Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 You don't think that Israel has thought of that already?I suspect they have retaliation plans ready. As I recall the former Iranian president talked about Israeli retaliation, but brushed it off since there are so many Muslims scattered so widely, but so few Jews all gathered together, it would be worth the retaliation. Most Muslims would survive but Israel would not, was what he said. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 It's suicide for Iran if they lob a nuke. And for those who cannot understand why it's suicide, once Iran lobs ONE nuke, they are turned to glass. They know their actions will prompt swift total retaliation. Suicide. What if a bomb goes off in Manhattan, and the Iranians constructed it using stolen uranium. I understand hundreds of pounds of the stuff has gone missing from Russia alone. So if you can't prove the bomb came from Iran, how do you nuke them? After all, it might have been the North Korans or some other crazy regime. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 You dont know if any countries really want to go to war over it, and even supposing they did you dont really know if its because they consider Iran any kind of real threat or clear and present danger. Why do you suppose there's so much fuss over Iran's nuclear program if it's all so innocent? I note that China and Russia joined the US, Britain, France and Germany in condemning Iran's refusal to cooperate with the UN and stop working on enriching uranium. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
eyeball Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 Yes, his is realistic and yours is pie-in-thes-sky. His is fatalistic actually. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Signals.Cpl Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 As I recall the former Iranian president talked about Israeli retaliation, but brushed it off since there are so many Muslims scattered so widely, but so few Jews all gathered together, it would be worth the retaliation. Most Muslims would survive but Israel would not, was what he said. Israel would not, but 42% of all Jews live in Israel, 42% live in Canada and the US, with most of the remainder living in Europe with some scattered around the world. I would say the 42% living in Canada and the US are pretty safe from Annihilation and with a country like Iran, you need to hit a few places and the whole thing will collapse in on itself so they are not much better off. Yes maybe Israel cannot nor would it want to try and take out all muslims but when push comes to shove they can take out Quite a few Iranians, and if Iran decides to nuke Israel they will take out Quite a few muslims along with Israel. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
dre Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 Do you really think the world would be upset if Canada announced it was building nukes? It is the instability of the Iranian regime which causes the concern. Do you really think the world would be upset if Canada announced it was building nukes? Probably. There was sanctions and a lot of tension around South Africas program, and they werent regarded as being islamic radicals or state sponsors of terrorism that I can remember. As for the regime it doesnt seem very unstable to me. Its lasted about 40 years, and seems to have a pretty solid grip on power. They also have a history of not doing anything brash, and being pretty measured and rational. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 Why do you suppose there's so much fuss over Iran's nuclear program if it's all so innocent? I note that China and Russia joined the US, Britain, France and Germany in condemning Iran's refusal to cooperate with the UN and stop working on enriching uranium. I think this kind of thing snowballs, and its good politics for elected officials. I also think western leaders are easily confused, and they dont have a lot of respect for the rule of law. They have essentially botched this whole thing by making the unreasonable demand that Iran halts enrichment when they have the clear legal right to enrich as a signatory of the NPT. We should have instead pushed for more monitoring and inspections. Who knows why politicians do what they do. What we DO know, is what the intelligence shows... Leon Panetta, US Secretary of Defense... Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they're trying to develop a nuclear capability. And that's what concerns us. And our red line to Iran is do not develop a nuclear weapon. That's a red line for us." 2/8/12, Face the Nation I think [iran is] developing a nuclear capability [but] our intelligence makes clear that they haven't made the decision to develop a nuclear weapon. 2/28/12, Senate Budget Committee US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper We continue to assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so. We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.[…] We continue to judge Iran's nuclear decisionmaking is guided by a cost-benefit approach, which offers the international community opportunities to influence Tehran. 