|
|
| Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? (147274) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
|
| (147280) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Tue Aug 29 15:09:11 2006, in response to Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 29 14:48:57 2006. I saw something saying what I've been thinking.Iran ain't scared anymore after Iraq. But why are you concerned with Iran for? Bush is the one who said Saddam was Hitler, not this guy. Plus, doesn't NK have the bomb now? Or maybe, some people upstairs don't really give a crap. Hence the headline Iran Delegated to Israel. ---- The United States, which is at loggerheads with Tehran over Iranian nuclear plans, issued a visa on Tuesday to Iran's former President Mohammad Khatami to visit the United States next week, the State Department said. The Shi'ite Muslim cleric would be the most high-profile Iranian to visit Washington since the United States cut diplomatic ties when 52 Americans were being held hostage at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran after the 1979 Islamic revolution. Casey said there were no restrictions on Khatami's travel while in the United States and that U.S. visas were also granted to several members of his entourage. He said there were no plans for U.S. officials to meet with Khatami. |
|
|
| (147301) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Aug 29 16:16:03 2006, in response to Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 29 14:48:57 2006. Does your hysteria know no bounds? Go change your underwear and stop panicking at every bit of propoganda the Iranians put out. If nukes are such horrible things then why exactly does Israel maintain an active stockpile? You can thank Dubya's handling of Iraq and North Korea for Iran's program to develop nuclear weapons. If there's one lesson that would-be troublemakers around the world can draw from our actions in 2003 it's that if you have nukes we'll leave you alone, but if you're threatening to develop them we'll invade. Clearly the deterrant value of the nuclear weapon is worth quite a bit, even at blunting the lone remaining superpower. If the North Koreans can keep the US out of their country with nukes then the Iranians certainly will be likely to try the same method to keep us out. Now of course there were other deciding factors in our attacking Iraq, including promised oil windfalls, and Saddam's history of annexing neighboring countries, but to the Iranians comparing North Korea and Iraq and looking to learn from their experiences the presence of nuclear weapons must be a deciding factor.Do you honestly think Iran is so fucking stupid as to attack Israel? Israel is just about the only country to actually have a national missile defence system based around the indigenous (yet US funded) Arrow, and the US's Patriot missile systems. An air attack is out of the question because the US just kind of controls the intervening airspace over Iraq and Saudi Arabia. The Israelis could likely teach us a hell of lot about controlling imports so even a terrorist container bomb is likely out. Even if the US didn't get involved the effect on Iran would be murderous, since Israel has had a fully operational IRBM, and their pilots have demonstrated a capability to bluff their way through air space they do not control, and the Iranians lack the integrated defensive systems the Israelis have built up over the past 40 or so years. It's highly unlikely that the US would sit idly by while Israel and Iran waged nuclear war on each other. It's debatable as to whether we'd respond with nuclear weapons, but even a series of conventional strikes from the massed US naval and air forces in Iraq and Saudi Arabia following a nuclear confrontation with Israel would truely cripple Iran. The one thing that likely could be said with some certainty is that a nuclear shooting war between Israel and Iran is that Iran would almost certainly come out the worse for it. With 68 million citizens and virtually no defensive systems against ballistic missiles Iran would likely become a massive humanitarian disaster on a nationwide basis. I only hope that if Israel, Iran, and the US are stupid enough to start shooting nukes at each other we'll at least be smart enough to help those who survive to pick up the pieces and move on in both countries. However, more likely than not this is all propoganda. Sure, they may have uranium enrichment underway, they may be working on the implosion triggers, and all the other stuff needed for a nuclear weapon. However, they cannot hope to attack Israel and come out the victor and they have to know that. It's one thing to publically put your faith in god while privately acknowledging your nation's strategic handicaps, and quite another thing to commit suicide with an entire nation. Saber-rattling always sounds good with a nation's collection of backwards, redneck types, and if the current regime is to stay in power they need those redneck types to keep the more progressive elements in check. Claiming that Iran will have a nuclear arsenal and will use those weapons to destroy Israel sounds good in a speech, but totally ignores Israel and the US's vast superiority in weapons, delivery systems, and defensive systems. In the end all Iran's nuclear weapon development program may do is keep the US out if the inferences that can be drawn from our actions with North Korea hold true. |
|
|
| (147306) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Tue Aug 29 16:44:05 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 29 16:16:03 2006. most countries holding nukes doesn't threaten to use them on a daily basis. most countries who have them don't have any intention on using them technically, nor are they also willing as a fanatic to use them to further their beliefs. most people with nukes don't talk openly about using them on their own population to further those fanatical goals.most people don't put their women in potato sacks, blow themselves up daily, and spend their days scheming and dreaming of genocide, with acceptable loses to themselves. Difference in having them, and being totally nuts. Let's not forget the suitcase bombs that were supposedly stoped on the border, and the iranian and syrian rockets that rain into Israel. Some of the stuff no one knew they had. They obviously don't mind using and testing out any new stuff. |
|
|
| (147327) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 17:45:53 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by orange blossom special on Tue Aug 29 16:44:05 2006. most countries holding nukes doesn't threaten to use them on a daily basis. most countries who have them don't have any intention on using them technically, nor are they also willing as a fanatic to use them to further their beliefs. most people with nukes don't talk openly about using them on their own population to further those fanatical goals.But think about before those countries had nukes. How many times did France invade Germany (or vice versa) between 1750 and 1950? Do we worry about Spain because they had a totalitarian dictatorship until thirty years ago? Did we worry even when Franco was still there? Do we worry about that little island off the north-west coast of Yurp that actually managed pre-nukes to take over a quarter of the world having schemes for world domination? most people don't put their women in potato sacks, blow themselves up daily, and spend their days scheming and dreaming of genocide, with acceptable loses to themselves. In our civilised world, that is true. However, I doubt that most people live in the civilised world. As civilised nations we have two basic strategies: a) civilise the barbarians b) put up barriers between us and the barbarians Obviously, these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and both have cheap and expensive aspects. Plan (b)'s military and intelligence aspects become extremely expensive in the case of barbarians getting nukes. Should barbarians get nukes, that would effectively force us to civilise that barbarian country. We're doing it to China, and I suspect in a decade or two it'll be Persia. Let's not forget the suitcase bombs that were supposedly stoped on the border, and the iranian and syrian rockets that rain into Israel. Israel is a self-important herring. |
|
|
| (147340) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 18:14:38 2006, in response to Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 29 14:48:57 2006. Iran will not nuke Israel, the nuke is more as a deterrant, rather than a provacation device. Its more as "if you attack us, we'll use the nuke if our backs are against the war". Israel has a huge nuke stockpile, and if I am not mistakened, Israel has not yet signed the nuclear proliferation treaty, meaning Israel can use a nuke first rather than only after have recieved a nuclear attack. Also Iran cannot attack Israel with a nuclear device because of the massive amount of damange it would cause to its neighbors, including its closest friend in Syria, then Lebanon, Saudia Arabia, Egypt would suffer the after effect in economic devastation from the radiation, the global economic impact would be disasterous, from that one nuclear attack alone. A reprisal would affect Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, China, so both sides know that already, both sides know the absolute chaos and economic destruction and the insurmoutable amount of countries that would be dragged into a conflict they do not want to be apart of. Irans leader isn't stupid, his actions (or lack) have put him in a stronger position than the US in the middle east. He doesn't want to do anything to destroy that, especially with the price of oil so high. |
|
|
| (147344) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:23:04 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 18:14:38 2006. the nuke is more as a deterrant (sic), rather than a provacation (sic) deviceYou haven't been paying attention to Ahmadinejad's rhetoric, have you? |
|
|
| (147347) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:25:45 2006, in response to Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 29 14:48:57 2006. I wonder why the world is dragging its feet about Iran and its nuke programOil. (Sounds like the ultimate lib comeback, right? but appeasement of the radical Islamists due to their stranglehold on oil has been ongoing—and as long as the Iranians continue to sell oil in dollars, the USA will never lay a finger on them.) |
|
|
| (147348) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:27:20 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 29 16:16:03 2006. Do you honestly think Iran is so fucking stupid as to attack Israel?They already did via Hezbollah, dummkopf. Iran started Hezbollah, remember? or do you have no knowledge of Hezbollah's history? Both Hezbollah and Hamas are organizations started by Iran. |
|
|
| (147349) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:28:49 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 17:45:53 2006. But think about before those countries had nukesWhy? All that does is drag apples/oranges comparisons into the fray. Israel is a self-important (red) herring Thanks for displaying de-facto support of Islamic terrorism. |
|
|
| (147352) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Aug 29 18:33:20 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:23:04 2006. Rhetoric is for the media. Given that we are not Vulcans, we can't look inside somebody else's brain, so we will presume he realizes that if Iran shoots first, Israel is going to retaliate and Iran knows Israel has nuclear weapons and will use them if they are attacked with one. |
|
|
| (147354) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:34:03 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Aug 29 18:33:20 2006. Rhetoric is for the mediaThey said that when Hitler was around, too. How many heads of state do you know that spout such rhetoric and don't follow through? |
|
|
| (147355) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Aug 29 18:35:03 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:34:03 2006. Look at history, there's a bunch. |
|
|
| (147361) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 18:47:58 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:23:04 2006. As dan said, rhetoric is for the media, he's not as big as a hardliner as people think, he's quite smart. He's managed to get Iran as the big power in the middle east, actually thanks to the U.S. and Israel, with Iraq weakened and Afghanistan gone, with Hezbollah winning the "moral victory" Iran has the high ground, its like poker, they've won each draw of the cards, now they're getting bold, thus why they're continuing with enrichment. They can do more damage by reducing oil output than any military action. Iran can thank the U.S. for allowing them to become as powerful as they are. Actually if you look at Iran inside, there is a HUGE division, and alot of people inside Iran want democracy, women wearing designer clothing, men in business suits discussing things that dont involve religion or anti-israel.Remember this as much as the U.S. and Iran may or may not like each other, but when you fill up the car, or when you heat your home, remember the strange relationship these two countries have. Iran has the high road unfortuantly. |
|
|
| (147366) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Aug 29 19:02:06 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 18:47:58 2006. But doesn't the US have Saudia Arabia or Iraq for oil? |
|
|
| (147368) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:02:41 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Aug 29 19:02:06 2006. Iran's got a lock on a tenth of all the world's oil. That ain't no small potatoes. |
|
|
| (147369) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:03:47 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Aug 29 18:35:03 2006. Not the ones with power. And there were no n00ks around during the era of most posturing. |
|
|
| (147371) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 19:07:32 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:02:41 2006. Bingo! Besides the more places you get oil from, the more competitive the price must become. Iran offering oil allows oil to become cheaper by increasing the total amount of oil on the market and competing heavily. |
|
|
| (147372) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:08:50 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 18:47:58 2006. As dan said, rhetoric is for the mediaUsually, such people mean what they say. Especially when they do have power—and Iran's got more power and influence than you perhaps realize. he's not as big as a hardliner as people think Oh? Why did he order Hezbollah to make their move against Israel now? He's more of a hardliner than you might realize. And are you even considering the intelligence on Iran throughout the decades, to wit that they're to blame for virtually all of the anti-Western and anti-Israeli terrorism? When terror is perceived to succeed, it does not abate. (Yes, Rafsanjani was no moderate either, if you look at what he said in the media.) Considering everything else you wrote, how can you say that Ahmadinejad is no hardliner?? |
|
|
| (147377) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 19:14:33 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:08:50 2006. True, but the Shah of Iran, whom the U.S fully backed, wasn't that great either. The Shah had a Secret Police that used nazi torture tactics taught to them by the C.I.A. The people of Iran have a good reason to detest the U.S. Luckily oil is the only reason that these two countries haven't gone to blows.Remember the U.S. has tried to take apart Iran through others, they tried by having Saddam go and attack Iran while Iran was still in the revolution stage and had no formal army. The U.S. has admitted it has the C.I.A. in Iran and is helping pro-democracy movements in Iran. So the U.S. has the C.I.A. and its friends to do its bidding too. Iran is just using the same card, it just suceeded instead, the bet paid off. |
|
|
| (147378) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:18:12 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 19:14:33 2006. The people of Iran have a good reason to detest the U.S. Luckily oil is the only reason that these two countries haven't gone to blowsNo, oil is the reason they have the US cowed, both in terms of oil supply and having petrodollars support the US currency itself. That's why people like me would prefer to have a transportation grid that isn't so dependent upon automobile transportation (which doesn't mean we must eschew our cars 100 percent in favor of electric trains, streetcars and trolleybuses, but to have that option available to us whereas in a lot of areas it is not available). That's why the big countries in Europe have done just what I have described, and in general consume half the oil the US does. |
|
|
| (147381) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 19:29:03 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:18:12 2006. Or look at Brasil which has virtually NO foreign reliance on oil. Thanks to the mandate that all cars can support E-85/M-85 and that the government fully backed the initiative. |
|
|
