World War III, anyone?

[wayneL]

What happened was the US gave the UN 12 years to sort Saddam out...



No ... the UN should have acted and removed Saddam when he broke the UN mandates...


So Iraq never fired any scud missles at Israel and was never trying to develop long range missles...

Israel never had to carry out an air strike on a nuc weapons program inside Iraq...



Now your getting way out of line.. you are now going so far as to say the CIA are the one's giving ammo to the insurgents in Iraq... take a step back and check yourself... you really think that... really...


No it's not... Clinton ( Dem ) did little to nothing ...even sent a signal from the events in Somalia that if u kill some of us then we will pack up and go home...


So you think that the mad mullahs in Iran should be allowed to become nuclear... kind words will not stop them...

Will stand corrected if you could show me that it was not America that halted communism...that has nothing to do with Fox.. you may hate Fox, along with all your other M Moore fan clubers, but the Left always hates being asked the hard questions...something that Fox does very well from both sides of politics, unlike CNN, who I was watching President Bush's last speech on the progress in Iraq live on CNN then CNN go straight to Basra and show as much trouble as they can for as long as they can on that ONE city and nothing about anything else in the whole country of Iraq, with the anchors going out of their way to diss what the President had just said...why be so negative in reporting, ok always show what's going on, but show ALL of whats going on, not half the picture... it's not only what CNN show, it's also what they don't show and say... thats a major reason why so many think the one war is justified and one is not...

Also maybe why people with views like you have, are so aggressive when it comes to Fox...

WOOOOOHOOO!

That post had more straw men in it than the whole state of Nebraska. LOL
Are you Bill O'Reilly himself? Honestly he's the only other man on the planet that could string together such a string of logical fallacies without even drawing breath.

I can see the futility of discussion here. I bid you Godspeed with your views and leave it there.

ROTFLMAO

 

[Superfly]

WOOOOOHOOO!

That post had more straw men in it than the whole state of Nebraska. LOL
Are you Bill O'Reilly himself? Honestly he's the only other man on the planet that could string together such a string of logical fallacies without even drawing breath.

I can see the futility of discussion here. I bid you Godspeed with your views and leave it there.

ROTFLMAO

As was said... "the left hates being asked the hard questions"... prime example

 

[wayneL]

As was said... "the left hates being asked the hard questions"...

I'm not left, I'm center right

But just for the record, those weren't questions, they were statements (fallacious ones mostly). It really pays to know the difference.

 

[Superfly]

I'm not left, I'm center right

But just for the record, those weren't questions, they were statements (fallacious ones mostly). It really pays to know the difference.

"fallacious"... is your response... lol

Should Iran be allowed to get the bomb... ? Question in case u missed that..

 

[wayneL]

"fallacious"... is your response... lol

Should Iran be allowed to get the bomb... ? Question in case u missed that..

Yes fallacious, because you attribute attitudes and viewpoints to me that I don't carry. e.g. That I am a lefty, that I even mentioned the CIA and the insurgents in the same breath and somehow connected dots that weren't there, that I'm a Moore fan clubber.

It seems you discredited yourself with your own rhetoric. Something Bill O'Reilly can only overcome with bluster and cutting to commercials, but cannot be done on a forum.

You sir, have been hoist by your own petard.

Re Iran and the bomb:
Are they getting one?
Should Israel be allowed to have the bomb?
Should Pakistan be allowed to have the bomb?
Should India be allowed to have the bomb?
Should China be allowed to have the bomb?
Should Russia be allowed to have the bomb?
Should America be allowed to have the bomb?

As I recall, there is only one country who has used it on foreign population centers. The same country who continues to splatter U238 dust all over the place.

I would prefer that nobody had the bomb, but as yet, we don't know whether Iran is telling the truth.

If we deny Iran the bomb, then we sure as hell should be denying some, if not all of the above as well.

 

[robert toms]

One thing that I do know...is that if the school yard bully and his gang of hangers-on was continually threatening me I would take measures to protect myself.
If Iran is developing a nuclear defence capacity it is understandable and justifiable!

 

[Santob]

One thing that I do know...is that if the school yard bully and his gang of hangers-on was continually threatening me I would take measures to protect myself.
If Iran is developing a nuclear defence capacity it is understandable and justifiable!

Gee, thats the kind of talk that gets you labelled as a terrorist sympathiser by the likes of superfly

 

[mayk]

Hey superfly, What about another puppet person supported by the west ( aka Musharraf), he killed people on the streets in Karachi, suspended the constitution, Jailed Supreme court Judges ( Never in the history of dictatorship this happened).

