 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
skafather84
Platypus God
Joined: Mar 21, 2006
Age: 24
Posts: 4686
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:51 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| DeanFoley wrote: | | There there...come here to Europe! At least we don't have this crap... |
and live under the big brother rule of the EU? no thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Mc_Jeff
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Jul 30, 2007
Posts: 191
|
|
| Back to top |
|
monty
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 05, 2007
Posts: 2265
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| John Bolton (a darling of the right on par with Kristol) suggests that Iran will be bombed after the election but before Obama takes office. |
|
| Back to top |
|
skafather84
Platypus God
Joined: Mar 21, 2006
Age: 24
Posts: 4686
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mc_Jeff wrote: | http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30451_Video-_IAEAs_ElBaradei-_Iran_Could_Have_a_Nuke_Within_6_Months
Iran is 6 months from nuclear weapons.
Which means it should be bombed within 6 months.
PS - don't bother trying to claim that LGF isn't credible, as it's more credible than whatever leftist rag you're reading and has probably rubbed that leftist rag's face in its own crapulence multiple times. |
give me a quick reader's digest version...when they say could have a nuke, does that just mean enough enriched uranium or do we know they're gathering supplies to create a nuke? have we seen testings being carried out?
we'd know pretty quickly if they have one or not because they'd have to test it first and if they test it, we can bomb the sh** out of them then.
i'm still wondering why we didn't with north korea going for their nuke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
monty
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 05, 2007
Posts: 2265
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
North Korea has a large standing army and tens of thousands of artillery pieces pointed at South Korea's cities. We could have attacked their nuclear facilities, but it would have cost a few million lives.
As far as where Iran is now, not sure. Some estimates (like the IAEA) put them at 5 to 10 years away from being able to make a bomb, but no one knows for sure, and the neocons are sprinkling and catapulting propaganda-bits about how it is only months (which favors their option of acting soon). |
|
| Back to top |
|
Pandora
Cat Lady
Joined: Jun 18, 2005
Age: 47
Posts: 4684
Location: Townsville
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Who is the onlycountry out of the many that have had nukes to have used them against another country? Right first time, the US. France tested them on Bikini Atoll, and Muroroa Atoll up until the 70s, and the Brits tested them at Maralinga in Sth Australia in the 50s. China has them and never used them, neither did the USSR/Russia? Why? because they knew that if either side started a nuclear war, then the only survivors would be the cockroaches. Now you;re talking about Iran and Nth Korea having them, but what if it's nuclear POWER that they intend using the uranium for? What it comes down to is that America is so paranoid of other nations like Iran, China, India or whoever starting some conflict that tehy are going to wind up copping it themselves; so they want to get in first. Nuclear fuel can be found to more efficient, and clean; so why deny them the chance to use the uranium for that, just because of some mispalced paranoia.
Nuclear war is pointless, because there are no winners, just irradiated corpses glowing in the wind.
_________________
Break out you Western girls,
Someday soon you're gonna rule the world.
Break out you Western girls,
Hold your heads up high.
"Western Girls" - Dragon
I am banned  |
|
| Back to top |
|
burnse22
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 07, 2008
Posts: 514
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
George Bush wouldn't launch an attack on Iran. It is the sort of thing that happens in fiction but there are so many reasons why that wouldn't happen. If Bush were to launch an attack it would be without the permission of Congress, Senate, the American people, the American military and most of his own government. He would probably be forced to stop, and even if he did succeed he would be forcibly removed from office.
PS - LGF isn't credible.
_________________
"Was that the bad thing?"
"Floss is boss. Floss is boss! FLOSS IS BOSS!!!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
Pandora
Cat Lady
Joined: Jun 18, 2005
Age: 47
Posts: 4684
Location: Townsville
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
As of the last 24 hours, Nth Korea has now been taken off the 'Axis of Evil' list, and they have blown up their own nuclear plant. They have been given 45 days to completely prove that they are on the up-and-up, and given that Bush's days as president are in the final stages, if they haven't co-operated there is nothing Bush could do. The election has put a stop to anything he could have done; Obama could reverse any decision with a flick of his wrist, and McCain would still have to get it past the next congress. So both Nth Korea and Iran will be around for a long time to come.
_________________
Break out you Western girls,
Someday soon you're gonna rule the world.
Break out you Western girls,
Hold your heads up high.
