Iranian Nuclear Program

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
141

[quote]pat36 wrote:
JustTheFacts wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Fuck off Nazi. Peddle your bullshit somewhere else. I have seen and read enough of your shit to know exactly what you are. You fit in well with the other scum on this board.

If Dustin and I are Nazis, what would you call this guy? This is TYPICAL Zionist verbiage.

Israeli Professor: ‘We Could Destroy All European Capitals’
2-6-03
(IAP News) – An Israeli professor and military historian hinted that Israel could avenge the holocaust by annihilating millions of Germans and other Europeans.

Speaking during an interview which was published in Jerusalem Friday, Professor Martin Van Crevel said Israel had the capability of hitting most European capitals with nuclear weapons.

“We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force…”

“Our armed forces are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that this will happen before Israel goes under…”

Wouldn’t you know, Professor Martin Van Crevel is on the US Army Chief of Staff’s required reading list.
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/reference/CSAList/list3.htm

Just like Alan Dershowitz - Its Israel’s right to ignore international law

Is it possible to think on your own with out advertising all this conspiracy theory bullshit. Your convictionsare clear, the radicals are justified in everyway to attack americans and jews because you believe the jews are pulling all the strings and everyone else are puppets. We should be thankful they attacked us, for we are evil and just do what jews beckon us to do.
Oh yea, almost forgot the holocaust didn’t happen and if it did, it wasn’t jews they were killing it was arabs and germans and they ust said it was jews…That about cover it antisemetic piece of shit?[/quote]

The sad thing is, is that it isn’t a conspiracy. The connection is quite clear. JTT, myself and others have provided plenty of sources that prove the connections between Israeli influence and American foreign policy. You just chose to ignore it and spout off the typical conformist response of Nazi, anti-semite, America hater, etc.

Dustin

142

[quote]Dustin wrote:
pat36 wrote:
JustTheFacts wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Fuck off Nazi. Peddle your bullshit somewhere else. I have seen and read enough of your shit to know exactly what you are. You fit in well with the other scum on this board.

If Dustin and I are Nazis, what would you call this guy? This is TYPICAL Zionist verbiage.

Israeli Professor: ‘We Could Destroy All European Capitals’
2-6-03
(IAP News) – An Israeli professor and military historian hinted that Israel could avenge the holocaust by annihilating millions of Germans and other Europeans.

Speaking during an interview which was published in Jerusalem Friday, Professor Martin Van Crevel said Israel had the capability of hitting most European capitals with nuclear weapons.

“We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force…”

“Our armed forces are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that this will happen before Israel goes under…”

Wouldn’t you know, Professor Martin Van Crevel is on the US Army Chief of Staff’s required reading list.
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/reference/CSAList/list3.htm

Just like Alan Dershowitz - Its Israel’s right to ignore international law

Is it possible to think on your own with out advertising all this conspiracy theory bullshit. Your convictionsare clear, the radicals are justified in everyway to attack americans and jews because you believe the jews are pulling all the strings and everyone else are puppets. We should be thankful they attacked us, for we are evil and just do what jews beckon us to do.
Oh yea, almost forgot the holocaust didn’t happen and if it did, it wasn’t jews they were killing it was arabs and germans and they ust said it was jews…That about cover it antisemetic piece of shit?

The sad thing is, is that it isn’t a conspiracy. The connection is quite clear. JTT, myself and others have provided plenty of sources that prove the connections between Israeli influence and American foreign policy. You just chose to ignore it and spout off the typical conformist response of Nazi, anti-semite, America hater, etc.

Dustin[/quote]

Here ya go! You and Just Fiction should feel at home here. They ignore reality too. But, their arguments are actually rather well thought out.
If I want to escape reality, I’ll drop some acid or mushrooms. I don’t need misinformation to make me feel like a man.

143

Zap, Pat, Cunn and others:

Let’s just skip the jtf/dustin nonsense, and discuss the reality of the situation.

With the exception of jtf/dustin, I was wondering if anyone had some constructive suggestions on how to deal with this growing threat.

