Bomb Iran: Yes or No?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
What self-hate? In order to love yourself, you must be honest with yourself and accept yourself.

Those in our country who refuse to grow as a nation, and take responsibility for our past while working to change the future, are the ones who are self hating and most of all self destructive.

I am not self destructive, and I don’t fear the Islamic bomb, Pakistan’s collapse has already made that happen.
Iran on the other hand, is probably one of the few countries in the world to deserve a nuclear weapon, they’ve been bullied into a corner.

BTW, Who the fuck is the USA to make call on any country? How would you feel if Japan started ttrying to mandate our internal policy? I think well-guided or not, any red blooded American would opposite of principle, violently if need be.[/quote]

Iran and the Islamic world in general presents a real danger. No, I would not trust them with nuclear matter in any form. I am, however, willing to give them the benefit of doubt and say nuclear POWER is fine. The moment they have nuclear weapons, all hell will break loose.

Like I said, despite what the USA has done, the threat is not any less. Moral relativism is a deeply immoral position to hold. When it comes to these matters, intention is everything - Iran will not hesitate to bomb Israel and then move onto your precious country.

82

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Iran and the Islamic world in general presents a real danger. No, I would not trust them with nuclear matter in any form. I am, however, willing to give them the benefit of doubt and say nuclear POWER is fine. The moment they have nuclear weapons, all hell will break loose. [/quote]

You may not know it, but Pakistan already has nukes and all hell did not break loose.

And Pakistan is a much more “Islamic” country than Iran. It’s also much less stable.

This is a ridiculous assertion.

Israel has nukes and more conventional firepower to obliterate Iran. The US is a couple of orders of magnitude above that. And you think Iran will consider bombing them?

83

[quote]lixy wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Iran and the Islamic world in general presents a real danger. No, I would not trust them with nuclear matter in any form. I am, however, willing to give them the benefit of doubt and say nuclear POWER is fine. The moment they have nuclear weapons, all hell will break loose.

You may not know it, but Pakistan already has nukes and all hell did not break loose.

And Pakistan is a much more “Islamic” country than Iran. It’s also much less stable.

Like I said, despite what the USA has done, the threat is not any less. Moral relativism is a deeply immoral position to hold. When it comes to these matters, intention is everything - Iran will not hesitate to bomb Israel and then move onto your precious country.

This is a ridiculous assertion.

Israel has nukes and more conventional firepower to obliterate Iran. The US is a couple of orders of magnitude above that. And you think Iran will consider bombing them?[/quote]

We call it ‘nipping it in the bud’.

I personally think we should call home all our troops and simply nuke these places from space. “Its the only way to be sure.” Ripley, in ALIENS II.

84

[quote]lixy wrote:
You may not know it, but Pakistan already has nukes and all hell did not break loose.

And Pakistan is a much more “Islamic” country than Iran. It’s also much less stable.[/quote]

Pakistan is the bitch of greater countries.

[quote]This is a ridiculous assertion.

Israel has nukes and more conventional firepower to obliterate Iran. The US is a couple of orders of magnitude above that. And you think Iran will consider bombing them?[/quote]

Yes. They have a guy who thinks the holocaust never happened running the show, and he’s only a smokescreen (a puppet if you will) to the real power of the country.

85

[quote]John S. wrote:

We are making them a threat, they are no threat to us right now.

[/quote]

???

86

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
The USA making some questionable calls with regards to Iran does NOT negate the threat of Islamic fundamentalists getting the power of nuclear fission.

The self-hate is rather pathetic.
What self-hate? In order to love yourself, you must be honest with yourself and accept yourself.

Those in our country who refuse to grow as a nation, and take responsibility for our past while working to change the future, are the ones who are self hating and most of all self destructive.[/quote]

Yep

Then you don’t know much about foreign affairs.

[quote]Pakistan’s collapse has already made that happen.
Iran on the other hand, is probably one of the few countries in the world to deserve a nuclear weapon, they’ve been bullied into a corner. [/quote]

“Deserve?”

Basically the US is the guy with his finger in the damn. Sure, waters coming through all around him, but the thing hasn’t collapsed yet. When it does, you can be sure we’ll all get caught up in it (again). Only problem is, this time oceans don’t mean as much as they used to.

