[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
Holy shit… we not only have to worry about Iran, but now Iraniani? Cripes, were sunk! :([/quote]
I was wondering if anybody was gonna heckle me about that. Remember when that dude posted that it’s “Irani”, not “Iranian”? I thought I’d glue the two together just to be weird.
[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
I’m not calling for anything other than common sense. I’m telling you the situation as it exists. We can have deterrence, but we cannot have control.
[/quote]
Okay, fair enough. So precision bombing the nuclear facilities is beyond our military capabilities? I might beg to differ on that. A little GPS goes a long way.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
endgamer711 wrote:
We can have deterrence, but we cannot have control.
Okay, fair enough. So precision bombing the nuclear facilities is beyond our military capabilities? I might beg to differ on that. A little GPS goes a long way.
[/quote]
It’s beyond our military intelligence. GPS is swell, but you need to know what coordinates to plug in. How good has our intelligence been thus far? If you can see whatever it is from orbit, we may have some clue. Otherwise not. That gets you a reactor this time, but likely little else. And next time (there will inevitably be a next time) everything will be better hidden.
[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
It’s beyond our military intelligence. GPS is swell, but you need to know what coordinates to plug in. How good has our intelligence been thus far? If you can see whatever it is from orbit, we may have some clue. Otherwise not. That gets you a reactor this time, but likely little else. And next time (there will inevitably be a next time) everything will be better hidden.
[/quote]
Oh, you mean this nuclear power plant that we don’t know about? :
I like the last passage in the report:
“According to Paul Leventhal of the Nuclear Control Institute, if Iran were to withdraw from the Nonproliferation Treaty and renounce the agreement with Russia, the Bushehr reactor could produce a quarter ton of plutonium per year, which Leventhal says is enough for at least 30 atomic bombs. See also Plutonium from Light Water Reactors as Nuclear Material, Harmon W.Hubbard, April 2003.”
No, maybe you’re right. We have no idea where this reactor is. 
[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Nope. Your “point” seems to me a complete non sequitur. 9/11 and Iran don’t connect any more directly than 9/11 and Iraq.[/quote]
I am talking about fanatical muslim extremists! I don’t care what country they are from. By the way do you even know what country the terrorists were from that flew the planes into our buildings?
Dangerous either way my friend! However, I will take the sort of danger where we disarm a country who is our sworn enemy (according to them) anyday!
I have to disagree with that statement. I think that we can dispose of any nuclear operations that they begin. And I think we can do it anytime that we want. However, even if you are correct, I am for the delaying such country from having nukes.
Anything built can be destroyed.
Don’t you think there is a better change of Al Quaeda getting the bomb if the mullahs, or any of the extremists groups have one? Of course there is!
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[more of zeb’s slice and dice]
[/quote]
So let’s see, it doesn’t matter who anybody actually is in this business, or what their objective are, if they’re Islamic they’re a problem, and military force will definitely solve the problem.
I thankfully doubt your view is held by the decision makers.
Especially given the Iraq situation.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Oh, you mean this nuclear power plant that we don’t know about?
[/quote]
I think there’s a lot of Plutonium you don’t know about. And the next reactor will be underground.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I am for the delaying such country from having nukes.
[/quote]
If you’re delaying them by attacking them, you might find that mere delay is not sufficient.
You need to draw a distinction between a nuclear program that can produce an arsenal of weapons and which is a chip at the negotiating table, and a program that can produce a few bombs for terrorists to use. if you’re worried about that last possibility, attacking Iran and driving its program underground is a good way to make your nightmare come true.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Anything built can be destroyed.
[/quote]
Zeb, as a militarist, I’m sure you’re looking forward to the day your children enter Basic Training. Yes? Because that is the future your solution will create for them.
Let’s see… the US goes around tossing bombs at Arabic countries in a willy-nilly fashion.
I wonder if anybody over there might get pissed off at the US for that?
If, and perhaps you’ll recognize that word and not presume I’m saying something without it, there are alternatives to throwing bombs at things, they should be explored.
The road to peace through war is a long one…
Anyway, that is what everybody wants right? Peace? The ability to not huddle in fear at home waiting for the terrorists to sneak a bomb across a border and vaporize a city?
If you want peace, you may want to think about the fact that it isn’t really brought about by force. Throwing bombs left and right may make you feel secure, but it isn’t likely to bring anything approaching peace.
And no, all you retards can kiss my ass, I’m not talking apologism or appeasement. I’m talking about getting to a peaceful coexistence.
Oh well, the world has serious issues, and I’m sure throwing bombs at everyone and preemptively invading countries under false pretenses will calm things down a lot.
endgamer, we know you think war is bad, but you are ignoring the fact that Iran has been at war with us for the last 26 years.
It has been a low intensity conflict, but it is very real.
We must stop Iran from developing nukes.
Counting on negotiations with such proven liars such as the Iranian leadership is naive at its best and possibly traitorously negligent.
I don’t really understand how you would stop them.
All I get from your posts is you do not agree with using military force and if we impeach Bush, withdraw from the world and apologize then MAYBE they will not hurt us.
I hope my impression is mistaken and that is not how you really feel.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Let’s see… the US goes around tossing bombs at Arabic countries in a willy-nilly fashion.
I wonder if anybody over there might get pissed off at the US for that?
[/quote]
Vroom - you post shit like this and then wonder why I question some of you other posts. Beam me up Scotty…
Willy-Nilly? Please. That is just stupidity, or a very bad attempt at humor.
Besides - I don’t know that you can actually call the Iraniani’s “Arabic”, but I could be wrong about that.
One thing is for damn sure - no one is talking about dropping bombs in this “willy-nilly” fashion that you have mentioned.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
…
Besides - I don’t know that you can actually call the Iraniani’s “Arabic”, but I could be wrong about that.
…
[/quote]
The Iranianianis are mostly Persian.
The Iraqians are mostly Arabic.
The majority of Afghanistanianis are neither.
Rainjack,
I’ll agree that the administration isn’t, but some of the folks on here are pretty damned aggressive with respect to the use of force.
However, how do you think people living inside the Middle East view America? I don’t know anybody there, so I don’t know, but I’d imagine it’s closer to “unpredictable use of force” than to “protectorate of the people”.
How we view ourselves over here isn’t really the issue.
I don’t see what you get so worked up about.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Rainjack,
I’ll agree that the administration isn’t, but some of the folks on here are pretty damned aggressive with respect to the use of force.
However, how do you think people living inside the Middle East view America? I don’t know anybody there, so I don’t know, but I’d imagine it’s closer to “unpredictable use of force” than to “protectorate of the people”.
How we view ourselves over here isn’t really the issue.
I don’t see what you get so worked up about.[/quote]
So what you saying is that the important thing is what others think of us?
I wasn’t brought up to think like that.
I don’t think Bush was either.
But - as far as the “so worked up” comment. I’m not.
You evidently think a lot higher of your posting skills than I do. No matter. You’ve been guilty of doing the same thing. Are you admitting that you get “so worked up” when your posts are called bullshit?
Lighten up and have some fries and gravy.
Rainjack,
I’m not saying “the important thing” is this or that.
Popular opinion in the Middle East has a lot to do with how things progress. It is the reality of the situation. You can’t just ignore reality and expect things to work out well!
[Obligatory joke, unless of course you are Bush]
Anyway, I figured you were worked up because of all the swearing, maybe you just swear a lot. I don’t care, but watch out for Zeb, he’s a stickler on these things.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Anyway, I figured you were worked up because of all the swearing, maybe you just swear a lot. I don’t care, but watch out for Zeb, he’s a stickler on these things.[/quote]
My last 2 posts included one “shit”, one “damn”, and one “bullshit”.
Yeah - I probably need to wash my mouth out with some Lever 2000.
[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
So let’s see, it doesn’t matter who anybody actually is in this business, or what their objective are, if they’re Islamic they’re a problem, and military force will definitely solve the problem.[/quote]
Again, you don’t even know where the terrorists were actually from who flew those planes into our buildings! And I don’t blame you for not knowing. The fact is if they are Islamic militants they are in fact our enemies. Iran is run by extremists, why give them an adavantage?
[quote]I thankfully doubt your view is held by the decision makers.
Especially given the Iraq situation.[/quote]
My view is in fact held by those who have decision making ability. Think about what President Bush said.
[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
I am for the delaying such country from having nukes.
If you’re delaying them by attacking them, you might find that mere delay is not sufficient.[/quote]
I stated that it could be stopped. However, delay is better than promoting it, or letting it occur.
Allowing it to flourish is a better way of making all our nightmares come true.
[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Anything built can be destroyed.
Zeb, as a militarist, I’m sure you’re looking forward to the day your children enter Basic Training. Yes? Because that is the future your solution will create for them.[/quote]
Sometimes there is no other way out. Allowing Iran to have nukes is simply out of the question.