Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

What the hell does that mean..'allowed'..man

I don't care. Look, I hate the fact that the US gets a freaking get out of jail free card with everything. Who made America God? I don't care about all that superpower shit either. When it comes down to morality, we're sure as hell not topping too many other nations. Fair is fair. If WE can have them, then who is to complain when another country wants them also? Look at this place! If I lived somewhere else and thought I could be in threat of becoming the next Hiroshima/Nagasaki/Afghanistan/Iraq...I'd want them too!
quote:
Originally posted by SistahSouljah:

What the hell does that mean..'allowed'..man

I don't care. Look, I hate the fact that the US gets a freaking get out of jail free card with everything. Who made America God? I don't care about all that superpower shit either. When it comes down to morality, we're sure as hell not topping too many other nations. Fair is fair. If WE can have them, then who is to complain when another country wants them also? Look at this place! If I lived somewhere else and thought I could be in threat of becoming the next Hiroshima/Nagasaki/Afghanistan/Iraq...I'd want them too!


Agreed, but rightly or wrongly, if the existing nuclear/world powers decided to exert pressure against Iran - up to and including military force - then they could prevent them from obtaining nuclear weapons.

The interesting thing, I bet that Israel is the primary force pushing the U.S. against Iran.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by SistahSouljah:

What the hell does that mean..'allowed'..man

I don't care. Look, I hate the fact that the US gets a freaking get out of jail free card with everything. Who made America God? I don't care about all that superpower shit either. When it comes down to morality, we're sure as hell not topping too many other nations. Fair is fair. If WE can have them, then who is to complain when another country wants them also? Look at this place! If I lived somewhere else and thought I could be in threat of becoming the next Hiroshima/Nagasaki/Afghanistan/Iraq...I'd want them too!


Agreed, but rightly or wrongly, if the existing nuclear/world powers decided to exert pressure against Iran - up to and including military force - then they could prevent them from obtaining nuclear weapons.

The interesting thing, I bet that Israel is the primary force pushing the U.S. against Iran.


If it comes down to it, they'll give the excuse that they had no other choice but to stop Iran from threating the rest of the world, and I'll call it bullshit. Israel is buddy buddy with the US, so that wouldn't suprise me at all. I bet they'd be happy to see all the rest of the Middle Eastern countries wiped away with a clean cloth. I mean look at it, look what's been going on...they're just going down the line and taking them out one by one.
You are not 'on the playing field' if you don't have nuclear technology.

That's a simple fact.

The world dances to the tune of the holders of nuclear technology.

Iran should go for eveything they can get.

Here's the good part, NOBODY IS GOING TO SHOOT.

They will complain. They will argue. They will threaten 'sanctions.'

But THEY WILL NOT SHOOT.

They'll send Israel who can be said to be 'protecting their space.'

We will recriminate. We will be chagrined. We will plead that Israel 'exercise restraint.

After it's over.

Israel is the guardian of the United States' interests in the Middle East.

Surely, everyone knows that by now.

PEACE

Jim Chester
the difference between having nukes and not having nukes is the difference between Iraq and N. Korea...one pleads that they truly do not have anything..and get the schit bombed out og them anyway...the other says hell yea I have em so now what?.....and gets handled diplomatically with kid gloves....which just proves what cowards this country selects as leaders.......
quote:
Originally posted by Popcorn:

quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

I bet that Israel is the primary force pushing the U.S. against Iran.


Did you say you had documentation to support this statement? References?
.
.


Well, as you see, I said "I bet". That implies conjecture on my part. Documentation is typically not required for one to present their opinions about something.

You refute the conjecture however. Please elaborate.

BTW - just ask yourself who benefits most by a certain action. It seems rather clear that Israel has the most to fear from a fundamentalist Muslim Arab country with nuclear weapons. No?
from the BBC:

Conservatives in control

Israel has become the latest country to express concern over the ultra-conservative mayor of Tehran's election as president.

Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres called it "a contest between extremists".

Israel views Iran as its biggest threat, says the BBC's Matthew Price in Jerusalem. Iran disputes the Jewish state's right to exist and when Israel lobbies foreign governments, it is Iran's nuclear programme which tops the agenda rather than other issues closer to home, our correspondent says.

The result of the elections means conservatives are now in control of every elected and unelected institution of government in Iran.

Mr Ahmadinejad, 49, won 62% of the vote in Friday's presidential run-off poll.

He will be Iran's first non-cleric president for 24 years when he takes office in August.

**kinda supports your theory Bro.............
Israel Fears Iran Could Accelerate Nuclear Weapons' Race
By Julie Stahl
CNSNews.com Jerusalem Bureau Chief
June 27, 2005


Jerusalem (CNSNews.com) - Israeli leaders want the international community to take tougher measures against Iran regarding its nuclear pursuits since a hardliner won overwhelmingly in presidential elections late last week.

Virtually an unknown, President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad scored an unexpected victory over well-known chairman of the Expediency Council Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.

The victory sparked fears here that Iran would now accelerate its development of nuclear weapons and could arm terrorist groups with nuclear weapons, spreading the threat all over the world.

