Nuclear Holocaust Possible with Obama!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by BernardRichards, May 23, 2009.

  1. Ahmadinejad 'The idea of a smaller Israel is dead'

    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

    History indicates that demonic maniacal demagogical tyrants like Ahmadinejad should be taken at their word.

    Obama apparently doesn't have the gumption and the will to take on the Iranians. The liberal school of politics of which Obama is part has an implicit belief that everybody is really good so with enough talk one's enemies will turn into one's friends and there will no longer be a conflict. Translation, it seems that the Obama clown will try to talk the Iranians to death while their nuclear program expands to fearful proportions. If Israel is not successful in taking out Iran's nuclear program solo a nuclear holocaust seems like a good possibility in my opinion.
  2. Look, if I recall correctly during Iran-Iraq war Ayatollah Khomeni promised to fight to the death (or something to that effect). Did he? NO. In that part of the world, hyperbole is business as usual.

    I think the "endgame" that white house has plotted for Iran (I am talking about bush administration) would be to make Iran as close to a middle east version of north korea as possible. A dirt poor nation with nukes.
  3. 911, the attacks on the US embassies, USS Cole, etc. were no hyperboles.

    Come on IShopAtPublix Islamist shahids regularly blow themselves while trying to kill as many Infidels as possible -- no hyperbole here as far as I can see.

    Remember, they love death more than we love life. I Am A Nut Job believes that nuking Israel will bring the mahdi (Islamic Savior) and he will get 720,000,000 beautiful black-eyed virgins and 360,000,000 little boys of fine appearance in Islamic heaven for his work of Infidel mass destruction.
  4. Damn... Must I explain everything. Do you not see the difference between USS cole and policy of a state?

    Policies of a state are driven by PRAGMATIC concerns above all. Even Ayatolla Khomeni while appearing a total nutcase to the outside world "saw the writing on the wall" and how Iraq was being supported by BOTH Soviet Union & the West and realized "fighting to the death" was not wise.

    Any number of citizens can blow themselves up, but policies of a state are driven by pragmatic concerns. Which means, even if Iran acquires nukes, they are not going to be launched just so Iran "goes down in a blaze of glory" There is even dispute as to who is supreme leader of Iran.
  5. The end game was for Iran to have a revolution and kick the Ayatollahs out. That is still the objective.

    Iran's populace is pro American. It came out of the relationships we had back when the Shah was in power.

  6. After seeing what the US did to Iraq and Hussein, what shithole mid-east country wants to go up against the United States?

    The "Ahmadinejad is going to start a nuclear war" bullshit is no different than the scare tactics/propaganda utilized during the Cold War, Vietnam War, and the fake war on terror.

    We average a major war in this country every 20 years. Follow the money.
  7. Bullshit. There would be no ayatollahs if they were pro american. A lot of people admire the romanticized (California or NY or Florida) version of USA they see in hollywood movies. Just because they like to live like in USA does not mean they like policies of the US government. After US "liberated" Iraq, nobody in their right mind would want the same happen in Iran.
  8. In Islamic states the end goal is that all citizens should get to Islamic heaven -- these states are not akin whatsoever to Western states by any stretch of the imagination, and they function on a totally different rationality.

    You should read up on this topic before you make comments that are totally erroneous. Islamism and states that are Islamic and follow a form of sharia law have been covered many times in this forum, and no one who is an active participant in this forum should be ignorant about them and what drives them.

    I'm sorry if you are die hard Obama supporter, and I attacked your leader, but I call them as see them. Clinton, another liberal democrat, failed to track down Osama bin Ladin when he had the chance and then we had 911. And the grandaddy of them all is Carter, another liberal democrat, that allowed Iran to turn from a US ally into the #1 enemy of the US, and the largest sponsor of world terrorism that believes its best days lie ahead in this area as this video indicates.

    Iran is a modern day Nazi Germany of the Islamic variety. What's the difference between it and Nazi Germany? In Nazi Germany they beheaded dissidents. In Iran they hang them! ;)

    BTW, The supreme leader of Iran is Ayatollah Khameinei. There is absolutely no dispute in this area as you state. Again, please read up on the topic before you make vague incorrect comments, and totally incorrect comments if you expect me to respond, and not to place you on my ignore list. If you want to tout Obama as the best thing that has come along since sliced bread then please do it in your own threads or another poster's thread who is more tolerant, and who can handle nonsensical responses better than I can.
  9. This is a smart comment IShopAtPublix. Making Iran like North Korea would certainly be an endgame -- make that deathgame -- if one wants to have nuclear missiles reach US soil, as North Korea is working to that goal.
  10. Ok, that's it IShopAtPublix. A man has to know his limitations. You are just too spaced out and illogical for me to have a serious discussion with so welcome to my ignore list.

    BTW IShopAtPublix, recreational drugs are bad for the mind!
    #10     May 24, 2009