It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Leaked Draft of Iran Nuke Deal

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: combatmaster

So you would march the USA armed forces into coumtrys round the world based on limited evidence?


Will you be in that army?


Or will stay safely at home?


Did you support Iraq aswell?


O and I do dont want or need your help with my logic thank you,
edit on 20-3-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: combatmaster

So, your fear is that Iran will 'nuke' itself to kill all of the gays when they develop a nuclear weapon?

Yea, that makes sense.

Btw, North Korea wouldn't have nuclear weapons if we had attempted cooperation. But, we didn't, and North Korea correctly decided that the only way to deal with us was through force.

Funny how you claim to be against proliferation while espousing the very same tactics that directly lead to proliferation.

Yup, you and logic go hand in hand.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

How would I respond? I will answer that. You also answer your own question.

Bottom line. No options are off the table. Continued international pressure right up to surgical conventional missile strikes at known sites.

If Iran is willing to go to war over this then they'd be even more likely to go to war when nuclear capable. Simple.
If the line in the sand is redrawn by the next President, then it cannot be erased and expect any credibility with those nations coveting nukes for themselves.

As far as your comparison with NK, nice! Your getting a little more creative...NK has nukes Iran doesn't...yet. We don't need another potential NK in Iran. Much harder to address with them than not. N.K. is a point in fact of that problem.

All you do is put barriers to addressing Iran and any nuke development. The options aren't 'pleasant'.

They are necessary....



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: xuenchen

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Obama is going to get off of a plane waving a white paper in his hand saying "Peace in our Time".

Then all hell on earth will break loose.

History repeats.


As for all hell breaking loose? BS! Iran is barely a regional power. They have limited projection power.



Listen tot his BS! You can go back to your cave now!



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Iran probably already has nukes and all this BS is simply a cover story.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock
Iran probably already has nukes and all this BS is simply a cover story.




Proof?


Or are we to start another war like Iraq based on hersay?




Plus if they do have nukes they havent used them.....


(post by crazyewok removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Now now. The entire US isnt made up of cowards. Some of us cant serve in the military because of physical limitations.

As for north korea they are holding the south hostage. So we should shoot the hostage right?

Clinton,bush and others screwed up the ability to stop NK from getting nuclear weapons when they were weak.

SO it may seem cowardly to stop them from getting them but if they dont then they will be another north korea.

Personally Yeah id love the US to go after lil kim in NK.His people are victims and are brainwashed though so it would be sad but could be called mercy killing. Its not like they cant locate the nuclear weapons and neutralize them before hand i guess,but the conventional side will kill millions in less than a couple days.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

You fall back to the same rhetoric anytime someone doesn't see things your way.

Your argument an whether "I'd" be the one going to war is pure B.S.. You know it as well.

Apparently, YOU'D go to war to force Israel to disarm! Your rhetoric pretty much is in the same area code as mine on Iran.

So right back at you, are YOU prepared to do whatever is necessary to de-nuke Israel?? Including going to war yourself??

I would! For my daughter's sake and my grand-childrens' sake, I would.

You spin my statements, I never said anything about U.S. troops into Iran. To stop their nuclear development is militarily easy and requires no boots on the ground whatsoever. You know it as well as I do.

You'd depend on "law" on the international court, on the "U.N.". Yet, none of their actions/inactions have reduced the proliferation of nukes. The U.N. now says Israel is the leading nation in oppressing women's rights. That's the group you'd rely on to fix this mess?? Then I'd question your I.Q..

Not many alternatives left...deal with it.






edit on 21-3-2015 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Yet every year we delay North Korea slowly develops its ICBM capability's.


If we attack now the wars confined to Korea/Japan.

Wait another 10 years and north Korea can possibly start raining now Nukes everywhere.


(post by nwtrucker removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

With fallout drifting over China...yeah, right.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker


Apparently, YOU'D go to war to force Israel to disarm! Your rhetoric pretty much is in the same area code as mine on Iran.

No id just be happy if they just signed the same Nuclear treaty's the other nuclear powers have.

They can have there nukes. Just obey the rules of having them

originally posted by: [post=19145396]nwtrucker[/post

So right back at you, are YOU prepared to do whatever is necessary to de-nuke Israel?? Including going to war yourself??

IF
They reused to sign up to the same treaty and used them in a first strike capacity of threatened to use them in a first strike capacity, the yes I would







originally posted by: [post=19145396]nwtrucker[/post
You'd depend on "law" on the international court, on the "U.N.". Yet, none of their actions/inactions have reduced the proliferation of nukes. The U.N. now says Israel is the leading nation in oppressing women's rights. That's the group you'd rely on to fix this mess?? Then I'd question your I.Q..

Not many alternatives left...deal with it.



I would not rely soley on them.

Thats why I would support action in North Korea without UN backing.

But I don't think the US of A should be the sole world policeman deciding whats good and evil at the barrel of a gun......that's tyranny.

And I certainly think SOLID evidence should be presented before any war.

IF

IF

Solid evidence that Iran had the bomb and would use it was presented. I may, in fact possibly would change my opinion.

BUT I wont go to war based on limited evidence and testimony of the lairs and fraudsters that brought as Iraq.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: crazyewok

With fallout drifting over China...yeah, right.



Pfft.

If you had reading comprehensions ,I said no strategic nuclear from the USA.

Any fallout would be from NK nukes......wouldn't that be funny if China took them out before we did!

China barley tolerates North Korea as it is.


PS
I just realized I said no US strategic nuclear strikes on another thread.
edit on 21-3-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

You are making this more complex than it is.

It is very simple.... you prefer that a regime that directly sponsors terrorists, hangs people in the street for the crime of being gay, that imprisons women for driving a car or fighting back against a male rapist, or dancing to Pharrell Williams' 'Happy', acquire nuclear weapons.

N Korea, i agree, should never have nukes in the first place. I am sure you agree. So why make the same mistake again with Iran?



edit on 2015-03-21T13:05:58-05:00201503bpm3103pm5831 by combatmaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Produce 'solid evidence' to whom?? YOU? If you'd allow action against NK but not Iran? There's an interesting logic...

Hey, crazywok says 'no' on Iran but gives his go ahead on NK. Ass backwards of course...




posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: combatmaster

He isn't making it complex. He's doing anything he can to deflect from the Iranian issue....



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

I didn't say U.S. nukes, talk about reading comprehension, obviously if NK is attacked, they would use their nuclear capacity on the south. it's their ace-in-the-hole that retrains the west...

China would blame the U.S.. It's who they blame any time they can.

Seeing you've drawn this off topic-as is your wont- kindly return to the subject of the thread.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: yuppa

Yet every year we delay North Korea slowly develops its ICBM capability's.


If we attack now the wars confined to Korea/Japan.

Wait another 10 years and north Korea can possibly start raining now Nukes everywhere.


True. With the current leaderships in all countries right now i do not see it.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Until the final deal is released, don't believe anything you hear.

I expect this "draft" is a trick of the right wing trying to show how bad the deal will be to the FAUX NEWS faithful.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join