If Barry's actions in the Persian Gulf lead to a Nuclear War will the MSM still be Cheerleaders for

I think that if A Nuclear War occurs because of Barry's actions in the Middle East,some liberal voices in the Media(Those on MSNBC for instance)will be brutal and throw Him aside. I think However that most of the media(those on CBS,ABC,NBC and CNN)will go down in flames with Barry and the Gov't while still singing it's praises.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by BigDaveJr]

reply to post by BigDaveJr


Can they revoke a Nobel Peace Prize? Someone needs to stop by and pick up Barry and Al's both! I think there may have been a mix-up in the distribution. Al lies about Global Warming and attacks a Masseuse for sex and gets a Nobel prize, Barry lies about bringing troops home, and gets us into a potential nuclear conflict with war brewing on FOUR fronts, and gets a Nobel prize?

I wonder what I would have to do to get a prize? Kick the neighbors dog? Attack his daughter? No, No, No too small scale. Maybe I could launch a television show, get a ship and go and violently attack and do thousands of dollars worth of damage to the whalers? No, no, they may have to rescue me and graciously give me a ride home. Hmmmm, maybe I could dress up crazy, start rumors that I am an androgenous alien, and sing about sex all the time while claiming to be celibate? No, that gets me a visit with the queen, but no Nobel Prize......I'll keep thinking.

reply to post by getreadyalready


If He gets a Nobel Prize for doing absolutely nothing,it's an award will no real value anymore.

Originally posted by BigDaveJr
I think that if A Nuclear War occurs because of Barry's actions in the Middle East,some liberal voices in the Media(Those on MSNBC for instance)will be brutal and throw Him aside. I think However that most of the media(those on CBS,ABC,NBC and CNN)will go down in flames with Barry and the Gov't while still singing it's praises.

Your post is quite low on analysis or facts, and high on divisive vitriol. This is some of the lowest quality stuff anyone is likely to encounter on ATS.

reply to post by buddhasystem


Gee thanks for the input,I guess you go down as a foe

reply to post by buddhasystem


Why even bother to reply to the post then? You're entitled to your opinion. He's asking a a question for clarification and to see where everyone else stands on the idea.

We seriously need some bug spray to use in the forums lately. People are continually jumping in a thread with no other purpose but to derail it and disallow peaceful discussion.

To inject a bit of reality into this: How exactly would the events in the Middle East lead to a nuclear war? The only country in the region with nukes is Israel. Iran has the capability to produce them eventually but this is far more of an involved process than most in the public understand.

Even having a nuclear bomb does not mean that a country has a way to deliver it. Note that the first nuclear weapons were dropped by massive B-29 Superfortress heavy bombers, these are not the kind of hardware most countries just have sitting around in storage. Mating of a bomb to a missile is incredibly complex and requires a great deal of technical and manufacturing skill, not to mention money.

The only scenario that I can see happening where Iran and Israel go into a nuclear exchange is if Iran manages some ingenious asymmetrical attack on Israel first and then the Israelis respond with conventional nuclear weapons. For this to happen Iran would have to develop some kind of delivery system that is not yet in use, perhaps using a semi truck or ship, get that to Israel without detection and detonate it hoping that it works completely untested.

Israel would then have to run an absolute gauntlet of European Union and Russian aircraft, hell bent on preventing a retaliatory strike or even less likely incur into Iraqi airspace and take on the United States Air Force in order to even reach Iran with enough fuel to make the hit.

This is so far out of the likely turn of events that it would be laughable even in a movie or novel.

Originally posted by PayMeh
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Why even bother to reply to the post then? You're entitled to your opinion.

And ATS also gives me the privilege to express my own, thank you.

reply to post by ProjectJimmy


Wrong. Pakistan, India, Russia, and any number of the old Soviet States could have Nuclear arsenals. Iran could have them as well, if we are claiming they are 1 year away, and they are not allowing inspections, then maybe they are not a whole year away. China certainly has them, and also has interests in Iran worth protecting. Terrorist cells operating out of Iran could be harboring stolen, smuggled, or bought nuclear weapons. The US and UK certainly have nukes in addition to Israel.

The potential for nuclear escalation is there, although I doubt it is necessary. Today's conventional weapons are better than yesterday's nukes. Other than population decimation, nukes have really outlived their usefulness. Today's wars are surgical strikes and bunker busters. Not massive casualty wars.

The OP made a post about media bias, and I agreed, the networks will shower the anointed one with praise while dehumanizing the Iranians.

And yes, revoke his Nobel Peace prize.

Your thread title appears to be both intellectually misleading as well as purposefully inflammatory. You might get some real and fruitful discussion about real facts and issues without attempting to draw simply your own ilk for a back-patting session or those radical opponents who are your polar opposites for a fight by couching this in more realistic terms. But then again, it all depends on what your agenda is. People who have lost focus of the basic tenets of this country and who continue to make every effort to divide Americans based on trivialities when unity is our only hope are the ones not to be trusted or believed in my view. Just my two cents.

That being said, Yes. I can see the MSM remaining cheerleaders for "Barry" if the world is burning. That would be just like them.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by ~Lucidity]

Originally posted by star in a jar
The OP made a post about media bias, and I agreed, the networks will shower the anointed one with praise while dehumanizing the Iranians.

And yes, revoke his Nobel Peace prize.

If you say so. Having the capability to post does not mean having the merit to post and you got a lot more out of the op than I did. I mean:

think that if A Nuclear War occurs because of Barry's actions in the Middle East,some liberal voices in the Media(Those on MSNBC for instance)will be brutal and throw Him aside. I think However that most of the media(those on CBS,ABC,NBC and CNN)will go down in flames with Barry and the Gov't while still singing it's praises.

What does that even mean? Why is "A Nuclear War" capitalized? Who is Barry? Who is Him? Jesus? God? Is there some significance to "However" being capitalized? Why would CBS, ABC, NBC and CNN go down in flames while singing the government's praises, yet MSNBC would be brutal and "throw 'Him' aside?" What does that even mean? I can't even figure out what it signifies. Is there the inference that MSNBC is less liberal than supposed?

Totally agree with buddhasystem: a thread of zero value and I'm proud to say so.

Barry is out for blood, no doubt about it.

Expanding the wars, imposing act-of-war sanctions against Iran, etc..

Throughout history, politicians have sought out war for political gain.

War is the health of the State.

We can expect a lot more of it here soon as the economy continues its debt implosion.

Next up, a default on US debt and hyper-inflation.

reply to post by BigDaveJr


I hope this is not deemed OT, but your very OP is disparaging and insulting.

BECAUSE you are ignorantly insulting the President of the United States -- and I believe that falls into a category here at ATS that is frowned upon.

We shall see....

(For context, imagine that in, say...2007 someone started a thread with the name "Georgie Jr." in the title? ...or worse....)

[edit on 29-6-2010 by Big Raging Loner]

Originally posted by Big Raging Loner


[edit on 29-6-2010 by Big Raging Loner]

Me too! I was certain that it was something from The Onion, or some other satire website. Then I learned that they voted for the prize way back in January of his term? He won it basically just for being sworn into office? He won it for campaign promises? He won it for being 1/2 black?

Parallel Universe indeed! I thought it could never get worse than Al Gore's acceptance. Boy was I wrong!

Edit: Oh Boo! I have posted way worse than scientifically correct terms for male and female anatomy? Edited so soon?


[edit on 29-6-2010 by getreadyalready]

reply to post by weedwhacker


I think Our "President" is going to destroy Our Country if He gets His way. I have no respect for Him,He may be Your President,but He's not mine. Hopefully in 2012,I'll get a President that I can believe in!

reply to post by getreadyalready


Actually all of the former-Soviet states except for Russia have given up their nuclear arsenals because of the expense of them and the fact that they needed to add much of the control systems that existed in Moscow if they ever were to be used.

India and Pakistan's weapons are firmly pointed at the other, and their rivalry has become very low key in recent years. China has absolutely zero interest in a nuclear war, it'd be the death of their country economically. The United States, United Kingdom and France simply will not use them, unless nuked first. Russia has no reason to use their nukes, they are starting to side with the United States in Iran and I still believe they are highly inflating the number of usable weapons they have.

This leaves Iran and Israel as the only real nuclear players in the Middle East, and saying that Iran is a year from a bomb still means they are many years from a deliverable bomb. As I said, it's not easy to make a bomb, but it's really hard to make one that you can use. North Korea is still working on that part and probably can't even nuke Tokyo yet. Israel stood on the shoulders of the US, UK and France to make their systems work, Iran does not have that luxury.

I actually do not believe there are loose nukes in the hands of terrorist organizations for one simple fact: They would have used them by now. You can bet Osama would have loved to take down more than the World Trade Center and a wing of the Pentagon. Al-Quaeda here in the UK would like nothing more than to turn my fair London into a hole and we could go on for pages about what various groups would do to Israel if they could, but none of it has happened yet.

What possible motivation would a terrorist organization today have for holding a nuclear weapon in reserve? Nuclear deterrence only works between countries, and if any organization ever proclaimed to the world that they had one for that purpose, they would be swamped by NATO troops within hours.

Russia, the best bet for a loose nuke, has locked down their stockpiles, and there are a number of contingencies in place just in case anything from Pakistan ever goes missing. The Asian powers and United States are watching North Korea like circling hawks for any exportation of nuclear materials and it would be far easier to walk to the moon than to steal a nuke from America, France, China or the United Kingdom.

This leaves us again with Israel and Iran. Iran has the already mentioned limitations and I truly pity any terrorist idiotic enough to try to steal a nuke from Israel. I do not think there are enough virgins in all of heaven to help one get over what Mossad would do to them.

I do think you're right the age of nuclear war is ending, we do have much better conventional bombs now. Honestly what I am really afraid of in an Iran-Israel conflict is the use of chemical weapons those are far cheaper and easier to deliver and we know for a fact that Iran has them.

Originally posted by BigDaveJr
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

I think Our "President" is going to destroy Our Country if He gets His way. I have no respect for Him,He may be Your President,but He's not mine. Hopefully in 2012,I'll get a President that I can believe in!

I have stayed out of the bickering thus far, but this is too much. You live in a Democracy, you vote, you lose, you support your president. I don't mind you calling him Barry, I don't mind you being opposed to his sweetheart relationship with the press, and I don't mind you wanting him out of office, but he is, IN FACT, your president, and you need to support the democratic process, or find a new home!

Everyone that thinks they don't have to support someone they didn't vote for, needs to grow up! Maybe you should have campaigned better for your candidate? Maybe you should have done more to get your opinion out? You do realize, that no matter how much he has done wrong, not every problem is his? Patriot Acts...not his. Iraq....not his. Economic problems...not his, though certainly mishandled and exascberated by him!

Support the Prez. Campaign, Run for office, join a Tea Party, whatever, get a better government in office, but know your place and quit whining like a 2nd grader that didn't get his way!

reply to post by getreadyalready


somebody else is itchin' to get on somebody's enemies list. just sayin'