Shaggy_C: At least our new president will try to talk to them before sadly continuing our policy of 'blow up the brown people' if they step out of line.


I thought the problem with the 'brown people' (as you so eloquently put it) is that they blow up on their own, and in the most inconvenient places?

Mordant: 6 months ? Again we have to wait. How's Yellowstone doing, any change ?

Yellowstone Fark Part '09?

/I'll bring the mustard

wilde_at_heart: Wake me when they actually have one ready to lob at Israel.

Then what?

x76:
Israel must expect other countries to be lying at least as much as they do regarding nuclear energy and weapons. Israel is a theocracy with a bizarre hold on UN foreign policy and a history that would make Nazi Germany blush.

Did you know that US law clearly states that nations who do not allow UN inspections of their nuclear facilities are banned from receiving a dime of US aid? Oops! Guess Israel will have to give all that money back... what? You spent it bribing US politicians?!?! OH NOES!!!!



Yes, but Hitler killed a lot of Jews, so that pretty much trumps any other considerations.

JESUS CHRIST! International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA. Learn it dumbass subby. Also, Newsmax is a complete fail.

IEAE =/= IFPA =/= IAEA

Shaggy_C: At least our new president will try to talk to them before sadly continuing our policy of 'blow up the brown people' if they step out of line.

Well, they have a policy of "blow up the jews", and the americans too. The jewish part is practically written into their constitution.

hopefully they'll use it against Israel.

3_Butt_Cheeks: wilde_at_heart: Wake me when they actually have one ready to lob at Israel.

Then what?


Then we urge US citizens to evacuate the area & get comfy in front of CNN.

Fail? A lot can happen in two years, subtard

Tissot: Shaggy_C: At least our new president will try to talk to them before sadly continuing our policy of 'blow up the brown people' if they step out of line.

Well, they have a policy of "blow up the jews", and the americans too. The jewish part is practically written into their constitution.

Considering how many millions of jews live in Iran they seem to be doing a Bushesque job at it.

2010 Iran nukes Israel

Thanks Chairman Obama, now get lost.

Cue the Israeli air strike in 5..4..3..2..

maxwellhauser: What does IKEA have to do with nuclear arms?

This is all about those Lingonberry sanctions...

Nabb1: When you say "we change who's in charge," are you suggesting a "regime change" if it comes down to it?

No. That's not changing who's in charge. That's taking charge.

I mean, and only mean, that we should influence the moderate population of the country and empower them however we can, while removing propaganda tools from the mullahs.

Reading it over again, I don't really know either. I think I mis-read it the first time. Apologies.

/need caffeine

No problem. If it's any consolation, neurologically we often select and discard choices-- that's why when someone asks if you want pickles you say, "Yes. Wait, no." You're trying out the "Yes" answer, and then rejecting it. Maybe this was some form of that, exacerbated by lack of caffeine.

Newsmax? Really?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if they want a nuke, let them have a nuke.

The only country that's ever used nukes on people has been the US-- twice.

Nobody else; yet, if we had it our way, we'd be the only ones allowed to have them.

Makes no sense.

Only the mole people will survive.

Nabb1: Obdicut: Either we change their desire to have nuclear weapons, or we change who's in charge when they get them. That's what I said. I really don't have any clue how you're misinterpreting that.

When you say "we change who's in charge," are you suggesting a "regime change" if it comes down to it?

That's the problem with today's music. Nobody wants to write a tune from scratch now. It's much easier to just rap over the top of an old song, or remake it using a drum machine and some record scratches.

If you don't bother changing the song at all, you're better off just leaving the classic original alone.

Fortunately, I hated this song when the original guys did it.

/Steppenwolfowitz?
/The Donald Rumsfeld Experience?
/Earth, Wind & PNAC?
/Somebody....

Erg, the second part of my post above was to KaponoFor3.

jshine: get comfy in front of CNN.

Now THAT's a challenge.

Remind me of the logic behind why we should all turn a blind eye to Israel's nukes but woe betide Iran if they should attempt the same?

Because they might kill innocent people? and Israel won't?

Israel has proven it doesn't give a shiat about innocent civilians deaths as long as it's targets get detroyed too (some would argue the innocents have been the targets in punishment attacks but i digress)....

They have shown more than anyone if push came to shove they would press that big red button without hesitation.

FTFA: * In October 2007, French authorities - citing estimates by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) - suggested that Iran was operating 3,000 centrifuges at its uranium enrichment facility at Natanz. That claim was later confirmed by Iranian officials.

* According to subsequent projections, that number of centrifuges could yield enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 2009 if operated at full (100 percent) efficiency, and in 2010 if they worked just a quarter of the time.


FAILMITTER

winterwhile: 2010 Iran nukes Israel

Thanks Chairman Obama, now get lost.

*groan*

Persepolis: This is a random special interest group's report. These groups have been putting out reports that Iran was going to have a weapon within the year since 2002ish.

