Iran Nukes

User avatar
Salmotrutta
Posts: 10008
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Classified

Iran Nukes

Post by Salmotrutta » Thu Oct 08, 2009 2:48 am

If they knew about the second secret site why did they let it continue? When is Obama gonna quit chopping down the beloved poppie fields & support Israel's stand?

Please answer & explain why we let these liar/rouge nations threaten with destruction & allow them to create the means to do so?
Lyrical

User avatar
shunned
Posts: 9999
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 1:01 am
Location: prison... but only on the weekends.
Contact:

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by shunned » Thu Oct 08, 2009 4:08 am

better the devil you know, son.

and israel is an occupying force.
oh, never mind. I'm preaching to the converted... :coffee
the depths of your narcissism never cease to amaze me

-raffa of all fucking people




.

User avatar
ditchdoc
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Flatlands of Kansas

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by ditchdoc » Thu Oct 08, 2009 10:52 am

Don't get me wrong. I think that little prick in Iran needs a scud missile shoved up his ass, but I have to say, where do we get off telling everyone else in the world that they can't have nuclear arms, when we're the only ones to have ever used them? I think that's a large part of our problem getting other countries to disarm, or stop research. We look and sound like hypocrites.

Sometimes I think that our President should go before the UN and just flatly state that anyone, anywhere, who uses weapons of mass destruction on anyone else, will incur the wrath of our military technology. I'm not talking nukes either. We have some nasty toys in our attic. We wouldn't even have to put a single soldier in harms way. Cruise missiles and predator drones are quite effective. And we have a lot of them.
Ignorance is curable. Stupidity is forever.

User avatar
Smithhammer
Posts: 4235
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 1:01 am
Location: Idaho

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by Smithhammer » Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:02 pm

I though Zakaria had a pretty good summation of the situation in an interview on CNN recently (try to ignore the cheesy/creepy profile pic...)

Basically, he's saying that if you look at the situation in its simplest form, there are really only two choices from which any and all policy decisions will flow - 1) either it is totally unacceptable for Iran to have nukes, or, 2) we need to figure out how to live with Iran having nukes. I know that's nothing profound, but sometimes the best place to start is with a simple decision based in realism rather than worked up emotion/anger/fear/whatever.

If the answer is #1, then we (as in, hopefully, the international community) are going to have to somehow assert influence on Iran, diplomatically or militarily - influence they have made clear they don't want, and that they will undoubtedly portray to the rest of the region as yet more unwelcome Western meddling trying to dictate the future of the Middle East. Given the current political/social climate in the region, this perspective will probably find a lot of resonance with a lot of people who are already fed up with Western aggression and dictation of what they can and can't do. Now we can argue the validity of that or not from our perspective, but at a certain point, that's moot if that's the way they see it regardless. This could be stronger diplomatic actions, which may work, or may not. In order to succeed, they would need to be shrewd diplomatic actions to aid in turning more Iranian public sentiment against the ruling theocracy of the country. The risk is that it backfires, and the ruling theocracy gets more public support because the public feels that their government is being unfairly persecuted.

These same risks become greatly magnified if any military action were taken, and the likelihood of it turning more public support against us (both in Iran and the region in general) becomes much more likely. It's very easy to say, "we should just bomb the fuck out of them," but I really think this would be totally disastrous for us in many different ways, unless we already had a very broad coalition of support for such an action, and even better if it wasn't the US taking the lead on it for a change (it would be great to see European countries step up, since this would seriously affect them as well...). Still, I think any military action against Iran would be extremely risky, to put it mildly.

If we choose answer #2, then are we opening the floodgates for more nuclear proliferation throughout the region and the world? While N. Korea may be a recent exception, in most cases where a country has gained nuclear technology (Pakistan, for example), we've let them. Personally, I think that in the case of Pakistan, this was a crazy allowance, probably as much or more so than Iran, but we allowed it, much to India's dismay. Israel is undoubtedly of the position that it is completely unacceptable for Iran to have nukes, and I might feel differently if I lived within striking range of Iranian missiles too. It also dramatically shifts the balance of power in the region, and takes away the "ace in the hole" that Israel has enjoyed having. I have no sympathy for Israel these days, to be honest, but the likelihood for escalating conflict in the region between two countries that bitterly hate each other, and which both have nukes, seems extremely dangerous. So allowing Iran to continue on the path it's on seems to hinge on Iran being open to regulation/supervision like other nuclear countries, and to being a more cooperative world player in terms of diplomacy. Then again, in many ways the same could be said of recent actions by the US, if you were to look at it from a non-US perspective, but that's another discussion. Either way, we need to make sure Iran realizes, and truly buys into the maxim that, "With great power comes great responsibility." If they don't, then we will unfortunately need a Plan B, and it won't be pretty.
"I expect more from the man who gave us all boobies and pie..." - epon

Buster Wants to Fish

Mouthful of Feathers

Salty
Posts: 2525
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: AZ
Contact:

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by Salty » Fri Oct 09, 2009 5:42 pm

Why we don't bomb Iran?

