Yawn.
hundreds of millions, why not say the whole world is doomed, doomed I say, muah ha ha hah ha......
North Korea & Iran, two states in need of "regime change"
- Thread starter fuji
- Start date
hundreds of millions, why not say the whole world is doomed, doomed I say, muah ha ha hah ha......
You are the only one clinging to the fiction that Iran's nuclear intentions are peaceful.Yawn.
It is far less concerning when a democracy obtains nuclear weapons than when a state sponsor of terrorism does. Even the Arab states are calling for Iran to be taken out, the threat is perceived as real by all but you.
Last edited:
IS developing weapons of mass destruction a crime in Iran?Developing weapons of mass destruction. They could be detained on a security certificate--so long as they're not able to just move on and set up shop somewhere else: their work developing nuclear weapons for the bad guys has to stop.
And who would compose the security certificate? Jordan Isreal..?
If you like, they could just be held as POW's. The point is to keep them from working on WMD's for rogue states. Whoever captured them would compose the security certificate.IS developing weapons of mass destruction a crime in Iran?
And who would compose the security certificate? Jordan Isreal..?
Me and the IAEA, oh, and the US state department.You are the only one clinging to the fiction that Iran's nuclear intentions are peaceful.
It is far less concerning when a democracy obtains nuclear weapons than when a state sponsor of terrorism does. Even the Arab states are calling for Iran to be taken out, the threat is perceived as real by all but you.
Well, since Israel is also a sponsor, or actively a terrorist state which routinely calls for other countries to be taken out, and has tried to sell nuclear weapons to apartheid South Africa and Iran an NPT signatory under constant inspection, I'd have to say the threat is all blather.
Israel has been saying that Iran is seconds away from developing the bomb since 1998, so yes, yawn.
Citation needed: Quote me the US State Dept. asserting that Iran has only peaceful nuclear intentions.Me and the IAEA, oh, and the US state department.
False. Propaganda.Well, since Israel is also a sponsor, or actively a terrorist state
IS there a state of war with Iran I am not aware of?If you like, they could just be held as POW's. The point is to keep them from working on WMD's for rogue states. Whoever captured them would compose the security certificate.
There will be once we invade and forcibly change the regime there--the topic of this thread.IS there a state of war with Iran I am not aware of?
By we I hope you are referring to Canada and your European allies....There will be once we invade and forcibly change the regime there--the topic of this thread.
OTB
Hopefully the entirety of NATO.By we I hope you are referring to Canada and your European allies....
OTB
So your premise is based on an invasion by NATO , that is very unlikly to happen, charging employees of a sovreign nation with a crime that I don't believe actually exists for following orders....There will be once we invade and forcibly change the regime there--the topic of this thread.
Well Christmas is coming and miracles do happen
How about NATO minus the US - I think we have our hands full and it would certainly be time for someone else to take the initiative.... like that's going to happen.Hopefully the entirety of NATO.
OTB
Its WMD madness all over again!!!There will be once we invade and forcibly change the regime there--the topic of this thread.
Same tune, different lyrics.
Well why not, it worked so well for us and the Iraqi's, who I expect are seriously enjoying their new found democratic freedoms, if they're not dead.
Warmonger.
Bad enough you keep trying to justify the murder of civilians, now you just want to add a few hundred thousand more?
And sure, just like Iraq, they'll find plenty o'WMD's. Whoops, I forgot, they just killed a 100,000 for nothing.....
Did I mention oil?
Any other motives you might have for suggesting the murder of thousands?
Funny thing...no-one is asking the US to take the lead - well, maybe the American Industrial Military complex is, but no-one else.How about NATO minus the US - I think we have our hands full and it would certainly be time for someone else to take the initiative.... like that's going to happen.
OTB
We did ask you to help out in 1939 - when it was REALLY NEEDED, but you chickened out for 3 years.
So in your view it would be better to let rogue states build nuclear weapons?So your premise is based on an invasion by NATO , that is very unlikly to happen, charging employees of a sovreign nation with a crime that I don't believe actually exists for following orders....
Well Christmas is coming and miracles do happen
I'll be waiting to see if anyone else leads... I'm betting against it.Funny thing...no-one is asking the US to take the lead - well, maybe the American Industrial Military complex is, but no-one else.
We did ask you to help out in 1939 - when it was REALLY NEEDED, but you chickened out for 3 years.
OTB
Reading things into quotes that are not there again I see.So in your view it would be better to let rogue states build nuclear weapons?
I am just pointing out the problems in your plan of action.
NATO is not going to authorize an attack on a largly Muslim nation, the politicians in power would never agree to it , specifically due to the Muslim populations in most Eurpoean nations. The NATO charter is also a defence charter , it would be a stretch to find a way to consider a premeptive strike a defensive reaction.
There is also the question of China, they have been a sponsor if a number of Iranian plans over the years, they may not allow such a strike as it would intrudde on their sphere of influence.
The UN is another issue, I doubt if they would endorse and attack, even with the current crop of resolutions and the nonprolifferation treat that iran signed.
The simplest plan is to destroy the enrichment centrifuges, once they are destroyed there is no way to produce the weapons grade material. There are a number of countries that have the capability .
Iran should abandon nuclear weapons at exactly the same time as Isreal, not before. Both are rogue states. Both are whipsawed by religious fanatics.
I'd like to hear what you think might really happen if either Iran or North Korea get the bomb, though North Korea already may have it.So in your view it would be better to let rogue states build nuclear weapons?
Do you expect that Iran would attack another nuclear armed country like Israel, or a country on the other side of the globe like Canada or the US?
Do you expect that Iran would sell a nuclear bomb to South Africa or Al Qaeda, despite their differences?
Do you really think that Iran would give Hamas or Hezbollah the bomb?
What is your real worry?
I'm curious why you think South Africa would want to buy a nuke?I'd like to hear what you think might really happen if either Iran or North Korea get the bomb, though North Korea already may have it.
Do you expect that Iran would attack another nuclear armed country like Israel, or a country on the other side of the globe like Canada or the US?
Do you expect that Iran would sell a nuclear bomb to South Africa or Al Qaeda, despite their differences?
Do you really think that Iran would give Hamas or Hezbollah the bomb?
What is your real worry?
They are actually the only country in history (that we know of) to develop the ability to build nuclear weapons and they dismantle that ability.
