Iran orders more enrichment, prompting US to call for the world to stand together

megaprogman said:

Military action should never be pre-emptive. Look at the mistake we made in Iraq that we are still having to deal with.

Click to expand...

Military action should be done when appropriate. Since Iran isn't a direct threat to the US, I would say the State Department should issue a warning to all US citizens in the Middle East, and especially Isreal, to get the **** out, when Iran finishes the bomb they've been working on for decades now.

I've been told by many on the left that Neville Chamberlain was an effective leader. So their Messiah should follow Neville's lead and get us peace with Iran in our time, right?

Hell, they're only going to blow up Isreal, what's the big deal?

Right?

Hmmmm?

The time to strike Iran was when Iran was sending aid to the terrorists in Iraq that were killing US soldiers. Any argument the Left makes now in some lame attempt to cover their Messiah's ass for the fact that this sorry buffoon now in the White House is sitting on his hands while yet another tyranny builds nuclear weapons should be viewed in light of the fact that those dumb asses consistently opposed any action by Bush.

Blame it on Bush ain't gonna work, again. If the Messiah lets Iran build a nuclear bomb, it will be the Messiah's fault.

Given that all the US needs to do to stop worrying about a nuclear armed Iran is to drill our own god damned oil, HERE, and build our own god damned ballistic missile defense system, HERE, we shouldn't be worrying about Iran but instead be concerned with why the buffoon the Left put in the White House is opposed to true American independence and true American self-defense.

So, let Iran build the damn bomb. And if they use it anywhere, and don't kill any Americans in the process, we should look on amused while the rest of the world scurries in panic.

SE102 said:

Since when could they hit the USA?

Please reply that I may lead you into a discussion about israel.:rofl

Click to expand...

All they need to do is put their toy on a small boat, or rather, tow a small boat close to US shores and have one of their wonderful teams of suicide bombers sail the toy into New York or the Potomac or Boston Harbor and set it off.

That's how easy it is. All they have to do is hire some drug smugglers to show them how to avoid the Coasties.

Alternative: Get some fine American muslims to sail a registered boat from one of the aforementioned harbors to pick up some contraband, like a bomb slung under the ship, and sail her back. Pick a day like Memorial Day, Fourth of July, or Labor Day, when there's a ****load of drunken boaters on the water, and they'll be able to get right in if they're competent sailors.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:

So, let Iran build the damn bomb. And if they use it anywhere, and don't kill any Americans in the process, we should look on amused while the rest of the world scurries in panic.

Click to expand...

Before they could use their bomb, Isreal would either conventionally destroy it, or nuke Iran out of existence. In either case, it would end up with Iran being hit pre-emptively by Isreal, which is completely justifiable on their side.

But, that wouldn't sit well with a whole host of people, so the point is to reach a resolution before that. If we stipulate that Isreal will attack Iran if they procure a nuclear weapon, then we, the United States, do not need to contemplate a military solution; the Isrealis will do that for us.

So, we only need to find a peaceful solution, if there is one. I think that we override Ford's Doctrine on eliminating foreign leaders, and go with the Ryan Doctrine (thank you Tom Clancy) and kill Amadinejad, Khomenei, and other top officials, paralyzing Iran's Government. Simultaneously, have Mousavi organize a replacement government. I know that doesn't sound very peaceful, but that's as peaceful as it's going to get, IMHO.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:

All they need to do is put their toy on a small boat, or rather, tow a small boat close to US shores and have one of their wonderful teams of suicide bombers sail the toy into New York or the Potomac or Boston Harbor and set it off.

That's how easy it is. All they have to do is hire some drug smugglers to show them how to avoid the Coasties.

Alternative: Get some fine American muslims to sail a registered boat from one of the aforementioned harbors to pick up some contraband, like a bomb slung under the ship, and sail her back. Pick a day like Memorial Day, Fourth of July, or Labor Day, when there's a ****load of drunken boaters on the water, and they'll be able to get right in if they're competent sailors.

Click to expand...

Yes, I hear in places like, hollywood california, the drug smugglers, iranians, and arab americans all get together and coordinate the exchange of magnificent handheld nuclear devices from the future to blow us up. Im sure its easy they got each-others phone numbers right?. There are so many holes in your worldview id have to write a 5 page essay on it, its holier than swiss cheese. Yo mama, etc

Alternative: Get some fine American muslims to sail a registered boat

Click to expand...

BAM!!!!:rofl damn ur KKK badge is all shiny and in my eyes dont pull that thing out like EVAR AGAIN.

repeter said:

Before they could use their bomb, Isreal would either conventionally destroy it, or nuke Iran out of existence. In either case, it would end up with Iran being hit pre-emptively by Isreal, which is completely justifiable on their side.

Click to expand...

<broken record>They can't destroy the bomb they don't have the means</broken record>

And it is likely that Israel would detect the nuclear launch and vaporise Iran in seconds. Its called Mutually assured destruction and it would serve Iran right for trying to nuke another country.

SE102 said:

<broken record>They can't destroy the bomb they don't have the means</broken record>

And it is likely that Israel would detect the nuclear launch and vaporise Iran in seconds. Its called Mutually assured destruction and it would serve Iran right for trying to nuke another country.

Click to expand...

Or they just might turn Iran into glass if they think that nuke exists...

Setting off a chain reaction of nuclear death all over the world yay.:rofl

Gray_Fox_86 said:

It's none of our business, and really I don't see the threat in Iran.

Click to expand...

That's because you are the only person in the West to get his oil from trees.

We balanced the Iran/Iraq War because we didn't want Hussein too powerful, but powerful enough to stop Khomeini's mission across the oil rich landscape. We went to war against Iraq because he invaded Kuwait and destabilized oil production. Oil is the life blood of technology and industry. Even that tupperware product holding a delicious PB & J is produced from oil. Iran is a fanatical country. It's government has supported terrorists organizations in the Middle East. It's president, with the blessing of the Majlis, has boasted on the destruction of another Middle Eastern nation. The deep hatred and disgust practiced between the Sunni and the Shia is legendary and historical. Sure...where's the harm or threat with a nuclear Iran (Shia).....and then a nuclear Saudi Arabia (Sunni). With nuclear toys, the tribes of the Middle East can have a blast. The environmentalists would have a heart attack while the rest of us get used to a world without oil products.

But let's address the threat of nuclear launch. Is Iran that stupid? Wouldn't it be easier to simply give a device to a local terrorist so that they can't be held responsible? Who's to say they had 11 or 10 in their inventory?

Still don't see the threat? I bet you do, you just don't want to acknowledge the world you live in.

MSgt said:

But let's address the threat of nuclear launch. Is Iran that stupid? Wouldn't it be easier to simply give a device to a local terrorist so that they can't be held responsible? Who's to say they had 11 or 10 in their inventory?

Still don't see the threat? I bet you do, you just don't want to acknowledge the world you live in.

Click to expand...

At this point, I think we don't have to worry. While I know it's not best to make assumptions, and to be overconfident, Isreal's Intelligence Services are incredible. While not technologically better then the US Intelligence Services, they get things done. If Isreal got information that Iran was giving nuclear weapons to a local terrorist group, they would attack Iran, and kill the terrorists.

If the terrorists succeed in their attack, I personally feel Isreal would attack Iran in a knee-jerk reaction, assuming that the weapon originated from Iran, which would be a fair guess. Iran knows this, and for that reason, they would never make a nuclear weapon. They'll, in all probability, get the materials ready for it, and keep them ready in a threatening manner, nothing beyond that.

If they do go beyond the point I've stated, they would be practically assuring their own destruction. Whether that means the entire country, or just a few key leaders, there will be bloodshed in Iran if they make a nuclear weapon.

Its time for the US to take action, if NATO wants to help thats fine.

SE102 said:

<broken record>They can't destroy the bomb they don't have the means</broken record>

Click to expand...

Then how come they've already done it before, with Iraq?

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera]Operation Opera - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

MSgt said:

That's because you are the only person in the West to get his oil from trees.

We balanced the Iran/Iraq War because we didn't want Hussein too powerful, but powerful enough to stop Khomeini's mission across the oil rich landscape. We went to war against Iraq because he invaded Kuwait and destabilized oil production. Oil is the life blood of technology and industry. Even that tupperware product holding a delicious PB & J is produced from oil. Iran is a fanatical country. It's government has supported terrorists organizations in the Middle East. It's president, with the blessing of the Majlis, has boasted on the destruction of another Middle Eastern nation. The deep hatred and disgust practiced between the Sunni and the Shia is legendary and historical. Sure...where's the harm or threat with a nuclear Iran (Shia).....and then a nuclear Saudi Arabia (Sunni). With nuclear toys, the tribes of the Middle East can have a blast. The environmentalists would have a heart attack while the rest of us get used to a world without oil products.

But let's address the threat of nuclear launch. Is Iran that stupid? Wouldn't it be easier to simply give a device to a local terrorist so that they can't be held responsible? Who's to say they had 11 or 10 in their inventory?