87

I guess I don’t really care if Israel and Iran want to fight eachother. I don’t really see what this has to do with us, other than the fact the Jew Lobby would like to convince us that New Zionstan is the 51st American state.

It is a world of Jewish bankers that’s turning our country to Corporate Communism, and bring us down to our knees, not Islamists and a legion of suicide bombers.
As far as I’m concerned the only real thorn, that making US and Islamic world hate eachother, is all the sideways pro-Israel shit and neo-colonial games we’ve played.

Perhaps they won’t forgive us for that. But I find Islamic people less intrusive in my personal life, than the Israeli tentacles that run our governmental=financial cartel that holds us all hostage.

The city I live in has 60,000 Bosnian Muslims, and about as many American Jews. I’ve had personal experiences with both, and find the Bosnian Muslims to be people I’d prefer to live around.

If you ever do business with a Bosnian, they will never charge you interest. You always decide what is the final sum to be paid up front. Jewish people are the ones who have invented all these demoralizaing financial instruments that create an ocean of power and wealth between the working class and their trickster masters.

I’d rather live in a country that was half muslim than half jewish. I by the way am an agnostic (born orthodox slav-descended) 1st generation American Latino.

88

As in genuine need one for defensive purposes from, Israel, United States, Western Neo-Imperialism & Saudi.
Both of their neighbors have been occupied by a foreign power. They lost over a million people in an American encouraged war to annihalate their very existence and put them under an insane CIA puppet named Saddam.
When they were getting bombed by mustard gas, noone cared. Noone cares if their country dies and in fact the USA wants that to happen. They need the means to defend themselves from all these haters.

89

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
I doubt Obama has the stones to do it himself. Just a few days ago Gibbs was lying and making up bullshit excuses about not talking to Iran for 6 years about it’s nuclear program. In December the Air Force will receive it’s new bunker buster bombs that are much bigger and can go a lot deeper than the ones we gave to the Israelis. What has Obama threatened to do in December? Try sanctions. The democrats are pathetic, they really do not understand how to deal with people who are hardcore ruthless like the Iranian leadership.

Right, because going to war has been so fuckin beneficial for us in the past eight years. [/quote]

It was a lot moe effective than sending out a cop with an arrest warrant to beg Afghanistan to give up Osama. Or the Clinton approach of don’t shoot at him if there could be collateral damage.

Surely you can’t be suggesting that it was a bad idea to end the status quo with Sadaam. Resolving the situation with Sadaam was very effective. It allowed us to get our army out of Saudi Arabia which was a major bone of contention in the muslim world. Because muslims consider that land to be sacred and having an infidel army based there goes against their religion. Have you forgotten about that?

Then there are the half a million people who were starved to death by the sanctions. Their deaths was another rallying call for hatred against the west. Have you forgotten about them?

Then there are the Iranians. Our options in dealing with Iran were limited because of Sadaam because we had to consider balances of power when dealing with either one of those countries. With Sadaam gone we can now take out the Iranian military without worrying about upsetting the balance of power with Iraq. Did that not occur to you?

Another thing is, have you ever for one moment given any thought whatsoever to what it must have been like for president Bush on 9/11 when he had to play the guessing game as to where the attack came from? For all the whining from the democrats about Iraq one thing that Obama will never have to do is play a guessing game that includes Sadaam. Getting rid of Sadaam makes it easier to sort out where any future attacks came from.

[quote]
Why don’t you limeys do it? Bomb Iran and then take your 34 troops you’ve got in Iraq and send them in to Iran and mop up. [/quote]

Really? So after sending in tens of thousands of troops and enduring all the sacrifices of dead and injured soldiers that the British have made to support Americas war effort you are still going to have an attitude. That’s incredible.

[quote]
It would be nice to share the burden with someone. [/quote]

Why would anyone want to share a burden like that with a bunch of ingrates like you? Now I understand why the British want to pull out of Afghanistan.

90

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
All this sanction talk has caught me. Serious question: Do U.S./U.N. sanctions affect the people of those sanctioned countries anymore negatively than the actions of their own country/leadership? [/quote]

They probably do hurt the people. But the other side of the coin is they open up lucrative commercial oppotunities for sanction busters. That is what happened with Iraq.

The problem with sanctions is the Iranians probably have everything they need to produce atomic weapons and they are close enough that they can tolerate their economy grinding down as they complete their bomb program. Sanctions alone are not going to do it quick enough.

Sanctions used in combination with a big set back like bombing a few key choke points in their program would be a different situation. Because sanctions alone would be suffering but there is light at the end of the tunnel to make the suffering bearable. Sanctions with the program getting set back would be suffering with no end in sight.

91

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Sifu wrote:
The democrats are pathetic, they really do not understand how to deal with people who are hardcore ruthless like the Iranian leadership.

You forgot to mention who has shown how to understand and deal with these people. [/quote]

The Iranian leaders are hardcore. Look at the blood they have on their hands. Ahmadinejad is a member of the Basij. The Basij are the ones who would use children to set off mines during the Iraq war. Even in a prison on death row you would have a hard time finding people that ruthless.

The type of person who is not going to get results with people like that is some smiling, chatty PTA mom who loves the children like Hillary or Nancy.

What you need is someone who is tough, grim and not afraid of what will be thought of him if he refuses to shake hands. George Bush was a great example of someone like that. Unforetunately he had idiots like Pelozi doing everything they could to undermine his credibility.

92

C Grade Ivy League, Business Burning, Spoiled Rich Kid, Drunk Driving, Coke Using, Draft Dodgers are Tough?

Maybe Bill Clinton should do UFC…

93

[quote]Sifu wrote:
What you need is someone who is tough, grim and not afraid of what will be thought of him if he refuses to shake hands. George Bush was a great example of someone like that. Unforetunately he had idiots like Pelozi doing everything they could to undermine his credibility.
[/quote]

At first I laughed and thought this was great sarcasm, but then I realized that you probably meant it to be serious. Unforetunately [sic] you can’t blame Bush’s lack of credibility on anyone but Bush himself. Well, maybe Rummy, Brownie, Cheney, Wolfie, Gonzi and a few others get a good share of the credit, but they were all part of the “dubya posse” so it’s still all on Bushie. But you can’t blame it on Pelozi or anyone outside of Bush’s posse. And his refusal to shake hands made him look more like a petulant brat than any kind of “tough”.

94

Putin is tough and decisive. Bush is a pathetic vagina.

95

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:

It is a world of Jewish bankers that’s turning our country to Corporate Communism, and bring us down to our knees, not Islamists and a legion of suicide bombers.
[/quote]

I see…

96

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Another thing is, have you ever for one moment given any thought whatsoever to what it must have been like for president Bush on 9/11 when he had to play the guessing game as to where the attack came from? For all the whining from the democrats about Iraq one thing that Obama will never have to do is play a guessing game that includes Sadaam. Getting rid of Sadaam makes it easier to sort out where any future attacks came from.

[/quote]

Guessing game? So, before the US invaded Iraq, it was unknown that 19 of the terrorists involved in 9/11 were from SAUDI ARABIA (hint: Saudi Arabia is not Iraq) ?

What intelligence was so concrete that Bush decided we should go into Iraq? Why didn’t we find any serious weapons there? Oh, wait. We did sell Saddam insane stockpiles of chemical weapons to use in the Iran Iraq War. That’s how we’d know if he had anything at all; we sold it to him…we must still have the receipts somewhere.

There are several reports by US intelligence that Iran is not even close to making a bomb. They can only refine up to 4% or so and a bomb requires above 99%. I don’t see where pursuing nuclear power is a bad thing for a country whose economy is running dry despite it being one of the largest exporters of oil in the world.

If the US is hell bent on disrupting the pursuit of alternative power within Iran, how would Americans take it if Saudi Arabia bombed US energy interests (i.e. green power projects) because it might eventually lead to the curbing of US reliance on Saudi Arabian oil, and hence a withdrawal of American troops in Saudi Arabia?

What if the Saudis bombed America for that? Is it any of Saudi Arabia’s business if the US pursues alternative energy?

We can’t afford another fucking war, and if Israel and Iran want to duke it out, let them do it. Everyone else should just shut the fuck up, mind their own internal turmoils and tend to their own goddamn domestic populous. We already give hundreds of billions to Israel every fucking year. Why do we need to support them militarily?

If Obama is serious about not engaging Iran militarily, he should threaten to pull the plug on Israeli aid money if Israel goes with a pre-emptive strike against Iran.

And I’ve said this before: as stupid of a political move it was for Ahmadinejad to say anything about the Holocaust, his point in a follow up interview was that, out of the 11-12 million that Hitler killed, if the 6 million Jews were put through a Holocaust, what about the remaining 5-6 million that died? He meant that to keep mentioning a Holocaust negates the other millions that died at the hands of Hitler. Stupid comment anyway, but that’s what he meant. I’ll try to dig up the interview.

97

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:

And I’ve said this before: as stupid of a political move it was for Ahmadinejad to say anything about the Holocaust, his point in a follow up interview was that, out of the 11-12 million that Hitler killed, if the 6 million Jews were put through a Holocaust, what about the remaining 5-6 million that died? He meant that to keep mentioning a Holocaust negates the other millions that died at the hands of Hitler. Stupid comment anyway, but that’s what he meant. I’ll try to dig up the interview.[/quote]

You are correct. Jews also hold positions in the Iranian government as well.

The war-mongers don’t care though and won’t be satisfied until Iranian streets are flowing with blood.

98

This article cites our own intelligence communities. This was also reported back in August of this year.

99

[quote]K2000 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Not unless they give you a reason to.

If it does turn out that they are making weapons of a nuclear nature, then I’d say start with a nuke to a major military target, demand they cease all nuclear activity (including power related, they’ve demonstrated they can’t be trusted) and also demand they hand over all weapons.

There is no negotiating with these people, so let’s not sugar coat it.

There’s no reason to bomb them currently. Negotiations seem like they are working. An unprovoked attack could escalate and draw in the Chinese and Russians, potentially. A massive regional conflict is nothing to take lightly.

Every time Ahmedinijad puffs out his chest (flares his lats) he is just trying to create leverage or apply counter-pressure (whether it actually works is a different story). They are not a threat to us, certainly not directly. Also, Iran is allowed to have nuclear power. However I have read that maybe the administration might try to spike that, in order to keep Iran weak economically (they need alternative power sources to avoid burning their own oil resources, their main source of revenue). It’s a delicate situation, but it seems like the administration is playing a shrewd game of poker with Iran, and hasn’t made any wrong moves yet.

[/quote]

Negotiations seem like they are working.???

What planet are you living on? Iran’s idea of negotiation is to stall for time, hoping they can build a bomb before we get the stones to act. They have NO intention of stopping. I bet you got tricked out fo lunch money alot…

100

[quote]tme wrote:
Sifu wrote:
What you need is someone who is tough, grim and not afraid of what will be thought of him if he refuses to shake hands. George Bush was a great example of someone like that. Unforetunately he had idiots like Pelozi doing everything they could to undermine his credibility.

At first I laughed and thought this was great sarcasm, but then I realized that you probably meant it to be serious. Unforetunately [sic] you can’t blame Bush’s lack of credibility on anyone but Bush himself. Well, maybe Rummy, Brownie, Cheney, Wolfie, Gonzi and a few others get a good share of the credit, but they were all part of the “dubya posse” so it’s still all on Bushie. But you can’t blame it on Pelozi or anyone outside of Bush’s posse. And his refusal to shake hands made him look more like a petulant brat than any kind of “tough”.
[/quote]

I knew it would upset some of you that’s why I wrote it, to stir things up. Seriously though, Bush ordered the invasion of two countries. There is an old saying that you should learn that goes like this, “actions speak louder than words”.

Invading two of Irans neighbors was an action that the Iranians took notice of. There was a time where the Iranians thought they were going to be next. That was when they were the most willing to negotiate. This was because they were afraid of what Bush would do next.

During that period of time the threat of military action by the US had great credibility because bush had twice demonstrated what he was capable of.

When Pelosi became speaker of the House one of her very first statements was we are not going to allow Bush to attack Iran. With that stupid public statement she seriously undermined Bush’s ability to use coercion on the Iranians as part of the negotiation process.