motobvious: kramers_hair: stuhayes2010:
Well, no one should have them, including us. But especially people that will most definately use them.

The only country to have "definitely" used nuclear weapons is the United States.

Even if they don't use them, they will export the bombs to those who will.

Yeah, just like Pakistan did. Oh, wait.

But Pakistan's possession married with constant political unrest means US dollars, politics and attention must be spent on that situation. Oh wait...Iran has all the same problems, but a worse government.

Define "worse". Iran's government is far more stable than Pakistan's.

Iran is far richer, healthier (etc etc etc) than Pakistan.

Perducci: HoboSong: vernonFL: Why can't Iran have nuclear power or nuclear weapons?

Because they are in the axis of evil

As defined by the most peaceful, happy, prosperous, and wonderful people on the planet, right?

Uh...yeah, pretty much.

ricktwig: Be careful. Now you (and the whole world) think Iran is working to develop nuclear weapons. However, sometime in the future, evidence may be found that Iran was not. At that time, the backbiting liberal media and conspiracy theorists (with perfect 20-20 hind-site) will forget any forged evidence, any UN resolutions, any consensus of nations based on the information lies being told at the time. They will just call you a cowboy, say you committed crimes (like intentionally lying to the congress, or the UN) (which are crimes, even treason), and they will ask for your head.

FTFY
Still waiting for the investigations...

stuhayes2010: fifth_of_november: What does Israel have against Nuclear Power?

Its a clean, efficient, carbon neutral, and safe source of energy.

Factoid: Your average coal power plant pumps more radioactive particles into the atmosphere than a nuclear plant.

Your average coal plant can't make weapons grade plutonium you troll.

Neither can your average nuclear plant.

Who can blame Israel, they're still stuck with all the baggage from the last time Persia attacked.

Iran should have nuclear weapons. All they ever did was say they would wipe Israel off the map. I mean what the hell? Retards should have guns. Felons should have grenade launchers and I'm going to strap a shotgun to the back of my dog. Everyone has the right to have weapons regardless of whether or not they can handle them safely.

Crunch61: degreeless: I think the argument is that the people running the government of Iran at this time are a batshiat crazy death cult

Except that they're not... So much for that argument.

Oh? Are you talking about the same government we have been watching lately? The one that is beating people in the streets?

Let them do it. If they do, let them deserve any blowback they get.

War_Kittens: LittleSmitty:
Iran is crazy, but not stupid
FTFY

And I do think we should give Iran some nuclear weapons. First of all, it would be the best thing since civilization to come out of that nuthouse. Secondly, it would level the playing field, literally.

A level playing field is good. Since they are a signatory of the NPT, the only sticking issue is the secrecy of their nuclear program

degreeless: I think the argument is that the people running the government of Iran at this time are a batshiat crazy death cult

It's a pretty specious argument. The leadership of countries like Iran and North Korea are not crazy; inhumane and unjust, yes, but no less rational that anybody other country's leadership.

They understand as well as anybody that if they launch a nuclear assault against the countries they blame all their problems on, one of two things will happen:
1. when the problems don't disappear after the enemy has been smited, the people will see how they've been deceived, and rise up; or, more likely,
2. the countries they target and/or their allies retaliate, turning their homeland and everybody they've ever known or loved into a fine, meat-scented powder.

Reverend Otis: Wow! This is completely unprecedented! Surely the Iranians will get the message now.


Israel prepares to attack Iran - April '09 (new window)

Israel prepares to attack Iran - September '08 (new window)

Israel prepares to attack Iran - January '07 (new window)

I think what we can get out of all of this is that Israel is an instigator and is essentially asking for it.

stuhayes2010: LittleSmitty: stuhayes2010: Usually I am not a big fan of Israel. But I can't wait for them to blow Iran's nuclear capabilities away.

What's Iran thinking? Didn't they see Isreal blow up Iraq's reactors in the 70's? (or was it 80's) Reactors are huge buildings with big X's on the roofs that say send missle here.

