Booster4324 Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Ruh Roh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 So? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 While you were on Drudge, did you happen to scroll down the page and follow the link to this little snippit http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...in-Red-Sea.html If Iran does indeed have the means to test a nuke within 6 months, Israel will strike before then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Why shouldn't they have nukes. They are trying to be good citizens of the world reduce their dependance on oil and use nuclear power. Oh wait, Obama said they weren't building bombs, they were only testing nukes for power plants. No way Iran and Obama lied to us. No that would never happen. Not the big O and his teleprompter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Why shouldn't they have nukes. They are trying to be good citizens of the world reduce their dependance on oil and use nuclear power. Oh wait, Obama said they weren't building bombs, they were only testing nukes for power plants. No way Iran and Obama lied to us. No that would never happen. Not the big O and his teleprompter. So Iran should be able to build nuclear power plants, but for some reason the US hasn't been allowed to build one since the 70s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 17, 2009 Author Share Posted July 17, 2009 While you were on Drudge, did you happen to scroll down the page and follow the link to this little snippit http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...in-Red-Sea.html If Iran does indeed have the means to test a nuke within 6 months, Israel will strike before then I wasn't on Drudge. I heard it from a local conservative hack on the drive home, who probably got it from Drudge. When I say hack it is not because of his politics by the way. Just an example, he was talking about the health care bill yesterday. He said, "And anyone that is 400% above the poverty line will get a health insurance credit." He then proceeded to talk about it and at least twice said, "These people are 400 times above the poverty level." He announced some figures, of like 43k for a single person and 88 k for a couple. 400 times eh? Even if he misread the article, you would think that he would have divided 43k by 400 in his head to think..."The poverty level is how much?" As to Isreal, I think they can handle anything thrown their way OTHER than a nuke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 As to Isreal, I think they can handle anything thrown their way OTHER than a nuke. Which is why, in my opinion, Israel will strike before Iran has the capability Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 17, 2009 Author Share Posted July 17, 2009 So? You do not see any issue with that whatsoever? You think Iran should be allowed to build nuclear weapons? If so, why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 You do not see any issue with that whatsoever? You think Iran should be allowed to build nuclear weapons? If so, why? Because a Democrat is in the White House. Believe me, if Bush was in the White House right now she'd be crapping purple Twinkies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 17, 2009 Author Share Posted July 17, 2009 Which is why, in my opinion, Israel will strike before Iran has the capability Quite possibly, and then the real fun begins. Hey, maybe investing in alternative forms of energy was smarter than we thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Quite possibly, and then the real fun begins. Hey, maybe investing in alternative forms of energy was smarter than we thought. Investing requires thinking ahead We could have invested in alternative forms of energy years ago. But gas was cheap, credit for SUVs was plentiful, and American Idol was on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 So? Israel will seriously !@#$ Iran up. Which may or may not be a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passepartout Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Iran and N. Korea need to be stopped before all he*l breaks loose. They are very dangerous. And it begins with those two idiots of a leaders, that have no care in the world about their people. Much less the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Israel will seriously !@#$ Iran up. Which may or may not be a good thing. I believe Israel will strike Iran within the next couple years, unless Iran changes course, and I don't see that really happening. In regards to Israel !@#$ing Iran up, mmmm. I don't know. I see it more like Israel dropping a few bunker bombs and tactical missile strikes, while crossing their fingers hoping that the Iranians don't strike back with conviction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 I believe Israel will strike Iran within the next couple years, unless Iran changes course, and I don't see that really happening. In regards to Israel !@#$ing Iran up, mmmm. I don't know. I see it more like Israel dropping a few bunker bombs and tactical missile strikes, while crossing their fingers hoping that the Iranians don't strike back with conviction. I suspect Israel will strike more in the range of months than years And if Iran strikes back "with conviction" as you say, Iran's "conviction" retaliation is no where near advanced as Israel's "conviction" counter-retaliation And by "conviction" I mean nuclear arsenal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 I suspect Israel will strike more in the range of months than years And if Iran strikes back "with conviction" as you say, Iran's "conviction" retaliation is no where near advanced as Israel's "conviction" counter-retaliation And by "conviction" I mean nuclear arsenal No way they go nuclear. But I do agree that if push comes to shove, Iran loses 10 times more lives than Israel does. Isn't that about the ration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 "The diplomats emphasize there are no indications of plans for such a nuclear test. They told the AP Friday it was unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West — and chances of Israeli attack — with such a course." Like the article says, just because they know how doesn't mean they will. I think the Arab states will pressure them to abstain from assembling a nuclear weapon, they don't want a nuclear arms race in the middle east. There would be no advantage for Iran to use a nuclear weapon, they want to leave it uncertain so no other countries threaten them with an attack in the future. They are entitled to create nuclear power facilities for civilian use. They want to be able to export more of their oil to increase revenue and boost their economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 "The diplomats emphasize there are no indications of plans for such a nuclear test. They told the AP Friday it was unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West — and chances of Israeli attack — with such a course." Like the article says, just because they know how doesn't mean they will. I think the Arab states will pressure them to abstain from assembling a nuclear weapon, they don't want a nuclear arms race in the middle east. There would be no advantage for Iran to use a nuclear weapon, they want to leave it uncertain so no other countries threaten them with an attack in the future. They are entitled to create nuclear power facilities for civilian use. They want to be able to export more of their oil to increase revenue and boost their economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 "The diplomats emphasize there are no indications of plans for such a nuclear test. They told the AP Friday it was unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West — and chances of Israeli attack — with such a course." Like the article says, just because they know how doesn't mean they will. I think the Arab states will pressure them to abstain from assembling a nuclear weapon, they don't want a nuclear arms race in the middle east. There would be no advantage for Iran to use a nuclear weapon, they want to leave it uncertain so no other countries threaten them with an attack in the future. They are entitled to create nuclear power facilities for civilian use. They want to be able to export more of their oil to increase revenue and boost their economy. Because Iran really, really, really gives two ***** about what the Arab world thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastback Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 "The diplomats emphasize there are no indications of plans for such a nuclear test. They told the AP Friday it was unlikely Iran would risk heightened confrontation with the West — and chances of Israeli attack — with such a course." Like the article says, just because they know how doesn't mean they will. I think the Arab states will pressure them to abstain from assembling a nuclear weapon, they don't want a nuclear arms race in the middle east. There would be no advantage for Iran to use a nuclear weapon, they want to leave it uncertain so no other countries threaten them with an attack in the future. They are entitled to create nuclear power facilities for civilian use. They want to be able to export more of their oil to increase revenue and boost their economy. You're farking clueless. Iranian's aren't Arabs dipschit, they're Persians. The Arabs are threatened by Iran's regional dominance. If you Lefty retards had a clue, instead of bashing Bush for attacking Saddam because of the WMD argument, you could actually make a decent case about him upsetting the balance of power in the region. But that's not what the Daily Kooks tells you, so we all know the result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts