Full Version: Iran
If Iran basically says to He!! with world opinion, we're going to build a nuclear bomb, should the U.S. take military action to stop them or should we just let them have it?
QUOTE (Udmas @ Aug 21 2006, 07:15 PM) 
If Iran basically says to He!! with world opinion, we're going to build a nuclear bomb, should the U.S. take military action to stop them or should we just let them have it?
No we should not "just let them have it" but I don't know of any instance where we've actually stopped anyone who wanted to build one. We've certainly questioned them, delayed them, and monitored them very closely.
Last month people were saying that Iran was hesitant to give their biggest weapons to Hezbollah because they knew that the US would retaliate. Isn't that the same logic as the "mutually assured destruction" argument.
I also believe that we should not prevent them from developing nuclear energy.
If anybody is going to use nuclear weapons it's more than likely going to be us. Just look at history.
Freakin' amazing -- even in comparing us to Iran, Idiot makes the USA the bad guy! 
Tell us, Idiot, did we use them to gain territory? Kill those with a different religion? Kill innocent civillians just because we hated them and their way of life?
And if we use them again, will it be for these reasons?
Maybe we should just unilaterally disarm and then we'll have "given peace a chance".
Tell us, Idiot, did we use them to gain territory? Kill those with a different religion? Kill innocent civillians just because we hated them and their way of life?
And if we use them again, will it be for these reasons?
Maybe we should just unilaterally disarm and then we'll have "given peace a chance".
Aw come on Snoopy, lets just get out the banner that says, PLEASE COME KILL US.
QUOTE (Snoopy @ Aug 22 2006, 07:23 AM)
Tell us, Idiot, did we use them to gain territory? Kill those with a different religion? Kill innocent civillians just because we hated them and their way of life?
I'm just going by history Snoop. When some other country uses a nuclear bomb then there will be 2 countries equally as likely.
Now that you mention it, we did kill 900,000 American Indians in order to take their land.
Am I proud of any of this history? No. But I'm not going to pretend that it didn't happen.
Btw, recently released documents from Germany reveal that Hitler was fascinated by, and admired, the way we systematically eliminated the indians.
QUOTE (cfulmor @ Aug 22 2006, 07:43 AM)
Aw come on Snoopy, lets just get out the banner that says, PLEASE COME KILL US.
Other than for normal "defense" measures, we never worried about someone coming to kill us for the first 225 years of our existence. But in the last 5 years we've been totally obsessed with it.
We've been attacked before, more than once, and we dealt with it without terrorizing the population. Speaking of which, on Nov 24 2006, the day after Thanksgiving, the United States will have been in Iraq for the length of time that elapsed between the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor and V-J Day, when the Japanese surrendered. But we'll be in Iraq at least another 30 months because our president has already said that as long as he's president we won't leave.
He'll just leave his mess for the next guy to clean up like he's been doing his entire life.
Idiot,
Thats quite a leap there from nuclear bombs raining down to killing the Indians with small pox blankets don't you think? I mean even for YOU this is apples and oranges. I guess we could always just sit here and take the first hit before we decide to fire back. Would that make it acceptable? i suppose we could sacrifice a few hundred thousand civilians to make our counter attack justified. Would you and yours like to volunteer for that sacrifice?
Thats quite a leap there from nuclear bombs raining down to killing the Indians with small pox blankets don't you think? I mean even for YOU this is apples and oranges. I guess we could always just sit here and take the first hit before we decide to fire back. Would that make it acceptable? i suppose we could sacrifice a few hundred thousand civilians to make our counter attack justified. Would you and yours like to volunteer for that sacrifice?
Good for Hitler!
Your point?
Your point?
Back to the question here, before Id, runs away with things.
Ud, I don't think it would be prudent at this juncture to strike Iran. There are enough other countries who are "friends" of Iran and the US who can possibly mediate this situation. I don't believe it is at the crisis stage yet.
Of course just like ALL presidents, no options should remain on the table.
Force against Iran or N. Korea will need to be the absolute last resort.
Ud, I don't think it would be prudent at this juncture to strike Iran. There are enough other countries who are "friends" of Iran and the US who can possibly mediate this situation. I don't believe it is at the crisis stage yet.
Of course just like ALL presidents, no options should remain on the table.
Force against Iran or N. Korea will need to be the absolute last resort.
