Iran, the real questions ...

[Figleaf]

This is what we need to ask ourselves. Not 'should we "allow"', but what would we do to prevent.

[Borg]

They will not stop until they have what they want.

I am not willing to do anything to stop them.

I do not trust them - as I have heard his threats.

But time will tell what will happen.

If we attempt to stop them it will be lose lose.

If they develop a weapon and use it - and I believe it will happen in my life time - then it will galvanize the western world into .... ?

Probably more appeasement.

Isreal will act - and will be castigated for it.

Proactive or reactive - if pro - there will be political hell to pay. If reactive there will be military hell to pay.

All the world is a coward until push comes to shove - I wonder what that shove will entail?

Borg

[M.Dancer]

I don't think it will require nukes to stop Iran, but if it did I would approve of their use.

There is a wonderful and dreadful principal in international affairs and wars...that the lives, even the innocent lives of your enemy are worth fat less than your own people lives or the lives of your kith and kin.

In that respect I have no problem with the math that says the deaths of 100,000 iranians is worth less than the children of Tel Aviv.

I hope they teach math in the Persian War College.

[Figleaf]

I don't think it will require nukes to stop Iran, but if it did I would approve of their use.

There is a wonderful and dreadful principal in international affairs and wars...that the lives, even the innocent lives of your enemy are worth fat less than your own people lives or the lives of your kith and kin.

In that respect I have no problem with the math that says the deaths of 100,000 iranians is worth less than the children of Tel Aviv.

I hope they teach math in the Persian War College.

Do you believe the US should have nuked the USSR in the early 50s?

[geoffrey]

I'm the only one that suggests that sanctions would work? Hrrmph. The Cuban missile crisis was solved with an embargo.

Where's our Kennedy?

[M.Dancer]

I'm the only one that suggests that sanctions would work? Hrrmph. The Cuban missile crisis was solved with an embargo.

Where's our Kennedy?

It was? I thought it was an enforced naval blocade and the threat of nuclear war.....

[M.Dancer]

I don't think it will require nukes to stop Iran, but if it did I would approve of their use.

There is a wonderful and dreadful principal in international affairs and wars...that the lives, even the innocent lives of your enemy are worth fat less than your own people lives or the lives of your kith and kin.

In that respect I have no problem with the math that says the deaths of 100,000 iranians is worth less than the children of Tel Aviv.

I hope they teach math in the Persian War College.

Do you believe the US should have nuked the USSR in the early 50s?

No, why? Did the USSR threaten to wipe the US off the map?

[Figleaf]

Odd that no-one chose genocide in question 2. That suggests a surprising lack of commitment or infirmity of purpose among the hawks. If Iran credibly threatened to kill every last Iranian unless they were left to make a nuke, it appears they would get away with it.

[Figleaf]

I don't think it will require nukes to stop Iran, but if it did I would approve of their use.

There is a wonderful and dreadful principal in international affairs and wars...that the lives, even the innocent lives of your enemy are worth fat less than your own people lives or the lives of your kith and kin.

In that respect I have no problem with the math that says the deaths of 100,000 iranians is worth less than the children of Tel Aviv.

I hope they teach math in the Persian War College.

Do you believe the US should have nuked the USSR in the early 50s?

No, why? Did the USSR threaten to wipe the US off the map?

No, they threatened to "bury" them.

BTW, the real text of Aminejihad's speach was not quite so provocative as 'wipe off the map'.

[M.Dancer]

Odd that no-one chose genocide in question 2. That suggests a surprising lack of commitment or infirmity of purpose among the hawks. If Iran credibly threatened to kill every last Iranian unless they were left to make a nuke, it appears they would get away with it.

If Iran credibly threatened to kill every last Iranian unless they were left to make a nuke, it appears they would get away with it.

I am reminded of the movie, Blazing Saddles.......

None the less...it is precisely that Iran has threatened genocide that tey should never be allowed to arm.

[Rue]

Let me give a hint to the Israel Bad Palestine good lobbyists at this forum. If Iran gets to the position where it can use a nuclear bomb I think some of those infidel Zionist colonialist expanionist victimizing unfair Israeli military types might be tempted to engage in a pre-emptive strike. Oh call it a wild hunch.

( and don't forget given I am a Hebrew, I am part of the world wide conspiracy that controls American foreign policy, controls the media, Hollywood and the world banks framed Mel Gibson, and am actively engaged in a one world government conspiracy with Masons, aliens from outer-space (Dracos) and the CIA as well as Condaleeza Rice who we have mind controlled)

[Higgly]

My suggestion is to take away Israel's nukes. As long as Israel has nukes, the other countries in the region will want them too.

