IRAN Nears Bomb Capability

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Landis82, Sep 9, 2009.

  1. Tresor

    Tresor

    Guys,

    Correct me if I am wrong; 1. Iran wants nuclear technology for civil use, and 2. International Atomic Energy Agency promotes civil use of atomic energy and thus IAEA, if wanted to prevent Iran from having atom for civil purposes would contradict its own policies and by-laws, and 3. Iran is a democracy (although not in a Western style), 4. Iran did not start any military conflict for the last 300 years.

    I do not see any reason why not to allow Iran to have nuclear technology.

    Regards
     
    #11     Sep 10, 2009

  2. LOL
     
    #12     Sep 10, 2009
  3. Ricter

    Ricter

    Many view such ardent, non-Christian religious belief as the Iran population generally holds to be borderline crazy, and we fear the consequences of their government becoming certifiably crazy with nuclear weapons. History changes.

    Furthermore, many don't like the idea of a new power center arising so close to our oil.
     
    #13     Sep 10, 2009
  4. Tresor

    Tresor

    This thread is boring. Let us get some entertainment:

    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_IQDMqs0xA0&hl=pl&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_IQDMqs0xA0&hl=pl&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
     
    #14     Sep 10, 2009
  5. US is not in business of attacking anyone who can fight back (at any level). Iran can create all kinds of problems in the middle east, so US a long time ago made peace with Iran nuclear ambition. US will not try "any bunker busting" weapons, it will just try to make Iran the north korea of the middle east with sanctions.

    There was perfect casus belli when Iran captured those UK sailors, nothing happened, that to me suggests that US is not in a position to launch something on Iran (and won't let Israel do it either)
     
    #15     Sep 10, 2009
  6. I disagree.

    The Israelis were "polite" the first time around and asked our State Department (under Bush) for permission to fly over Iraqi airspace to deliver U.S. made bunker-busting bombs on the nuclear reactors in Natanz. Bush turned them down.

    I suspect that the Israelis won't be so "nice" the next time.
    The United States might get a 'courtesy' call, but that will be about it.
     
    #16     Sep 11, 2009
  7. The US can [probably] live with a nuclear Iran, Israel can't. Israel can fly over the Iraqi airspace without the US permission, assuming of course that they don't find a better alternative.

    What can possibly our military do if it they see Israeli planes in Iraqi skies. Will Obama order to shoot down Israeli bombers, will he alert the Iranians? No way in hell. Moreover, everyone in the western and arab world secretly wants Israel to succeed (I am talking about the people in power of course, not the arab and euro-liberal street), everyone will cooperate (while faking outrage of course).
     
    #17     Sep 11, 2009
  8. Tresor

    Tresor

    ''Our military''???

    You are a Jew. Your military is Jewish army, not US army. To fly over Iraq, your Jewish forces MUST ask US for permmission!
     
    #18     Sep 14, 2009
  9. And if they don't, then what?
     
    #19     Sep 14, 2009
  10. Tresor

    Tresor

    Then you, a_person, will be once again happy to screw Americans as you already did when you attacked USS Liberty in 1967.
     
    #20     Sep 14, 2009