So what do you think we should do about Iran's nuclear ambitions?

I definitely don't think we can allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.

Israel is getting increasingly worried, I can't blame them, with all the rhetoric from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.



Israel readies forces for strike on nuclear Iran I can see this happening.

An IAF air strike against Iran's nuclear facilities wouldnt be anywhere near the surgical solution it was when Heyl ha'Avir took out the Osirak reactor in '81. On the one hand the Iranians wont be caught napping with all their atomic eggs in one basket. One the other hand, the last thing the US needs is for Israel to further inflame the region at a point when our interests in Iraq and Afghan are highly vulnerable.

If rhetoric is a benchmark of danger then we're late for the party in the land of the morning bomb. Attacking Iran is bound to do wonders for Dear Leader's considerable paranoia. Then there's al Qaeda, which is half a coup away from acquiring nuclear capability courtesy of fellow extremists in Pakistan.

Wasnt the invasion of Iraq supposed to frighten the axis of evil and deter WMD proliferation instead of exacerbating the problem?

I hope they do it and we're thereby forced to take a clear stand for Israel again. We've gone way too far down the road to friendliness towards Arabs and other anti-Semitic groups. The process should also help to flush out the anti-Semites within our own nation as well. That would definitely hurt the demonrats.

The most prominent anti-Semites in the US are almost as radically right as you Bboy :}

Perhaps you were thinking of anti-Zionists?

No I was thinking of the pro-arab, anti-semitic Democratic party.

Actually, the most accomplished anti-semites, the nazis, were an extreme LEFT-WING group, as you must certainly know.

Which explains why 77% of Jewish voters backed Kerry, why 56% of Jews identify their political affiliation as Democrat but only 13% of Jews claim to be Republican, and why the ADL home page has half a dozen links pointing to the anti-semitic threat from the religious right.I also hear that your ilk know with divine certainty that the earth is flat.

Dating back a millenium to the genesis of anti-semitism when Pope Urban exhorted the faithful to crusade against the Moslem infidel. The Euro-Christian rabble, finding no Moslems in the immediate vicinity, took to vengeance against the infidels at hand - the Jews. Flash forward thru eight centuries of Christian anti-Semitism and the Zionists decide its time to bail for Palestine, intending to create a "Jewish nation for the Jewish people" by ethnic cleansing of it's the Arab occupants - 'spirit them across the border'. The rise of fascism causes a flood of Zionist emmigration. Conflict with the Arabs inevitably ensues but the cataclysm of the Holocaust provides Zionism with two strategic advantages - 1) enormous numbers of Jewish refugees rejected by quota from their preferred destination in the US or Commonwealth and 2) an enormous amount of Christian guilt for Auschwitz etc. Zionism leverages these, along with their own terrorism (Irgun) against the Brits and Arabs, into independence for Israel.

Who invited the pencil-necked geek terrorist?

Still searching for the Block function Biggie...or just too incompetent to figger out how to use it?

;}

Is this guy for real, maybe he's just trying to see how many countries he can p!ss off.

Thing's are looking up

Nope, no one comes to mind.

re: Iranian president "out of touch with a large portion of his own public"The more Iranian leaders try to suppress western culture, the more popular it becomes with the majority of Iran's population - those under age 30.

But then back in the day, Raygun, fearing the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, backed Saddam's war of aggression against the mullahs in Iran and, in doing so, created the threat of external enemies that allowed the mullahs to entrench their power.

As opposed to Bill Clinton, who was IN TOUCH with far too large a portion of HIS public.

Think 1979?Laundry on his head dude & hostages??
Is that who you are thinking of? Or is it Stalin and the people who were 'after him' that he consistently got rid of & convinced the average Joe were making life hard in mother russia..
Or maybe you are thinking of Hitler in 32?
Or maybe Herrod?
IS this a guessing game? There have been some nutcases all thru history...read the history of the world--and not the movie w/mel brooks.

Click to view attachment

Is anyone worried about an Iran/Russian alliance against Israel? Maybe calling for Israel to disarm if Iran is required? And, where would the USA stand on that one? I am not so sure they would back up Israel.

Doesn't Russia ship its oil to Asia via the Trans-Israel Pipeline (the Tipline) which allows it to compete with the Gulf States?

I doubt Russian oil interests would be served by an unarmed Israel. Russia may have a commercial interest in Iran and may use its influence to flex its muscle with the US but the scenario of an Iran/Russian alliance against Israel is unlikely.

Russian oil influence in Asia might be more of a concern to the US.

A failure of the US to stand up to Israeli intimidation by Russia and/or Iran is at least equally unlikely, IMO. We may have betrayed our long-time ally in many ways, but I doubt we would go as far as you suggest. At least not under Bush.

Israel hasnt yet openly admitted to the nukes possessed in it's arsenal since '67. From the preliminary noise Russia is making about Iran, it looks as if Putin will trade sanctions against Tehran for more leeway in rolling back democracy in the motherland. While Butch has been preoccupied holding the torch of freedom to the Middle Eastern tinderbox, China and Russia have seized the opportunity to crack down.Jehovah might choke Butch with a pretzel or smite his bicycle spokes if he didnt support Israel. Nah, that's just "apocalyptic idiocy"

Ya think Mullah Robertson apologized just so he could get his JesusWorld project back on track in Palestine?