True or not true. All this article is saying: BOMB IRAN NOW!

[edit on 20-11-2008 by Benarius]

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

4. Israel and the US Will think again before invading/occupying an arab
nation

Yo, expert on all these issues ...

Iran does not consider itself to be an "arab nation". It pisses them off to be called that. They call themselves persians.

Still, IMO neither arabs or persians should have nuclear weapons.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

4. Israel and the US Will think again before invading/occupying an arab
nation

Yo, expert on all these issues ...

Iran does not consider itself to be an "arab nation". It pisses them off to be called that. They call themselves persians.

Still, IMO neither arabs or persians should have nuclear weapons.

Why in your oppinion should America and other nations have them?

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

Still, IMO neither arabs or persians should have nuclear weapons.

How long will they be stopped from getting nuclear weapons?

IF a developing rugged nation like Pakistan can have more than 100 nuclear warheads in its arsenal than so can Arabs and Persians.

Pakistan has a long history of links with terrorism compare to Arab and persian nations.

Originally posted by 44soulslayer

Fox has just cemented Ahmedinejad's success in the upcoming Iranian elections!

Personally I dont think a nuclear armed Iran is a major issue. If anything, it would aid in the stability of the region. Iranians have a great distaste for Arabs, so a nuclear Iran would balance against the conventionally strong Saudi Arabia (supplied with US hardware).

Pakistan is far more concerning. Obama is correct on this issue... coalition troops out of Iraq and into the Afghan-Pakistani border regions. If those militants in Waziristan aren't destroyed, Pakistan risks losing control of its arsenal. That would be doomsday.

Correct. I mean think of where the terrorists are. They arent coming out of Iran they are coming from places like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. I too dont see a big deal. Israel has nukes. The fact is Iran has oil and the PTB want that oil. On top of that Iran isnt conforming to the one world government that they want. They choose not to live the ultra liberal lifestyle that we choose to live. Who are we to tell them how to live but with oil and a non conformation that puts a big bullseye on their back. Sigh....

Iran is ALLOWED to produce uranium enriched for its own nuclear reactor - thats what signing the NPT means;

so why the sensationalist headlines? - the reactor is ready to roll - and is the second they have anyway ; the first was built by the USA in the 1950`s , is still in use and is in Tehran.


so what would happen if someone attacked a fully running reactor then.... thats right the ME would be contaminated by the nastiest things imaginable - chernobyl gives an idea of the crap from a reactor

Originally posted by sunny_2008nywe have to accept the fact that Iran has a nuclear bomb.

Yeah, if they decide to further refine the fuel to weapon's grade. Which would take another 8-10 years with the equipment they have. This is backed up by our own intelligence, and news released by front (public facing) organizations like the CIA.


They are doing it for energy. Plain and simple. Most countries do not have entire mountain ranges made of coal, like USA, China, and a few others. Israel (by way of USA & UN) does not want Iran to have energy independence. But why NOT spin this into "OMG Iran has a nuke!!" to scare up a few drum beats of war, if you're one of the psychopaths behind the curtain??

Even worse though is the North Korean progress, which imo is not nearly as advanced an energy program. Some spinners have even tried to suggest that they would use spent fuel rods to make a bomb. That's as ridiculous as saying that someone is going to drive a car, to make gas.

This is just spin, designed to incite support for McCain's favorite song.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Still, IMO neither arabs or persians should have nuclear weapons.

WHY?

If I can have an apple, then an arab can have an apple.

If I'm not allowed to have that apple then, the arab can't have it.

If we fight over it, then no one can have the apple.

If I have an apple, then I have to respect the fact the arab want's an apple.


Today's simple wisdom for you I hope you get the message rapidly.
Of how silly your point was.

Originally posted by mind is the universe

Originally posted by centurion1211

Still, IMO neither arabs or persians should have nuclear weapons.

WHY?

If I can have an apple, then an arab can have an apple.

If I'm not allowed to have that apple then, the arab can't have it.

If we fight over it, then no one can have the apple.

If I have an apple, then I have to respect the fact the arab want's an apple.


Today's simple wisdom for you I hope you get the message rapidly.
Of how silly your point was.

Whats good for the goose isn't good for the gander.

Some simple wisdom for you courtesy of my grand pappy.

If Iran has enough radioactive material to make one bomb then good for them, and to assist even further, I think Israel or the US should give Iran another eleven nukes to make it an even dozen.

But not in the way they want.

Iran's persistence in this is to their destruction.

The sooner Israel or the US get on with it, the sooner we can move on to other problem areas.

Syria.

Originally posted by CharlesMartel
It sounds like you think the President of Iran is a liar and does not plan of wiping Israel off the map.

It sounds like you believe politicians.

Do You believe American politicians all tell the truth?
Do you believe Iranian politicians are more trustworthy than American politicians?

Do you realise this "quote" has since been proven to be a mistranslation, and was first printed in a little, Jewish-owned news-sheet in Canada, and spread from there?

Originally posted by jd140

Originally posted by mind is the universe

Originally posted by centurion1211

Still, IMO neither arabs or persians should have nuclear weapons.

WHY?

If I can have an apple, then an arab can have an apple.

If I'm not allowed to have that apple then, the arab can't have it.

If we fight over it, then no one can have the apple.

If I have an apple, then I have to respect the fact the arab want's an apple.


Today's simple wisdom for you I hope you get the message rapidly.
Of how silly your point was.

Whats good for the goose isn't good for the gander.

Some simple wisdom for you courtesy of my grand pappy.

My wisdom to you,

Disern what's good for the goose isn't for the gander in this scenario

I'm all ears

Originally posted by dooper

Iran's persistence in this is to their destruction.

Dooper............


STOP trolling. Back up your statements, otherwise don't post it
Please don't derail the topic thanks.