What is Iran up to? - Page 2

Kliro · 11-01-2006, 23:37

So we can have selective allowances for nukes because of the say-so of the UN, who have already been shown to be a pretty pointless conglomerate, as the US don't seem to listen to anything they are told by them....

Just because Bush has passed a mental competency test doesn't stop him from being influenced by misinterpretations of the bible.

Religion is a ver powerful tool, whether its Muslim, Christian, whatever....

Quote:

Originally Posted by punky

Everyone has conceded that Saddan was trying to restart his program, all he needed was the time.

Heh, just because the Sun says something doesn't mean that everyone has that viewpoint.

punky · 11-01-2006, 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kliro

So we can have selective allowances for nukes because of the say-so of the UN, who have already been shown to be a pretty pointless conglomerate, as the US don't seem to listen to anything they are told by them....

OK, let's ban everyone from having nukes, that way the only people that have nukes are homocidal dictators who have even more incentive to use them.

I am far from being a fan of the UN as everyone should know, but at least 4 of the biggest & most influential countries agreed that the US should have them, which is a legitmacy that Iran will never receive.

Quote:

Heh, just because the Sun says something doesn't mean that everyone has that viewpoint.

This wasn't The Sun, it was an independent investigation into the Iraq war.

**Damien** · 11-01-2006, 23:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kliro

So we can have selective allowances for nukes because of the say-so of the UN, who have already been shown to be a pretty pointless conglomerate, as the US don't seem to listen to anything they are told by them....

Just because Bush has passed a mental competency test doesn't stop him from being influenced by misinterpretations of the bible.

Religion is a ver powerful tool, whether its Muslim, Christian, whatever....

Heh, just because the Sun says something doesn't mean that everyone has that viewpoint.

For a start America has a lot more checks and balances on not only who is in power but what they do while there, ESPECIALLY in the case of such powerful weapons.

They also keep there arms in check, I.E secure, well stored and so on.

Iran has not got checks and balances, barely have a proper system to hold leaders accountible, have a much more unstable goverment and are not likely to have the required safe storage and security.

This is not a matter of Religion or bullying who is allowed to have nukes. Its a matter of safety. I trust america far more than Iran, i think some people are blinded in this regard due to a willingness to slate america

Kliro · 11-01-2006, 23:54

I'm not slating America because its 'cool' or whatever your claiming now.

But because I'm afraid of how far they are willing to go to protect their own economy..

**Damien** · 11-01-2006, 23:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kliro

I'm not slating America because its 'cool' or whatever your claiming now.

But because I'm afraid of how far they are willing to go to protect their own economy..

As far as any country would, they are just better at it.

Iran should not have Nukes, Full stop. This has nothing to do with america.

Kliro · 12-01-2006, 00:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

As far as any country would, they are just better at it.

Iran should not have Nukes, Full stop. This has nothing to do with america.

Well, we'll see exactly what happens when Iran cease to trade in the Dollar and favour the Euro instead.

TheDaddy · 12-01-2006, 00:04

Lets not forget who is the only country that has used them on people and if they had developed them earlier I am sure they would have used them on Germany, nuclear winter on main land Europe. The fact is America got more than they bargained for in Iraq and Iran is trying to take advantage of that,

danielf · 12-01-2006, 00:04

IIRC Iran signed up to the non-proliferation treaty, and thereby agreed themselves to not develop nukes. Therefore, they can not have them. Under the conditions of the same treaty however, they are allowed research into/develop nuclear energy.

**Damien** · 12-01-2006, 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kliro

Well, we'll see exactly what happens when Iran cease to trade in the Dollar and favour the Euro instead.

Iran are sealing their own fate. America can get in beofre the weapons are completed and if they continue along this path then they will be invaded. Maybe this time with the backing of the gutless UN who are against iran having weapons

TheDaddy · 12-01-2006, 00:13

I just cant see America having the stomach for another war for a while yet, it would probabley be a lot worse than Iraq to.

Stuart · 12-01-2006, 00:41

Just wait until Bush need a popularity boost.

AndrewJ · 12-01-2006, 03:53

How do we not know they ain't making a new way to deliver takeout?

Nuclear delivered takeouts, direct to your door.

etccarmageddon · 12-01-2006, 08:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien

Iran are sealing their own fate. America can get in beofre the weapons are completed and if they continue along this path then they will be invaded. Maybe this time with the backing of the gutless UN who are against iran having weapons

there's no chance of the UN backing an invasion as Iraq hasn't been successful in PR terms. if they'd pulled WMDs out of Iraq then I'd say Iran and Syria would be at risk but lack of WMD plus soldiers being attacked by 'insurgents' means Iran is safe. unless there's another major terrorist attack on USA soil or WMD are suddenly discovered in Iraq.

BBKing · 12-01-2006, 08:41

Quote:

America can get in beofre the weapons are completed and if they continue along this path then they will be invaded

Er, Damien, we've been over this before. America do not have the resources for a full-scale invasion and occupation of Iran - it would take four times the Iraq force (which is about 150,000 troops) to have the same (inadequate) troop density as in Iraq, the whole country of 66m people would oppose them instead of 20% of 22m in Iraq, the country's four times the land area of Iraq, Iran controls the balance of power in Iraq and can make things very difficult there and the US Army is only about 500,000 strong anyway.

So without massive conscription, which would be highly unpopular, no way. Limited air strikes and special forces missions are about the maximum military threat possible and both leave the Iranian government and elite troops intact and they'd retaliate by letting their boys in Iraq off the leash and stirring things up in Palestine. Quite how this helps, I'm not sure.

12-01-2006, 08:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kliro

But because I'm afraid of how far they are willing to go to protect their own economy..

Like some of us ar afraid of how far Iran will go to follow their idealogy.

Anyone that says that Israel should be wiped off the map and thinks it's a good idea to kill Americans is NOT a safe bet for owning nukes.

Despite having nukes and EXTREME provocation, neither the US nor Israel has ever used them (since WWII.) I can't imagine Iran having such restraint.