Why Iran Should Get the Bomb

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My suspicions are confirmed.

Our new friend is definitely German. [/quote]

Surely not every German is also a Gibbering Idiot.
But if this example proves the rule, who am I to dispute it?[/quote]

Well, my deduction had more to do with his use of syntax and punctuation (not at all characteristic of a North American poster), as well as his referring to the Munich Agreement by its proper name. [/quote]

I, too, read these, and the strained use of American idiom. And then there was as well the academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious. Definitely nord deutsche. Very likely Hamburg. Yes, Hamburg�¢?�¦the odor of hake and haddock linger�¢?�¦
But, principally, a Gibbering Idiot.[/quote]

I think it’s a well assembled ruse.

Name: Bismark- A german battleship.

Avatar: From Inglorious Basterds the character SD Standartenfuhrer Hans Landa a.k.a “The Jew Hunter”

MO: Starts a debate using a seemingly relevant topic, then proceeds to act like a stereotypical europrick.

My guess is someone whom, even if German, isn’t a big fan of Germany. The Bismark got sunk, the character in the movie was easily hateable, and nobody likes a europrick.

82

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My suspicions are confirmed.

Our new friend is definitely German. [/quote]

Surely not every German is also a Gibbering Idiot.
But if this example proves the rule, who am I to dispute it?[/quote]

Well, my deduction had more to do with his use of syntax and punctuation (not at all characteristic of a North American poster), as well as his referring to the Munich Agreement by its proper name. [/quote]

I, too, read these, and the strained use of American idiom. And then there was as well the academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious. Definitely nord deutsche. Very likely Hamburg. Yes, Hamburg�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�?�¦the odor of hake and haddock linger�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�?�¦
But, principally, a Gibbering Idiot.[/quote]

I think it’s a well assembled ruse.

Name: Bismark- A german battleship.

Avatar: From Inglorious Basterds the character SD Standartenfuhrer Hans Landa a.k.a “The Jew Hunter”

MO: Starts a debate using a seemingly relevant topic, then proceeds to act like a stereotypical europrick.

My guess is someone whom, even if German, isn’t a big fan of Germany. The Bismark got sunk, the character in the movie was easily hateable, and nobody likes a europrick.
[/quote]

Name: Bismark- Close! Otto von Bismark, the Prussian statesman who unified Germany. The Bismarck-class battleships were named in his honor.

Avatar: I added that when the good DrSkeptix wrote of what he perceived as my “academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious,” and relating that to the inhabitants of North Germany. Naturally, I couldn’t resist the image most Americans seem to have of the country. You know, after Bier, Wurst and Lederhosen.

Europrick? I have been blunt and aggressive perhaps, but I am trying to facilitate an intellectual discussion in what I have discovered to be a decidedly hostile environment. It’s been rather enjoyable actually. Reread my posts. I have made exactly zero disparaging remarks concerning the United States, and I have made all efforts to keep the discussion on topic. To the contrary, in the “Russian Gives SAMs to Hezbollah” thread, I criticized many European states for what I see as free-riding of the American security apparatus. Others however, have devolved to name calling and speculation instead of addressing the arguments I’ve attempted to make. Attack my arguments and the reasoning that serves as their foundation. Don’t attack me.

Now, in the name of all that is holy, can we please focus our attention on the namesake of this thread?

83

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My suspicions are confirmed.

Our new friend is definitely German. [/quote]

Surely not every German is also a Gibbering Idiot.
But if this example proves the rule, who am I to dispute it?[/quote]

Well, my deduction had more to do with his use of syntax and punctuation (not at all characteristic of a North American poster), as well as his referring to the Munich Agreement by its proper name. [/quote]

I, too, read these, and the strained use of American idiom. And then there was as well the academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious. Definitely nord deutsche. Very likely Hamburg. Yes, Hamburg�??�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�??�?�¦the odor of hake and haddock linger�??�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�??�?�¦
But, principally, a Gibbering Idiot.[/quote]

I think it’s a well assembled ruse.

Name: Bismark- A german battleship.

Avatar: From Inglorious Basterds the character SD Standartenfuhrer Hans Landa a.k.a “The Jew Hunter”

MO: Starts a debate using a seemingly relevant topic, then proceeds to act like a stereotypical europrick.

My guess is someone whom, even if German, isn’t a big fan of Germany. The Bismark got sunk, the character in the movie was easily hateable, and nobody likes a europrick.
[/quote]

Name: Bismark- Close! Otto von Bismark, the Prussian statesman who unified Germany. The Bismarck-class battleships were named in his honor.

Avatar: I added that when the good DrSkeptix wrote of what he perceived as my “academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious,” and relating that to the inhabitants of North Germany. Naturally, I couldn’t resist the image most Americans seem to have of the country. You know, after Bier, Wurst and Lederhosen.

