• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran Rejects Deal to Ship Out Uranium, Officials Report

Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Sit down with ImOnAJihad and discuss this like two adults.

"Discuss" with a psychopathic front man for the IRGC, who just lavishly murdered hundreds of their own citizens in cold blood in front of the world?

Do you expect qualitative, honest, enforceable agreements to be produceable from a government of that nature?

Is there no bottom to the cluelessness/naivete/infantilism of the left?
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

This is a cop-out answer for people who want to sound tough without bothering to actually think through the situation. Israel can huff and puff, but they are most certainly not capable of ending Iran's WMD program. They could only fight Hezbollah to a draw through a full-scale invasion of a neighboring country...what makes you think that a country the size of New Jersey can wipe out thousands of nuclear sites thousands of miles away, in a country thousands of times larger?

Man, WTF ARE you talking about?

"Couldn't wipe out hezbollah"?

They did not even send in ground troops until the 30th day of a 31-day war, please enlighten yourself. This forum operates at between a 3rd and 4th grade reading level ;(
 
Last edited:
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Imo we are witnessing the passing of an era, and in some ways, the birth of a new nightmare world. I know that sounds hyperbolic, but it seems to me that North Korea and Iran are working together to make a breakout from the existing nuclear order created by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Imo nuclear weapons technology and ballistic missile technology are spreading, and will continue to spread, despite the NPT regime.

With the spread of these technologies, sooner or later they will pass into the hands of a political elite in some country prepared to make a first strike. Sooner or later they will be used. Probably in this century.

I have two sons. They are young men. The world I am bequeathing to them is sadly inferior to the one that passed to me from my father.

Great post.

We would be looking forward to a better world if far left trash/weak leaders like obama were not elected to office.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

You mean Iranian?



And where is the funding going to come from for this new war? Are there any other countries you'd like to start a war with, while we're at it?

Here's an idea, instead of flushing another $1 trillion on a health care plan 2 people want, we can spend the money on the air sorties/spec ops to wipe out the iranian government, which would solve most of the problems of the middle east rather quickly.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Here's an idea, instead of flushing another $1 trillion on a health care plan 2 people want, we can spend the money on the air sorties/spec ops to wipe out the iranian government, which would solve most of the problems of the middle east rather quickly.

It's nearly impossible to wipe out a government through air strikes alone.
 
Israel is the size of New Jersey and is 1,000 miles away from Tehran. And it would be flying over Arab states who would be reluctant, at best, to acquiesce to the use of its air space for an Israeli bombing campaign. There is simply no way Israel is capable of knocking out Iran's nuclear sites.

Again, not that I agree with most of people you are arguing with, but this a false claim. Although it would tricky, Israel can attack Iranian nuclear site with the required munitions. Iranian nuclear sites are not located that far east, and aerial refueling massively extends the range of aircraft. Airspace violations would be a problem politically, but would not be a problem from a military standpoint. Although it might be costly in material and political consequences, it certainly is possible for Israel to mount an effective attack.

All I know is what I've read from interviews with people familiar with Iran. The consensus seems to be that they've learned from the mistakes of Iraq and Syria, and have spread their nuclear sites throughout the country and hidden them in difficult-to-bomb locations.

This shows the locations of various Iranian nuclear sites.
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles_pdfs/Iran/iran_nuclear_sites.pdf
It certainly is true that they won't lose their program in a single attack like Iraq or Syria did, but they aren't safe from a concentrated effort either.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

So you are proposing that we allow these nukes to be built because Iran will just try to build them again anyway? Cool beans! I'm just gonna stop dusting my house. Hell, it's just gonna get dusty again anyway! How about every time they begin to build a nuclear facility we blow the s/hit out of it. I bet after a while it will get quite expensive for them. Just a hunch

And you're also gonna make the argument that a strike on their facilities will grant them legitimicy in future nuclear endeavors? Wow. What could possibly make you think that? Think for a second. "Our nuke sites were blown up, therefore we now legitimately have the need for nuclear weapons!" Now does that sound like it makes sense to you? I mean honestly, tell me if it does.

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Again this is based on the assumption that Iran seeks to build a nuclear weapon and that they are capable of doing so. I see no evidence that this is as much of a forgone conclusion as its being made out to be.

And as regards the house dusting metaphor, this isnt comparable as it is making the situation worse not better. If we,re going to create a situation where we keep bombing the factories, they build new ones, etc then he can say goodbye to any hope of the opossition taking over. This will also mean that the regime could argue that if they are attacked for building (aparently) civillian nuclear facilities then they have legitimate reasons for trying to defend themselves (like nuclear weapons).
 
1. The president emphasized as centerpiece of his campaign some preposterous pledge to pursue personal diplomacy with the psychopathic potentates of Persia.

2. In June, Obtuse Obama overruled decades of international diplomacy by one-sidedly declaring Iran has the right to nuclear power.

Obama: Iran Has Right to Nuclear Power | NBC Philadelphia

3. Then, when Iran's Supreme Leader blatantly sandbagged their presidential election, inspiring mass protests on the Streets of Tehran, Oblivious Obama reacted by repeating his absurd aim to share almonds and arabica with Ahmedinejad.

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

4. Not until that little girl was shot dead on a sidewalk, captured on someone's freedom-loving cell phone, did the agape president express his ounce of outrage.

5. In September, when it was his turn to chair the UN's Security Council, the nonplussed president pushed thru unanimously his pledge for a pretty planet purged of post-modern weaponology.

6. The NEXT DAY, Obama was embarrassed by the internationalists' announcement in Pittsburg that Iran was engineering one of those nasty nukes at Qom.

Iran Admits New Nuclear Facility : NPR

7. "Severe sanctions" seemed our sane resort.

8. Sarkozy, Merkel and Gordon Brown were solidly on board.

9. But China's Foreign Minister He Yafei THAT SAME DAY undermined any such eventualities: "Personally, I don't like the word 'punishment,'" pronounced the spokesperson from Peking.

DrudgeReportArchives.com 2009

10. China is Iran's number one trade partner, shipping more of its crude to the Far East than anywhere else, while importing the majority of its refined gasoline from Chinese refineries in return.

11. And Puppet Master Putin, prospectively, has spoken pessimisticly against sanctions, as well.

Russia's Putin warns against intimidating Iran | World | Reuters

12. This, despite over-his-head Obama's giveaway gratis of our missile protection of Poland and Prague, bargaining chips highly valued by the String Puller in Moscow.

Russia Makes New Threats Over U.S.-Poland Missile Deal - ABC News

13. Iran is more than just Iran, if the Shiites succeed in manufacturing nukes they are certainly capable, potentially, of handing them off to the terrorist networks they sponsor.

14. A nuke-ified Iran is a game changer.

15. What do you want our perplexed president to do, you ask?

16. Answer---act like a Commander in Chief who knows what the heck he's doing.

17. When's the last time you heard mention of Obtuse Obama's ludicrous Sand Dune Summit with Ahmedinejad?

18. From Afghanistan to Tehran, foreign affairs are KILLING this president.

19. He's utterly lost.

20. Maybe he should sport his peace prize.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

"Discuss" with a psychopathic front man for the IRGC, who just lavishly murdered hundreds of their own citizens in cold blood in front of the world?

Do you expect qualitative, honest, enforceable agreements to be produceable from a government of that nature?

Is there no bottom to the cluelessness/naivete/infantilism of the left?

It worked for Regan and Nixon.
 
it's not working for obama
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

It's nearly impossible to wipe out a government through air strikes alone.

I guess a strong attention to detail is not one of your virtues. Read the statement again:

Here's an idea, instead of flushing another $1 trillion on a health care plan 2 people want, we can spend the money on the air sorties/ spec ops to wipe out the iranian government, which would solve most of the problems of the middle east rather quickly.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

I guess a strong attention to detail is not one of your virtues. Read the statement again:

And where are all these troops going to come from?

I find it amusing that the people who are shrieking the loudest about going to war with Iran are the same people bitching that we haven't increased troops in Afghanistan enough, or that we're considering pulling some troops out of Iraq.

Do you understand that our military strength is not infinite? That there is a limit to how much we can do at any given time?
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Iran Rejects Deal to Ship Out Uranium

Color me surprised.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

I guess a strong attention to detail is not one of your virtues. Read the statement again:

Are you serious?

You really think that removing the Iranian government (questionable at best without a ground invasion and occupation) will solve most of the Middle East's problems?

Way to ignore about 500 years of history.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

And where are all these troops going to come from?

I find it amusing that the people who are shrieking the loudest about going to war with Iran are the same people bitching that we haven't increased troops in Afghanistan enough, or that we're considering pulling some troops out of Iraq.

Do you understand that our military strength is not infinite? That there is a limit to how much we can do at any given time?


Institute the draft. Isn't that what demagogues like Barry wanted when Bush was CiC?


j-mac
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Institute the draft.

The 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude. And in any case, instituting the draft is a moronic idea, as it would send the morale of the armed forces plummeting.

j-mac said:
Isn't that what demagogues like Barry wanted when Bush was CiC?

Huh? I never heard anyone suggest we implement the draft when Bush was president. Certainly not Barack Obama. Is there a specific quote to which you are referring, or are you just making crap up? :confused:
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

The 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude. And in any case, instituting the draft is a moronic idea, as it would send the morale of the armed forces plummeting.

Nice try but the 13th amendment does not apply to the Draft. If it did then a draft would never have been instituted for Vietnam nor would so many have been concerned about it during the Bush administration.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

The 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude. And in any case, instituting the draft is a moronic idea, as it would send the morale of the armed forces plummeting.


I assure you the draft is lawful....completely. And for as Barry put it the "necessary" war I should think that he would want to win it quickly and get it over with. Unless he needs some more staged photo ops at Dover.



Huh? I never heard anyone suggest we implement the draft when Bush was president. Certainly not Barack Obama. Is there a specific quote to which you are referring, or are you just making crap up?


Where have you been?

Here is a plethora of articles from liberals wringing their hands over a draft.

Democrats.com Archive: Military Draft

Funny, Bush had NEVER said anything about it. It was just liberals trying to undermine him.


Barry said:
US Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama said on September 13th that his job as president would include demanding that the American people recognize an “obligation” for military service. “If we are going into war, then all of us go, not just some,” Obama declared at an evening forum on national service at Columbia University in New York City.


Obama Calls For US Military Draft


Oh my.


j-mac
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

I assure you the draft is lawful....completely.

Just because it's been done before doesn't mean it's legal. The 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude. A draft is involunary, and it is servitude.

j-mac said:
Where have you been?

Here is a plethora of articles from liberals wringing their hands over a draft.

Democrats.com Archive: Military Draft

Huh? Everything on this website looks like they're just attacking Bush over the draft, rather than suggesting it themselves. Normally if you're going to cite a website, it should actually back up your argument. :2wave:

j-mac said:
Funny, Bush had NEVER said anything about it. It was just liberals trying to undermine him.

I really don't know what the hell you're talking about. I never claimed Bush said anything about the draft. YOU are the one who brought up the draft.

j-mac said:

He was talking about shared sacrifice, not everyone literally going to war. Do you actually believe he was talking about sending every person in America into a war zone? :roll:

Now then, are you actually advocating re-instituting the draft? Or are you just trolling like the partisan hack you are?
 
Last edited:
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

The 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude. And in any case, instituting the draft is a moronic idea, as it would send the morale of the armed forces plummeting.

It's not involuntary servitude. It's involuntary service. The difference, draftees would get paid for their service.



Huh? I never heard anyone suggest we implement the draft when Bush was president. Certainly not Barack Obama. Is there a specific quote to which you are referring, or are you just making crap up? :confused:


CNN.com - Rangel introduces bill to reinstate draft - Jan. 8, 2003
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Are you serious?

You really think that removing the Iranian government (questionable at best without a ground invasion and occupation) will solve most of the Middle East's problems?

Way to ignore about 500 years of history.

More like fourteen-hundred years of history. The ME's problems started the day that Islam showed up on he scene.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

It's not involuntary servitude. It's involuntary service. The difference, draftees would get paid for their service.

That is what distinguishes involuntary servitude from slavery. Both are illegal.

apdst said:

Did this have wide support amongst Democratic congressmen? Did Barack Obama (who wasn't even in the Senate at the time) support this?
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

That is what distinguishes involuntary servitude from slavery. Both are illegal.

Military conscription isn't illegal.



Did this have wide support amongst Democratic congressmen? Did Barack Obama (who wasn't even in the Senate at the time) support this?

You said,
Huh? I never heard anyone suggest we implement the draft when Bush was president.

I posted a link that proved that your comment is mistaken.
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Military conscription isn't illegal.

It is unconstitutional. The fact that it's been violated before does not change that fact.

apdst said:
You said,

I posted a link that proved that your comment is mistaken.

I've now heard one Democratic congressman suggest a draft. Are there any others? Did Barack Obama support this, as the previous post implied?


More importantly, is anyone here seriously proposing a draft as a solution for our stretched military commitments, or is this simply partisan trolling?
 
Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war

Are you serious?

You really think that removing the Iranian government (questionable at best without a ground invasion and occupation) will solve most of the Middle East's problems?

Way to ignore about 500 years of history.

Since iran is de-stabilizing israel, iraq, lebanon, and is known to have terrorist cells inside qatar and other gulf states, is completely rejectionist with respect to an israeli-arab peace process, uses terrorism as a political method and murder as an internal one, and is working on illegal nuclear weapons, then yes, it is safe to say that removing that fascist dictatorship would solve many middle east problems literally overnight.

As for the other poster's question as to where the troops would come from, i would pull the 40,000 troops stationed in s korea, 60,000 in japan, and 65,000 in germany, and send them into iran. That would be plenty, along with the fact that both the air force and navy are mostly inactive WRT to both the iraq and afghan missions.
 
Back
Top Bottom