I’m very nervous as the backdoor is wide open (russia) in case of sanctions.

Iraq isn’t ready to confront them militarily.

The international community (france) is not serious about confronting the issue.

We have a-thingy threatening to destroy Israel and the U.S.

This frightens me.

JeffR

144

[quote]pat36 wrote:

Here ya go! You and Just Fiction should feel at home here. They ignore reality too. But, their arguments are actually rather well thought out.
If I want to escape reality, I’ll drop some acid or mushrooms. I don’t need misinformation to make me feel like a man. [/quote]

Pat YOU ARE THE MAN!!!

I love it!!!

JeffR

145

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Zap, Pat, Cunn and others:

Let’s just skip the jtf/dustin nonsense, and discuss the reality of the situation.

With the exception of jtf/dustin, I was wondering if anyone had some constructive suggestions on how to deal with this growing threat.

I’m very nervous as the backdoor is wide open (russia) in case of sanctions.

Iraq isn’t ready to confront them militarily.

The international community (france) is not serious about confronting the issue.

We have a-thingy threatening to destroy Israel and the U.S.

This frightens me.

JeffR[/quote]

I say we start a new thread…this one is highly poluted. I’ll use the majority of what you said, I’ll call it “Constructive Solutions Noone will pay attention to”

146

[i]*“When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war.”

*“I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its stupidity. War settles nothing.”

*“If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They’ll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government.”[/i]

Dwight D. Eisenhower
34th President of the United States
(1953-1961)

WEST POINT GRADUATES AGAINST THE WAR
“Dear Lieutenant Ehren Watada: We are pleased to write to you to express our profound respect and gratitude for your refusal to participate in the illegal war in Iraq. We stand with you regarding the illegality of the orders issued to you and fully support your exercising your conscientious duty to refuse to obey them…”
http://thankyoult.live.radicaldesigns.org/content/view/180/42/

147

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Is it possible to think on your own with out advertising all this conspiracy theory bullshit. Your convictionsare clear, the radicals are justified in everyway to attack americans and jews because you believe the jews are pulling all the strings and everyone else are puppets. We should be thankful they attacked us, for we are evil and just do what jews beckon us to do.
Oh yea, almost forgot the holocaust didn’t happen and if it did, it wasn’t jews they were killing it was arabs and germans and they ust said it was jews…That about cover it antisemetic piece of shit?[/quote]

lol, is the only thing you neocon idiots are capable of is tossing non sequiturs and red herrings and attacking strawmen? These would seem to be your fortes.

Do you not comprehend that it is possible to hold certain viewpoints without making any associated value judgements?

Not everything has to be “justified”, one way or the other.

Some things are simply TRUE or FALSE. Not “good”, nor “bad”, nor “moral”, “just” or “unjust”.

You are stuck in a 12 year old mentality which is causing you to associate neutral perspectives with moral value judgements. It’s pathetic to watch, I feel like I’m in daycare.

As an example, let’s say that I think Bush is an idiot, and happen to voice this opinion here.

You see this statement and your developmentally-retarded mind automatically springs into action and creates a value judgement, which you then associate with me. You interpret my statement as:
“I hate Bush!”
And respond accordingly. Trouble is, I never said that I “hated Bush”, and I may not have meant anything similar to it, either".

Did you ever stop to consider that I might actually have an affinity for idiots, and that my statement about him could therefore be constituted as praise? Obviously not. You had better wake the fuck up and start to consider it, then.

The above was an extreme example. The majority of the time, blatantly disparaging terms such as “idiot” will, indeed, be associated with negative value judgements of their creators. Nevertheless, this example illustrates that you can’t go assuming someone’s personal convictions and make a value judgement about his statements instead of addressing them from an objective, scientific (true/false) basis.

So in your response to a person, address what the fuck was written, not what you assume his personal convictions are (or any other boneheaded assumption you might make).

Think the Iraq war was justified? Then explain why that’s the case – don’t spout unrelated bullshit about how “anyone who doesn’t believe [this or that] must be a traitor/liberal/commie/etc”.

It’s a sad reflection on the education system on this country when I have to spend half an hour writing out a post just to get someone to stop committing a basic logical fallacy.

I know, it’s a hell of a lot harder to respond to people’s arguments when you can’t make up ficticious claims and attribute said claims to your opponent. But that’s what every self-respecting person does on an internet forum, because to use red herrings and non sequiturs is to be a moron.

I thought conservatives were all about hard work and getting the job done. Not the case when it comes to mental labor, I see.

148

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
lol, is the only thing you neocon idiots are capable of is tossing non sequiturs and red herrings and attacking strawmen? These would seem to be your fortes.

Do you not comprehend that it is possible to hold certain viewpoints without making any associated value judgements?

Not everything has to be “justified”, one way or the other.

Some things are simply TRUE or FALSE. Not “good”, nor “bad”, nor “moral”, “just” or “unjust”.

You are stuck in a 12 year old mentality which is causing you to associate neutral perspectives with moral value judgements. It’s pathetic to watch, I feel like I’m in daycare.

As an example, let’s say that I think Bush is an idiot, and happen to voice this opinion here.

You see this statement and your developmentally-retarded mind automatically springs into action and creates a value judgement, which you then associate with me. You interpret my statement as:
“I hate Bush!”
And respond accordingly. Trouble is, I never said that I “hated Bush”, and I may not have meant anything similar to it, either".

Did you ever stop to consider that I might actually have an affinity for idiots, and that my statement about him could therefore be constituted as praise? Obviously not. You had better wake the fuck up and start to consider it, then.

The above was an extreme example. The majority of the time, blatantly disparaging terms such as “idiot” will, indeed, be associated with negative value judgements of their creators. Nevertheless, this example illustrates that you can’t go assuming someone’s personal convictions and make a value judgement about his statements instead of addressing them from an objective, scientific (true/false) basis.

So in your response to a person, address what the fuck was written, not what you assume his personal convictions are (or any other boneheaded assumption you might make).

Think the Iraq war was justified? Then explain why that’s the case – don’t spout unrelated bullshit about how “anyone who doesn’t believe [this or that] must be a traitor/liberal/commie/etc”.

It’s a sad reflection on the education system on this country when I have to spend half an hour writing out a post just to get someone to stop committing a basic logical fallacy.

I know, it’s a hell of a lot harder to respond to people’s arguments when you can’t make up ficticious claims and attribute said claims to your opponent. But that’s what every self-respecting person does on an internet forum, because to use red herrings and non sequiturs is to be a moron.

I thought conservatives were all about hard work and getting the job done. Not the case when it comes to mental labor, I see.[/quote]

Well, aren?t you a bit late in the game. Did you feel a need to prop yourself up by insulting me without cause or provocation or any attention to fact or detail? I am a neocon? That is a logical fallacy called argumentum ad hominem since you seem to be tossing around big words to make yourself feel important. I am sorry you are of such weak a mind.

Maybe if you have read what I have written you may have found other details, but I do have little patience for people who justify violence against innocent people based on where they live, political affiliation or what religion they are. The arguments put forth by you cronies are that two wrongs make a right. It?s okay to do violence against Israel and the U.S. because they had done bad things to.

If you had actually read through that is what you would have found. Apparently you agree with this point of view and you get your information from conspiracy theory sites that have no basis in fact as well . Or apparently anybody who does not subscribe to your point of view is just a dumb old neocon.

So what next your are going to further insult me to make yourself feel smart?

149

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
lol, is the only thing you neocon idiots are capable of is tossing non sequiturs and red herrings and attacking strawmen? These would seem to be your fortes.

Do you not comprehend that it is possible to hold certain viewpoints without making any associated value judgements?

Not everything has to be “justified”, one way or the other.

Some things are simply TRUE or FALSE. Not “good”, nor “bad”, nor “moral”, “just” or “unjust”.

You are stuck in a 12 year old mentality which is causing you to associate neutral perspectives with moral value judgements. It’s pathetic to watch, I feel like I’m in daycare.

As an example, let’s say that I think Bush is an idiot, and happen to voice this opinion here.

You see this statement and your developmentally-retarded mind automatically springs into action and creates a value judgement, which you then associate with me. You interpret my statement as:
“I hate Bush!”
And respond accordingly. Trouble is, I never said that I “hated Bush”, and I may not have meant anything similar to it, either".

Did you ever stop to consider that I might actually have an affinity for idiots, and that my statement about him could therefore be constituted as praise? Obviously not. You had better wake the fuck up and start to consider it, then.

The above was an extreme example. The majority of the time, blatantly disparaging terms such as “idiot” will, indeed, be associated with negative value judgements of their creators. Nevertheless, this example illustrates that you can’t go assuming someone’s personal convictions and make a value judgement about his statements instead of addressing them from an objective, scientific (true/false) basis.

So in your response to a person, address what the fuck was written, not what you assume his personal convictions are (or any other boneheaded assumption you might make).

Think the Iraq war was justified? Then explain why that’s the case – don’t spout unrelated bullshit about how “anyone who doesn’t believe [this or that] must be a traitor/liberal/commie/etc”.

It’s a sad reflection on the education system on this country when I have to spend half an hour writing out a post just to get someone to stop committing a basic logical fallacy.

I know, it’s a hell of a lot harder to respond to people’s arguments when you can’t make up ficticious claims and attribute said claims to your opponent. But that’s what every self-respecting person does on an internet forum, because to use red herrings and non sequiturs is to be a moron.

I thought conservatives were all about hard work and getting the job done. Not the case when it comes to mental labor, I see.[/quote]

Well, aren?t you a bit late in the game. Did you feel a need to prop yourself up by insulting me without cause or provocation or any attention to fact or detail? I am a neocon? That is a logical fallacy called argumentum ad hominem since you seem to be tossing around big words to make yourself feel important. I am sorry you are of such weak a mind.

Maybe if you have read what I have written you may have found other details, but I do have little patience for people who justify violence against innocent people based on where they live, political affiliation or what religion they are. The arguments put forth by you cronies are that two wrongs make a right. It?s okay to do violence against Israel and the U.S. because they had done bad things to.

If you had actually read through that is what you would have found. Apparently you agree with this point of view and you get your information from conspiracy theory sites that have no basis in fact as well . Or apparently anybody who does not subscribe to your point of view is just a dumb old neocon.
So what next your are going to further insult me to make yourself feel smart?

150

Pat,

I think I’m going to write a new book.

It will have john “I’ll be keeping 40 million from the 2004 campaign” kerry and ted “no seatbelt” kennedy and nominal “the sun revolves around the Earth” prospect on the cover.

The title will be: “massachusetts: 1776 to 2007. How the mighty have fallen.”

JeffR

151

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Pat,

I think I’m going to write a new book.

It will have john “I’ll be keeping 40 million from the 2004 campaign” kerry and ted “no seatbelt” kennedy and nominal “the sun revolves around the Earth” prospect on the cover.

The title will be: “massachusetts: 1776 to 2007. How the mighty have fallen.”

JeffR[/quote]

What’s even more scary then the mentality of a man who kills a woman, gets away with it and has the balls to run for public servant, is the mentality of those nimrods who continually vote for him.
Can I write the forward? I think Mass. should be it’s own little socialist country. I wouldn’t object to the defection.

152

Haha, Mass isn’t socialist, don’t make me laugh. I have been living here for over a decade and I keep searching for the leftist power base that is so frequently attributed to this state. I can tell you what I see on a daily basis, living in a suburb right outside of Boston. It’s hardly drones of latte-sipping liberals in SUVs (although they are around), but more commonly, working-class, Irish and Italian conservative stiffs driving huge pickups.

Hockey, Football, and Baseball are immensely popular and among “secondary sports”, boxing and MMA rank high.

Even the Bostonian accent is the accent of the working-class: cops, firefighters, and construction workers – surely not bourgeoisie elitists!

Sure, you can go into Cambridge or Somerville and see the hippies crawling around Harvard Square, like insects, but - much as insects - they are harmless.

Also, plenty of old farts in Buicks and Oldsmobiles wearing blue Navy caps with “USS Merrimack” and the like written on them (there is a constant stream of them going in-and-out of Jimmy’s Steer House on Mass. Avenue). The old, rich guys who stand around naked in the lockerroom at Gold’s Gym are obviously conservative in their outlook, as well.

Leftists have no power outside of academics: not here in Mass, or anywhere. The world always has been and always will be ruled by a conservative power elite.

Liberals are insane and stupid, yes, but more to the point, they are irrelevant. Hence, I chose to spend my time arguing with conservatives.

153

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Haha, Mass isn’t socialist, don’t make me laugh. I have been living here for over a decade and I keep searching for the leftist power base that is so frequently attributed to this state. I can tell you what I see on a daily basis, living in a suburb right outside of Boston. It’s hardly drones of latte-sipping liberals in SUVs (although they are around), but more commonly, working-class, Irish and Italian conservative stiffs driving huge pickups.

Hockey, Football, and Baseball are immensely popular and among “secondary sports”, boxing and MMA rank high.

Even the Bostonian accent is the accent of the working-class: cops, firefighters, and construction workers – surely not bourgeoisie elitists!

Sure, you can go into Cambridge or Somerville and see the hippies crawling around Harvard Square, like insects, but - much as insects - they are harmless.

Also, plenty of old farts in Buicks and Oldsmobiles wearing blue Navy caps with “USS Merrimack” and the like written on them (there is a constant stream of them going in-and-out of Jimmy’s Steer House on Mass. Avenue). The old, rich guys who stand around naked in the lockerroom at Gold’s Gym are obviously conservative in their outlook, as well.

Leftists have no power outside of academics: not here in Mass, or anywhere. The world always has been and always will be ruled by a conservative power elite.

Liberals are insane and stupid, yes, but more to the point, they are irrelevant. Hence, I chose to spend my time arguing with conservatives.[/quote]

John Kerry and Ted Kennedy are elected by conservatives?

Just go away.

154

How’s diplomacy working?

Iran on course for nuclear bomb, EU told
By Daniel Dombey and Fidelius Schmid in Brussels

Published: February 12 2007 22:18 | Last updated: February 13 2007 13:51

Iran will be able to develop enough weapons-grade material for a nuclear bomb and there is little that can be done to prevent it, an internal European Union document has concluded.

In an admission of the international community?s failure to hold back Iran?s nuclear ambitions, the document ? compiled by the staff of Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief ? says the atomic programme has been delayed only by technical limitations rather than diplomatic pressure. ?Attempts to engage the Iranian administration in a negotiating process have not so far succeeded,? it states.

The downbeat conclusions of the ?reflection paper? ? seen by the Financial Times ? are certain to be seized on by advocates of military action, who fear that Iran will be able to produce enough fissile material for a bomb over the next two to three years. Tehran insists its purposes are purely peaceful.

?At some stage we must expect that Iran will acquire the capacity to enrich uranium on the scale required for a weapons programme,? says the paper, dated February 7 and circulated to the EU?s 27 national governments ahead of a foreign ministers meeting yesterday.

?In practice . . . the Iranians have pursued their programme at their own pace, the limiting factor being technical difficulties rather than resolutions by the UN or the International Atomic Energy Agency.

?The problems with Iran will not be resolved through economic sanctions alone.?

The admission is a blow to hopes that a deal with Iran can be reached and comes at a sensitive time, when tensions between the US and Tehran are rising. Its implication that sanctions will prove ineffective will also be unwelcome to EU diplomats. Only yesterday the bloc agreed on how to apply United Nations sanctions on Tehran, overcoming a dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar.

Iran has set up several hundred centrifuges to enrich uranium, a process that can yield both nuclear fuel and weapons-grade material. But analysts say that Iran is behind schedule on plans to install 3,000 centrifuges to produce enriched uranium on a larger scale.

Last year Ernst Uhrlau, the head of German intelligence, said Tehran would not be able to produce enough material for a nuclear bomb before 2010 and would only be able to make it into a weapon by about 2015.

The EU document is embarrassing for advocates of negotiations with Iran, since last year it was Mr Solana and his staff who spearheaded talks with Tehran on behalf of both the EU and the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

The paper adds that Tehran?s rejection of the offer put forward by Mr Solana ?makes it difficult to believe that, at least in the short run, [Iran] would be ready to establish the conditions for the resumption of negotiations?.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007

155

“But you’re JUST a journalist…”
—Ahmini-jihad to Diane Sawyer

That didn’t make the edit though.

156

[quote]hedo wrote:
How’s diplomacy working?

Iran on course for nuclear bomb, EU told
By Daniel Dombey and Fidelius Schmid in Brussels

Published: February 12 2007 22:18 | Last updated: February 13 2007 13:51

Iran will be able to develop enough weapons-grade material for a nuclear bomb and there is little that can be done to prevent it, an internal European Union document has concluded.

In an admission of the international community?s failure to hold back Iran?s nuclear ambitions, the document ? compiled by the staff of Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief ? says the atomic programme has been delayed only by technical limitations rather than diplomatic pressure. ?Attempts to engage the Iranian administration in a negotiating process have not so far succeeded,? it states.

The downbeat conclusions of the ?reflection paper? ? seen by the Financial Times ? are certain to be seized on by advocates of military action, who fear that Iran will be able to produce enough fissile material for a bomb over the next two to three years. Tehran insists its purposes are purely peaceful.

?At some stage we must expect that Iran will acquire the capacity to enrich uranium on the scale required for a weapons programme,? says the paper, dated February 7 and circulated to the EU?s 27 national governments ahead of a foreign ministers meeting yesterday.

?In practice . . . the Iranians have pursued their programme at their own pace, the limiting factor being technical difficulties rather than resolutions by the UN or the International Atomic Energy Agency.

?The problems with Iran will not be resolved through economic sanctions alone.?

The admission is a blow to hopes that a deal with Iran can be reached and comes at a sensitive time, when tensions between the US and Tehran are rising. Its implication that sanctions will prove ineffective will also be unwelcome to EU diplomats. Only yesterday the bloc agreed on how to apply United Nations sanctions on Tehran, overcoming a dispute between Britain and Spain over Gibraltar.

Iran has set up several hundred centrifuges to enrich uranium, a process that can yield both nuclear fuel and weapons-grade material. But analysts say that Iran is behind schedule on plans to install 3,000 centrifuges to produce enriched uranium on a larger scale.

Last year Ernst Uhrlau, the head of German intelligence, said Tehran would not be able to produce enough material for a nuclear bomb before 2010 and would only be able to make it into a weapon by about 2015.

The EU document is embarrassing for advocates of negotiations with Iran, since last year it was Mr Solana and his staff who spearheaded talks with Tehran on behalf of both the EU and the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

The paper adds that Tehran?s rejection of the offer put forward by Mr Solana ?makes it difficult to believe that, at least in the short run, [Iran] would be ready to establish the conditions for the resumption of negotiations?.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007

[/quote]

Hedo, imagine if the International Community (france/russia/germany) were serious. This threat would disappear.

I don’t have any faith in diplomacy now that the backdoor is wide open.

JeffR

157

You can calm down now, Jeff.

EU: Brussels Rushes To Clarify ‘Nuclear Iran’ Report
BRUSSELS, February 13, 2007 (RFE/RL) – EU officials launched a rare and hurried exercise in damage control today to counter a suggestion by the “Financial Times” newspaper that the bloc has concluded that Iran cannot be prevented from acquiring a nuclear bomb.

A spokeswoman for EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said the report misrepresents the contents of an internal “reflection paper…”

“It’s rather unfortunate that an internal document which has no official status has been presented in such a distorted manner,” Gallach said…

The senior EU source said the document does not say anywhere that the EU believes it is “too late to halt Iran’s nuclear bomb” – as he said the “Financial Times” suggests…