the US aint that much into the business of putting nukes in the hands of poor, war torn countries like the euros do.PureFodder wrote:
The US on the other hand has probably the worst record on nuclear proliferation.
England gave nukes to Israel back in the day. Why are you not including them in on this discussion? Because you are a one sided nazi racist piece of trash, that's why.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
And israel is propagated by the USA.
No difference..
on the money.usmarine wrote:
Because you are a one sided nazi racist piece of trash, that's why.
Of course they want a nuke .. and i understand their need for it.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
your logic fails. the fact that they want to have a nuke will legitimize any western military action. you think like a 5 year old "they just want a nuclear weapon so they wont have to use it..."
so, now you admit Iran is full of shit when they say its all for peaceful purposes, at least the clown make up is coming off.
Theres not one nuclear country in the world who will use its nuke for offensive purpose.. Iran is not different from them. Having a nuke is just a way to say to your ennemies: don't attack or you will get hurt.
North Korea is still standing.. and that is only because they have the bomb.
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
I have to agree. I don't like nukes at all but in an age where the super powers invade countries just because they don't like the regimes nuclear deterrence is the only guaranteed refuge...sad really.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Of course they want a nuke .. and i understand their need for it.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
your logic fails. the fact that they want to have a nuke will legitimize any western military action. you think like a 5 year old "they just want a nuclear weapon so they wont have to use it..."
so, now you admit Iran is full of shit when they say its all for peaceful purposes, at least the clown make up is coming off.
Theres not one nuclear country in the world who will use its nuke for offensive purpose.. Iran is not different from them. Having a nuke is just a way to say to your ennemies: don't attack or you will get hurt.
North Korea is still standing.. and that is only because they have the bomb.
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
And Hezbollah survive because of Iran.. why are you offended by that?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
your point? like I said before, you think the world stage is some kind of playground where if enough kids feel like they are being jipped they could go run and tell the teacher. yes, israel survives because of the United States. WOW, what a fucking scoop. You should be working for the new york times or washington post or something.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
And israel is propagated by the USA.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
the caliphate was sunni. iran is shia
giving money to Iran now are we?
everyone knows hezbollah is propagated by iran.
No difference..
If we let them create a nuclear weapon no doubt they'll be passing it to the terrorists they're sponsoring to do the dirty job for them.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Of course they want a nuke .. and i understand their need for it.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
your logic fails. the fact that they want to have a nuke will legitimize any western military action. you think like a 5 year old "they just want a nuclear weapon so they wont have to use it..."
so, now you admit Iran is full of shit when they say its all for peaceful purposes, at least the clown make up is coming off.
Theres not one nuclear country in the world who will use its nuke for offensive purpose.. Iran is not different from them. Having a nuke is just a way to say to your ennemies: don't attack or you will get hurt.
North Korea is still standing.. and that is only because they have the bomb.
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
inane little opines
NK gave up their weapons and enrichment program in return for aid.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Of course they want a nuke .. and i understand their need for it.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
your logic fails. the fact that they want to have a nuke will legitimize any western military action. you think like a 5 year old "they just want a nuclear weapon so they wont have to use it..."
so, now you admit Iran is full of shit when they say its all for peaceful purposes, at least the clown make up is coming off.
Theres not one nuclear country in the world who will use its nuke for offensive purpose.. Iran is not different from them. Having a nuke is just a way to say to your ennemies: don't attack or you will get hurt.
North Korea is still standing.. and that is only because they have the bomb.
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
Point taken. Nukes have been the only reason there hasn't been a war like WW2. Otherwise we would've had probably 3-4 WW2-esque wars in the space of the time. They really do make peace. Of course, this is only possible with stable (mentally) governments who wouldn't dare using them. If countries like the USSR, and Pakistan can refrain from using them on their Arch Nemesis, I'm sure we could give Iran some credit. Then again, they have said alot of shit about their "enemy" that neither the USSR nor Pakistan have said. So I'm torn on the Issue, I wouldn't have a problem with Iran having nukes, but their current government is fucked up.AussieChainsaw wrote:
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
Change the government, then you can have your deterrent nukes.
um ok.. North Korea hate the United States right? They already have the bomb right? Why didn't they already pass the bomb to a terrorist organisation to nuke an american city?dayarath wrote:
If we let them create a nuclear weapon no doubt they'll be passing it to the terrorists they're sponsoring to do the dirty job for them.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Of course they want a nuke .. and i understand their need for it.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
your logic fails. the fact that they want to have a nuke will legitimize any western military action. you think like a 5 year old "they just want a nuclear weapon so they wont have to use it..."
so, now you admit Iran is full of shit when they say its all for peaceful purposes, at least the clown make up is coming off.
Theres not one nuclear country in the world who will use its nuke for offensive purpose.. Iran is not different from them. Having a nuke is just a way to say to your ennemies: don't attack or you will get hurt.
North Korea is still standing.. and that is only because they have the bomb.
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
Probably because the entire world will know that it come from them.. same thing with Iran
Why does every body here think that Iran is willing to self destruct just to hurt american or israelis target?
Iran is a tad different from NK. If they give a terrorist group their nuke they could use it as a cover up, and not be tracked when done accordingly. This could prevent an invasion while still getting it their way.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Probably because the entire world will know that it come from them.. same thing with Iran
Why does every body here think that Iran is willing to self destruct just to hurt american or israelis target?
Everyone in that whole region wants Israel gone, you can't deny that. And Iran is probably the one who wants it the most. The difference between them and NK is that they can actually do it when thought out properly.
inane little opines
I'd say that because North Korea is so shut off from the world it has no connections with terrorist groups, N. Korea doesn't have that sort of agenda like a lot of ME countries. They would wage a proper organised war given the chance. But they were offered help in terms of aid and fuel should they give up their weapons program, which they did. A US symphony orchestra also recently played in North Korea and weren't kidnapped, so they can't hate them as much to the extent they used to.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
um ok.. North Korea hate the United States right? They already have the bomb right? Why didn't they already pass the bomb to a terrorist organisation to nuke an american city?dayarath wrote:
If we let them create a nuclear weapon no doubt they'll be passing it to the terrorists they're sponsoring to do the dirty job for them.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Of course they want a nuke .. and i understand their need for it.
Theres not one nuclear country in the world who will use its nuke for offensive purpose.. Iran is not different from them. Having a nuke is just a way to say to your ennemies: don't attack or you will get hurt.
North Korea is still standing.. and that is only because they have the bomb.
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
Probably because the entire world will know that it come from them.. same thing with Iran
Why does every body here think that Iran is willing to self destruct just to hurt american or israelis target?
Last edited by M.O.A.B (2008-04-09 11:25:49)
tbh they used blackmail to get aid. dont forget the missle tests over japan... they aren't some beacon of shining example for other countries, all they did was show off some wmd's and some veiled threats, then they gave them up for aid programs. not a good way to do business.M.O.A.B wrote:
NK gave up their weapons and enrichment program in return for aid.
I agree that Ahmadinejad is pretty fucked up but we should never forget that he is a very intelligent man.. he would not be the leader of the country if he was like a ben laden or any crazy islamist.Mek-Izzle wrote:
Point taken. Nukes have been the only reason there hasn't been a war like WW2. Otherwise we would've had probably 3-4 WW2-esque wars in the space of the time. They really do make peace. Of course, this is only possible with stable (mentally) governments who wouldn't dare using them. If countries like the USSR, and Pakistan can refrain from using them on their Arch Nemesis, I'm sure we could give Iran some credit. Then again, they have said alot of shit about their "enemy" that neither the USSR nor Pakistan have said. So I'm torn on the Issue, I wouldn't have a problem with Iran having nukes, but their current government is fucked up.AussieChainsaw wrote:
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
Change the government, then you can have your deterrent nukes.
He probably love his country and is probably not willing to sacrifice it just to hurt America or israel.
Jjjjjjeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzuzusmarine wrote:
England gave nukes to Israel back in the day. Why are you not including them in on this discussion? Because you are a one sided nazi racist piece of trash, that's why.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
And israel is propagated by the USA.
No difference..
