Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 Feb '12 16:37
    Nations "talk" to each other with their actions [can't find the quote from the Cuban Missile Crisis movie, but you know what I mean]. Surely the U.S. could not possibly wage war on Iran right now or even for years to come? So what is the second swing by of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln "saying"?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17027768
  2. 14 Feb '12 16:55
    Originally posted by FMF
    Nations "talk" to each other with their actions [can't find the quote from the Cuban Missile Crisis movie, but you know what I mean]. Surely the U.S. could not possibly wage war on Iran right now or even for years to come? So what is the second swing by of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln "saying"?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17027768
    Excellent reference.

    Robert McNamara: This is not a blockade. This is language. A new vocabulary, the likes of which the world has never seen! This is President Kennedy communicating with Secretary Khrushchev!

    related:

    Robert McNamara: A blockade is technically an act of war; therefore we recommend calling the action a quarantine.
    Kenny O'Donnell: Let's hope that translates into Russian the way we want it to.

    There are a ton of quotes at IMDB for Thirteen Days
  3. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    14 Feb '12 16:58
    Gunboat diplomacy isn't exactly a new concept.
  4. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 Feb '12 17:12
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Gunboat diplomacy isn't exactly a new concept.
    That doesn't answer the OP question. I'm surprised that you chose to sidestep it.
  5. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    14 Feb '12 17:13
    Originally posted by FMF
    That doesn't answer the OP question. I'm surprised that you chose to sidestep it.
    "Stop nuclear research or we'll make you asplode"
  6. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 Feb '12 17:15
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    "Stop nuclear research or we'll make you asplode"
    You think the U.S. is really saying that?
  7. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    14 Feb '12 17:16 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by FMF
    You think the U.S. is really saying that?
    No, I think the US is really "saying" that. Also the US is "saying" that there needs to be political reforms in Iran so that Iranian opposition can have a voice.

    Of course maybe the ship just needed to get to the Indian Ocean and it had nothing to do with Iran.

    Oh yeah. It's also "saying" don't close the straits or we'll make you asplode. When you communicate with gunboats it's not terribly clear what you're "saying" except that if you don't do what we want we'll make you asplode.
  8. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 Feb '12 17:20
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    No, I think the US is really "saying" that.
    The U.S. is saying 'we are going to attack you'? That's what the aircraft carrier is saying?
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    14 Feb '12 17:25
    Originally posted by FMF
    The U.S. is saying 'we are going to attack you'? That's what the aircraft carrier is saying?
    What else does gunboat diplomacy ever "say"? It's not a hospital ship. It's a big flat thing where warplanes can land and take off
  10. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 Feb '12 17:27
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    What else does gunboat diplomacy ever "say"? It's not a hospital ship. It's a big flat thing where warplanes can land and take off
    You reckon the U.S. is saying 'we are going to attack you' even though it probably isn't going to do it and perhaps the people hearing them "say" that know they won't?
  11. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    14 Feb '12 17:30
    Originally posted by FMF
    You reckon the U.S. is saying 'we are going to attack you' even though it probably isn't going to do it and perhaps the people hearing them "say" that know they won't?
    Saddam thought he was safe too. So did bin Laden. And Gaddafi.

    You sidestepped MY question now. What else could an aircraft carrier "say"? YOU seem to think it's there to "say" something to Iran. I left open the possibility that maybe it's just going to the Indian Ocean.
  12. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    14 Feb '12 17:57
    Originally posted by FMF
    Nations "talk" to each other with their actions [can't find the quote from the Cuban Missile Crisis movie, but you know what I mean]. Surely the U.S. could not possibly wage war on Iran right now or even for years to come? So what is the second swing by of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln "saying"?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17027768
    While I don't think the US would invade Iran, I don't doubt that it could carry out airstrikes.

    Therefore, I think the presence of the carrier is saying

    "We have a military presence here and we can prevent you from closing the strait and taking other actions against our interest. Be warned that our diplomatic efforts in the area of your nuclear program are not to be ignored or retaliated against."
  13. Subscriber WoodPush
    Pusher of wood
    14 Feb '12 18:09 / 1 edit
    I think the carrier is saying "we're enforcing our embargo", and "we're monitoring global sanctions from other countries" and oh hey, don't forget, we can easily make this a full blockade.

    Use of force doesn't always have to be about making things explode.

    That said, I think it's a little naive to state that the U.S. can't or won't make things explode under the right circumstances. And while I wouldn't say public support is "strong" in support of war against iran, it's not weak either, and public support can be a fickle and manipulable thing.
  14. 14 Feb '12 18:31
    Originally posted by FMF
    Nations "talk" to each other with their actions [can't find the quote from the Cuban Missile Crisis movie, but you know what I mean]. Surely the U.S. could not possibly wage war on Iran right now or even for years to come? So what is the second swing by of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln "saying"?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17027768
    'You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?'
  15. 15 Feb '12 05:38
    Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon
    TEHRAN—Amidst mounting geopolitical tensions, Iranian officials said Wednesday they were increasingly concerned about the United States of America's uranium-enrichment program, fearing the Western nation may soon be capable of producing its 8,500th nuclear weapon. "Our intelligence estimates indicate that, if it is allowed to progress with its aggressive nuclear program, the United States may soon possess its 8,500th atomic weapon capable of reaching Iran," said Iranian foreign minister Ali Akbar Salehi, adding that Americans have the fuel, the facilities, and "everything they need" to manufacture even more weapons-grade fissile material. "Obviously, the prospect of this happening is very distressing to Iran and all countries like Iran. After all, the United States is a volatile nation that's proven it needs little provocation to attack anyone anywhere in the world whom it perceives to be a threat." Iranian intelligence experts also warned of the very real, and very frightening, possibility of the U.S. providing weapons and resources to a rogue third-party state such as Israel.