Ahmadinejad said on Sunday that negotiations between Iran and the trio of European Union countries - Britain, France and Germany - would continue based on national interest and confidence-building measures.

But the White House expressed skepticism over the fruit of such talks.

"We will see in the negotiations. We have reason to be skeptical," spokesman Scott McClellan said. "It remains to be seen what the true intentions of the un-elected few that run [Iran] are."

Both the U.S. and Israel are convinced that Iran is using the development of a civilian nuclear power program as a cover to develop atomic weapons.

Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom urged the international community to "formulate a unified and stern policy towards Iran."

"We must ensure that modern Western countries do not become hostage to Iranian radicalism," Shalom said.

Israel and the U.S. have been pushing for the issue of Iranian nuclear development to be referred to the United Nations Security Council, but European nations have been reluctant to do so, preferring instead to engage in dialogue with the radical regime.

The foreign minister told the cabinet on Sunday that the new regime would accelerate efforts to develop its nuclear program with the sole aim of obtaining nuclear weapons to match the launching ability that it already has.

Iran has test-fired missiles with a range capable of reaching all of Israel and U.S. troops in the region. It is working on a more developed version that could cover Europe and possibly reach the eastern United States.

Shalom said it is now even more likely that Iran will arm terrorist organizations with nuclear weapons creating a global existential threat.

Israeli Vice Prime Minister Shimon Peres said the free world would continue to face big troubles following the election because of the combined elements of extremism, non-conventional weapons and Iranian isolation.

"The dangerous combination of extremists, non-conventional weapons, and [Iranian] isolation from the West will continue and will generate a great deal of problems for the free world," Peres said in a statement.

Peres' comments were mentioned in a news broadcast about the elections on Iranian television. Israeli television news, in turn, picked up the fact that the Iranians had commented on what Peres said.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said that Israel was angry about Iran's economic growth and regional influence, the official Iranian news agency IRNA quoted him as saying.

Asefi accused Israel of being "the main factor behind threats to the region." Israeli expert on Iranian affairs Menashe Amir said that he did not believe that Iran's nuclear policy would be very affected by the election because the policy is not determined by the president.

Nevertheless, Amir said, because Ahmadinejad is an extremist, Iran will have more difficulty with negotiations.

European countries must also be convinced that it is time to abandon negotiations and turn the Iranian nuclear development over to the United Nations Security Council, Amir said.

Dr. Ephraim Kam, deputy head of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, said that Ahmadinejad would probably have the biggest influence on internal issues rather than on foreign policy and thus he did not expect Iran's policy on nuclear development to change too much.

Nevertheless, the Ahmadinejad's election could encourage Europe to exhibit less flexibility toward Iran, Kam said.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
quote:
Originally posted by jazzdog:

So Iran gets a nuke big deal, the US has over 10,000 warheads, Iran getting a nuke and actually using it ain't going to happen because the moment they use one they crease to exist....period.


As inferred above, this is less about the US and more about Israel. Beyond that, 'mutual assured destruction' is not a politcally viable alternative. Israel will send in air strikes destroying their nuclear capacity before Iran gets a "bomb". The people in the US and in Israel could care less about what happens to Iran after a nuclear bomb kills tens or hundreds of thousands of their people. They want protection prior to anything happening. That is the extraordinary leverage that belligerant nuclear powers have.
nuclear war will kill everyone over time...not just people in the close proximity of the strikes...if radiation from a power plant in russia can make it over here through the jet stream, what do people think will happen if you attach a propulsion unit and a means of dispersing warheads over a large area.....there will be fallout all over the world..now some people here like to spout that john wayne azz mentality...but this is not 1950's, technology has changed...and many people do not mind dying....unlike here..what we cry over others celebrate in their country....and i think that is what the white man is refusing to acknowledge.....that his heyday was from 1946-64 and then it was all over from there...think about 9/11...who thought that would happen when nothing had happened on this soil that big since the civil war...hell they even put tim mcveigh in the background over that one...and instead of a self-examination, they plowed ahead in an arrogent fashion...if w & condi cause this place to get attacked and millions get killed...i will not be surprised....because no one will let themselves be the next sadaam hussein...that is why N. korea and Iran are not waiting on the pre-emptive strike to get caught with their drawers down.....
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

Well, as you see, I said "I bet". That implies conjecture on my part. Documentation is typically not required for one to present their opinions about something.


No! Conjecture, supposition, speculation are not as benign as you represent them to be when posted on a public web site. Statements like this can be inflammatory and prejudicial. There is a greater responsibility, especially if they're coming from someone who is respected.

It would be like saying "I'll bet the Black guys did it. Who else would have anything to gain?" Or, some of Lofton's statements regarding the Latoyia Figueroa disappearence.

"Chances are it was a Black person in Philadelphia who killed her."

"I bet that Israel is the primary force pushing the U.S. against Iran."

Is there a difference?
.
.
Well Popcorn...that is why I posted those articles to show that Israel is indeed behind the effort to stop Iran from developing nukes...unlike those other statements, what MBM said lent itself to having credibility based on past events...do those articles convince you at all that Israel is probably pushing the US?.....think about it.......they have been pimping the US for years now..............

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×