Just to kick Monday off to a rocking start - here’s a great thread topic:
I propose that he Leftists actually want Iran to develop a nuclear arsenal because it gives them a plausible way to not fight the GWOT and to withdraw our troops from the Middle East. If Iran has the ability to threaten our forces with nuclear attack, then they do not look weak on national defense by “courageously” avoiding a nuclear holocaust . . . what do you all think?
Its pretty clear that nuclear proliferation would have a negative impact anywhere in the world. there are arguments for and against but generally today the countries that actively seek nuclear weapons are countries that are having or are likely to have a conflict.
does anyone know the weaknesses of the NPT and what the leading nations can do about it? each country having the power to veto sounds alot like the League of Nations…
great question - the proliferation of nuclear technology and material is of great concern and will only increase as other nations obtain nuclear power. Most people are unaware that nuclear bombs require continually maintenance and upkeep to remain in an operational status - and this requires trained specialists. It is one of the reasons that detecting and defeating nuclear terrorism is a bit easier than defeating chemical or biological weapons. However, as the technology becomes more readily available and more technicians are trained, that ease of detection and defeat is lessened and the potential for an actual nuclear attack becomes exponentially closer to reality.
of even greater concern is that, as you correctly stated, the nations seeking nuclear power/weapons are the ones most likely to resort to their use as a tool to reach political or religious goals.
dark days ahead if Iran succeeds in gaining nuclear tech . . .
Israel would NEVER allow Iran to go Nuclear. They would unilaterally destroy any true Iranian nuclear facilities.
I am not a military expert and really have taken no interest in military technology. I wonder if we really care about Iran having nukes.
Have conventional weapons reached the point where they are just as effective and more affordable than nukes? How much money would Iran have to spend on a nuclear program and for what effectiveness? Could they spend just as much on conventional military improvements and be more effective?
Has all the talk about nuclear weapons become more political than rational threat?
[quote]dhickey wrote:
I am not a military expert and really have taken no interest in military technology. I wonder if we really care about Iran having nukes.
Have conventional weapons reached the point where they are just as effective and more affordable than nukes? How much money would Iran have to spend on a nuclear program and for what effectiveness? Could they spend just as much on conventional military improvements and be more effective?
Has all the talk about nuclear weapons become more political than rational threat?[/quote]
No, it is a problem. Iran is just batshit crazy enough to use them unprovoked, even if it’s their ass. They do not value their own lives or anybody elses. If the get vaporized by a retaliatory nuke, they think they are going to heaven and so they just don’t care.
Mutually assured destruction is not a deterrent for iran.
Further, they are the parents to hamas and hezbolah. Putting nukes in those crazy fuckers hands could lead to a World War in record time.
I think you’re wrong, and that the batshit crazy conspiracy theories about Obama need to stop.
Just my opinion though.
Did not have any “batshit crazy conspiracy theories about Obama” - just proposed a simple working hypothesis of how a Leftist might employ the situation of Iran actually acheiving nuclear weaponization to justify an already held belief - not a huge stretch of the imagination, and an arguement we will certainly hear in the future.
Yeah, umm if that happens and we get bombed. I dont think Obama mama has the testicular fortitude to level Iran. Just my two cents
[quote]Fallen wrote:
Yeah, umm if that happens and we get bombed. I dont think Obama mama has the testicular fortitude to level Iran. Just my two cents[/quote]
Fallen, you know, I hadn’t even given his reaction to that event any serious thought yet - but you are on to something here.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I think you’re wrong, and that the batshit crazy conspiracy theories about Obama need to stop.
Just my opinion though.[/quote]
Well, thanks for the enlightenment. Yes, no more theories about Obama because IRISH says so. We’re disturbing his fapping fantasy.
[quote]Fallen wrote:
Yeah, umm if that happens and we get bombed. I dont think Obama mama has the testicular fortitude to level Iran. Just my two cents[/quote]
Agreed. Michelle has the fortitude, but Obama cares more about being liked by all then doing what is right for American citizens.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Fallen wrote:
Yeah, umm if that happens and we get bombed. I dont think Obama mama has the testicular fortitude to level Iran. Just my two cents[/quote]
Agreed. Michelle has the fortitude, but Obama cares more about being liked by all then doing what is right for American citizens.[/quote]
Michelle only worries about what to wear 2 hours from now
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]Fallen wrote:
Yeah, umm if that happens and we get bombed. I dont think Obama mama has the testicular fortitude to level Iran. Just my two cents[/quote]
Fallen, you know, I hadn’t even given his reaction to that event any serious thought yet - but you are on to something here.[/quote]
“We…were victims of attack today in Amerikkuh…but there is hope for when we are united…we are strong.”
