"Drumming up propaganda against Iran" by saying they don't have weapons-grade uranium?rammunition wrote:
too much terminator eh (i had to google it up,lol), but seriously this was well known for a long time that iran is enriching low enrich uranium.M.O.A.B wrote:
Not really, that's Skynet's plan.rammunition wrote:
thats like saying, just because America can make robot armies (which they have, robot dogs or something), doesn't mean they won't mass produce to take over the world
The U.S is drumming up more propaganda against Iran, they are still bitter that the Revolution ousted the U.S puppet, the shah. they see Iran's advancing, moving forward as a way to drum up propaganda against them.
orLividBovine wrote:
One side has them and does not want to use them, well maybe just the 2 times. The other side wants to get them and use them, in my delusional mind anyways.
I believe what I believe. More nukes helps no one. It's interesting the same argument for keeping nukes works for getting rid of them. So is it an answer?m3thod wrote:
Who in their right mind steps down when they have superior weapon technology?Pug wrote:
Or step down...fuck I hate both sides of a debate, don't you?m3thod wrote:
Tough shit. Some people gotta play catch up or they are going to get fucked up.
Being arsey doesn't suit you.
I actually hope you are right. I don't think anyone is going to be willing to stop Iran from aquiring them so the only alternative is that he is not going to follow through with own perceived destiny.m3thod wrote:
orLividBovine wrote:
One side has them and does not want to use them, well maybe just the 2 times. The other side wants to get them and use them, in my delusional mind anyways.
one side has them but has to restrained not to use them....the other side desperately wants to acquire them to address the inequality.
tell you what my friend, if the USA enemies had F15's, B2 bombers and those fancy carrier strike group equivalents you lot wouldn't be half as inclined to go about the adventures you've been undertaking in the past few years.Pug wrote:
I believe what I believe. More nukes helps no one. It's interesting the same argument for keeping nukes works for getting rid of them. So is it an answer?m3thod wrote:
Who in their right mind steps down when they have superior weapon technology?Pug wrote:
Or step down...fuck I hate both sides of a debate, don't you?
Being arsey doesn't suit you.
Last edited by m3thod (2009-03-11 19:09:58)
Who is Israel to dictate what happens?[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Israel right or wrong wont allow Iran to have a nuke... it's about their preservation... and you guys in Europe should be more concerned
than even the US... Do you want that nutter... not ramnutter...lol... aquadinnajihad nutter to have a nuke...?
And then the enemies of said enemies would be enduring the same inclinations due to a technology advantage. No?m3thod wrote:
tell you what my friend, if the USA enemies had F15's, B2 bombers and those fancy carrier strike group equivalents you lot wouldn't be half as inclined to go about the adventures you've been undertaking in the past few years.
The enemy capability to strike the equivalent damage as yourself, would make you think just a little bit more before pressing that little red button.
cause they can... I'm not saying it's right or wrong... just that they will do what they need to do to preserve their country...BN wrote:
Who is Israel to dictate what happens?[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Israel right or wrong wont allow Iran to have a nuke... it's about their preservation... and you guys in Europe should be more concerned
than even the US... Do you want that nutter... not ramnutter...lol... aquadinnajihad nutter to have a nuke...?
emmm...can't really argue with that now, can we.m3thod wrote:
tell you what my friend, if the USA enemies had F15's, B2 bombers and those fancy carrier strike group equivalents you lot wouldn't be half as inclined to go about the adventures you've been undertaking in the past few years.Pug wrote:
I believe what I believe. More nukes helps no one. It's interesting the same argument for keeping nukes works for getting rid of them. So is it an answer?m3thod wrote:
Who in their right mind steps down when they have superior weapon technology?
Being arsey doesn't suit you.
The enemy capability to strike the equivalent damage as yourself, would make you think just a little bit more before pressing that little red button.
Sure you can. Depends on what they were doing with it. This idea that we have absolutely zero restraint because we have superiority is wrong. I, as a matter of opinion, do not think that the entirety of the world would be so reluctant.ATG wrote:
emmm...can't really argue with that now, can we.m3thod wrote:
tell you what my friend, if the USA enemies had F15's, B2 bombers and those fancy carrier strike group equivalents you lot wouldn't be half as inclined to go about the adventures you've been undertaking in the past few years.Pug wrote:
I believe what I believe. More nukes helps no one. It's interesting the same argument for keeping nukes works for getting rid of them. So is it an answer?
The enemy capability to strike the equivalent damage as yourself, would make you think just a little bit more before pressing that little red button.