QUOTE (Idiot @ Aug 22 2006, 09:20 AM)
PS - I'll leave before SMan shows up and says this discussion is over. It seems as thow some friend of W's made a rule that whenever you bring up Hitler you have to stop the conversation.
That's a cheap shot. According to wiki that internet rule predates Bush's presidency by almost a decade. And yes, I do think you get carried away with your Bush/Hitler references.
To get back on track and answer the original question, no, I do not think millitary force should be used by us to stop Iran. If diplomatic and economic sanctions don't work, then it's back to mutually assured destruction.
A better question would be is Israel going to let Iran have nukes? Iran is more of a threat to them right now than a threat to us.
A better question would be is Israel going to let Iran have nukes? Iran is more of a threat to them right now than a threat to us.
QUOTE (SMan @ Aug 22 2006, 09:43 AM)
That's a cheap shot. According to wiki that internet rule predates Bush's presidency by almost a decade. And yes, I do think you get carried away with your Bush/Hitler references.
I'll admit to it being a cheap shot at Bush, I had no idea when the guy came up with it. But it wasn't intented as a criticism of you. I should have used a smilie there.
Regardless of when it originated, you have to admit that the people who benefit from it the most are the ones who are often compared to Hitler. And btw, it wasn't a Bush/Hitler reference. It was more a Hitler/Calvary reference.
QUOTE (samy0 @ Aug 22 2006, 09:09 AM)
Idiot,
Thats quite a leap there from nuclear bombs raining down to killing the Indians with small pox blankets don't you think? I mean even for YOU this is apples and oranges. I guess we could always just sit here and take the first hit before we decide to fire back. Would that make it acceptable? i suppose we could sacrifice a few hundred thousand civilians to make our counter attack justified. Would you and yours like to volunteer for that sacrifice?
Thats quite a leap there from nuclear bombs raining down to killing the Indians with small pox blankets don't you think? I mean even for YOU this is apples and oranges. I guess we could always just sit here and take the first hit before we decide to fire back. Would that make it acceptable? i suppose we could sacrifice a few hundred thousand civilians to make our counter attack justified. Would you and yours like to volunteer for that sacrifice?
I was responding to Snoopy's questions. He asked them as though it was above us to do such a thing and I was merely citing history.
Look, I don't hate my country. I love my country. I also don't hate our government nor do I even hate the Republican party. I do however hate the small fanatical neo-con-lunatic element within the Republican party who have taken control of our government and are making stupid decisions for stupid reasons.
For clarification, in the future I will refer to them as the Repub-liban.
So, you're saying that for 225 years we sat around and gave up a few hundred thousand civilians before we did anything? I must have missed that chapter in US History.
As for volunteering for the sacrifice, I'm not willing to sacrifice everything this country has stood for and go hide under my bed and pray that W keeps me safe, I can tell you that much.
Virtually every country now in existence (except Iceland, I think) took its land from someone who was there first. Is what we did to the indians right? No. But that was several hundred years in the past, idiot.
Duck and cover exercises weren't because we were afraid of being attacked? 24/7/365 airborne nukes in B-52's weren't? The nation wasn't scared more than now during WWII??
You have some nerve calling others fanatical or lunatic...
Duck and cover exercises weren't because we were afraid of being attacked? 24/7/365 airborne nukes in B-52's weren't? The nation wasn't scared more than now during WWII??
You have some nerve calling others fanatical or lunatic...
I agree this is not the time for a military strike, but the day will definitely come when we will have to make that decision all Iran is doing now is stalling for more time.
Mutually assured destruction works better with sane leaders, but even if Iran develops the bomb I don't think they would use it. My problem with them having the technology is that they will give it to other people who will use it i.e. Hezbollah or another terrorist organization that we would have a hard time confronting.
Mutually assured destruction works better with sane leaders, but even if Iran develops the bomb I don't think they would use it. My problem with them having the technology is that they will give it to other people who will use it i.e. Hezbollah or another terrorist organization that we would have a hard time confronting.
QUOTE (Udmas @ Aug 22 2006, 04:01 PM)
My problem with them having the technology is that they will give it to other people who will use it i.e. Hezbollah or another terrorist organization that we would have a hard time confronting.
Then we have to make it crystal clear that giving out bombs that end up used against us will result in them being held as responsible as if they dropped it on us themselves.
some one has to deal with iran , if iran had a bomb they might not use it , but im sure they would give it to some one that would, hezbollah would love to have one , but then again iran might , they sure do want to get rid of israel bad , untill iran is taken care of there will be war over there , iran is in irag causing trouble , i dont know whos going to do it , but some one must soon.
QUOTE (Snoopy @ Aug 22 2006, 12:03 PM)
The nation wasn't scared more than now during WWII??
No it wasn't but it very well could have been. You can give FDR some of the credit for it, i.e. We have nothing to fear but fear itself", but I think most of it should go to the American people. They were angry, they were determined, and most of all they were united.
Oh, I'm sure there was some fear. You can't be brave unless there is the element of fear first. Courage without fear is actually foolishness.
They also had a true leader. George W Bush had the same opportunity in the Fall and Winter of 2001, when not only the country but most of the world supported us. I really don't need to point out the differences, do I?
People today are just as brave. What we lack is leadership.
QUOTE (Udmas @ Aug 22 2006, 04:01 PM)
Mutually assured destruction works better with sane leaders...
I don't know about that, it's worked ok for the last 6 years.
My brother is over in Iran. We are hoping this all stops. We want him back safe.
QUOTE (Udmas @ Aug 21 2006, 06:15 PM)
If Iran basically says to He!! with world opinion, we're going to build a nuclear bomb, should the U.S. take military action to stop them or should we just let them have it?
"should we just let them have it?"
That could be taken more than one way!
Gee ya think?!? 
What a wonderful grasp for the obvious.
What a wonderful grasp for the obvious.
QUOTE (cfulmor @ Aug 24 2006, 11:47 AM)
Gee ya think?!?
What a wonderful grasp for the obvious.
What a wonderful grasp for the obvious.
As opposed to those whose ability to grasp the obvious seems to be selective.
[quote name='Idiot' post='64466' date='Aug 21 2006, 06:44 PM'][quote name='Udmas' post='64462' date='Aug 21 2006, 07:15 PM']
I also believe that we should not prevent them from developing nuclear energy.[/quote]
Didn't the U.S. get Iran started in developing its nuclear energy program under the Shah?
Odd that a country with so much oil wanted to have a nuclear program. We didn't think it odd back then but we wanted a nuclear Iran to make our enemy the Soviets nervous.
Probably provides quite a few chuckles around the Kremlin these days that now we want the Russians help because we are afraid of Iran. Those crazy Americans.
If we do decide to do the "bombs away" route at least we should be able to find the nuclear plant in Tehran. After all, we built it.
I also believe that we should not prevent them from developing nuclear energy.[/quote]
Didn't the U.S. get Iran started in developing its nuclear energy program under the Shah?
Odd that a country with so much oil wanted to have a nuclear program. We didn't think it odd back then but we wanted a nuclear Iran to make our enemy the Soviets nervous.
Probably provides quite a few chuckles around the Kremlin these days that now we want the Russians help because we are afraid of Iran. Those crazy Americans.
If we do decide to do the "bombs away" route at least we should be able to find the nuclear plant in Tehran. After all, we built it.
QUOTE (millennium @ Aug 24 2006, 11:24 PM)
If we do decide to do the "bombs away" route at least we should be able to find the nuclear plant in Tehran. After all, we built it.
Source?
QUOTE (SMan @ Aug 22 2006, 09:43 AM)
And yes, I do think you get carried away with your Bush/Hitler references.
I don't think I've used it seventeen times.
Rumsfeld’s speech.
For the record, Americans who have the audacity to question the leaders who work for them and are paid by them, have now been called irresponsible, reprehensible, shameful, cowardly, terrorist, Nazi fascists by the Bush administration.
I’m not going to lose any sleep over the fact that I compared him to Hitler.
get the record strait, we pay them but they sure dont work for us, no one in the white house is working for the american people, they are all working for big companys, voting on bills that they want them to vote on .
Speaking of Rumsfeld and Nazis, this one is worth filing.
Real news with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC
opps thought this was the joke thread
opps thought this was the joke thread
I wish this was a joke.
As Yogi Berra once said, ”It seems like déjà vu all over again.”
QUOTE
Some officials at the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department said they're concerned that the offices of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney may be receiving a stream of questionable information that originates with Iranian exiles, including a discredited arms dealer, Manucher Ghorbanifar, who played a role in the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal.