Is this the high moral ground west is working to install in the world?


I am sure looking back a decade or two, you will compare Saddam to Musharraf. History repeats it self, and this time it will be no different. The friends of today will be the enemies of tomorrow.


Seriously, tell me for how long the nuclear technology can be protected from other nations. 10-20-40 years. At some point in time the nations you like or dislike will aquire this technology, then what? Start a killing spree all over again?


Americans have a magic wand by virture of which they can touch a small problem and then convert it into an insolvable disaster.

A more humane and rational thinking all over the world is required. Keeping in mind the respect for other nations, their ideals and virtues.

 

[Superfly]

One thing that I do know...is that if the school yard bully and his gang of hangers-on was continually threatening me I would take measures to protect myself.
If Iran is developing a nuclear defence capacity it is understandable and justifiable!

Defence ?... this is the same Iran that states openly to have Israel wiped of the face of the earth...

 

[Superfly]

A more humane and rational thinking all over the world is required. Keeping in mind the respect for other nations, their ideals and virtues.

..All the while Iran works away to achieve it's goal... while some look & hope for a more humane & rational way of thinking to deal with the problem... but how do you deal with an unrational government...

 

[Superfly]

Then to start pointing fingers at Iran and Syria for sponsoring unrest? LOL! That a standard CIA tactic as well. The US has had it's fingers in so many pies it's unreal.

hmmmm... do not how I thought that you meant Iran & Syria have nothing to do with the trouble in Iraq, and that the CIA has finger prints are all over it...hmmmmm

 

[mayk]

but how do you deal with an unrational government...

May I dare say, how to deal with Uncle Sam? Does Bush govt. seem rational to you? Cuts both ways aye!

 

[metric]

..All the while Iran works away to achieve it's goal... while some look & hope for a more humane & rational way of thinking to deal with the problem... but how do you deal with an unrational government...

superfly, i suggest to you to expand your reading of daily news beyond corporate mainstream media....

just for an exercise, read prisonplanet.com occasionally.

 

[Superfly]

Yes fallacious, because you attribute attitudes and viewpoints to me that I don't carry. e.g. That I am a lefty, that I even mentioned the CIA and the insurgents in the same breath and somehow connected dots that weren't there, that I'm a Moore fan clubber.

Well you have not discredited many or any of my statements... you gloss over most and attack the M Moore link, when it's ok for you to throw the Fox / Bill O'R thing at me...

It seems you discredited yourself with your own rhetoric. Something Bill O'Reilly can only overcome with bluster and cutting to commercials, but cannot be done on a forum.

Whatever.... ( there you go again )...

You sir, have been hoist by your own petard.

Re Iran and the bomb:
Are they getting one?
Should Israel be allowed to have the bomb?
Should Pakistan be allowed to have the bomb?
Should India be allowed to have the bomb?
Should China be allowed to have the bomb?
Should Russia be allowed to have the bomb?
Should America be allowed to have the bomb?

Pakistan no.. but even Pakistan is more stable and level headed (at the moment) than Iran... and thats to late now, which is some of the point... once it's achieved, then it's to late. So what is it YES or NO ?

As I recall, there is only one country who has used it on foreign population centers. The same country who continues to splatter U238 dust all over the place.

Have you any idea what a land invasion of mainland Japan would have cost in American / Australian / English lives... most estimates 200000 to 1+million... the bomb saved countless brave men & women...

I would prefer that nobody had the bomb, but as yet, we don't know whether Iran is telling the truth.

How are we going to know ?? if they are no being fully open with all their sites, which they ARE NOT ( even building deeper under mountains ) then what else in the interest of world can one suspect... what does that make you think they are doing... growing roses down there .....

If we deny Iran the bomb, then we sure as hell should be denying some, if not all of the above as well.

It's not a perfect world...

 

[Superfly]

superfly, i suggest to you to expand your reading of daily news beyond corporate mainstream media....

just for an exercise, read prisonplanet.com occasionally.

Will do... but heading to work for 4 weeks just now so will have a look through when return home... till then just posting now and then...

 

[disarray]

nukes are still a restricted tech and iran can't be allowed to have them while their head of government says he wants to obliterate israel on national tv. if a state really wants nukes they can develop them but it takes time and effort. while there are many legitimate reasons for nuclear development, certain nations are erratic so it is denied to them by the international community.

so who has nukes and who deserves to have them?

india and pakistan have theirs pointed at each other. this collection has the whole MAD (mutually assured destruction) thing going for it and they don't have intercontinental delivery systems yet, so its a regional thing.

russia probably covers western europe, the US, china and maybe the odd troublesome republic. international threat but obvious targets, and high chance of MAD. ex-soviet republics dismantled and shipped their inherited arsenals back to russia (supplying the blackmarket)

the us covers russia, china, and probably middle eastern targets. they also have nuke sharing with nato partners, maybe likely (imho) to launch against a smaller adversary if desperate but otherwise responsible.

france and the uk are cold war arsenals so no immediate threat. i wonder who they are pointing at?

china has them because a nation of 1 billion can do whatever it wants. i'll probably get slammed for this but they are pretty xenophobic - secure the borders, build the great wall then go about its business with the nukes as a deterrent. no point nuking taiwan, maybe some grudge missiles looking at japan and a few reserved for north korea if they flip out really badly with their stockpile.

these are the main nuclear players, they are all large and relatively stable with a history of not wanting to annihilate the world. pakistan may become a danger if the islamists gain power because the arsenal would have a different priority.

that leaves north korea, israel and iran. north korea is still plugging away but aren't a large threat. no delivery system and only a few warheads which are more useful as bargaining chips than flying towards a target.

israel has them but doesn't admit it. probably not afraid to use them and actively involved in denying its middle eastern neighbours nuclear technology, even going so far as to attack targets inside syria and iran. suffering from a seige mentality for some reason, maybe the 200 million arabs still baying for israeli blood has something to do with it. arsenal is most likely targetted throughout the middle east.

then you have a newly assertive, religiously fuelled iran. iran was mellowing out until bush starts sabre rattling and sends the voters back into the arms of the conservatives. maybe has them, maybe not but has the capacity to develop them. high probability it would throw them at israel at what they consider an opportune time and the israels know it, so a pre-emptive strike would be on the cards.

so there you have it, most of the worlds nuclear powers have nukes that pretty much counterbalance each other, its in no ones interest to destroy each other. the "rogue states" on the other hand are obviously nutters and should be stymied in any attempt to develop nuclear technology. too bad about the whole electricity generation thing but you can't let nations get nukes when you know they are erratic and lack counterbalance.

 

[robert toms]

Superfly ,I suggest that you google who has attacked who since the second world war and you find some facts that do not fit your scenario.
To my knowledge Iran has never attacked anyone...and as for threatening behaviour look to the US and Israel...
I am not ideoligical about any of this....I try to keep to the facts.
I can remember when the US were bombing Haiphong and bragging how they would bomb the Vietnamese into the stone age...these are facts.
Very populated areas they were bombing...nothing has changed...only the propaganda has become more sophisticated!
A very cunning bloke GWB ,urging Iraqis to fight and kill Iraqis...now thats the way to win their hearts and minds!Not!

 

[mayk]

The problem is we are equating personalities with nations. GWB with America, Ahmet with Iran, and Musharraf with Pakistan. I am sure people of these nations are not that crazy and given the chance will seek moderate forces to pervail.

Iranian are not physco paths, they know how lonely they are in the arab world. Which nation in sane mind will deploy a N-weapon in its own backyard?

Study history, Iran is generally hated in Gulf region. It is disliked by majority of its neighbours, especially Saudia Arabia. It is as lonely in this region as Israel.

Israel should settle the Palestine problem once and for all, stop building new colonies and stop amassing the land of other nations. Israel has to clear its act first to gain respect and support of its neighbours.

But I see a grand design which will not allow peace to establish, because then ,USA has to undeploy its forces from that region ( Oil yummmm.)

 

[metric]

ahmadinejad has never stated iran wants to "obliterate" israel. (which is a corporate mainstream media beat up). he said to "remove israel from the map" which is the corresct translation, and means basically it should be called palestine.

if iran wants nukes, they would already have them from old soviet union states. it is common knowledge there are 'hundreds' of nukes missing. do a google.

of all the countries in the world, the two most likely to use nukes are the US and Israel. IMO.

 

[disarray]

ahmadinejad has never stated iran wants to "obliterate" israel. (which is a corporate mainstream media beat up). he said to "remove israel from the map" which is the corresct translation, and means basically it should be called palestine.

Iran: Nuke Israel!

power in iran is still with the theocracy. that is who we will be dealing with.