"Western Girls" - Dragon
I am banned |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sir_Beefy
Raven
Joined: Jun 10, 2008
Age: 20
Posts: 123
Location: Middle of Nowhere, Maryland
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
You know, its funny how the United States is the only country that is allowed to have nuclear weapons, but everyone else has to stay clean. Can I get a....HYPOCRITE
_________________
Clones are people two |
|
| Back to top |
|
pbcoll
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 15, 2007
Posts: 1732
Location: England
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Surely if the Israelis thought they knew where all the nuclear facilities were, they would have taken them out ages ago? And if Mossad doesn't know, surely neither does the CIA. The risk is that an attack would radicalise Iran more without entirely derailing their nuclear program, merely setting it back a little. With so many troops tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan, and given that Iran is about 3 times as big as Iraq with twice the population, the US simply cannot mount a credible occupation of the place, unless a draft is reinstated.
Plus, can the US economy survive oil at $200 a barrel? $300?
_________________
I neither take revenge, nor beg for favours. (Rabindranath Tagore)
I am the steppenwolf that never learned to dance. (Sedaka) |
|
| Back to top |
|
Mc_Jeff
Pileated woodpecker
Joined: Jul 30, 2007
Posts: 191
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sir_Beefy wrote: | | You know, its funny how the United States is the only country that is allowed to have nuclear weapons, but everyone else has to stay clean. Can I get a....HYPOCRITE |
You're not very smart, are you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
snake321
phoenix
Joined: Mar 26, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 3235
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DeanFoley wrote: | | There there...come here to Europe! At least we don't have this crap... |
It'll happen eventually in Europe too, it's a New **World** Order. Europe is part of this world. The same people who financed Nazi germany and USSR, among other regimes, are at it again. Many of the same corporations you hear about in the media today reeped the benefits from slave labor in death camps that went down in Nazi germany. The ptb are greater than any secular nation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
oscuria
Verbal Guerrilla
Joined: Feb 01, 2008
Posts: 2033
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pandora wrote: | Who is the onlycountry out of the many that have had nukes to have used them against another country? Right first time, the US. France tested them on Bikini Atoll, and Muroroa Atoll up until the 70s, and the Brits tested them at Maralinga in Sth Australia in the 50s. China has them and never used them, neither did the USSR/Russia? Why? because they knew that if either side started a nuclear war, then the only survivors would be the cockroaches. Now you;re talking about Iran and Nth Korea having them, but what if it's nuclear POWER that they intend using the uranium for? What it comes down to is that America is so paranoid of other nations like Iran, China, India or whoever starting some conflict that tehy are going to wind up copping it themselves; so they want to get in first. Nuclear fuel can be found to more efficient, and clean; so why deny them the chance to use the uranium for that, just because of some mispalced paranoia.
Nuclear war is pointless, because there are no winners, just irradiated corpses glowing in the wind. |
Yeah. That's it.
Perhaps it will help them make Persian rugs more efficiently. I like Persian rugs.
هزار و یک شب till war.
_________________
I'm no democRAT, I'm a republiCAN! |
|
| Back to top |
|
skafather84
Platypus God
Joined: Mar 21, 2006
Age: 24
Posts: 4686
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| oscuria wrote: | | Pandora wrote: | Who is the onlycountry out of the many that have had nukes to have used them against another country? Right first time, the US. France tested them on Bikini Atoll, and Muroroa Atoll up until the 70s, and the Brits tested them at Maralinga in Sth Australia in the 50s. China has them and never used them, neither did the USSR/Russia? Why? because they knew that if either side started a nuclear war, then the only survivors would be the cockroaches. Now you;re talking about Iran and Nth Korea having them, but what if it's nuclear POWER that they intend using the uranium for? What it comes down to is that America is so paranoid of other nations like Iran, China, India or whoever starting some conflict that tehy are going to wind up copping it themselves; so they want to get in first. Nuclear fuel can be found to more efficient, and clean; so why deny them the chance to use the uranium for that, just because of some mispalced paranoia.
Nuclear war is pointless, because there are no winners, just irradiated corpses glowing in the wind. |
Yeah. That's it.
Perhaps it will help them make Persian rugs more efficiently. I like Persian rugs.
هزار و یک شب till war. |
or maybe they want to be able to use more of their oil for sale and so they're switching over to nuclear to use the least oil domestically so they can maximize their ability to sell in the market.
it'd make sense. if it weren't for the pseudo-liberal fascists here, we would be using more nuclear power plants too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
oscuria
Verbal Guerrilla
Joined: Feb 01, 2008
Posts: 2033
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| skafather84 wrote: | or maybe they want to be able to use more of their oil for sale and so they're switching over to nuclear to use the least oil domestically so they can maximize their ability to sell in the market.
it'd make sense. if it weren't for the pseudo-liberal fascists here, we would be using more nuclear power plants too. |
Khamenei is not Gandhi. What would make anyone think the leaders of Iran would want nuclear capabilities for peaceful means? If people don't believe the rhetoric Bush says, they shouldn't believe the rhetoric these people make also.
_________________
I'm no democRAT, I'm a republiCAN! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
