Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 97

Thread: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

  1. #31
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocalypse View Post
    I can see that you are not trying to justify his actions but rather explain why he would act so.
    I have no need to discuss the reason that led him to believe that nukes would protect him from an invasion, as long as he is disarmed it's all good.
    Trying to keep nukes out of a rouge leader's hands is a good thing. But on our side, can we keep up a 3-front war if we were to go into Iran? I also think there is a lot of hope for Iran in their people. They are well educated, have a healthy middle class, and would be the most probable people for accepting a Western style Republic. Still I wonder how feasible these things are given the circumstances.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Trying to keep nukes out of a rouge leader's hands is a good thing. But on our side, can we keep up a 3-front war if we were to go into Iran? I also think there is a lot of hope for Iran in their people. They are well educated, have a healthy middle class, and would be the most probable people for accepting a Western style Republic. Still I wonder how feasible these things are given the circumstances.
    Why do people continue to argue that the ONLY solution available is an invasion of Iran? Who has argued for this and who thinks that this is a coherent solution?

    It may have been one of many options available that had to be discussed, but I haven't seen anyone credible on BOTH sides of the aisle arguing to do this. So why do you keep asserting that it is?

  3. #33
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by Ward View Post
    Iran ranks 2nd in natural gas reserves and 3rd in oil reserves and Ahmedinejad is enriching uranium just for energy? I figure it's one of these two reasons. He is extremely worried about having a large carbon foot print burning all that oil and natural gas for energy [/sarcasm] or he's getting ready to blow a country up cough*Israel*.

    “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
    Iran and their current leadership most likely are scum bags but I do not think them to be stupid/suicidal. To attack Israel or virtually any other country with nukes will casue the US and /or other countries to in turn elihilate Iran. As mucha s they hate Israel they will not die for the pleasure of destroying Israel. The Iraniacs are just not that brave. Yet Iran is a country of scum bag leadership and they would probably not think twice of giving small nukes to terrorists such as Al queda.
    “I do not recall the Viet Cong asking me if I was a natural born or Naturalized American before they shot at me, they just shot at all of us “ f107HyperSabr

  4. #34
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Why do people continue to argue that the ONLY solution available is an invasion of Iran? Who has argued for this and who thinks that this is a coherent solution?

    It may have been one of many options available that had to be discussed, but I haven't seen anyone credible on BOTH sides of the aisle arguing to do this. So why do you keep asserting that it is?
    Alright, fair enough. I can accept political and economic pressures to try to get him to abdicate the program. But in our current state, I'm not sure we can effectively do anything militarily. Unless we're just destroying the place without pretense of setting up a new government and engaging in occupation.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #35
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Why do people continue to argue that the ONLY solution available is an invasion of Iran? Who has argued for this and who thinks that this is a coherent solution?

    It may have been one of many options available that had to be discussed, but I haven't seen anyone credible on BOTH sides of the aisle arguing to do this. So why do you keep asserting that it is?
    To invade Iran would br stupid. That would take many countries to coooperate. What would be needed is a series of some very punishing surgical strikes.
    “I do not recall the Viet Cong asking me if I was a natural born or Naturalized American before they shot at me, they just shot at all of us “ f107HyperSabr

  6. #36
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    07-19-11 @ 08:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    205

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    To invade Iran would br stupid. That would take many countries to coooperate. What would be needed is a series of some very punishing surgical strikes.
    And what do you assume will be the Iranian response to such an action?

  7. #37
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:47 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,073

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Did you see how MSNBC handled this? LOL

    They scrolled "Caught Red-Handed" as if Obama caught them in the act.

    They ADMITTED they had the facility. Nobody caught them.

    LOL.

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Alright, fair enough. I can accept political and economic pressures to try to get him to abdicate the program. But in our current state, I'm not sure we can effectively do anything militarily. Unless we're just destroying the place without pretense of setting up a new government and engaging in occupation.
    We cannot do anything until the entire UN body including the Russians, who are selling/assisting the/with technology to Iran, can agree on one uniform and strong action; which of course will never happen.

    We must all console ourselves on the reality that Obama is abdicating the US leadership role in world politics to a feckless organization that has become nothing more than a mouthpiece for morons, despots and dictators.

    His speech to the UN Body was basically all about him and contained another outright lie; "I closed Gitmo" and basically consisted of, "see how wonderful I am compared to my evil predecessor."

    It contained nothing that could be mistaken for courageous leadership.

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    To invade Iran would br stupid. That would take many countries to coooperate. What would be needed is a series of some very punishing surgical strikes.
    Once more; who the "F" is arguing for war with Iran???

  10. #40
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Iran 'concealed nuclear facility'

    1. What happened to the president's pledge to pursue personal diplomacy with the principals of Iran?

    2. Today, he's not talking TO the Iranians, he's talking ABOUT them.

    3. In June, the president approved nuclear energy for the world's leading Shiite power.

    Obama: Iran Has Right to Nuclear Power | NBC Philadelphia

    4. In Pittsburg, he said, "Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear power that meets the needs of its people, but the size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program."

    5. Given such an easy out, the Iranians grabbed it.

    6. The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran explained that his country is producing nukes "to preserve and enjoy its undeniable right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes."

    7. But, hey, at least Obama got Russia to release a harsh statement---LOL!

    8. Israel, meanwhile, is being forced into unilateral action.

    9. The White House said "intelligence agencies have known about the facility for several years."

    10. That would include, therefore, all the time on the campaign trail when Obama was prioritizing his absurd assertion that he could alter Iran's attitude over a cup of coffee.

    11. So, suddenly the administration BELIEVES the CIA?

    12. "We have excellent clandestine collection," says US intel, "we are highly confident."

    13. Obama doesn't know what he's doing.

    14. After Ahmedinejad openly stole the election in June, the president's reaction for a week was---hey, I'll talk to them.

    BBC NEWS | Americas | Obama's cautious reaction to Iran

    15. Ahmedinejad, meanwhile, demands another atonement---the disclosure of Qom "simply adds to the list of issues over which the United States owes the Iranian nation an apology."

    16. Obama is moving towards sanctions, he sounds like Bush.

    17. Except the current prez is so typically half stepping and non committal.

    18. According to The Post, he "spoke in more measured terms, did not mention sanctions specifically."

    19. "The US is committed to demonstrating that international law is not an empty promise, that obligations must be kept and that treaties will be enforced," said our overworked Obama in Pittsburg.

    20. Qom, at current rates, is capable of producing one nuclear warhead per year, according to The Post.

    21. China's reaction is not as tough as Russia's, not even as strong as our uncertain, over-his-head chief exec: "You talk about punishment, and personally I don't like the word 'punishment,' and I think all issues can only be solved through dialogue and negotiation," uttered Hu's Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs.

    22. Today's tidings also put a rather dank downer on Obama's unanimously approved resolution JUST YESTERDAY in the Security Council for a world free of nukes.

    23. Now that his policy of personal diplomacy with Persia's potentates is comprehensively seen as preposterous, perhaps the president should pull another missile defense system, it sure seemed to turn the trick just a week ago.

    Iran Reveals Existence of Second Uranium Enrichment Plant
    Last edited by The Prof; 09-25-09 at 04:44 PM.

Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •