Roj Bash Kurdistan

What will happen when Iran achieves it’s nuclear ambition?

It will stop oil supply to the market and forces Saudi Arabia to do the same under nuclear threat. This will cause oil price to rocket sky high by 5 to 10 times. Iran also could cause the region to become nuclear battlefield. So what is the solution? It is simple: demilitarise Iran and politically rebuild it as made up of a loose confederate states from East Kurdistan, Arabistan, Azerbaijan, Persia and Bluchistan.

Londoner wrote:What will happen when Iran achieves it’s nuclear ambition?

It will stop oil supply to the market and forces Saudi Arabia to do the same under nuclear threat. This will cause oil price to rocket sky high by 5 to 10 times. Iran also could cause the region to become nuclear battlefield. So what is the solution? It is simple: demilitarise Iran and politically rebuild it as made up of a loose confederate states from East Kurdistan, Arabistan, nAzerbaijan, Persia and Bluchistan.

the israeli government and american government should butt out and stop making up lies about iran. do you know israeli government and american government are planning to attack iran very soon? do you realy believe that iran developing nuclear weapons? do you believe the rumor cause of its big oil and gas reserves it does not have need for nuclear energy? i think you are alot older than me so you probably remember hearing about in the 70s when the shah let it be known that he had plans to buy many nuclear reactors from america, france and germany to generate electricity. america gave the shah the okey and the government of the shah did a contract with a subsidiary of company siemens in germany to build 2 1,200 megawatt reactors in bushehr. while this was going on america told iran to make bigger its non-oil energy base. a study was done too by stanford research institute and it was agreed that iran need by 1990 a amount of around 20,000 megawatts. did you know 1st cadre of nuclear engineers of iran was trained at masachusetts institute of technology? this was in recognition of energy needs of iran. the final draft of america and iran nuclear energy agreement was signed in 1978. a few months before the horrid islamic revolution. the agreement stated the american export of nuclear technology, material and in helping in search for uranium deposits.
did you know that electrical reaquirments now in iran are much bigger than was predicted? there is yearly growth of around 6 % to 8% in demand for electricity and population of iran is estimated to be around 100,000,000 by 2025. do you think now iran can only rely on gas and oil? the sanctions have caused problems in foreign investment too. now cause of this iran not been able to even get to pre-revolution production level of 5.5 million barrel a day and is only exporting around 2 million barrels a day. also did you know that alot of major oil fields in iran need to be repaired very much? i have heard that would cost around $40,000,000,000 more than 15 years. the production level of iran now is around 2 million barrel a day very much geared to domestic consumption and grown by more than 280% since late 70s. if this keep going on iran will be net oil importer around 2010. it would be devastating for iran cause it relies on oil for around 80% of its foreign currency and 45% of its yearly budget. nuclear reactors will not solve problem of shortage of electricity in iran but they will help as one source of energy at least.

Londoner wrote:What will happen when Iran achieves it’s nuclear ambition?

It will stop oil supply to the market and forces Saudi Arabia to do the same under nuclear threat. This will cause oil price to rocket sky high by 5 to 10 times. Iran also could cause the region to become nuclear battlefield. So what is the solution? It is simple: demilitarise Iran and politically rebuild it as made up of a loose confederate states from East Kurdistan, Arabistan, Azerbaijan, Persia and Bluchistan.

I don't think Saudi Arabia would follow in cutting off the oil supply, but there is no doubt that oil prices would rise. Also, building confederate states wouldn't be that simple (especially for Kurds) because the Iranians consider most of East Kurdistan to be Azerbaijan. "Kordestan" province in Iran doesn't include key Kurdish cities like Mehebad. They would include Mehabad in West Azerbaijan province for example. Kirmashan would be seperate as well.

@ Kak Nuray

"the jews and americans should butt out and stop making up lies about iran. do you know the jews and america are planning to attack iran very soon? do you realy believe that iran developing nuclear weapons? "

-The problem is that Ahmadinejad threatened to wipe Israel off the map. He said the Jews should go live in Alaska. He denies that the Holocaust took place.

- I agree with you in that it is none of America's business, but Israel has a right to defend itself.

- Also, you can't compare the Shah to Ahmadinejad. The Shah did not threaten to wipe a race of people off the map.

nuray wrote:

Londoner wrote:What will happen when Iran achieves it’s nuclear ambition?

It will stop oil supply to the market and forces Saudi Arabia to do the same under nuclear threat. This will cause oil price to rocket sky high by 5 to 10 times. Iran also could cause the region to become nuclear battlefield. So what is the solution? It is simple: demilitarise Iran and politically rebuild it as made up of a loose confederate states from East Kurdistan, Arabistan, nAzerbaijan, Persia and Bluchistan.

the jews and americans should butt out and stop making up lies about iran. do you know the jews and america are planning to attack iran very soon? do you realy believe that iran developing nuclear weapons? do you believe the rumor cause of its big oil and gas reserves it does not have need for nuclear energy? i think you are alot older than me so you probably remember hearing about in the 70s when the shah let it be known that he had plans to buy many nuclear reactors from america, france and germany to generate electricity. america gave the shah the okey and the government of the shah did a contract with a subsidiary of company siemens in germany to build 2 1,200 megawatt reactors ......

Sorry,

I disagree. Iran has natural gas and oil enough to last hundreds of years for export and domestic use. Iran has at least 100bn barrel reserve. The estimate is between 90 to 132 billion barrels. If production continued at 6m b/d like 1974, the reserve would last for over 50 years. This more than enough to find solutions of all problems in Iran without going to nuclear energy.
Source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... _n25105955

It is not safe for the world to let a superstitious political System like the one in Iran to become in charge of nuclear technology. They will misuse it and could cause the region to become a nuclear battlefield. One thing for sure is this: Israel will never dare to let the superstitious political system in Iran to gain nuclear power. Israel doesn't have resources to go to Iran to neutralsie nuclear sites in Iran but Israel has nuclear weapons. This is some thing, which the free world doesn't want but also they want the security of Israel. So the solution, in this case, is that the free world have to go to Iran to neutralise nuclear sites.

matin123 wrote:

Londoner wrote:What will happen when Iran achieves it’s nuclear ambition?

It will stop oil supply to the market and forces Saudi Arabia to do the same under nuclear threat. This will cause oil price to rocket sky high by 5 to 10 times. Iran also could cause the region to become nuclear battlefield. So what is the solution? It is simple: demilitarise Iran and politically rebuild it as made up of a loose confederate states from East Kurdistan, Arabistan, Azerbaijan, Persia and Bluchistan.

I don't think Saudi Arabia would follow in cutting off the oil supply, but there is no doubt that oil prices would rise. Also, building confederate states wouldn't be that simple (especially for Kurds) because the Iranians consider most of East Kurdistan to be Azerbaijan. "Kordestan" province in Iran doesn't include key Kurdish cities like Mehebad. They would include Mehabad in West Azerbaijan province for example. Kirmashan would be seperate as well.

If Iran uses nuclear threat, Saudi Arabia will have no choice but to cut oil supply to the market. It would be easy to rebuild Iran as a loose confederation of states of East Kurdistan, Arabistan, Azeristan, Percia and Bluchistan. Mahabad and Kermanshah will join Kurdistan because the majarity of people in these cities are Kurds and will vote to join Kuridstan Confederate State. You have to give free choice to the people of each place to vote to choose to join to which confederate states.

@ Kak Londoner

Are Iraqi Kurdistan and Palestine considered confederate states? What's the difference between a confederate state and a city state?

Thanks

matin123 wrote:@ Kak Londoner

Are Iraqi Kurdistan and Palestine considered confederate states? What's the difference between a confederate state and a city state?

Thanks

There isn't any clear cut definition. Confederate states could be defined as states, which don't have any legal restrictions between them because they have many common identities and interests. For example European Union could be considered as European Confederate States. Practically, not legaly, Palestine is alomst a free state. Because there is nothing common between Palestine and Israel. S. Kurdistan is legally a federal state of Iraq, which means it is not as independent as to conduct its foreign affairs. That is way Central Government in Baghdad can create legal obstacles abroad as it is the case now with the oil contracts in Kurdistan. A city state could meen full sovereign state like the city of vatican. But these things may not be as simple as these definitions.

yeah, i understand better now. zor spas

matin123 wrote:I don't think Saudi Arabia would follow in cutting off the oil supply, but there is no doubt that oil prices would rise. Also, building confederate states wouldn't be that simple (especially for Kurds) because the Iranians consider most of East Kurdistan to be Azerbaijan. "Kordestan" province in Iran doesn't include key Kurdish cities like Mehebad. They would include Mehabad in West Azerbaijan province for example. Kirmashan would be seperate as well.

if this were to happen as londoner says. yes i agree that iranians consider most of the east as west azerbaijan. i also do not think the confederate states idea would be possible.

matin123 wrote:@ Kak Nuray

"the jews and americans should butt out and stop making up lies about iran. do you know the jews and america are planning to attack iran very soon? do you realy believe that iran developing nuclear weapons? "

-The problem is that Ahmadinejad threatened to wipe Israel off the map. He said the Jews should go live in Alaska. He denies that the Holocaust took place.

- I agree with you in that it is none of America's business, but Israel has a right to defend itself.

- Also, you can't compare the Shah to Ahmadinejad. The Shah did not threaten to wipe a race of people off the map.

i do not like the israeli government. i have nothing against jewish people. i will edit my post to 'israeli government' instead of 'jews' and 'american government' instead of 'americans'. i also do not like majles-e-khobregan and do not agree with ayatollah ali khamenei or president ahmadinejad. i do think the hideous holocaust happened. if this were proven to be true that iran is developing nuclear weapons, then i agree that israel should have 'a right to defend itself'.
i was not comparing the shah to ahmadinejad. i was trying to explain that america... wanted and helped iran to enrich uranium to have nuclear energy for electricity from the time of the shah and now are against iran having it and accusing iran of building a nuclear weapon...

nuray wrote:i was not comparing the shah to ahmadinejad. i was trying to explain that america... wanted and helped iran to enrich uranium to have nuclear energy for electricity from the time of the shah and now are against iran having it and accusing iran of building a nuclear weapon...