Party Boy has links that go back farther than that doesn't he? I thought the last time I saw him post in one of these "Iran's gonna get nukes" threads he listed a timeline that goes back into the 90's.

KaponoFor3: "The " =/= IAEA

more like "Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis" = Defense Contractor's Propaganda Office

those think tanks are nothing but paid hacks made to form policy around the "sponsors" agenda and promote it through their outlets like Newsmax and others.

Who cares, Israel will take out Iran's nuclear capability when it is needed.

Israel enters the Gaza in 2010 to counter suicide and rocket attacks from Hamas, Iran threatens a nuclear strike on Tel Aviv if they don't pull out.

Israel will never let that scenario happen.

Nuclear Iran you say?



/Aylar Dianati Lie, fyi

Reading Newsmax will give you mental herpes.

Marcus Aurelius: Pie. I like pie.

Pie is gooooood.

/on-topic: I'm not sure if I prefer the IEAE being wrong about Iran, or Bush Jr. being wrong about Iraq.

1. Headline is totally dishonest: a conservative think tank saying something is not the same as the IAEA.
2. Even if the headline were true, these things are not mutually incompatible. Even if there was no evidence of it in 2007, it's possible Iran has been building weapons in secret.
3. Iran has a treaty right to enrich uranium. That alone is not enough to justify any sort of attack or even sanctions on them..
4. The U.S. is acting in bad faith and in violation of our own agreements with Iran by interfering in their internal affairs, something we agreed not to do. Where are the calls for international sanctions against the United States?

winterwhile: 2010 Iran nukes Israel

Thanks Chairman Obama, now get lost.

It's a legacy Bush left for him to deal with.

JDAT: I've said it before. We should have gone in to Iran ..... not Iraq.

Why not both? We're infinitely powerful and have God on our side, after all.

It's cool, Obama is on it.

Nabb1: The state controls the media in Iran.



Bootleg satellites and the internetz FTW.

Silovik: Who cares, Israel will take out Iran's nuclear capability when it is needed.

Israel enters the Gaza in 2010 to counter suicide and rocket attacks from Hamas, Iran threatens a nuclear strike on Tel Aviv if they don't pull out.

Israel will never let that scenario happen.

Iran will never nuke Israel. Never. They care about their own self-preservation, and there is no reason to believe that MAD will not apply to them somehow.

jshine
3_Butt_Cheeks: wilde_at_heart: Wake me when they actually have one ready to lob at Israel.
Then what?
Then we urge US citizens to evacuate the area & get comfy in front of CNN.

What jshine said. But really, there's nothing any of us could do about it anyway even if it was a real threat, so there's no point worry about it until then - particularly when all there is is right-wing fear-mongering.

HoboSong: Nor does any country if they need to win a war.

So you are saying Israel would be prepared to use a nuke to win a war

and therefore should have nuclear limitaions placed upon it also

Nabb1: Sweet. Still, how much gets through?

Given modern technology, it's almost impossible even for the most oppressive regimes to block the flow of information into their country.

Nabb1
Sweet. Still, how much gets through?

all of it.. WTF kinda of question was that.

its satellite service.

Mnemia: Silovik: Who cares, Israel will take out Iran's nuclear capability when it is needed.

Israel enters the Gaza in 2010 to counter suicide and rocket attacks from Hamas, Iran threatens a nuclear strike on Tel Aviv if they don't pull out.

Israel will never let that scenario happen.

Iran will never nuke Israel. Never. They care about their own self-preservation, and there is no reason to believe that MAD will not apply to them somehow.

I agree, but they would threaten, and use MAD as a deterrent. But Iranian foreign policy shouldn't get the benefit of MAD therefore if Israel and America are smart they would knock off Iran's nuclear capability right away.

Mnemia: Iran will never nuke Israel. Never. They care about their own self-preservation, and there is no reason to believe that MAD will not apply to them somehow.

Of course, but that doesn't mean that nuclear arms aren't a very powerful negotiating tool.

Al Sicandar: So you are saying Israel would be prepared to use a nuke to win a war

and therefore should have nuclear limitaions placed upon it also

Quite frankly, I'm much more worried about Israel or the United States escalating a non-nuclear conflict to a nuclear one than I am Iran.

Newsmax translates into English as "Do not read".

Nabb1: Sweet. Still, how much gets through?

Depends on what you're looking for. From what my cousins tell me, a lot of subtitled new movies. (They're more up to date on the Hollywood scene I am)

Most their programming comes from Turkey and the UAE (which have much more relaxed airwaves, especially the PPV type stuff.) Also Voice of America does a lot of broadcasts into Iran.

Same with the internet. There's a countrywide filter that blocks a lot of everything. (Youtube being the most notable that I know of) but there's easy ways around that. Most internet savy Iranians know how to use proxies as a matter of necessity.

(Also, it's worth it to note that the above picture seems to be from Southern Tehran, which is a very poor part of the city. The people to the north probably have better access.