Still don't see the threat? I bet you do, you just don't want to acknowledge the world you live in.

Click to expand...

No I get my oil from Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and Nigeria not from trees but from those countries above and we do produce some oil as well. I know the extent that oil plays in our everyday lives my family consists of Chemical engineers.

All I'm seeing is tough talk by a desperate leader who doesn't want to get invaded and who is trying to suppress his people who are protesting. And I thought that Iran never said they wanted to wipe off Israel from the world, because there wasn't a farsi word for "wipe". Anyways all I see are a bunch of old people who are fighting with words but happy to engage because they won't have to go to battle.

I guess what I am saying is that we don't have to worry and that there are way to many people calling for a war but how many of you that are calling for a war will actually go fight in the war?

Rassales said:

We haven't declared war in over 50 years, which is what the Constitution authorizes. It's interesting how the strict constructionists don't worry about the letter of the Constitution when it's inconvenient to them.

Click to expand...

No, it's not what the Constitution authorizes.

It's what the Constitution requires.

That Bush and the Congress refuse to obey the Constitution doesn't mean we didn't have to project rerpisals on Afghanistan for their act of war upon us.

That Congress does not adhere to the Constituiton is an indictment of the fools that send those criminals to office, since they stopped demanding the Constitution be obeyed.

One could also argue that the authorization by Congress for the President to use force to depose Hussein was a "declaration of war" since the Constitution does not specify format.

Rassales said:

Not really. There was no declaration of war. There was an authorization of force. Not the same thing.

Click to expand...

This is called "quibbling".

Vader said:

Oh.

My bad!

Click to expand...

Yeah, so my point is the Islamofascists have managed to convince themselves that we are there to Christianize and Colonize there lands.
This is why an Iranian full out ground offensive and occupation would only confirm there "beliefs" further.
Best we stay away from them and let them kill each other. I still think air strikes to stop there nuclear ambitions shouldn't be dismissed.

repeter said:

But, that wouldn't sit well with a whole host of people, so the point is to reach a resolution before that. If we stipulate that Isreal will attack Iran if they procure a nuclear weapon, then we, the United States, do not need to contemplate a military solution; the Isrealis will do that for us.

So, we only need to find a peaceful solution, if there is one.

Click to expand...

There is NO peaceful solution. Iran cannot be stopped from building nuclear weapons by saying "Please" or "Go to your room". Ain't gonna happen.

Breaking their processing facilities, that will stop their progress.

Nothing else will.

People who aren't willing to use violence to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions have to become accustomed to the fact that Iran will have enough nukes, and the means to deliver them, and the will to use them.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:

There is NO peaceful solution. Iran cannot be stopped from building nuclear weapons by saying "Please" or "Go to your room". Ain't gonna happen.

Breaking their processing facilities, that will stop their progress.

Nothing else will.

People who aren't willing to use violence to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions have to become accustomed to the fact that Iran will have enough nukes, and the means to deliver them, and the will to use them.

Click to expand...

Agreed. It is time for Iran's nuclear facilities to be destroyed.

Vader said:

Agreed. It is time for Iran's nuclear facilities to be destroyed.

Click to expand...

The best way to take out the American fascists, the ruling class elite, the corrupted political institutions and the American deterioration, would be to bomb the political quarters of Washington DC with controled nuclear detonation, and then proceed to do the same with the Pentagon...

Thats just to say the best strategy to change Iran, would be to get rid of their government infrastructure in a violent way.

(PS. If either scenario happened I would not even feel an inch of sadness)

Maximus Zeebra said:

The best way to take out the American fascists, the ruling class elite, the corrupted political institutions and the American deterioration, would be to bomb the political quarters of Washington DC with controled nuclear detonation, and then proceed to do the same with the Pentagon...

Thats just to say the best strategy to change Iran, would be to get rid of their government infrastructure in a violent way.

(PS. If either scenario happened I would not even feel an inch of sadness)

Click to expand...

Uncalled for.
You owe your life to American soldiers. I am an EU supporter to the grave but...
uncalled for.

What do you suggest then? We chain ourself to Iranian tree's so they cant clear the land to build nuclear fabrications?

It worked in Iraq.
A country who threatens the world means we can afford to apply the same hostility.

MetalGear said:

Uncalled for.
You owe your life to American soldiers. I am an EU supporter to the grave but...
uncalled for.

Click to expand...

No I dont. I dont owe my life to American soldiers. And if you refer to World war 2 I wasnt born then. And I probably would have been born even if the NAZIs won. So the argument is irrelevant and flawed. Besides if I in such a scenario owe my life to anyone I owe it even more to Soviet soldiers and the British people than I do American soldiers.

MetalGear said:

What do you suggest then? We chain ourself to Iranian tree's so they cant clear the land to build nuclear fabrications?

Click to expand...

Why not bomb out government infrsatructure and let the people have the revolution they want? If that is the case we could easily solve the nuclear issue with a post Islamic Iran state with a more liberal and sane government.

If I was the prime minister of Israel I would rather do this(possibly with controlled nuclear bombing), rather than do the same to nuclear installations.

MetalGear said:

It worked in Iraq.

Click to expand...

Nothing works or worked in Iraq.

MetalGear said:

A country who threatens the world means we can afford to apply the same hostility.

Click to expand...

It doesnt threaten the world.

Maximus Zeebra said:

No I dont. I dont owe my life to American soldiers. And if you refer to World war 2 I wasnt born then. And I probably would have been born even if the NAZIs won. So the argument is irrelevant and flawed. Besides if I in such a scenario owe my life to anyone I owe it even more to Soviet soldiers and the British people than I do American soldiers.

Click to expand...

You just saved yourself a hostile response for reasons as put in bold.
Im proud of you son.

Maximus Zeebra said:

No I dont. I dont owe my life to American soldiers. And if you refer to World war 2 I wasnt born then. And I probably would have been born even if the NAZIs won. So the argument is irrelevant and flawed. Besides if I in such a scenario owe my life to anyone I owe it even more to Soviet soldiers and the British people than I do American soldiers.

Click to expand...

Are you arguing that Britain did more to win WWII then America?

Or are you arguing that because you were born in the UK, the British did more to defend the country then the Americans?

repeter said:

Are you arguing that Britain did more to win WWII then America?

Or are you arguing that because you were born in the UK, the British did more to defend the country then the Americans?

Click to expand...

It was a team effort :mrgreen:

repeter said:

Are you arguing that Britain did more to win WWII then America?

Or are you arguing that because you were born in the UK, the British did more to defend the country then the Americans?

Click to expand...

He wasn't born in the UK and he certainly isn't British.
The Soviets and British allies would have crumbled had it have not been for the contribution of America.

Gray_Fox_86 said:

All I'm seeing is tough talk by a desperate leader who doesn't want to get invaded and who is trying to suppress his people who are protesting. And I thought that Iran never said they wanted to wipe off Israel from the world, because there wasn't a farsi word for "wipe". Anyways all I see are a bunch of old people who are fighting with words but happy to engage because they won't have to go to battle.

Click to expand...

History is full of "tough talkers" and the blood they eventually spilled. Assuming this "tough talker" is just kidding is a luxury our leaders are not allowed to have. The U.S. has been playing the anti-nuclear game with Iran since Khomeini decided to restart the Shah's program. The vary last thing the world needs is a North Korea scenario in the Middle East.....but with a zealot's fondness to please a brutal God.

As far as his fear....who exactly is he worried about in regards to invasion? Iran's history with conflict has always involved other Muslims...not the west. And is nuclear tough talk supposed to suppress his people's desires to finally move beyond their self prescribed oppression?


Iran's celebration of the possible future destruction of another nation has been quite public. Imagine a nuclear Cold War in the MIddle East between the Sunni, Shia, and the Israelis. Fun, fun, fun.

Gray_Fox_86 said:

I guess what I am saying is that we don't have to worry and that there are way to many people calling for a war but how many of you that are calling for a war will actually go fight in the war?

Click to expand...

Who's worried? It's a strategic concern for which is being taken serious by those who are tasked with our security. The military has gotten quoite used to being ordered to kill and slaughter by people who have never served. I deployed to Somalia under a President that never laced up a boot and I deployed to Iraq twice under a President who's military service consisted of the National Guard. My point is that I will deploy to Iran if that be the call, but again it will be under a President who has never laced up a boot. Actually fighting in a war was not something civilians did when they wanted their revenge post 9/11. It hardly matters.

And who's calling for a war that doesn't already exist?

This "War on Terror" was always poorly named. This is not a war on terror. Terror is a symptom. We are up against something much tougher than terrorists. We are up against a civilization's failure to evolve beyond religious superstition, beyond ignorance, and beyond self prescribed cultural failure. People seek to label Iraq and Afghanistan as two separate wars, but they are not. What's happening in North Africa, Yemen, Pakistan, and Iran are all a part of the same grand disease and this will take generations. There is a cultural maturity that must happen throughout this region. And this must happen before they begin parading their nuclear weapons down their Main Streets.