Throw in a couple more of these caliber rants and that will sum it up. I dont know where those bastards would strike though. With the power of assumption, we can believe that their technology is so primitive that in the event that they launched a missile from Iranian soil the thing would probably make it to North Africa and crash. Yet, they might be able to put in a brief case and get on board a plane. I dont like Bush or any of his poliices. The man is a failure in life, a drunkard, and only made it to office because his number got picked in the elites bingo game. BUT he leveled those fuckers when they hit the towers he allowed to come crashing down. Obama wouldn’t retaliate with the same firepower.
Level the fuckers, and take their oil. End of story. Manifest destiny
[quote]Fallen wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Fallen wrote:
Yeah, umm if that happens and we get bombed. I dont think Obama mama has the testicular fortitude to level Iran. Just my two cents[/quote]
Agreed. Michelle has the fortitude, but Obama cares more about being liked by all then doing what is right for American citizens.[/quote]
Michelle only worries about what to wear 2 hours from now[/quote]
I saw the last 5 minutes of the movie W this weekend, and it is amazing how the left view W as a weak person controlled by his Father and people around him. W is a cowboy, and would make Iran a freaking radioactive watering hole if they dare even flinch. Obama Mama in my opinion is more afraid of everything around him than W ever was. IMO Obama hates America and loves everything outside of America more, and I will lump all leftist socialists into this stereotype.
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Israel would NEVER allow Iran to go Nuclear. They would unilaterally destroy any true Iranian nuclear facilities.
[/quote]
Not really, because we built 90% of those nuclear facilities back in the '70s to give the Shah of Iran nuclear capability. We also built them to withstand nuclear bombardment from Soviet ICBMs. The facility at Natanz, which is Iran’s main nuclear facility, was built by the US. If the Islamic Revolution happened just 6 months later, Iran would already have been a nuclear power.
Why do you think every administration has been so wishy-washy about attacking and wiping out Iran’s facilities? They know how hardened they are because we built them.
[quote]0mar wrote:
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Israel would NEVER allow Iran to go Nuclear. They would unilaterally destroy any true Iranian nuclear facilities.
[/quote]
Not really, because we built 90% of those nuclear facilities back in the '70s to give the Shah of Iran nuclear capability. We also built them to withstand nuclear bombardment from Soviet ICBMs. The facility at Natanz, which is Iran’s main nuclear facility, was built by the US. If the Islamic Revolution happened just 6 months later, Iran would already have been a nuclear power.
Why do you think every administration has been so wishy-washy about attacking and wiping out Iran’s facilities? They know how hardened they are because we built them.[/quote]
Curious about your source on that. Since construction at Natanz was only begun in 2000 under the guise of a desert eradication preject by the Jahad-e Towse’eh and Towese’eh-Sakjteman construction companies . . . .
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]0mar wrote:
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Israel would NEVER allow Iran to go Nuclear. They would unilaterally destroy any true Iranian nuclear facilities.
[/quote]
Not really, because we built 90% of those nuclear facilities back in the '70s to give the Shah of Iran nuclear capability. We also built them to withstand nuclear bombardment from Soviet ICBMs. The facility at Natanz, which is Iran’s main nuclear facility, was built by the US. If the Islamic Revolution happened just 6 months later, Iran would already have been a nuclear power.
Why do you think every administration has been so wishy-washy about attacking and wiping out Iran’s facilities? They know how hardened they are because we built them.[/quote]
Curious about your source on that. Since construction at Natanz was only begun in 2000 under the guise of a desert eradication preject by the Jahad-e Towse’eh and Towese’eh-Sakjteman construction companies . . . .[/quote]
Got my facilities mixed up. Natanz is new, Bushehr is the old US built nuclear reactor. My bad.
[quote]0mar wrote:
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
[quote]0mar wrote:
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Israel would NEVER allow Iran to go Nuclear. They would unilaterally destroy any true Iranian nuclear facilities.
[/quote]
Not really, because we built 90% of those nuclear facilities back in the '70s to give the Shah of Iran nuclear capability. We also built them to withstand nuclear bombardment from Soviet ICBMs. The facility at Natanz, which is Iran’s main nuclear facility, was built by the US. If the Islamic Revolution happened just 6 months later, Iran would already have been a nuclear power.
Why do you think every administration has been so wishy-washy about attacking and wiping out Iran’s facilities? They know how hardened they are because we built them.[/quote]
Curious about your source on that. Since construction at Natanz was only begun in 2000 under the guise of a desert eradication preject by the Jahad-e Towse’eh and Towese’eh-Sakjteman construction companies . . . .[/quote]
Got my facilities mixed up. Natanz is new, Bushehr is the old US built nuclear reactor. My bad.
[/quote]
But honestly do you think that Iran would be stupid enough to not look at the old facility and design the defenses around the first one? I might be wrong, but Omar’s thoughts do sound true.