| (147402) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Aug 29 20:30:59 2006, in response to Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Mitch45 on Tue Aug 29 14:48:57 2006. Well just point your nukes at him and have Mutual Assured Destruction as a deterrent.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (147428) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 21:01:44 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 18:28:49 2006. "But think about before those countries had nukes"Why? All that does is drag apples/oranges comparisons into the fray. Only in the sense that all historical parallels are technically invalid as something will inevitably be different. Ultimately people have been drawing them since at least the late 1st Century AD. Repeating clichés about fruit is not a particularly constructive or logical counter-argument. "Israel is a self-important (red) herring" Thanks for displaying de-facto support of Islamic terrorism. You really need to stop seeing things in black and white. I'm not an Islamic terrorist, nor am I a Zionist. Are we all Buddhist-haters for failing to bomb China over their occupation of Tibet? In the brutal world of realpolitik, we just need to stop what's going on in some foreign country from harming us - in most other situations, we can ignore them. |
|
|
| (147432) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 21:04:25 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:03:47 2006. Not the ones with power.Read my lips... |
|
|
| (147436) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 21:07:36 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 21:04:25 2006. Who did the USA claim they were going to "wipe off the map"? |
|
|
| (147437) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 21:08:38 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 19:08:50 2006. Usually, such people mean what they say. Especially when they do have powerPoliticians lie. And you know what? Most lies are for domestic consumption - give the populace panem et circenses. |
|
|
| (147438) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 21:09:14 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 21:01:44 2006. In the brutal world of realpolitik, we just need to stop what's going on in some foreign country from harming usRealpolitik is dead. Ahmadinejad thinks so. |
|
|
| (147441) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 21:10:08 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 21:08:38 2006. Politicians lieDemagogues quite often don't. |
|
|
| (147482) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 21:32:26 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 21:07:36 2006. No, US doesn't say anything, it just does it, and acts like nothing happened. |
|
|
| (147491) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 21:39:05 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 21:32:26 2006. Who has the US wiped off the map lately? So far, nobody. |
|
|
| (147494) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Tue Aug 29 21:40:04 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 21:04:25 2006. 'Read my lips... 'no new taxes? |
|
|
| (147552) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Aug 29 22:50:31 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 19:07:32 2006. Hem I wonder when the US will head down to Venezuela? :) |
|
|
| (147561) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 22:58:03 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Aug 29 22:50:31 2006. Never. They're buds with Commie China (Chavez is socialist) and the US corporations don't want to have their assets taken away from them by force . . . |
|
|
| (147579) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Tue Aug 29 23:23:30 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by WillD on Tue Aug 29 16:16:03 2006. First of all, you can thank Bill Clinton and Madeline Halfbright for the North Korean nuclear threat. Bill Clinton gave north Korea US nuclear technology with no strings attached. As for Iran, I thik you need to thank the soviets and chinese and stop using politicizing Iran's nuclear program to to bash the current president.The soviets have been secretly and not so secretly arming Iran for nearly 2 decades. They have even sold Iran 6 Kilo class submarines over the last decade or so. Iran has copied this technology and has even begun to produce its own Ghadir class submarines. But most apparent is your lack of understanding at to why Iran would be such a nuclear threat. I doubt that Iran would directly use nuclear weapons directly. Most US and international military and political experts agree. The danger in Iran developing a nuclear capability lies in the probability that they'd share the nuclear technology with terrorist groups that share their insane goals. As we've seen in their recent arming of Hezbullah, Iran would rather have their thug proxy soldiers do the fighting for them and supply the arms to help them meet their political objectives. |
|
|
| (147581) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Tue Aug 29 23:27:22 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Train Dude on Tue Aug 29 23:23:30 2006. I hope Halfbright has a stroke one day and just die. |
|
|
| (147598) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Dand124 on Tue Aug 29 23:31:08 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Train Dude on Tue Aug 29 23:23:30 2006. The sovietsYou really hurt your case when you refer to a county that hasn't existed in 15 years. |
|
|
| (147602) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Tue Aug 29 23:34:47 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Dand124 on Tue Aug 29 23:31:08 2006. I don't believe so but if you do, completely ignore my post and beleie what you want. |
|
|
| (147611) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 23:40:31 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Dand124 on Tue Aug 29 23:31:08 2006. Soviets are people, not a nation. Putin is very, very Soviet. All of the countries that were in the Soviet Union still exist, most importantly Mother Russia. |
|
|
| (147613) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 23:42:44 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Train Dude on Tue Aug 29 23:23:30 2006. First of all, you can thank Bill Clinton and Madeline Halfbright for the North Korean nuclear threatChina's puppets, like the rest of our politicians in both RNC and DNC. Would've happened even if those two didn't do that appeasement dance, of course; but why help it along? |
|
|
| (147617) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Aug 29 23:46:51 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 23:40:31 2006. Huh? A soviet is a council, not a person. |
|
|
| (147619) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Tue Aug 29 23:53:53 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Aug 29 23:46:51 2006. There are people on councils. And since those councils consist of Commies, and Commies of individuals, they are people who believe in the Soviet system. |
|
|
| (147634) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Wed Aug 30 08:58:37 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Aug 29 23:46:51 2006. Does it really matter if the submarines came from Russia or Chechnya? |
|
|
| (147654) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Aug 30 10:39:33 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Tue Aug 29 19:14:33 2006. He was like Saddam, just keep order of the country and don't try to invade other countries or attack Israel and all is ok.Carter had to fuck things up by not supporting the Shah and let a radical like the Ayatolla come in. Saddam - all he had to do was leave Kuwait alone, but he had what was coming to him. And even a weakened Saddam would've been better than the mess Bush II left. |
|
|
| (147670) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Wed Aug 30 15:07:11 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Aug 30 10:39:33 2006. Well, I have to stop you there."Mr Khatami was president of Iran from 1997 to 2005, when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected." Khatami was just granted the first US entry VISA since '79 I think. I don't know why he just didn't run across the border tough. That says 2005. That says the piece of crap nutcase was ELECTED, in 2005 The articles I read says this guy wasn't that horrible as now. Condi Rice is talking about democracy fixing the middle east. The article says the current nutcase was ELECTED! DURING BUSH! HELP ME! Why distract us with Carter when the worst of the worst happened DURING BUSH, USING HIS METHOD HE LOVES? IT'S LEGITIMIZED! |
|
|
| (147671) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Wed Aug 30 15:14:26 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 17:45:53 2006. In our civilised world, that is true. However, I doubt that most people live in the civilised world. As civilised nations we have two basic strategies:a) civilise the barbarians b) put up barriers between us and the barbarians I agree with you here. I don't know if that's common for Americans though. But I'll have to disagree with you elsewhere. how often are the barbarians blowing themselves up? We had two terrorist attacks in the US recently. A shooting rampage in Seattle, and just YESTERDAY a barbarian was driving on teh sidewalks in San Francisco taking out anyone they could, starting at a jewish center. And called himself a terrorist. Why do they always say it's not terrorism? How does this country define terrorism? I sure don't know. Couple that in there with a country who says it want's to wipe out a race of people, and a country off the map....DAILY....and doesn't care about self-inflicated collaterial damage. Pakistan and India. Well, India isn't full of the barbarians. Pakistan hopefully won't get democracy(please dubya, don't fuck around). But wasn't those materials shipped elsewhere? I'm sorry. But France ain't Riyahd. |
|
|
| (147674) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 30 15:44:03 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Rail Blue on Tue Aug 29 17:45:53 2006. As civilised nations we have two basic strategies:a) civilise the barbarians b) put up barriers between us and the barbarians Consider how well that worked for ancient Rome. It'll never work in this day and age, unless "not learning from history" is in vogue . . . |
|
|
| (147676) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Wed Aug 30 15:50:27 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Grand Concourse on Wed Aug 30 10:39:33 2006. Shah was just as radical as the Ayatolla, he tortured his rivals, used a secret police that were trained by the C.I.A. and were specialized in nazi torture tactics. The difference between the Shah and the Ayotolla is that the Shah kissed the U.S. ass while the Ayotolla didn't. The Shah was nothing more than a puppet for the U.S. |
|
|
| (147678) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 30 15:51:52 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Christopher Rivera on Wed Aug 30 15:50:27 2006. And the Islamists don't do that kind of stuff, and worse? You're drawing a picture of what the Shah was up against. Allowing the Shah to be deposed was tantamount to opening Pandora's box. |
|
|
| (147686) | |
Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke? |
|
|
Posted by Christopher Rivera on Wed Aug 30 16:56:36 2006, in response to Re: Does Iran Already Have a Nuke?, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Aug 30 15:51:52 2006. The problem is the Shah was backed by the U.S. meaning the Shah should've stood for true democracy. Shah was the reason why the Iranians hated the U.S. He wasn't against Islamist, he was the reason why Islamist became what they were. To them Democracy was a farse, nothing more than an instrument for imperialism. The ayotollah made it look like if Islam was in control or Iran, the religion would bring peace and happiness to the land and the money from the oil into their hands.If the U.S. and the Shah did it right and the government if Iran was a true Western Democracy then it wouldn't have bred the hatred that allowed the Ayotollah and Radical Islam to become as powerful as it was. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|