Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ironhide wrote:
Land-wise and population-wise, Iran is not as big as Russia. Which equates to less mouths to feed and less infrastructure. So Iran would not need to spend as much as Russia.

Which isn't directly relevant to this issue.

dogma wrote:
Israelis are not Arabs. Why don't you go and tell an Israelis (or an Arab for that matter) that they are Arabs.

I know several Israelis. Some of them balk at the notion that they are Arab, others admit it openly. The term Arab is one related to ethnicity. The term Israeli is one related to nationality. They are not mutually exclusive.

Orlanth wrote:
I now understand what you are saying, but it doesnt tally with a definition of Orientalism.

Not the common definition, but certainly the one proffered by Said and many of his contemporaries.

@dogma: It's relevancy, is to refute this post made:

Iran, like North Korea just wants to be one of the "big boys". They didn't learn the lesson that the Sov's learned in the early 90's, nukes ruin the economy's of oppressive socialist governments.

What worked against the Soviets during the Cold War, ain't necessarily going to work against Iran.

I know several Israelis. Some of them balk at the notion that they are Arab, others admit it openly. The term Arab is one related to ethnicity. The term Israeli is one related to nationality. They are not mutually exclusive.

Yeah, but in the case of this topic we are talking about one nation against another. So the nationality term would apply. Don't ya think?

I'm pretty sure it was the breakdown of communist economic practice that burst the soviets economic bubble. Not the fact that they were hording nukes. Being an opressive government has little to do with how well you can horde nukes. As it is there is really only two cases of that happening ever. Us and them. Implying that the "oppressive" nature of their government caused the nuclear construction program to run their economy is a stretch at best.

Iran, like North Korea just wants to be one of the "big boys". They didn't learn the lesson that the Sov's learned in the early 90's, nukes ruin the economy's of oppressive socialist governments.

North Korea had no economy when they started their nuclear ambition. Irans was already going downhill. I think the point could be better stated as:

"Opressive socialist governments have difficulty maintaining strong economies"

However thats an issue for another thread.

dogma wrote:
Israelis are not Arabs. Why don't you go and tell an Israelis (or an Arab for that matter) that they are Arabs.

Ironhide wrote:
I know several Israelis. Some of them balk at the notion that they are Arab, others admit it openly. The term Arab is one related to ethnicity. The term Israeli is one related to nationality. They are not mutually exclusive.

Essentially true, but by technical definition it is closer to the other way around. Arabs are a semitic race. Arabic is listed as one of the semitic languages.

This more closely follows the idea that Arabs are descendents of Ishmael son of Abraham as implied by both the Torah and Koran.

Israel the nation contains lots of different ethnic and religious groups.

First, all Jews aren't the same -- there are tensions between the traditional Hassadic Jews and the less orthodox ones.

Many Israeli citizens are actual Arabs and muslim, there are also small Druze and Christian communities.

I don't dispute the fact that there are different ethnic groups living in Israel. I just think that when discussing Iran and Israel you have to look at the nationalistic views of those who are in power. The minority ethnic groups aren't the ones who will be making the decisions when the bombs start falling.

Ironhide wrote:I don't dispute the fact that there are different ethnic groups living in Israel. I just think that when discussing Iran and Israel you have to look at the nationalistic views of those who are in power. The minority ethnic groups aren't the ones who will be making the decisions when the bombs start falling.

Where do you get the notion that it will result in a war?

A little less panic please.

I'M NOT PANICKING! I'M NOT PANICKING!

Seriously though, because Israel tends to a bit too proactive when it comes to national defense? And because Iran likes to try and wear the big boy pants?

Ironhide wrote:I'M NOT PANICKING! I'M NOT PANICKING!

Seriously though, because Israel tends to a bit too proactive when it comes to national defense? And because Iran likes to try and wear the big boy pants?

Meh, it'll just be another india pakistan deal. No one will push the button because that button blows up both countries.

Not that I wouldn't mind either country becoming a glass parking lot.

Ironhide wrote:Not that I wouldn't mind either country becoming a glass parking lot.

And here people may have been starting to take you seriously.

How the hell do you pronounce that dude's name?

Ironhide wrote:
What worked against the Soviets during the Cold War, ain't necessarily going to work against Iran.

True, but that's always the case when dealing with varying nations. However, Iran's economy has a great deal in common with the USSR's, so the comparison is valid despite differences of mass.

Ironhide wrote:
Yeah, but in the case of this topic we are talking about one nation against another. So the nationality term would apply. Don't ya think?

We are? If we're talking about nationality why are you even using the word Arab? Unless you're specifically referencing the Saudis there is no reason to do so.

Considering how both Israel and Iran have exported hate and uncompromising ideals over the years, and caused most of the problems in that area of the world. To see both nations gone wouldn't be a bad thing IMO. Either in smoldering ruins, or the populaces actually deciding their own fate.

Iran's economy doesn't have to support the vast population that the Soviet Union had to, there is no comparison.

Arabs always see themselves as their own nation regardless of borders or religion.

Ironhide wrote:
Iran's economy doesn't have to support the vast population that the Soviet Union had to, there is no comparison.

There is actually a very sound comparison. The economic modality is almost exactly the same (state sponsored monopoly with a shift towards privatization), and the per capita GDP is within 3000 USD after PPP adjustment. The variance might be even lower if it were possible to accurately correct for PPP in the Soviet case.

What does lead to a failure of comparison is the presence of a contiguous Iranian culture. It would be much more accurate to compare Iran to Bolshevik Russia with the rest of the Middle East being analogous to the FSU.

Ironhide wrote:
Arabs always see themselves as their own nation regardless of borders or religion.

That's incorrect. Read up on the failure of Panarabism to see why.