01/31/12, Unclassified Statement for the Record on the Worldwide Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence I do […] I think they're keeping themselves in a position to make that decision but there are certain things they have not yet done and have not done for some time. [...]"02/16/12, Senate Armed Services Committee Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, head of the Israeli military (IDF) [iran] is going step by step to the place where it will be able to decide whether to manufacture a nuclear bomb. It hasn't decided to go the extra mile. I don't think [iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei] will want to go the extra mile. I think the Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak [iran has] not yet decided to manufacture atomic weapons."04/25/12, The Raw Story Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Shady Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 What if a bomb goes off in Manhattan, and the Iranians constructed it using stolen uranium. I understand hundreds of pounds of the stuff has gone missing from Russia alone. So if you can't prove the bomb came from Iran, how do you nuke them? After all, it might have been the North Korans or some other crazy regime. That seems to be the biggest worry. Is Iran, develping that capability, and then passing something off to one of it's terrorist groups, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, and having them do the dirty work for them. Quote
GostHacked Posted September 13, 2012 Author Report Posted September 13, 2012 We don't know that. How much they spend on terrorists and on undermining other governments is certainly not something Iran is likely to publish. Maybe you can point out in our budgets that show how our intelligence services are taking part in undermining countries like Iran. Right, it's all off the books. That way plausible denial can be claimed. Classified budgets for the military may show just that, but .. they are classified! Quote
GostHacked Posted September 13, 2012 Author Report Posted September 13, 2012 That seems to be the biggest worry. Is Iran, develping that capability, and then passing something off to one of it's terrorist groups, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, and having them do the dirty work for them. Absolute Nonsense (Registered Trademark of Shady Inc. All rights reserved, not used by permission) Quote
Shady Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 Absolute Nonsense (Registered Trademark of Shady Inc. All rights reserved, not used by permission) How is it nonsense? Are you unaware of Iran arming Hezbollah? Quote
GostHacked Posted September 13, 2012 Author Report Posted September 13, 2012 How is it nonsense? Are you unaware of Iran arming Hezbollah? The links are there, but your nuke bit is what is the nonsense. Might want to pay attention to a few of dre's posts. Quote
Shady Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 The links are there, but your nuke bit is what is the nonsense. Might want to pay attention to a few of dre's posts. Hezbollah is a Shiite military, political and social organization in Lebanon with strong ties to Iran and Syria. Over the past generation, it has transformed itself from a shadowy militant group known primarily for terror attacks to the country’s pre-eminent political and military force.The United States regards Hezbollah as a terrorist group financed by Iran, which has supplied as much as $200 million a year, and by Syria NTY Quote
GostHacked Posted September 13, 2012 Author Report Posted September 13, 2012 Whatever was posted by Shady here did not address my question of the nukes. I asked about NUKES Shady. NUKES .. Again, reading comprehension. Quote
dre Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) How is it nonsense? Are you unaware of Iran arming Hezbollah? Pakistan has armed the Taliban at various points as well. Doesnt mean they are going to give them nukes. The US armed the Mujihadeen against the soviets as well. Edited September 13, 2012 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) His is fatalistic actually. Maybe to some extent. For the first few years he wanted nothing to do with China. I seem to recall him being HEAVILY criticized for that by the media, the business community and, oddly, the Left. Then came the recession, and a lot of Canadians out of work, and suddenly he was persuaded that he better try to cozy up to the Chinese and their big economic machine so we could get Chinese tourists and Chinese investment. Do I think he did that because he WANTED to? Based on his previous behaviour, no. He did it because he figured he had to. Edited September 13, 2012 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 As for the regime it doesnt seem very unstable to me. Its lasted about 40 years, and seems to have a pretty solid grip on power. They also have a history of not doing anything brash, and being pretty measured and rational. Rational? You, as well as everyone else, ignored my post earlier on this topic questioning why Iran has set itself up to be the mortal enemy of Israel. Israel never did anything to them. Israel has no borders or trade with Iran. So why did Iran have to select them as the most evil regime in the world, sponsor terrorism against them, and amp up the rhetoric about having to destroy Israel? Why did it make itself Israel's mortal enemy? And don't tell me the Iranian regime was horrified at the abuse of human rights in Palestine since it has no respect for the human rights of its own people. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 I think this kind of thing snowballs, and its good politics for elected officials. I also think western leaders are easily confused, and they dont have a lot of respect for the rule of law. They have essentially botched this whole thing by making the unreasonable demand that Iran halts enrichment when they have the clear legal right to enrich as a signatory of the NPT. We should have instead pushed for more monitoring and inspections. Who knows why politicians do what they do. What we DO know, is what the intelligence shows... Leon Panetta, US Secretary of Defense... US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper You keep posting these for some reason. I can accept that Iran isn't building a nuclear bomb at the moment. But it sees fairly obvious they are building the infrastructure which will enable them to start building nuclear bombs. That's why everyone is concerned. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) Absolute Nonsense (Registered Trademark of Shady Inc. All rights reserved, not used by permission) How is that nonsense? How is that implausible? Edited September 13, 2012 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 Pakistan has armed the Taliban at various points as well. Doesnt mean they are going to give them nukes. The US armed the Mujihadeen against the soviets as well. The Pakistanis have no need to arm the Taliban with nukes. What would be the reason? They just want the situation there chaotic, and it is. There's no need for nukes. However, if I was an Indian I would be worried that one of those wack job extremists managed to get control over a nuke and slide it under the table to someone who'd blow it up in New Delhi. Fortunately, for now, the nukes are under the control of the army, which has not shown much sign of being crazy. But that country is going to hell in a handbasket, so who knows how long those nukes will be in stable hands. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Shady Posted September 13, 2012 Report Posted September 13, 2012 I asked about NUKES Shady. NUKES .. Again, reading comprehension. Iran doesn't have the capability yet. Yet. However, smuggling a dirty bomb into say Tel Aviv wouldn't be all that difficult. Especially if facilitated through Hezbollah first, and it would almost be impossible to trace back to them. Quote
eyeball Posted September 14, 2012 Report Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) Maybe to some extent. For the first few years he wanted nothing to do with China. I seem to recall him being HEAVILY criticized for that by the media, the business community and, oddly, the Left. Whoever said lefties don't have their share of sycophants too? Support for or an aversion to tyranny fundamentally has nothing to do with an individuals ideology, it's more about an individual's personal relationship with their society. It's an issue between the governed and their governments. I was sick to death at the thought of Chretien leading trade missions to China that included Canadian internet security experts at the time China's desire to build a firewall around it's society and between the rest of the planet's was becoming known. Then came the recession, and a lot of Canadians out of work, and suddenly he was persuaded that he better try to cozy up to the Chinese and their big economic machine so we could get Chinese tourists and Chinese investment. Do I think he did that because he WANTED to? Based on his previous behaviour, no. He did it because he figured he had to. Meh...compared to the nature of the sacrifice previous generations of Canadians made in the face of tyranny, go cry them a river. Edited September 14, 2012 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
dre Posted September 14, 2012 Report Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) Iran doesn't have the capability yet. Yet. However, smuggling a dirty bomb into say Tel Aviv wouldn't be all that difficult. Especially if facilitated through Hezbollah first, and it would almost be impossible to trace back to them. :lol: These people cant even find a way to get a bottle of tylenol to palestinians. This whole terrorists with nukes thing is pure fantasy along the same lines as believing Iraq had a large wmd industrial complex in the back of pickup trucks. Edited September 14, 2012 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted September 14, 2012 Report Posted September 14, 2012 The Pakistanis have no need to arm the Taliban with nukes. What would be the reason? They just want the situation there chaotic, and it is. There's no need for nukes. However, if I was an Indian I would be worried that one of those wack job extremists managed to get control over a nuke and slide it under the table to someone who'd blow it up in New Delhi. Fortunately, for now, the nukes are under the control of the army, which has not shown much sign of being crazy. But that country is going to hell in a handbasket, so who knows how long those nukes will be in stable hands. Iran has no need to arm anyone with nukes either. They have absolutely no interest in doing so what so ever. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
dre Posted September 14, 2012 Report Posted September 14, 2012 You keep posting these for some reason. I can accept that Iran isn't building a nuclear bomb at the moment. But it sees fairly obvious they are building the infrastructure which will enable them to start building nuclear bombs. That's why everyone is concerned. I post them to keep things in perspective. A lot of people DO for some reason think its a forgone conclusion that Iran is building nuclear weapons, just like they assumed Iraq had vast chemical weapons programs. Seems worth pointing out thats a delusional fantasy unsupported by any evidence. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.