You and gs need to release some tension. Go jerkoff or something.
no, because that situation could change over night. trhe last war between the nations was like 10 years ago. people really need to think about things a bit more critically. Or, are you that ignorant of the subject to understand the conflict over kashmir as not being resolved in the slightest?AussieChainsaw wrote:
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
how do you think Iran is getting their nuclear feet wet, dummy.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
um ok.. North Korea hate the United States right? They already have the bomb right? Why didn't they already pass the bomb to a terrorist organisation to nuke an american city?dayarath wrote:
If we let them create a nuclear weapon no doubt they'll be passing it to the terrorists they're sponsoring to do the dirty job for them.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Of course they want a nuke .. and i understand their need for it.
Theres not one nuclear country in the world who will use its nuke for offensive purpose.. Iran is not different from them. Having a nuke is just a way to say to your ennemies: don't attack or you will get hurt.
North Korea is still standing.. and that is only because they have the bomb.
Theres no more war between Pakistan and India.. guess why.
Probably because the entire world will know that it come from them.. same thing with Iran
Why does every body here think that Iran is willing to self destruct just to hurt american or israelis target?
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-04-09 12:09:53)
Since he has provided zero detail on what his plans are once in office, that remains to be seen. He may just be a very, very, very change-minded hopeful moron.CameronPoe wrote:
Give him some credit. He's not a moron.FEOS wrote:
Dialogue does not equate to appeasement. I'm sure Ronny wasn't all "that's a sweet tie you've got, Gorby...can I wear it sometime" when they were talking. If Obama's dialogue consists of "We know you are supplying these specific weapons and this specific training and these specific members of QF are doing it...and we will kill them and show the world your complicity in this insurgency if it doesn't stop yesterday" then there's some hope. If he just asks Ahmanutjob where he gets his cool shirts and can we pretty please be BFF...then not so much.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Sorry, but I do not like nor have any sympathy for racists and people who fiddle with children.ATG wrote:
Jjjjjjeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzuzusmarine wrote:
England gave nukes to Israel back in the day. Why are you not including them in on this discussion? Because you are a one sided nazi racist piece of trash, that's why.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
And israel is propagated by the USA.
No difference..
You and gs need to release some tension. Go jerkoff or something.
Look who's talking, mr "islam is a disease".usmarine wrote:
Sorry, but I do not like nor have any sympathy for racists and people who fiddle with children.ATG wrote:
Jjjjjjeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzuzusmarine wrote:
England gave nukes to Israel back in the day. Why are you not including them in on this discussion? Because you are a one sided nazi racist piece of trash, that's why.
You and gs need to release some tension. Go jerkoff or something.
islam is a religion, not a race.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
Look who's talking, mr "islam is a disease".
religion equates to race when dealing with awwshits88
good pointGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
religion equates to race when dealing with awwshits88
well, since the cold war has proven that nuclear weapons can act as a deterrent against a possible attack from the outside, I think the idea that Iran might want to develop one is not so far-off.
That's why, from my point of view, the US is stuck in a dilemma. As long as Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon, there is no justification for an attack, and once they have one, an attack might be too risky.
I am afraid though, that a military confrontation between Iran and the US is bound to happen. Israel won't risk for Iran to even have the slightest chance at a nuclear weapon.
The problem is, it is unlikely that the US can finance another costly war in the middle east.
That's why, from my point of view, the US is stuck in a dilemma. As long as Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon, there is no justification for an attack, and once they have one, an attack might be too risky.
I am afraid though, that a military confrontation between Iran and the US is bound to happen. Israel won't risk for Iran to even have the slightest chance at a nuclear weapon.
The problem is, it is unlikely that the US can finance another costly war in the middle east.
not for the people that are pushing for war. they cant wait till they have a justifiable reason to go to iran.B.Schuss wrote:
an attack might be too risky.
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-04-09 12:58:35)
no offense, but sometimes I have the impression America goes to war too easily...or maybe it's just GWB, I am not sure...GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
not for the people that are pushing for war. they cant wait till they have a justifiable reason to go to iran.B.Schuss wrote:
an attack might be too risky.