Pages: 1 2

 

2006-12-20 18:16:59
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6788|PNW

Even if Iran had a dozen nukes, what are they compared to the US stockpile?

SenatorMendoza wrote:

What are you talking about!?!? The USA is the ONLY country that has ever used nuclear weapons!!! DON'T FORGET THAT. Over two hundred thousand people were killed by the bomb and its after-effects. And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!
CAPS !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! CAPS CAPS CAPS !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! CAPS CAPS !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! CAPS !!!

You mean "officially" used. Other countries have still tested them, and we've tested them on our own soil. Check out the cancer rates in those regions...

SenatorMendoza wrote:

I really don't think they'll nuke Israel but it's always a terrifying possibility.
You accept the possibility then, so I'll ask what you think should be and should have been done if they do.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-12-20 18:23:20)

2006-12-20 18:19:36
Deadly-Bulb
Member
+2|6574
taking action against climate change is like taking action against planetary rotation.
2006-12-20 18:45:21
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6383|Columbus, Ohio

SenatorMendoza wrote:

What are you talking about!?!? The USA is the ONLY country that has ever used nuclear weapons!!! DON'T FORGET THAT. Over two hundred thousand people were killed by the bomb and its after-effects. And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!

(Sounds like 'Amedinutjob' isn't the only 'holocaust denier'!)
Do you have any idea how many lives would have been lost if an invasion would have happened?  The number of Japan civilian losses would be to disturbing to think about.
2006-12-20 19:12:57
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6660

SenatorMendoza wrote:

And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!
might wanna re check your facts there buddy
2006-12-20 19:16:05
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6383|Columbus, Ohio

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!
might wanna re check your facts there buddy
Pfffttt..Facts.  It is Christmas break for the school kids, who needs facts?
2006-12-20 19:24:15
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6554|Long Island, New York
That silly billy Mahmoud, always getting himself into trouble.

WHO ELSE BUT MAHMOUD?
2006-12-20 19:33:57
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6421|North Carolina

Deadly-Bulb wrote:

taking action against climate change is like taking action against planetary rotation.
Not necessarily, but it will certainly be difficult as the Third World industrializes further....
2006-12-20 21:58:01
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6545|Global Command

SenatorMendoza wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

So what? At least Iran is taking action against climate change, unlike the USA.

Nuclear Weapons? BIG DEAL, the USA has 10,000 nukes.

Threatening to blow up Israel etc... They've always hated Israel but it will never happen . . .
The US has many nukes, but we haven't used them.  Amedinutjob is crazy enough to pop off a nuke at a nation he's always loathed.
What are you talking about!?!? The USA is the ONLY country that has ever used nuclear weapons!!! DON'T FORGET THAT. Over two hundred thousand people were killed by the bomb and its after-effects. And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!

(Sounds like 'Amedinutjob' isn't the only 'holocaust denier'!)

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

They've always hated Israel but it will never happen.
right on, we got a psychic posting on this thread.
No, I'm not psychic, I DON'T think that Iran should develop nuclear weapons, but it's hypocritical to try and force them not to. Nuclear weapons are the main thing that gives a country influence on the world stage so I'm not surprised that they might want the capability. I really don't think they'll nuke Israel but it's always a terrifying possibility.

Weapons = wrong
Power = OK (for 50 years or so until uranium runs out)
Dude, your facts are so wrong on so many levels. And you double posted a flailing post.
2006-12-20 22:20:01
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6617|132 and Bush

U.S. may send second carrier to Mideast Gulf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. command responsible for Middle East operations has asked the
Pentagon to add a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf region as a warning to
Syria and
Iran and to help it carry out other operations, a senior defense official said on Wednesday.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061220/ts_ … ildup_dc_1

Centcomm is responsible for the mid east region. It is less than 30 mins from my house. If you guys have any comments I'll run down there and tell them..lol

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-12-20 22:23:49)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
2006-12-20 22:43:43
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6691|Canberra, AUS

SenatorMendoza wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

So what? At least Iran is taking action against climate change, unlike the USA.

Nuclear Weapons? BIG DEAL, the USA has 10,000 nukes.

Threatening to blow up Israel etc... They've always hated Israel but it will never happen . . .
The US has many nukes, but we haven't used them.  Amedinutjob is crazy enough to pop off a nuke at a nation he's always loathed.
What are you talking about!?!? The USA is the ONLY country that has ever used nuclear weapons!!! DON'T FORGET THAT. Over two hundred thousand people were killed by the bomb and its after-effects. And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!
Au contraire, many nations have used nuclear weapons. Incidentally, the last to use one was North Korea.