- i still believe that england and/or america are the ones responsible for removing the shah and replacing him with khomeini. they saw that iran was making progress under reza shah, and they didn't want iran to become a superpower. since there were already accusations that reza shah was corrupting the country, steeling money, etc., it wasn't difficult to bring back khomeini who was in exile at the time and was already pretty well known.

- and you're right, america helped iran under the shah's rule and are now against iran, but that's because the shah was an ally of the US. IRI is not. however, this is not the only time america has done something like this. they helped the afghans, osama bin laden, and the mujahidin against the soviets, but are now against them. they helped saddam against IRI during the Iran-Iraq war, and then turned against him.

- i don't know of any proof of Iran having nuclear weapons, but i rather the rest of the world keep a close eye on iran anyway. it doesn't make sense to say we are a peaceful nation and our nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, and then threaten to wipe israel off the map. i hope that the next US president (whoever it is) engages in peace talks with iran so that there's at least a chance to a peaceful resolution. it is not in persian or kurdish blood to hate jews. kourosh (cyrus the great) freed the jewish captives in babylon. he is mentioned in the torah 23 times by name. there is a great history and culture of jews in persia and kurdistan. it's a shame what's going on right now.

here's an interesting link about israel/iran conflict...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/ ... index.html

matin123 wrote:- i still believe that england and/or america are the ones responsible for removing the shah and replacing him with khomeini. they saw that iran was making progress under reza shah, and they didn't want iran to become a superpower. since there were
already accusations that reza shah was corrupting the country, steeling money, etc., it wasn't difficult to bring back khomeini who was in exile at the time and was already pretty well known.

- and you're right, america helped iran under the shah's rule and are now against iran, but that's because the shah was an ally of the US. IRI is not. however, this is not the only time america has done something like this. they helped the afghans, osama bin laden, and the mujahidin against the soviets, but are now against them. they helped saddam against IRI during the Iran-Iraq war, and then turned against him.

- i don't know of any proof of Iran having nuclear weapons, but i rather the rest of the world keep a close eye on iran anyway. it doesn't make sense to say we are a peaceful nation and our nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, and then threaten to wipe israel off the map. i hope that the next US president (whoever it is) engages in peace talks with iran so that there's at least a chance to a peaceful resolution. it is not in persian or kurdish blood to hate jews. kourosh (cyrus the great) freed the jewish captives in babylon. he is mentioned in the torah 23 times by name. there is a great history and culture of jews in persia and kurdistan. it's a shame what's going on right now.

here's an interesting link about israel/iran conflict...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/ ... index.html

i think america was more 'responsible for removing the shah...' i agree with you that the reason was that 'they did not want iran to become a super power...'
i know american government has done this many times. they do not care about people other countries. they butt in and manipulate other governments and then turn against them when they have no more use for them...
it is good idea to keep watch and search for proof. you are right that it does not 'make sense...' remember ahmadinejad believes when there are revolts, signs in the heavens, many natural disasters, wars, famine, massive death etc it means it is time for the 12th imam mahdi a.s. to reappear. i think ahmadinejad wants to help speed up the process of the appearance of the mahdi a.s. so maybe he is saying he will wipe israel off the map cause of this and the nuclear program maybe is only to develop electricity.
i hope americas next president is obama. he at least would 'engage in peace talks with iran' there then could be some hope for a 'peaceful resolution'.
i read about kourosh the great freeing 'the jewish captives in babylon', but i have never read the torah so i did not know about the other info.
yes the article is interesting but also frightening. if mofaz replaces olmert when olmert steps down then it will be very likely that israel will attack iran.

"If Iran continues its program to develop nuclear weapons, we will attack it," Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz told Yediot Ahronot, Israel's largest mass-circulation daily. "The window of opportunity has closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear program."

Mofaz's threat is one of the most explicit made against the Islamic Republic of Iran by a member of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's Cabinet.

The threat is not without precedent. In 1981, Israeli warplanes destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor being built by Saddam Hussein's regime. Israel also is reported to have targeted a Syrian reactor in September.

Israel don't have resources enough to neutralise Iranian Nuclear sites, the same way it did with Saddam Hussein#s Nuclear Site on 1981. But Israel has nuclear weapons and will use it as the last resort. However, the free world wouldn't let such thing to happen. For this purpose, the free world will do the job by themselves by going to Iran and rebuild it politically as made up from many new states like Kurdistan, Arabistan and others. In this way, Iran will never pose a threat again.

Israel exercises to attack Iran:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0621/p99s01-duts.html