Europrick? I have been blunt and aggressive perhaps, but I am trying to facilitate an intellectual discussion in what I have discovered to be a decidedly hostile environment. It’s been rather enjoyable actually. Reread my posts. I have made exactly zero disparaging remarks concerning the United States, and I have made all efforts to keep the discussion on topic. To the contrary, in the “Russian Gives SAMs to Hezbollah” thread, I criticized many European states for what I see as free-riding of the American security apparatus. Others however, have devolved to name calling and speculation instead of addressing the arguments I’ve attempted to make. Attack my arguments and the reasoning that serves as their foundation. Don’t attack me.

Now, in the name of all that is holy, can we please focus our attention on the namesake of this thread?[/quote]

Nope!

It’s all about you now.

Maybe if we ask a mod really nicely, they’ll track your isp and maybe reveal your identity or who else has or had the same one.

84

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My suspicions are confirmed.

Our new friend is definitely German. [/quote]

Surely not every German is also a Gibbering Idiot.
But if this example proves the rule, who am I to dispute it?[/quote]

Well, my deduction had more to do with his use of syntax and punctuation (not at all characteristic of a North American poster), as well as his referring to the Munich Agreement by its proper name. [/quote]

I, too, read these, and the strained use of American idiom. And then there was as well the academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious. Definitely nord deutsche. Very likely Hamburg. Yes, Hamburg�??�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�??�?�¦the odor of hake and haddock linger�??�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�??�?�¦
But, principally, a Gibbering Idiot.[/quote]

I think it’s a well assembled ruse.

Name: Bismark- A german battleship.

Avatar: From Inglorious Basterds the character SD Standartenfuhrer Hans Landa a.k.a “The Jew Hunter”

MO: Starts a debate using a seemingly relevant topic, then proceeds to act like a stereotypical europrick.

My guess is someone whom, even if German, isn’t a big fan of Germany. The Bismark got sunk, the character in the movie was easily hateable, and nobody likes a europrick.
[/quote]

Name: Bismark- Close! Otto von Bismark, the Prussian statesman who unified Germany. The Bismarck-class battleships were named in his honor.

Avatar: I added that when the good DrSkeptix wrote of what he perceived as my “academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious,” and relating that to the inhabitants of North Germany. Naturally, I couldn’t resist the image most Americans seem to have of the country. You know, after Bier, Wurst and Lederhosen.

Europrick? I have been blunt and aggressive perhaps, but I am trying to facilitate an intellectual discussion in what I have discovered to be a decidedly hostile environment. It’s been rather enjoyable actually. Reread my posts. I have made exactly zero disparaging remarks concerning the United States, and I have made all efforts to keep the discussion on topic. To the contrary, in the “Russian Gives SAMs to Hezbollah” thread, I criticized many European states for what I see as free-riding of the American security apparatus. Others however, have devolved to name calling and speculation instead of addressing the arguments I’ve attempted to make. Attack my arguments and the reasoning that serves as their foundation. Don’t attack me.

Now, in the name of all that is holy, can we please focus our attention on the namesake of this thread?[/quote]

LOL, passive aggressive and condescending all wrapped up in one big cliche’.

Very impressive

85

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My suspicions are confirmed.

Our new friend is definitely German. [/quote]

He’s not new. Just a guy that was around awhile back under a different screen name.

Pomposity leaves a stain that’s difficult to remove. [/quote]

Nominal Prospect?!?!?

86

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My suspicions are confirmed.

Our new friend is definitely German. [/quote]

He’s not new. Just a guy that was around awhile back under a different screen name.

Pomposity leaves a stain that’s difficult to remove. [/quote]

Nominal Prospect?!?!?[/quote]

Man, I miss that spinning record/cat avatar.

87

.

88

[quote]Bismark wrote:
.[/quote]

Hmmm. Slight resemblance.

89

Landa is a lot smarter than Robertson, of course, but he had better writers.

91

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My suspicions are confirmed.

Our new friend is definitely German. [/quote]

Surely not every German is also a Gibbering Idiot.
But if this example proves the rule, who am I to dispute it?[/quote]

Well, my deduction had more to do with his use of syntax and punctuation (not at all characteristic of a North American poster), as well as his referring to the Munich Agreement by its proper name. [/quote]

I, too, read these, and the strained use of American idiom. And then there was as well the academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious. Definitely nord deutsche. Very likely Hamburg. Yes, Hamburg�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�??�??�??�?�¦the odor of hake and haddock linger�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢?�??�??�??�??�??�?�¦
But, principally, a Gibbering Idiot.[/quote]

I think it’s a well assembled ruse.

Name: Bismark- A german battleship.

Avatar: From Inglorious Basterds the character SD Standartenfuhrer Hans Landa a.k.a “The Jew Hunter”

MO: Starts a debate using a seemingly relevant topic, then proceeds to act like a stereotypical europrick.

My guess is someone whom, even if German, isn’t a big fan of Germany. The Bismark got sunk, the character in the movie was easily hateable, and nobody likes a europrick.
[/quote]

Name: Bismark- Close! Otto von Bismark, the Prussian statesman who unified Germany. The Bismarck-class battleships were named in his honor.

Avatar: I added that when the good DrSkeptix wrote of what he perceived as my “academic arrogance steeped in ignorance, balanced between the presumptuous and the obsequious,” and relating that to the inhabitants of North Germany. Naturally, I couldn’t resist the image most Americans seem to have of the country. You know, after Bier, Wurst and Lederhosen.

Europrick? I have been blunt and aggressive perhaps, but I am trying to facilitate an intellectual discussion in what I have discovered to be a decidedly hostile environment. It’s been rather enjoyable actually. Reread my posts. I have made exactly zero disparaging remarks concerning the United States, and I have made all efforts to keep the discussion on topic. To the contrary, in the “Russian Gives SAMs to Hezbollah” thread, I criticized many European states for what I see as free-riding of the American security apparatus. Others however, have devolved to name calling and speculation instead of addressing the arguments I’ve attempted to make. Attack my arguments and the reasoning that serves as their foundation. Don’t attack me.

Now, in the name of all that is holy, can we please focus our attention on the namesake of this thread?[/quote]

LOL, passive aggressive and condescending all wrapped up in one big cliche’.

Very impressive[/quote]

What I find to be trite is your refusal to engage me directly. You can’t attack the argument, so you attack the man. Is anyone in this sub forum actually interested in having a discussion?

92

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:
.[/quote]

Hmmm. Slight resemblance. [/quote]

They do juxtapose quite nicely, yes?

93

[quote]Bismark wrote:
.[/quote]

Ok then. How many home runs did Babe Ruth hit in 1937?

94

[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
.[/quote]

95

What more is there to discuss?

As far as I’m concerned, Iran will develop a nuclear weapons program. Whether they “should” or not is irrelevant. They are a sovereign nation with real an perceived threats to their national sovereignty, and they will act accordingly.

Whether they will use those weapons, or whether they will be allowed to keep those weapons, depends entirely upon circumstance. The Iranians, in my estimation, are not interested in self-annihilation, so I don’t think that a preemptive nuke strike upon a US ally will be something that the leadership will consider.

As far as terrorists getting hold of Iranian nukes, this makes little sense to me. If the Iranians are going to the trouble of developing a nuclear weapon, I don’t see them then just throwing them away. And if terrorists really wanted a nuke, they would have gotten one already from corrupt military sources in Ukraine or Georgia or some other former Soviet republic.

Just my zwei pfennig.

96

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
.[/quote]

This must be your favorite picture. You have posted it twice. Did you catch the ghey?

97

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
What more is there to discuss?

As far as I’m concerned, Iran will develop a nuclear weapons program. Whether they “should” or not is irrelevant. They are a sovereign nation with real an perceived threats to their national sovereignty, and they will act accordingly.

Whether they will use those weapons, or whether they will be allowed to keep those weapons, depends entirely upon circumstance. The Iranians, in my estimation, are not interested in self-annihilation, so I don’t think that a preemptive nuke strike upon a US ally will be something that the leadership will consider.

As far as terrorists getting hold of Iranian nukes, this makes little sense to me. If the Iranians are going to the trouble of developing a nuclear weapon, I don’t see them then just throwing them away. And if terrorists really wanted a nuke, they would have gotten one already from corrupt military sources in Ukraine or Georgia or some other former Soviet republic.

Just my zwei pfennig.[/quote]

Das ist ausgezeichnet! Your assessment practically mirrors my own. As far as the discussion is concerned, it’s clear that few actually read the article itself, and many seem to be only interested in arguing semantics and constructing strawmen than having a rational discourse. At least it serves as an opportunity to improve my use of syntax and punctuation.

98

Does anybody else consider the ability to develop nuclear technologies as a sign of societal development? I mean, it’s right up there with the ability to leave earths atmosphere as far as scientific development goes.

I figure if they’ve come along enough to accomplish these things they have reached a benchmark of development, but unless or until they themselves are privy to it, there will be no help from the outside. In a lot of crappy countries one of their bad habits is to prosecute or murder the best and the brightest, usually causing an exodus of intellectuals and top scientists. If they can manage to abstain from stupid shit like that, they will probably have the homegrown capability to create their own nuclear power and/or weapons at some point.