They might hit Power generating reactors, but any nuclear weapons programs are buried so deep underground they won't be able to get to them.

Iran is crazy, but not stupid

No reactor means no weapons grade Uranium.

You don't make weapons grade Uranium (HEU) with a reactor. You generally use a centrifuge.

vernonFL: stuhayes2010: But I can't wait for them to blow Iran's nuclear capabilities away.

Why?

Israel has nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

Why can't Iran have nuclear power or nuclear weapons?

This is 60 year old technology.

Because nuclear weapons kill large amounts of people with little warning, and Iran is the kind of country that would use them for exactly that purpose.

vernonFL: You guys really assume that the Iranians are a batshiat crazy death cult, I don't believe it.

If they were, why wouldn't they have started WW3 already?

If they really wanted to they could have sent chemical weapons to Israel. If blowing up Israel is their goal, they could have done that years ago.

That's just the thing. I don't really believe that's their goal. I believe the nuclear posturing is better for them than nuclear armament itself. It's politics. The world is waiting for an excuse to find fault with Israel. So, Iran postures...maybe sneaks a few women and children into the site areas...Israel strikes...the world gets angry with Israel again, just like it does everytime Israel defends herself...Arabs/Russians become indignant and ready for war...Europe and U.S. turn away in a cold, neutral political stance...voila. Israel gets screwed and Iran looks victimized. Classic tale. In fact, it's been told year after year in Lebanon and Palestine.

Sorry Jews...you're screwed no matter what you do. I wish the world didn't envy you so much.

kramers_hair: motobvious: kramers_hair: stuhayes2010:
Well, no one should have them, including us. But especially people that will most definately use them.

The only country to have "definitely" used nuclear weapons is the United States.

Even if they don't use them, they will export the bombs to those who will.

Yeah, just like Pakistan did. Oh, wait.

But Pakistan's possession married with constant political unrest means US dollars, politics and attention must be spent on that situation. Oh wait...Iran has all the same problems, but a worse government.

Define "worse". Iran's government is far more stable than Pakistan's.

Iran is far richer, healthier (etc etc etc) than Pakistan.

Easy and I already did. Theocracy = bad politics

motobvious: That's just the thing. I don't really believe that's their goal. I believe the nuclear posturing is better for them than nuclear armament itself. It's politics

It's the crafty mullahs figuring out Israel's achilles heel. Their sense of victimhood. You can goad them into doing anything easily if you determine and exploit this key part of their culture.

And it's sad that it's working.

An Israeli strike on Iran is in the best interest of the Mullahs alone. That's it. No one else benifits, and Israel loses even more "we're not as crazy as them" footing. (See: The most recent Lebanon incursion that did nothing.)

Israel is a dog on our chain and isn't doing shiat to Iran.

arbitrarily, lets give jamaica some nukes, and see what they can come up with.

motobvious: vernonFL: You guys really assume that the Iranians are a batshiat crazy death cult, I don't believe it.

If they were, why wouldn't they have started WW3 already?

If they really wanted to they could have sent chemical weapons to Israel. If blowing up Israel is their goal, they could have done that years ago.

That's just the thing. I don't really believe that's their goal. I believe the nuclear posturing is better for them than nuclear armament itself. It's politics. The world is waiting for an excuse to find fault with Israel. So, Iran postures...maybe sneaks a few women and children into the site areas...Israel strikes...the world gets angry with Israel again, just like it does everytime Israel defends herself...Arabs/Russians become indignant and ready for war...Europe and U.S. turn away in a cold, neutral political stance...voila. Israel gets screwed and Iran looks victimized. Classic tale. In fact, it's been told year after year in Lebanon and Palestine.

Sorry Jews...you're screwed no matter what you do. I wish the world didn't envy you so much.

So, this is the cunning strategy you're ascribing to the Iranians:

1) Spend billions of dollars and develop a nuclear program.
2) Sneak in civilians.
3) Goad Israel into attacking.

all so that "the world gets angry" with Israel.

Wow. Just, wow.

/Cause, you know, the world got really angry when Israel attacked that unspecified site in Syria.

anarchy_x: Because nuclear weapons kill large amounts of people with little warning, and Iran is the kind of country that would use them for exactly that purpose.

Iran already has missiles and already has chemical warheads. Plus I'm sure if they wanted to they could make conventional 'daisy cutter' type bombs.

If Iran really wanted to, they could launch a devastating attack against Israel tomorrow.

Why don't they?

vernonFL: If Iran really wanted to, they could launch a devastating attack against Israel tomorrow.

Why don't they?

They're chicken

Buk buk buk buk buk BBBBBBBAaaaaaaaaaawk

Persepolis: motobvious: That's just the thing. I don't really believe that's their goal. I believe the nuclear posturing is better for them than nuclear armament itself. It's politics

It's the crafty mullahs figuring out Israel's achilles heel. Their sense of victimhood. You can goad them into doing anything easily if you determine and exploit this key part of their culture.

And it's sad that it's working.

An Israeli strike on Iran is in the best interest of the Mullahs alone. That's it. No one else benifits, and Israel loses even more "we're not as crazy as them" footing. (See: The most recent Lebanon incursion that did nothing.)

Right. But to tell you the truth, if I were a Jew and I lived in Israel and my government allowed a blood-thirsty, lunatic fringe theocracy to obtain these weapons...and I'm not exaggerating here to make a point...I would literally assassinate my own leaders.

Seriously, no Jew should have to deal with that. So like I said, they're damned if they do, damned if they don't. I would strike and deal with the political fallout before cowering like little girls. Better to fight and die than to brace for impact.

kramers_hair: all so that "the world gets angry" with Israel.

That's just one of the many benefits for the mullahs also on the table:

1. Development of nuclear energy (which is something most, if not all, advancing nations want.
2. Regained public support at home. (The big one)
3. Sympathy from neighboring countries in the region.
4. Increased world debate on, "why are we supporting Israel anyway"

Again, this is in the best interest of the mullahs. They WANT to get hit. It helped them when Saddam did it in 80s, it'll help now.

Persepolis: The most recent Lebanon incursion that did nothing.

Actually, the recent invasion (call it what it was) of Lebanon did quite a bit -- it really reduced the reputation of the IDF in the eyes of the world.

Which is probably why Israel is going for quick and easy victories to rebuild that reputation -- attack Gaza, bomb Iran, who knows what else.

Dammit... we were doing so well. It looked like there was going to be peace for a while there. Then Clinton has to open her giant mouth and mug for the cameras and now THIS.

motobvious: Right. But to tell you the truth, if I were a Jew and I lived in Israel and my government allowed a blood-thirsty, lunatic fringe theocracy to obtain these weapons...and I'm not exaggerating here to make a point...I would literally assassinate my own leaders.

Don't forget, the origins of Chess is debatable, but it was further developed in Persia.

Sometimes you can force your opponent to make a move you know they WANT to make given the circumstances and how they act. Short term it makes them feel good, sometimes its their ONLY real move, but it'll mess them up in the long run. This is what they are doing.

The nuclear gambit.

Can we PLEASE just get WWIII over with, already?! Sheesh!



/tired of waiting
//headline made me lulz
///wolverines!

Persepolis:
4. Increased world debate on, "why are we supporting Israel anyway"

But this simply didn't happen when Israel bombed Syria's (alleged) reactor.

There was (essentially) no response from the international community.

HotWingConspiracy: Israel America is a dog on our Israel's chain and isn't doing shiat to Iran.

FTFY

thereisnospoon: arbitrarily, lets give jamaica some nukes, and see what they can come up with.

Second.

Perducci: How silly. Don't the Israelis know that the best course of action is to start a campaign on Twitter, encouraging users to change the color of their profile pictures? Now THAT will cause some real change.