Who is Iran to dictate what happens?BN wrote:
Who is Israel to dictate what happens?[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Israel right or wrong wont allow Iran to have a nuke... it's about their preservation... and you guys in Europe should be more concerned
than even the US... Do you want that nutter... not ramnutter...lol... aquadinnajihad nutter to have a nuke...?
The Iranians know full well if they nuke Israel they will be destroyed by America.Catbox wrote:
Israel right or wrong wont allow Iran to have a nuke... it's about their preservation
Well your stance is commendable but unachievable . Lets face it, it's intrinsic human behaviour to fuck over the weak. It's happened since the dawn of time, and it's not going to stop. Look every great civilisation ever to grace the planet, they didn't get to their apex through organic growth. Someone, somewhere always got it in the ass.Pug wrote:
And then the enemies of said enemies would be enduring the same inclinations due to a technology advantage. No?m3thod wrote:
tell you what my friend, if the USA enemies had F15's, B2 bombers and those fancy carrier strike group equivalents you lot wouldn't be half as inclined to go about the adventures you've been undertaking in the past few years.
The enemy capability to strike the equivalent damage as yourself, would make you think just a little bit more before pressing that little red button.
And if they we an ally of another nation which has the red button...
Yeah, I understand the concept. It doesn't make it something I'm willing to support.
The only realistic way forward is to let Iran get nukes. Why?Pug wrote:
And then the enemies of said enemies would be enduring the same inclinations due to a technology advantage. No?m3thod wrote:
tell you what my friend, if the USA enemies had F15's, B2 bombers and those fancy carrier strike group equivalents you lot wouldn't be half as inclined to go about the adventures you've been undertaking in the past few years.
The enemy capability to strike the equivalent damage as yourself, would make you think just a little bit more before pressing that little red button.
And if they we an ally of another nation which has the red button...
Yeah, I understand the concept. It doesn't make it something I'm willing to support.
No you're not.m3thod wrote:
Am i the only fucking one that want the Iranians to get a fucking nuke?
Having one or two nukes loaded onto missiles that can be shot down wouldn't be enough to prevent an attack if they wanted to. It always makes me lol that so many people want nukes completely removed but think its ok for Iran to get a couple because others have some. The world isn't fair, there is no law saying that Iran should be allowed them just because others own them and considering that Iran is an Islamic republic with revolutionary views as well as supporting listed terrorist groups that actively engage in combat against Israel, the US and coalition forces in Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza, there's a damn good reason why a lot of western countries don't want them to have an underground or secretive nuclear project. Nobody produces nuclear power in secret.AutralianChainsaw wrote:
No you're not.m3thod wrote:
Am i the only fucking one that want the Iranians to get a fucking nuke?
I don't want them to use it against anyone but just having some nukes will prevent any agressive country like the US or israel to bomb their peaceful nuclear installations.
That or remove all nukes from Israel, pakistan and India.
But if they have nukes then Israel will probably go after and bomb the nuclear weapons sites, not the peaceful sites...AutralianChainsaw wrote:
No you're not.m3thod wrote:
Am i the only fucking one that want the Iranians to get a fucking nuke?
I don't want them to use it against anyone but just having some nukes will prevent any agressive country like the US or israel to bomb their peaceful nuclear installations.
That or remove all nukes from Israel, pakistan and India.
Last edited by FEOS (2009-03-12 10:31:50)
Everything. Well, almost everything. We actually have more to do with it than Israel. See Iran fears either Israel or us coming to invade them. The easiest way to deter that is for tham to have nukes. I can't say I blame them for seeking them.FEOS wrote:
Just what in the wide wide world of sports does Israel having nukes have to do with Iran having them?
For existing, no. For a lot of other things, yes.FEOS wrote:
Has Israel threatened Iran for just existing? No.
See above.FEOS wrote:
Has Iran done the same to Israel? Yes.
I don't think you'll find many people who will disagree with you that Iran has brought a lot of stuff on themselves. They've done a lot to earn the ire of Israel.FEOS wrote:
Has Israel funded/trained/armed insurgents in and around Iran to wage a proxy war against Iran just because Iran exists? No.
Has Iran done that to Israel? Yes.
I'm detecting a pattern.
Sorry, it has everything to do with Israel having nukes because they're enemies.FEOS wrote:
Iran having nukes has fuckall to do with Israel having nukes. When Israel starts threatening Iran or anyone else with nuclear annihilation for no good reason, that argument will have merit. Until then, it's nonsensical. If that argument held any water, then Saudi would have a nuke program...they don't. So would most other GCC countries...they don't. When did those countries start talking about starting their own nuke programs? When Iran started theirs back up.
Yep. All Israel's fault.