Open an atlas, or look at a globe. Find the Straights of Hormuz. Attacking Iran= Saudi and Kuwatii Oil Tankers + Silkworm anti-ship missiles.
Ryan

http://busterwantstofish.com

"a complete lack on intellectual curiosity, and a sense of humor that make beavis and butthead look like NPR commentators" Fyshnutz

User avatar
Rusty Hook
Posts: 3678
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere north of Boulder
Contact:

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by Rusty Hook » Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:10 pm

Post-September 11, GWB identified Iran, Iraq, North Korea, and presumably, Taliban-controlled Afghanistan as an "Axis of Evil."
Iran and Afghanistan had no nuclear weapons; we invaded, occupied, and are still there.
North Korea has nuclear weapons. We negotiate with the North Koreans, and have no intention of invading their country.

We shouldn't be surprised that Iran would want a few atomic bombs. Given our record, it would be foolish not to.
The virtues are lost in self-interest as rivers are lost in the sea.
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Image

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5059
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Everywhere

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by Plow » Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:29 pm

Rusty Hook wrote:Post-September 11, GWB identified Iran, Iraq, North Korea, and presumably, Taliban-controlled Afghanistan as an "Axis of Evil."
Iran and Afghanistan had no nuclear weapons; we invaded, occupied, and are still there.
North Korea has nuclear weapons. We negotiate with the North Koreans, and have no intention of invading their country.

We shouldn't be surprised that Iran would want a few atomic bombs. Given our record, it would be foolish not to.
Damn GWB! If it weren't for him they'd just want world peace.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
eponymous
Posts: 1503
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:01 am
Location: The Hub

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by eponymous » Sat Oct 10, 2009 6:03 pm

ditchdoc wrote:Sometimes I think that our President should go before the UN and just flatly state that anyone, anywhere, who uses weapons of mass destruction on anyone else, will incur the wrath of our military technology. I'm not talking nukes either. We have some nasty toys in our attic. We wouldn't even have to put a single soldier in harms way. Cruise missiles and predator drones are quite effective. And we have a lot of them.
Once again Ditch I totally agree with you.

However, to do something like that you would either need to be a B-list actor from Hollywood or a cowboy from Texas (ahh err Connecticut). I'm sure you wouldn't get any flack from the rest of the world or from many of our own citizens for acting like a bully or anything.
"Baseball gives every American boy a chance to excel, not just to be as good as someone else but to be better than someone else. This is the nature of man and the name of the game." Ted Williams

User avatar
ditchdoc
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Flatlands of Kansas

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by ditchdoc » Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:26 pm

Epo,

I've been accused of being a lot of things liberal mountain hippie, for one but I've never been accused of agreeing with St. Ronnie or Shrub. But I will admit to agreeing with H.S. Truman that one way to stop a war is to scare the holy shit out of your enemy with overwhelming fire power. The thing most of these tin-pot rulers forget is that IF we wanted to, we could turn most any country into either glass or a smoldering hole. We need to make the promise I mentioned in the previous post, and wait and see who dares us. I think we would only need to follow through once. Of course, this is all predicated on the belief that we should not fire first.
Ignorance is curable. Stupidity is forever.

User avatar
highstream
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Georgia

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by highstream » Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:36 pm

ditchdoc wrote:Epo,

I've been accused of being a lot of things liberal mountain hippie, for one but I've never been accused of agreeing with St. Ronnie or Shrub. But I will admit to agreeing with H.S. Truman that one way to stop a war is to scare the holy shit out of your enemy with overwhelming fire power. The thing most of these tin-pot rulers forget is that IF we wanted to, we could turn most any country into either glass or a smoldering hole. We need to make the promise I mentioned in the previous post, and wait and see who dares us. I think we would only need to follow through once. Of course, this is all predicated on the belief that we should not fire first.

As much of a "real american" and "redneck conservative trailer trash" I have been deemed, as this post is an example how both sides can come together. I consider myself a Conservative with a touch of Left Wing Conservation. With all the things I disagree with on the Left this is one thing we agree on. I go off on Obama all the time, BUT, he has seemed to figure out that the war in Afghanistan needs to be fought and finished. If only he sends more troops like they are requesting. We are the U.S.A and damned if we back down to anyone that make other people suffer. We have the weapons to get the job done and not lose anymore American lives. I'm not saying to just Nuke the heck out of everyone, but, we are in a position to do away with real evil. And no we should not fire first unless provoked.
"I suppose you're swilling 400 proof White lightning and smoking hand rolled poison ivy leaves while you fish? tough guy. I was smoking Marlboro Reds back when you were still shitting in your carseat."--Lenny

User avatar
eponymous
Posts: 1503
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:01 am
Location: The Hub

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by eponymous » Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:54 pm

Ditch:

Had a smallish friend in HS who was getting bullied - teased really. I think HS age is too old to be bullied.

Anyway one day he comes in and says "I am going Harry Truman on his ass." He did. Took a few shots but kept coming back until the other kid finally said "no mas". Never got shit again. Though he did get considerably more ass.....
"Baseball gives every American boy a chance to excel, not just to be as good as someone else but to be better than someone else. This is the nature of man and the name of the game." Ted Williams

User avatar
ditchdoc
Posts: 3075
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Flatlands of Kansas

Re: Iran Nukes

Post by ditchdoc » Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:35 pm

I'm usually a pretty liberal guy. I say stay out of my business and I'll stay out of yours. You can be straight, gay, christian, heathen, want to marry your dog?--no skin off my nose. But, I don't believe in taking very much crap from anyone, individually or collectively. T.R. was right too, "Speak softly, but carry a big stick"
Ignorance is curable. Stupidity is forever.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 382 guests