By the way, here's a quick quiz: who was it that was responsible for giving nukes to Israel?

[Riverwind]

My suggestion is to take away Israel's nukes. As long as Israel has nukes, the other countries in the region will want them too.

Israel needs its nukes as long as its neighbors refuse to acknowledge its right to exist. Furthermore, you misunderstand the situation: Iran wants nukes because it is worried about US conventional forces like cruise missiles and smart bombs. It also wants nukes so it can use the men's washroom at the UN instead of the little boy's room. Neither of those issues would be addressed by disarming Israel. What we need to do is stop isolating Iran diplomatically. If the US can be best buddies with thugs like Musharraf, the House of Saud and the lastest party hack in Beijing then it should have no problems getting cozy with the Mullahs in Iran.

[sharkman]

My suggestion is to take away Israel's nukes. As long as Israel has nukes, the other countries in the region will want them too.

By the way, here's a quick quiz: who was it that was responsible for giving nukes to Israel?

ah yes, let's take away the one thing that has helped Israel to survive the last 30 years and watch Syria, Iran, Jordan Egypt and assorted thousands of terrorists mass on the borders. Really good idea.

If you think all the Arab countries in the middle east want nukes simply because Israel has them then you are living in a dreamland.

[JerrySeinfeld]

My suggestion is to take away Israel's nukes. As long as Israel has nukes, the other countries in the region will want them too.

By the way, here's a quick quiz: who was it that was responsible for giving nukes to Israel?

ah yes, let's take away the one thing that has helped Israel to survive the last 30 years and watch Syria, Iran, Jordan Egypt and assorted thousands of terrorists mass on the borders. Really good idea.

If you think all the Arab countries in the middle east want nukes simply because Israel has them then you are living in a dreamland.

and while you're at it - what are you waiting for, higgly - why don't you just convert already, move to afghanistan, buy some goats and start taking away your wife's right to feel the sun shine on her face/

[Higgly]

I'm disappointed nobody has guessed who gave Israel its nukes .

[Argus]

I'm the only one that suggests that sanctions would work? Hrrmph. The Cuban missile crisis was solved with an embargo.

Where's our Kennedy?

Sanctions do not work against a country with oil. Especially a country with Russia and China so close.

[Remiel]

We all know who gave Israel its nukes, Higgly, hehehe...

Anyway... somehow, I don't really see why Israel must keep a store of nuclear weapons. For one, if they ever had to actually use them, they would probably be screwed anyway, and second of all, aren't they a little too close to all of their potential targets to be able to use them without poisoning themselves?

[Riverwind]

Anyway... somehow, I don't really see why Israel must keep a store of nuclear weapons. For one, if they ever had to actually use them, they would probably be screwed anyway, and second of all, aren't they a little too close to all of their potential targets to be able to use them without poisoning themselves?

MAD is an extremely effective defence mechanism.

[M.Dancer]

I don't think it will require nukes to stop Iran, but if it did I would approve of their use.

There is a wonderful and dreadful principal in international affairs and wars...that the lives, even the innocent lives of your enemy are worth fat less than your own people lives or the lives of your kith and kin.

In that respect I have no problem with the math that says the deaths of 100,000 iranians is worth less than the children of Tel Aviv.

I hope they teach math in the Persian War College.

Do you believe the US should have nuked the USSR in the early 50s?

No, why? Did the USSR threaten to wipe the US off the map?

No, they threatened to "bury" them.

BTW, the real text of Aminejihad's speach was not quite so provocative as 'wipe off the map'.

The quote is ""Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you"...in the context of the M-L dialectic view nof history, it means that communism will outlast capitalism.

So you read Persian?

[M.Dancer]

My suggestion is to take away Israel's nukes. As long as Israel has nukes, the other countries in the region will want them too.

By the way, here's a quick quiz: who was it that was responsible for giving nukes to Israel?

Israel

[Figleaf]

MAD is an extremely effective defence mechanism.

I suppose Iran thinks so too.

[Figleaf]

The quote is ""Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you"...in the context of the M-L dialectic view nof history, it means that communism will outlast capitalism.

You sound like a typical pinko commie apologist.

[M.Dancer]

The quote is ""Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you"...in the context of the M-L dialectic view nof history, it means that communism will outlast capitalism.

You sound like a typical pinko commie apologist.

Yeah that's me......

[JerrySeinfeld]

MAD is an extremely effective defence mechanism.

I suppose Iran thinks so too.

MAD isn't very effective on a culture whose chief export aside from oil is....young males who self-destruct.