Dont' forget that nuclear tests are still usages of nuclear weapons. Carry on.

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

They've always hated Israel but it will never happen.
right on, we got a psychic posting on this thread.
No, I'm not psychic, I DON'T think that Iran should develop nuclear weapons, but it's hypocritical to try and force them not to. Nuclear weapons are the main thing that gives a country influence on the world stage so I'm not surprised that they might want the capability. I really don't think they'll nuke Israel but it's always a terrifying possibility.

Weapons = wrong
Power = OK (for 50 years or so until uranium runs out)
"Nuclear weapons are the main thing that gives a country influence on the world stage so I'm not surprised that they might want the capability."

K, you're definitely wrong here. Power on the world stage is the ability to manipulate world events. Power is now measured in SOFT terms - e.g. trade, money. This is why some of the most powerful entities are corporations - and their armies total to zero people (well, maybe a bit more but not much more)

And I think the article title should be Iran Now Nuclear PowerED.

Last edited by Spark (2006-12-20 22:45:10)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-12-21 02:20:28
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6648|949

Spark wrote:

"Nuclear weapons are the main thing that gives a country influence on the world stage so I'm not surprised that they might want the capability."

K, you're definitely wrong here. Power on the world stage is the ability to manipulate world events. Power is now measured in SOFT terms - e.g. trade, money. This is why some of the most powerful entities are corporations - and their armies total to zero people (well, maybe a bit more but not much more)

And I think the article title should be Iran Now Nuclear PowerED.
Almost.  "Power" in international politics is the perceived ability of entity to manipulate world events.  Nuclear weapon capability is a perceived threat in world politics.  A country with nuclear weapon capability is influential in world politics.  This is why countries such as North Korea and Iran publicly declare their intentions in pursuing nuclear technology.

Corporations are powerful because certain political climates allow for "donations" to equal votes.
2006-12-21 03:31:37
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6598|SE London

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!
might wanna re check your facts there buddy
I'm not positive about it, but there is a lot of evidence to suggest that is what happened. Numerous politicians who were around in that era have said so, one example is Tony Benn. The idea being that the US used nuclear weapons on the Japanese to scare Stalin with a demonstration of the effectiveness of their new weapon, which certainly sounds very likely.

It's not exactly a clear cut fact, like the US allowing the attack on Pearl Horbour to take place, but it is probable considering the scenario and the supporting evidence.

Mike_J wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

The USA is the ONLY country that has ever used nuclear weapons!!!
Might want to check that one too
The US is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons. There is a difference between using and testing.
2006-12-21 10:22:08
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6660

Bertster7 wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

And that was AFTER Japan had already SURRENDERED!!!
might wanna re check your facts there buddy
I'm not positive about it, but there is a lot of evidence to suggest that is what happened. Numerous politicians who were around in that era have said so, one example is Tony Benn. The idea being that the US used nuclear weapons on the Japanese to scare Stalin with a demonstration of the effectiveness of their new weapon, which certainly sounds very likely.

It's not exactly a clear cut fact, like the US allowing the attack on Pearl Horbour to take place, but it is probable considering the scenario and the supporting evidence.

Mike_J wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

The USA is the ONLY country that has ever used nuclear weapons!!!
Might want to check that one too
The US is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons. There is a difference between using and testing.
ill settle for that.  but,  homedude said that we dopped the bomb after they surrendered.  the bombs were dropped in the first week of august, japan surrendered weeks later, after the fact.
2006-12-21 10:58:54
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6598|SE London

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:


might wanna re check your facts there buddy
I'm not positive about it, but there is a lot of evidence to suggest that is what happened. Numerous politicians who were around in that era have said so, one example is Tony Benn. The idea being that the US used nuclear weapons on the Japanese to scare Stalin with a demonstration of the effectiveness of their new weapon, which certainly sounds very likely.

It's not exactly a clear cut fact, like the US allowing the attack on Pearl Horbour to take place, but it is probable considering the scenario and the supporting evidence.

Mike_J wrote:

Might want to check that one too
The US is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons. There is a difference between using and testing.
ill settle for that.  but,  homedude said that we dopped the bomb after they surrendered.  the bombs were dropped in the first week of august, japan surrendered weeks later, after the fact.
That's the official story. There is a lot to suggest Japans surrender happened before the bombings. Well respected MPs have said that is what happened, that may well be what happened - but I'm not 100% sure. You have to accept that we are told happened is not necessarily exactly what did happen, Pearl Harbour is a good example of this.
The evidence I have seen for this is compelling, but not absolute proof. It is something that is certainly worth keeping an open mind about though.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2006-12-21 11:01:41)

2006-12-21 11:53:52
jonsimon
Member
+224|6511

Bertster7 wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

might wanna re check your facts there buddy
I'm not positive about it, but there is a lot of evidence to suggest that is what happened. Numerous politicians who were around in that era have said so, one example is Tony Benn. The idea being that the US used nuclear weapons on the Japanese to scare Stalin with a demonstration of the effectiveness of their new weapon, which certainly sounds very likely.

It's not exactly a clear cut fact, like the US allowing the attack on Pearl Horbour to take place, but it is probable considering the scenario and the supporting evidence.


The US is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons. There is a difference between using and testing.
ill settle for that.  but,  homedude said that we dopped the bomb after they surrendered.  the bombs were dropped in the first week of august, japan surrendered weeks later, after the fact.
That's the official story. There is a lot to suggest Japans surrender happened before the bombings. Well respected MPs have said that is what happened, that may well be what happened - but I'm not 100% sure. You have to accept that we are told happened is not necessarily exactly what did happen, Pearl Harbour is a good example of this.
The evidence I have seen for this is compelling, but not absolute proof. It is something that is certainly worth keeping an open mind about though.
The Japenese proposed surrender multiple times before the bombs, however, they would not agree to an unconditional surrender. Because we refused to settle for less, our higher ups advocated the bomb as a means to force the Japenese into unconditional surrender.
2006-12-21 13:52:03
SenatorMendoza
Member
+7|6504

Spark wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

"Nuclear weapons are the main thing that gives a country influence on the world stage so I'm not surprised that they might want the capability."
K, you're definitely wrong here. Power on the world stage is the ability to manipulate world events. Power is now measured in SOFT terms - e.g. trade, money. This is why some of the most powerful entities are corporations - and their armies total to zero people (well, maybe a bit more but not much more)
The G8 (the most influential nations) are all nuclear powers. (I know that doesn't necessarily mean that it was their nuclear capability that gave them that level of infulence....)

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

SenatorMendoza wrote:

I really don't think they'll nuke Israel but it's always a terrifying possibility.
You accept the possibility then, so I'll ask what you think should be and should have been done if they do.
Well I certainly don't think that anyone should nuke them back! To be honest i think that retaliation is always wrong. I think that the issue is far more complex than that. We should work on trying to resolve the differences between Iran and Israel and the rest of the Middle East so that there is no desire to use nuclear weapons. Now that is extremely hard, but it's the only justified answer.

And another thing, this thread was about nuclear electricity, sorry if I derailed it a bit. But clearly everyone's biggest fear is that nuclear power will make it easier for iran to make nukes.
2006-12-21 14:09:45
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|6678|USA

Kmarion wrote:

Ahmadinejad: Iran now nuclear power
Iranian president: Our scienists have reached zenith, accessed nuclear fuel cycle
Iran is now a "nuclear power," its President, Mahmoud Ahamdinejad, delcared Wednesday, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency .
During a speech delivered in the Western Iranian province of Javanroud, Ahmadinejad said: " The Islamic Republic of Iran is now a nuclear power, thanks to the hard work of the Iranian people and authorities."
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 … 89,00.html


Consider that with this.
Ahmadinejad: Israel, US will vanish
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 … 68,00.html
Ahmadinejad says Israel, US, Britain will vanish – 'this is a divine promise;

That Ahmadinejad is a silly bitch.
Century 8, Quatrain 77
The antichrist very soon annihilates the three,
twenty-seven years his war will last.
The unbelievers are dead, captive, exiled;
with blood, human bodies, water and red hail covering the earth.

^
NOstradamus prediction of the 3rd Antichrist.
2006-12-21 16:38:31
mafia996630
© 2009 Jeff Minard
+319|6780|d
i don't believe the source, if Iran was a nuclear power, CNN and co would have been the first ones to launch an all out attack.

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard