Kalahari.

I will now get back to MY regular programming.

You can get back to whatever it is you do in the frozen north.

Much Love

V

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments