If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Iranian president willing to share nuclear technology with other Muslim states   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 602
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

9128 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Sep 2005 at 5:36 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



602 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-09-15 10:19:13 PM
I mean, 'meet secretly with the Iranians', not Vietnamese. I don't know what I was thinking!
 
2005-09-15 10:20:13 PM
You're all idiots, I seriously wanted to shoot myself to get all this stupidity outta my head. That is all I really have to say on this topic you panseys.
 
2005-09-15 10:21:38 PM
Anagrammer: "Nazi" - that's short for "National Socialist Party, isn't it? I know modern American socialists are pretty bad, but that's no reason to call them Nazis.


I see that you're a patriot.

Throbbing_Space_Pickle: He's a real hero! We really need his services today! He should go and meet secretly with the Vietnamese and negotiate for peace behind the administration's back! We could even drop him behind enemy lines, just like he did back in his heroic youth. I bet he's not thought of that great idea before.

Or, we could get Chimpy to put on his flight suit and strafe Austin, like he shoulda done while Kerry was over in Vietnam getting those fake medals. That'll solve the problem! Plus, it'll look so cool!
 
2005-09-15 10:22:56 PM
Throbbing_Space_Pickle: I mean, 'meet secretly with the Iranians', not Vietnamese. I don't know what I was thinking!


Nobody else does either!
 
2005-09-15 10:23:00 PM
Wolfanoz: Wow... just wow.


I'd prefer it if no one died, but fark, man, we need something to happen or we'll all just rot away from the inside. Personally, I'd rather go out in a giant, firey nuclear holocaust.
 
2005-09-15 10:23:03 PM
Chimpy? Ahh haha thats a good one!
 
2005-09-15 10:25:05 PM
snoringtoad: Chimpy? Ahh haha thats a good one!


Yeah! He's more fun than a barrel of monkeys!
 
2005-09-15 10:31:38 PM
altrocks:

I wonder if people who lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis are more or less scared these days.

If nobody else has answered this, I will. I'm old enough to have lived through both.

Today is like reading a page 16 article that someone you fear might have a gun. Some time in the future. Mildly alarming, but no big deal.

During the Cuban Missile Crisis it was like you were looking up the barrel and there was an extremely dangerous man behind it.

No comparison. The Cuban Crisis was terrifying.
 
2005-09-15 10:32:27 PM
Well, whether or not the bozo-in-chief or his staff knowingly lied about Iraq's WMD, I think they've set a precident now which will make the Iran question harder...

Like it was said earlier, what makes Iran so special?

BRB -- gotta go stock up on survival supplies...

I predict mandatory military service for 18-19 year olds in 3... 2... 1....
 
2005-09-15 10:33:07 PM
Has anyone yet mentioned that Iran isn't Arab and said Muslim states, not Arabs?
/snickers
 
2005-09-15 10:33:52 PM
From the Nuclear Weapons Archive re: Neutron bombs

"The common perception of the neutron bomb as a "landlord bomb" that would kill people but leave buildings undamaged is greatly overstated. At the intended effective combat range (690 m) the blast from a 1 kt neutron bomb will destroy or damage to the point of unusability almost any civilian building. Thus the use of neutron bombs to stop an enemy attack, which requires exploding large numbers of them to blanket the enemy forces, would also destroy all buildings in the area. "
 
2005-09-15 10:34:15 PM
Smart Ass said:

General?

Who in-the-fark ever told you life was fair?


My kindergarten teacher, and my first and second grade teachers too.... but I think they were lying to me.

I'd rather be sick and free than healthy and opressed.

Me too... if those were the only two choices. But they're not.

Life is tough, it's tougher if you're stupid.

True. For instance, if people are stupid enough to imagine that they only have two choices between bad and worse, then life will be tougher.

You really want the Government to wipe your ass? Sweep up your broken glass? Make you feel better about yourself?

No. I don't want the government to wipe my ass... and they don't need to sweep up my broken glass. I'd just be happy if they stopped puposely breaking the glass, and then charging me triple for it, while awarding the glass-sweeping contract to Halliburton.

As for the government making me feel better about myself... heck, they're making everyone on EARTH feel better about themselves... because, who hasn't looked at Bush's smirky little tongue-stumbling on TV and realized to themselves "Damn, I'm smarter than the leader of the free world!!"?

Prepair yourself for the following reallity check:

Ain't gonna happen.

Give up your freedoms and it still ain't gonna happen.


Absolutely correct.

Giving up your freedoms to the PATRIOT act, and ripping up the constitution in order to try and be "safer" is stupid. We are no safer against a 9/11 style attack than we were on the morning of 9/11.

We've spent Trillions on the war on terror and Homeland Security, and the only thing preventing another 9/11 is exactly what stopped flight 93 over Pennsylvania: Common Americans getting stuff done while the morons in charge of the government dithered.

Do you hate your country?

Nope. My country was a place called The United States of America. It had a constitution and a Bill Of Rights. People in that country had the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to peaceable assemble, the right to a trial by a jury of their peers, and the right against unreasonable search and siezure.

It was a real cool country... but it's been missing lately. Could someone please let me know if they find it wandering around, and let it know that we want it to come back?

Was someone mean to you? Are you mad at God? Were you abused? Were you liked by other children? Are you having a substance problem? Do you hear voices? Do they tell you things? Not making the $$ you want? Do you work hard? Do you think everyone owes you something because you got good grades inspite of your rebel-like need to be different?

Yes. No. Yes. Yes. No. No. No. Don't care. Yes. No.

Should everyone depend on Demo's or whoever for their Health?

Should everyone depend on Repubs or whoever for making us all perfectly safe and snugly wrapped up in our beds where the boogeyman can't get us?

It'll only cost a few more trillions, and Bush says we're making progress ;)

You think the Iranians will cut you some slack?
You think we can count on other-envious-countrys to help us?


The Iranians never suspended the right to trial by jury on American soil. The Iranians aren't running torture camps on foreign soil. The Iranians never used their friends who own electronic voting machine companies to rig an American election. In fact... the Iranians have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans.

So, the Iranians are looking a lot more friendly to the average American than Bush and his cabal are.

Would you like some pitty?

No... save your pitty for the United States of America that generations of Americans shed blood for, and generations of Americans worked to make the freeest nation on Earth.... only to have it all turned into a mockery of it's former self in only 4 years.

We would be better served by Leaders who consult you first.

True. Consulting the people who are governed... every 4 years... something called an election. We'd all be better served by a system of government that worked like that.

/group hug.

No.. you're not very huggable. :P
 
2005-09-15 10:34:48 PM
Okay, question one: If Iran launches a nuclear weapon at Israel, a US target such as a fleet or division, or Europe, should the US retaliate with a nuclear weapon? Whether or not their missile blows up its target or is shot down.

This one if for the liberals out there.

Question two: If Iran launches a nuclear missile at someone, will it be George Bush's fault?
 
cot
2005-09-15 10:35:58 PM
Throbbing_Space_Pickle: I'd like a picture. That would look really cool.


Here's one for ya.

 
2005-09-15 10:36:41 PM
knobmaker: Hey, ever attended a Young Republican meeting? Pencil necks and nervous grimaces as far as the eye can see. It goes along way toward explaining why so few in Bush's administration actually served in the military.

I know what you mean. Those frail and weak people aren't very smart at that military stuff. They shouldn't voice an opinion on such things. If you want to fight a war, do it yourself. Chickenhawks!

I like that idea. If you want to fight a war, do it yourself. How about, If you want to promote a prescription drug plan, buy them yourselves. Chickenentitlers!

Wow!

If you want to feed the homeless, feed them yourself. Set a place at your table, you chickenfeeder!

If you think we need more police protection, you need to become an officer!

I could really get into this philosophy of yours, but I don't know if I can hold so many jobs down at the same time.
 
2005-09-15 10:39:20 PM
I want a new world. I think this one is broken.

/I need a hug
 
2005-09-15 10:39:55 PM
Human population is growing exponentially. There are only three things that can control that: disease, warfare, and global government. Are we past our carrying capacity as a virally reproducing species with no natural predators? The "global" government isn't really authoritative enough to control exponential population growth yet, the disease is not pervasive enough, looks like warfare is the answer. Hopefully after one good war, enough of the world population will be incinerated such that the global government can see to it that it never happens again. Then we can enter the age of Aquarius, grow out our hair, smoke pot, and sleep around. If we aren't dead.
 
cot
2005-09-15 10:40:13 PM
whammer: Question two: If Iran launches a nuclear missile at someone, will it be George Bush's fault?

Of course not, he's a diplomat of the highest order and will be remembered at such.
 
cot
2005-09-15 10:41:51 PM
Le Petomane: Human population is growing exponentially. There are only three things that can control that: disease, warfare, and global government.

You forgot birth control.

Exponential growth = old and busted. Negative population growth = New hotness, at least amongst the educated and middle class and above.

Europe is facing a real crisis because of it. The US might be in danger long term if it weren't for all the immigrants.
 
2005-09-15 10:43:27 PM
Dear Christians and Muslims,

Your god is so wonderful, especially when he lets you blow us all to smithereens.

Thanks for your compassion for life.

Signed,

Go fark YOURSELVES
 
2005-09-15 10:44:17 PM
One of the best things I've read in a long time: Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
 
2005-09-15 10:46:09 PM
"//I'm sure you Jew hater's out there are high fiving yourselves and smiling at the thought of the mushroom cloud that will be Israel. If only Hitler himself were alive to celebrate with you....."

Is this what is passing for trolling these days? The shark has been jumped.
 
2005-09-15 10:46:23 PM
Um, I believe successful "development" curbs the growth rate, Le Petomane.

"The more developed countries in Europe and North America, as well as Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, are growing by less than 1 percent annually. Population growth rates are negative in many European countries, including Russia (-0.6%), Estonia (-0.5%), Hungary (-0.4%), and Ukraine (-0.4%). -Population Reference Bureau
 
2005-09-15 10:47:30 PM
Anagrammer: "Nazi" - that's short for "National Socialist Party, isn't it? I know modern American socialists are pretty bad, but that's no reason to call them Nazis.

by that logic, the democratic people's republic of china is both republican and democrat.

or lack of logic, really.
 
2005-09-15 10:48:00 PM
catdrchris said:

Lolol. What a pathetic knee-jerkian lib.

General Zang thinks that Osama (how many thousands has al Q murdered? 7? 10? )and suicide bombers (more thousands, 177 just murdered today) are...

LESS threatening...

than the prisoners at Abu Grabbed (how many dead-by-glowstick-in-the-butt?), the prisoners at Club Gitmo (how many dead by air-conditioning overdose?)

lolololoser!!!!one!eleven!


Um... you Sir, are a shining example of the Bush crowd.

First off, we're talking about Iran.... NOT Osama Bin Laden.

Iran is primarally Shiite Muslim, and the population largely speaks Farsi.

Osama Bin Laden is a Wahabist Muslim, speaks Arabic, and is currently being sheltered by other Sunnis and Wahabists in the nation of Pakistan.

Pakistan, our ALLY, ***already*** has demonstrated that they possess nuclear weapons and also possess long-range missiles.

So... to recap for the silly Bush voters, Iran does not have nuclear weapons, and says that they are not working on nuclear weapons. They just want to have nuclear power plants.

Pakistan, our "ally", is the muslim country that is harboring Bush old family-friend and ex-CIA operative named Osama Bin Laden... and they **already** have nuclear weapons and loudly proclaim that they have them.

So, when I say that Bush and his supporter's destruction of constitutional rights in America, and their support of murder and torture across the globe, is a far far bigger threat than a few power plants in Iran.... it has fark all to do with Bush's old family friend who is currently hanging out in a nation that is our ally.

Simpler, for Red-Staters to figure out: Osama Bin Laden has fark-all to do with Iran, and a heck of a lot more to do with the Bush family who a) employed him when a Bush was head of the CIA, and b) who do lots of bussiness with Bin Laden's family.

Any questions?
 
2005-09-15 10:49:13 PM
Throbbing_Space_Pickle: I like that idea. If you want to fight a war, do it yourself.


Now you're talkin'! It's just an unfortunate coincidence that almost no one who served during the Vietnam war is in the White House today. No one knows why! They'd have all gone to fight in that noble cause, if only they hadn't had boils on their butts or other priorities! So take that, peaceniks!
 
2005-09-15 10:51:24 PM
MrBelvedere: I'm not an Islamic scholar, but the history of the Middle East since Mohammed arrived doesn't seem to have any notion of tolerating minorities.


When Isabella reconquered Spain from the Moors in 1492 and burn all the Muslims and Jews in the name of the Church, guess where all the Jews fled too?

Tolerant London or Paris?

Nope.
 
2005-09-15 10:51:49 PM
I say we share with them some of our own nuclear technology!
 
2005-09-15 10:55:35 PM
We're going to look pretty @$#@$ dumb when they cut off the oil and that Russian and China protect their butts
 
2005-09-15 10:58:06 PM
knobmaker: It's just an unfortunate coincidence that almost no one who served during the Vietnam war is in the White House today.

Yeah! Now you're talkin! If Kerry were elected, he wouldn't have to go on a secret mission behind enemy lines and negotiate with the Iranians behind the government's back! But, since he's not President, I'm proud that this true American hero isn't sitting idle, watching the world go to hell. He's probably with an A-Team of skilled UN negotiators, putting life and limb in peril to save the free world. We need to be punished for being the source of evil in the modern world. I get goosebumps thinking of the stories yet to be told of his heroic efforts!

I'd be proud to give him his medals back to him, so that he could throw them away all over again, or at least, borrow some else's so that he could keep his.
 
2005-09-15 10:58:28 PM
catdrchris:

From the Nuclear Weapons Archive re: Neutron bombs

"... Thus the use of neutron bombs to stop an enemy attack, which requires exploding large numbers of them to blanket the enemy forces, would also destroy all buildings in the area. "

Still what is better? Using a "neutron bomb" or an "atomic bomb" on rogue states?

Would America care if they can't never occupy an Iranian house or house of worship again? As long as they can enter the territory sooner than later and through nuclear ffallout out, radiation and of course dig through the glass parking lot to get at the oil :-)

Even if the "neutron bomb" took out people and property over all it is much safer to use than the "atmoic bomb" isn't it? Plus now there are "microwave weapons" so you can essentially fry the Iranian government in their palaces :-)

http://www.manuelsweb.com/neutronbomb.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb

http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/neutron-bomb.html
 
2005-09-15 11:00:15 PM
Damn I'm tired tonight, I'm making too many simple typos :-)
 
2005-09-15 11:01:37 PM
General Zang: Simpler, for Red-Staters to figure out: Osama Bin Laden has fark-all to do with Iran, and a heck of a lot more to do with the Bush family who a) employed him when a Bush was head of the CIA, and b) who do lots of bussiness with Bin Laden's family.

Any questions?


I have one.

I've already got Halliburton and Big Oil in my portfolio, now how do I cash in on this Bin Laden/Bush deal? Do you think that they'll be offering stock? I hope it's not an insider thing. That would just suck.

If the Illuminati and Freemasons are involved, I don't want anything to do with it, though.
 
2005-09-15 11:03:26 PM
whammer said:

Okay, question one: If Iran launches a nuclear weapon at Israel, a US target such as a fleet or division, or Europe, should the US retaliate with a nuclear weapon? Whether or not their missile blows up its target or is shot down.


Did Israel join NATO while I wasn't looking?

Did Isreal become the 51st state while I wasn't looking?

Israel has their own army, their own air force, and their own nukes. I'm pretty darn sure that if someone launches a nuke at Isreal, that the Isrealis aren't going to be sitting around reading "My Pet Goat" while waiting for George Bush to leap into action to defend them.

So, your first question is moot. By the time Bush had figured out what to do, the Israelis would have responded an hour before.

This one if for the liberals out there.

Question two: If Iran launches a nuclear missile at someone, will it be George Bush's fault?


Depends.

If they just up and decide to fire a nuclear missile at.. say.. South Africa, for no possible reason that anyone could figure out? Then no, it would not be George Bush's fault.

If Iran nukes our amphibious assault force as we're preparing to do a sea invasion of Iran? Well yeah, that would be entirely Bush's fault.
 
2005-09-15 11:05:08 PM
Uranium has a higher energy content than oil, and probably isn't as easy to sell on the world market. In short, switching from oil power to nuclear power and then selling the excess crude is an economically sound decision for Iran. Yeah, they're probably going to at least research nuclear weapon technology, but what are we going to do about it? Our troops are conveniently bogged down in Iraq when lo and behold, a legitimate threat might taking shape elsewhere.

I think we can categorically state that nothing Bush has done in the last five years has made us safer.
 
2005-09-15 11:05:23 PM
One dozen ICBM's, coming right up! Enjoy the afterglow!
 
2005-09-15 11:06:16 PM
I see the rewriting of history has begun.

"Bin Laden was never under the employ of the CIA!!!1!!one!"
 
2005-09-15 11:10:53 PM
General Zang: You raise an interesting point by saying that if Iran pre-emptively nukes a US military force it sees as a threat, then it is George Bush's fault.

However, Iran sees the US presence in the Middle East, to include our fleets in their vicintity, and our forces in Iraq as a threat, right now, too.

So does this mean if they attack any of them with nuclear weapons because they feel threatened by them, that it is George Bush's fault?
 
2005-09-15 11:13:27 PM
Sharing is scaring.
 
2005-09-15 11:13:27 PM
whammer:

Who's fault would it be if [insert country here] had it's ships poised in attack range of the the Continental US, and we nuked their fleet because we felt threatened?
 
2005-09-15 11:13:49 PM
Throbbing_Space_Pickle said:

I've already got Halliburton and Big Oil in my portfolio, now how do I cash in on this Bin Laden/Bush deal? Do you think that they'll be offering stock?


The most obvious answer would be The Carlyle Group. I believe that their stock is available for sale on public stock exchanges.

I hope it's not an insider thing. That would just suck.

A few minutes googling for past bussiness ties of the elder Bush and the Bin Laden family show that, unfortunatelly, it's larger an insider thing.

Unless, of course, you think that random guys who's daddies aren't heads of the CIA just happen to get TWO failing oil companies bought out at a profit by the Bin Laden family.

If the Illuminati and Freemasons are involved, I don't want anything to do with it, though.

I think the "illuminati" is a made-up thing.... but the Bush/Bin Laden connection is very much real and quite well-documented.
 
2005-09-15 11:18:10 PM
The first hundred posts in this thread had me laughing my ass off. Bravo.
 
2005-09-15 11:21:39 PM
I can't blame the Iranians for being a little jumpy. The preeminent imperial military power in the world today has them covered on two sides.

All of a sudden I'll bet that the idea of "preemptively attacking before being attacked" doesn't sound so good to Perle, Wolfowitz & co., at least insofar as Iran might decide to seize the opportunity to go with that "preemption" idea, backed with more and truer facts than the US could ever muster for invading Iraq.
 
2005-09-15 11:21:51 PM
But because I know that the US is not a true democracy that makes me a right wing douche rag? Sorry..but try again.
 
2005-09-15 11:23:59 PM
Throbbing_Space_Pickle: Yeah! Now you're talkin! If Kerry were elected, he wouldn't have to go on a secret mission behind enemy lines and negotiate with the Iranians behind the government's back! But, since he's not President, I'm proud that this true American hero isn't sitting idle, watching the world go to hell.


Hey, we're on the same page! He can be joined by Bush, who can drink them under the table, share his coke, and play a few verses from Country Joe and the Fish on his new guitar! That'll teach them infidels not to mess with Texas! Or better yet, Bush can order an invasion of Poland. That'll put the fear o' god into them camel jockeys!
 
2005-09-15 11:25:37 PM
NarrMaster: The Soviet Union had its ships poised to do just that for many years, if you remember. And yet we never nuked them or threatened to nuke them. So your comparison is not a good one.

Now, if you said, "If Iran parked nuke carrying ships in range of the continental US and the US nuked them first, whose fault would it be?" I would give credit to George Bush for a job well done.

Which means you should ask yourself the question: "Why is even the Soviet Union, the ol' Evil Empire itself, less threatening than a bunch of religious fundamentalists who regularly chant "Death to U.S.A.!"?

Really ponder this one. Though I doubt you are capable of coming up with any answer that does not involve blaming George Bush.
 
2005-09-15 11:26:51 PM
whammer said:

General Zang: You raise an interesting point by saying that if Iran pre-emptively nukes a US military force it sees as a threat, then it is George Bush's fault.


No, I did not.

You're the second person in this thread to attempt to put words in my mouth, and I don't appreciate it. If you can't respond to what I said, but must twist it out of shape before responding, then why are you even bothering?

Here are my actual words: If Iran nukes our amphibious assault force as we're preparing to do a sea invasion of Iran? Well yeah, that would be entirely Bush's fault.

The words "our amphibious assault force as we're preparing to do a sea invasion of Iran" is not the same as "a force it sees as a threat".

Some people, like Bush, see "threats" everywhere they look.... but that's not quite the same thing as a fleet full of amphibious assault craft loaded with Marines and amphibious tanks approaching your coast under air cover and bombardment.

However, Iran sees the US presence in the Middle East, to include our fleets in their vicintity, and our forces in Iraq as a threat, right now, too.

Gosh... really? Gee, maybe that's why I specifically *didn't* say "a force that they see as a threat"?
 
2005-09-15 11:30:25 PM
General Zang: Gosh... really? Gee, maybe that's why I specifically *didn't* say "a force that they see as a threat"?


General, you're arguing with idiots. There's probably no point to it, unless you can get a cheap giggle out of it.
 
2005-09-15 11:32:24 PM
knobmaker: General, you're arguing with idiots. There's probably no point to it, unless you can get a cheap giggle out of it.

We have a winner.
 
2005-09-15 11:32:48 PM
Jew Haters rejoice!

If only Hitler himself were alive to share your happiness and progress towards wiping Jew's from the face of the Earth.
 
Displayed 50 of 602 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report