Officials at all three agencies said they suspect that the dubious information may include claims that Iran directed Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group, to kidnap two Israeli soldiers in July; that Iran's nuclear program is moving faster than generally believed; and that the Iranian people are eager to join foreign efforts to overthrow their theocratic rulers.
The officials said there is no reliable intelligence to support any of those assertions and some that contradicts all three.
The officials said they fear a replay of the administration's mishandling of what turned out to be bogus information from Iraqi exiles in the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, documented earlier this month in a Senate intelligence committee report.
Officials at all three agencies said they suspect that the dubious information may include claims that Iran directed Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group, to kidnap two Israeli soldiers in July; that Iran's nuclear program is moving faster than generally believed; and that the Iranian people are eager to join foreign efforts to overthrow their theocratic rulers.
The officials said there is no reliable intelligence to support any of those assertions and some that contradicts all three.
The officials said they fear a replay of the administration's mishandling of what turned out to be bogus information from Iraqi exiles in the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, documented earlier this month in a Senate intelligence committee report.
As Yogi Berra once said, ”It seems like déjà vu all over again.”
Sadly, I agree, De ja vu. History and human behavior goes round and round. Just like around the world and now in congress. Different parties, different countries, different names: but the same amazement at human behavior comes up. Over the years we ask the same questions. How could that happen?,
When we speak of national or world-wide security it gets politicized. The average joe is left wondering ..............
Speaking of wondering, Condeleeza Rice now states she was briefed about risks before 911. She had been so adament. I always liked her, everyone has ups and downs. Unfortunately, to forget being briefed on a security matter is disheartening.
When we speak of national or world-wide security it gets politicized. The average joe is left wondering ..............
Speaking of wondering, Condeleeza Rice now states she was briefed about risks before 911. She had been so adament. I always liked her, everyone has ups and downs. Unfortunately, to forget being briefed on a security matter is disheartening.
it looks like north korea tested a nuclear bomb, now what do we do ? i know what bush will do just sit back and wait.
Okay, Tag, what would YOU do? And/or what would you have done years ago to prevent this?
I'm sure you, Idiot, and Pops have all the answers.
I'm sure you, Idiot, and Pops have all the answers.
I'd sit back and see what their neighbors do about it first.
Nobody starts a nuclear war with their neighbor. Come to think of it, nobody has started a nuclear war anywhere. When you consider that and the fact that the last missile they tested was airborne for less than 45 seconds, then sitting back and waiting isn't such a bad option for now. At least until we have a leader capable of dealing with the situation, instead of one that already has a hard-on to start another war of any kind, anywhere.
PS: A quick look at CNN, WaPo, and NYT showed lots of stuff on NK's nukes.
It's like magic. Foley has disappeared.
PS: A quick look at CNN, WaPo, and NYT showed lots of stuff on NK's nukes.
It's like magic. Foley has disappeared.
QUOTE (Idiot @ Oct 9 2006, 09:47 AM)
It's like magic. Foley has disappeared.
That's fine with me; bombs are more interesting anyway.
America knows that Foley is a pedophile, let's move on with our lives, and the news.
QUOTE (coma @ Oct 9 2006, 10:20 AM)
...let's move on with our lives, and the news.
I recall a lot of democrats saying the same thing once before. Ever heard of MoveOn.org?
I don't recall many republicans agreeing at the time though.
You see the republicans have the right idea. I've been told that I should be worried about some crazy A-hole with a nuke for my entire life. These sex scandals only come around every so often.
QUOTE (Idiot @ Oct 9 2006, 11:18 AM)
QUOTE (coma @ Oct 9 2006, 10:20 AM)
...let's move on with our lives, and the news.
I recall a lot of democrats saying the same thing once before. Ever heard of MoveOn.org?
If that sleezeball woulda stepped down like Foley did there would have been no need for Republicans to keep it in the news, huh? Republicans did not run out in support of their sleezeball.
QUOTE (Snoopy @ Oct 9 2006, 11:39 AM)
Republicans did not run out in support of their sleezeball.
The republicans supported their sleazeball for the last eleven years by keeping it quiet.
Don't worry guys, there's still plenty of time to be terrified before the elections. Osama will probably release a new hit recording soon. I'm sure it will shoot right up the charts to #1.
QUOTE (Idiot @ Oct 9 2006, 11:18 AM)
You see the republicans have the right idea. I've been told that I should be worried about some crazy A-hole with a nuke for my entire life. These sex scandals only come around every so often.
Nothing wrong with a juicy sex scandal a la Clinton/Lewinsky, however, if you find enjoyment in a sex scandal that involves a pedophile, I dunno what to tell ya.
blech! 
QUOTE (coma @ Oct 9 2006, 12:27 PM)
Nothing wrong with a juicy sex scandal a la Clinton/Lewinsky, however, if you find enjoyment in a sex scandal that involves a pedophile, I dunno what to tell ya.
From everything I've read they were at least 16 years old and in DC that's the legal age, so this case doesn't actually involve pedophilia.
What it does involve is an irresponsible homosexual republican congressman along with republican party leaders who covered up for him. Maybe that's what you would rather avoid discussing.
PS: My apologies to all the Iran posters. I'll take this to the Foley thread. Btw, did you see my pic there. I was thinking of having a caption contest for it but Andrew Sullivan beat me to it. I'll post the best ones.
QUOTE (Idiot @ Oct 9 2006, 12:53 PM)
QUOTE (coma @ Oct 9 2006, 12:27 PM)
Nothing wrong with a juicy sex scandal a la Clinton/Lewinsky, however, if you find enjoyment in a sex scandal that involves a pedophile, I dunno what to tell ya.
From everything I've read they were at least 16 years old and in DC that's the legal age, so this case doesn't actually involve pedophilia.
What it does involve is an irresponsible homosexual republican congressman along with republican party leaders who covered up for him. Maybe that's what you would rather avoid discussing.
PS: My apologies to all the Iran posters. I'll take this to the Foley thread. Btw, did you see my pic there. I was thinking of having a caption contest for it but Andrew Sullivan beat me to it. I'll post the best ones.
Is this is turning into the NAMBLA thread?
Are we now debating legal terms on this freak? Call it what you want but this guy was on OUR dime while he was spanking skippy and chatting with an UNDERAGE BOY! If the roles were reversed and this was a democrat you can't honestly believe they wouldn't have gone to great lenghts to try and hide this do you?
Its not dem or rep! Its CROOKED politicians trying to cover their collective a$$es thats all. No more no less!
hey i dont know what the answer is, everyone knew north korea was building a bomb, so everyone sits by and waits untill they built it , then try and think of what to do next, you do the same thing you did when they told everyone they were building one , now wait to see if they use it , thats what the world did.
What to do about North Korea and it's nuclear test?
Buy stock in any company that supplies nuclear weapon capability and sit back and watch the arms race.
Buy stock in any company that supplies nuclear weapon capability and sit back and watch the arms race.
QUOTE (millennium @ Oct 9 2006, 01:40 PM)
Buy stock in any company that supplies nuclear weapon capability and sit back and watch the arms race.
Buying stock probably won't do much good because in the case there was a nuclear arms race, it would almost certainly result in a nuclear war that would have many countries (not just a couple of superpowers) trying to destroy each other the fastest in hopes of surviving. It would likely be the end of the world as we know it, and possibly, the human race, and quite honestly, that's fine by me. We really don't deserve to live anymore.
start from scratch and let the roaches take over
QUOTE (coma @ Oct 9 2006, 01:50 PM)
It would likely be the end of the world as we know it, and possibly, the human race...
Of course it would. That's why nobody has ever started one. None of the current crop of lunatic leaders, George Bush included, are as crazy as they'd like everyone to think the are.
QUOTE (coma @ Oct 9 2006, 01:50 PM)
...We really don't deserve to live anymore.
Why not? What did we do that was so bad? Besides trust our government that is.
Don't forget listening to IDIOT's spouting BS at every news item. Oh wait, that's my friends across the aisle. Oh well same-same.
i disagree , i think bush is crazy enough to start a nuclear war.
QUOTE (tagout @ Oct 9 2006, 05:21 AM)
it looks like north korea tested a nuclear bomb, now what do we do ? i know what bush will do just sit back and wait.
Maybe Bush should have done what Clinton did (give North Korea millions of dollars in aid, food, oil and a nuclear reactor so Kim Jong-il would stop his nuclear weapons development) oh nevermind it looks like that didn't work.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.