One creme-filled donut for you sir.

/and one for me

kramers_hair: motobvious: vernonFL: You guys really assume that the Iranians are a batshiat crazy death cult, I don't believe it.

If they were, why wouldn't they have started WW3 already?

If they really wanted to they could have sent chemical weapons to Israel. If blowing up Israel is their goal, they could have done that years ago.

That's just the thing. I don't really believe that's their goal. I believe the nuclear posturing is better for them than nuclear armament itself. It's politics. The world is waiting for an excuse to find fault with Israel. So, Iran postures...maybe sneaks a few women and children into the site areas...Israel strikes...the world gets angry with Israel again, just like it does everytime Israel defends herself...Arabs/Russians become indignant and ready for war...Europe and U.S. turn away in a cold, neutral political stance...voila. Israel gets screwed and Iran looks victimized. Classic tale. In fact, it's been told year after year in Lebanon and Palestine.

Sorry Jews...you're screwed no matter what you do. I wish the world didn't envy you so much.

So, this is the cunning strategy you're ascribing to the Iranians:

1) Spend billions of dollars and develop a nuclear program.
2) Sneak in civilians.
3) Goad Israel into attacking.

all so that "the world gets angry" with Israel.

Wow. Just, wow.

/Cause, you know, the world got really angry when Israel attacked that unspecified site in Syria.

You're missing the key point, jumping to conclusions and hoisting hasty generalizations at me now. The Syrian ordeal occurred when there was an ally in the White House. It seems like nothing has changed, but the big domino that determines Israeli foreign policy is U.S. support. I don't forsee the same kind of support from this administration.

Persepolis: motobvious: That's just the thing. I don't really believe that's their goal. I believe the nuclear posturing is better for them than nuclear armament itself. It's politics

It's the crafty mullahs figuring out Israel's achilles heel. Their sense of victimhood. You can goad them into doing anything easily if you determine and exploit this key part of their culture.

And it's sad that it's working.

An Israeli strike on Iran is in the best interest of the Mullahs alone. That's it. No one else benifits, and Israel loses even more "we're not as crazy as them" footing. (See: The most recent Lebanon incursion that did nothing.)

If Ahmadinnerjacket and Khomeini continue to circumvent the will of the Iranian people, a neutralization of offensive nuclear facilities would be definitely justified and in the best interests of the Iranian people. The rest of the world does not want to see a nuclear-armed Iran (or Iran launch what I would call The Last Jihad), but are unwilling to send in the cruise missiles themselves. Therefore, to keep the middle-east from turning into a glass parking lot, the biggest target for said nuclear weapons would be the ideal force to neutralize said threat.

The average person on the ground in Tehran or Mecca (Hajj trippers aside) would recognize that, due to the domestic turmoil, weapons capable of causing millions of casualties in a single shot in the hands of the Guardian Council would be a bad thing, especially if they were ordered to be used on their own people.

/I don't think it will happen, but it needs to

kramers_hair: But this simply didn't happen when Israel bombed Syria's (alleged) reactor.

There was (essentially) no response from the international community.

Syria is not Iran, there are many differences between their nuclear programs, world scrutiny on the respective regimes and programs, the relations between Israel and said country, and the logistics of Israel bombing the two countries.

Simply put, it's different. Which part of the points I outlined (specifically the benifits to the mullahs) do you disagree with and why?

stuhayes2010: smerfnablin: btw, its missile...

not that it matters... Iran may just glow in the dark if Israel gets pissed

Man, I've been misspelling that word for years then. Thanks.

Heheheh, I think someone at the UN has a similar spelling issue. They keep spelling it missal (as in "strongly worded letter") instead of missile...

Persepolis: motobvious: Right. But to tell you the truth, if I were a Jew and I lived in Israel and my government allowed a blood-thirsty, lunatic fringe theocracy to obtain these weapons...and I'm not exaggerating here to make a point...I would literally assassinate my own leaders.

Don't forget, the origins of Chess is debatable, but it was further developed in Persia.

Sometimes you can force your opponent to make a move you know they WANT to make given the circumstances and how they act. Short term it makes them feel good, sometimes its their ONLY real move, but it'll mess them up in the long run. This is what they are doing.

The nuclear gambit.

I've thought this exact same thing since it was discovered that Iran was in development. Thus far, nothing has infringed upon that very strategy playing out. The pieces are all in place, especially now that Israel's only staunch ally is likely to make a shift in policy.

Excen: a neutralization of offensive nuclear facilities would be definitely justified and in the best interests of the Iranian people

As a supporter of the Iranian protests and one of the "iranian people", I disagree.

If Israel attacks Iran based on the intel and info we have now, I'd be vehemently anti-Israel. Possible for the rest of my life.

We're bullheaded like that. All people all. Being attacked by a foreign aggressor is a hell of a thing.

m2313: thereisnospoon: arbitrarily, lets give jamaica some nukes, and see what they can come up with.

Second.

Dynamite weed. Good shiat.
/Thirded.

kramers_hair: Persepolis:
4. Increased world debate on, "why are we supporting Israel anyway"

But this simply didn't happen when Israel bombed Syria's (alleged) reactor.

There was (essentially) no response from the international community.

Yep. And like I said, the balance shifted in Nov. '08.

rytheran: Crunch61: degreeless: I think the argument is that the people running the government of Iran at this time are a batshiat crazy death cult

Except that they're not... So much for that argument.

Oh? Are you talking about the same government we have been watching lately? The one that is beating people in the streets?

Who's talking about the United States? Or were you talking about the UK? Stay on topic.

motobvious: I've thought this exact same thing since it was discovered that Iran was in development. Thus

I mean seriously. If you're trying to build a nuclear weapon on the DL, why would you go out on a world stage and say/do the things iran has been?

Shoot, if you're so close to building and using a nuke, you'd play buddy buddy as much as you can.

No, they WANT Israel to strike. They KNOW this (fear, victimization) has been a staple of Israel life for thousands of years. And it's horrible that it's working so effectively.

Persepolis: kramers_hair: But this simply didn't happen when Israel bombed Syria's (alleged) reactor.

There was (essentially) no response from the international community.

Syria is not Iran, there are many differences between their nuclear programs, world scrutiny on the respective regimes and programs, the relations between Israel and said country, and the logistics of Israel bombing the two countries.

Simply put, it's different. Which part of the points I outlined (specifically the benifits to the mullahs) do you disagree with and why?

I definitely agree with (1) and (2), and mostly disagree with (3) and (4).

Saudi Arabia would be happy if Iran was bombed, Iraq would be split.

relevant to those who read:

Why won't Iran relocate the 30,000 Iranian Jews to every nuke site
/That's what I would do

motobvious: kramers_hair: Persepolis:
4. Increased world debate on, "why are we supporting Israel anyway"

But this simply didn't happen when Israel bombed Syria's (alleged) reactor.

There was (essentially) no response from the international community.

Yep. And like I said, the balance shifted in Nov. '08.

You overestimate the power of Obama.

kramers_hair: Saudi Arabia would be happy if Iran was bombed, Iraq would be split.

I agree with this. But they'll still all play the "poor Iran, boo israel" card.

Arab hatred for Iran is a constant. But you can still play for sympathy.

kramers_hair: motobvious: kramers_hair: Persepolis:
4. Increased world debate on, "why are we supporting Israel anyway"

But this simply didn't happen when Israel bombed Syria's (alleged) reactor.

There was (essentially) no response from the international community.

Yep. And like I said, the balance shifted in Nov. '08.

You overestimate the power of Obama.

Your faith in your friends is yours!



/whut?

drjekel_mrhyde: Why won't Iran relocate the 30,000 Iranian Jews to every nuke site
/That's what I would do

I would make a list of these Jews. That's what I would do. Then I'd prance around in black and white for the next 2 hours.