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.

 

Iranian Nukes... Should the World Allow Madmen Such Power?

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 
Well, we can't go acting preemptively because of words spoken alone, or in conjunction with the idea that they might be building a nuclear weapon, sans proof. It's often not worth it, look at the Iraq campaign as an example of why - Iraq is now one of the top three nations in the world suffering terrorism within it's borders, this was not the case before our arrival. Think about the cost, think about the consequences, the ramifications.

What tricks might Iran have up it's sleeve if we do choose to go striking nuclear sites? I bet you more than Iraq had up theirs.

Regarding what was said specifically, that is often up for debate but what Ahmadinejad was trying to convey I think is that the Israeli regime occupying Jerusalem must go. He never referred to Israel itself, however, nor suggested blowing them sky high or anything like that. The problem came when this message was lost in translation and misconstrued to mean what CBS/Mike Wallace thought it could mean.

Iran won't attack Israel, or the U.S. first. They know deploying a nuclear weapon would be the end of them.




posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sek82
reply to post by GhostLancer
 
Well, we can't go acting preemptively because of words spoken alone, or in conjunction with the idea that they might be building a nuclear weapon, sans proof. It's often not worth it, look at the Iraq campaign as an example of why - Iraq is now one of the top three nations in the world suffering terrorism within it's borders, this was not the case before our arrival. Think about the cost, think about the consequences, the ramifications.

What tricks might Iran have up it's sleeve if we do choose to go striking nuclear sites? I bet you more than Iraq had up theirs.

Regarding what was said specifically, that is often up for debate but what Ahmadinejad was trying to convey I think is that the Israeli regime occupying Jerusalem must go. He never referred to Israel itself, however, nor suggested blowing them sky high or anything like that. The problem came when this message was lost in translation and misconstrued to mean what CBS/Mike Wallace thought it could mean.

Iran won't attack Israel, or the U.S. first. They know deploying a nuclear weapon would be the end of them.

A lot of the turmoil in Iraq was incited by terrorist agents (perhaps al Qaida) from Iran during the US occupation. It is far easier to destroy than to create. US influences in Iraq sought to create. Iranian influences sought to destroy.

As far as Ahmadinejad (Iranian president) goes, in a few of his speeches (Youtube it if you care), he has directly, publicly called for the destruction of Israel in no uncertain terms. If I were a high-paid lawyer on his defense team I could NOT disprove this because it is on video, on Youtube... it is *everywhere.* There is no way to contradict what he has said, what he has called for. There is no backtracking. There is no apology. There is no way to state that he "misspoke" his intentions. He has (for the world record) without doubt stated his position on Israel (and its citizens: babies, children, women, men, elderly) DEATH. DESTRUCTION. There is not backing away from what he has stated. You can't rewind history on this. He said this. There is no redaction, no erasing. He said these things. People who argue otherwise are lying to themselves and the world.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 


What a joke. Do some more research. The US has bombed or invaded over 20 countries since WW2 alone. Iran has had armed conflicts with.. 1, Iraq, who we also bombed and invaded of course. 20+ vs 1. Who are the real "madmen" here?

We have plenty of our asshat politicians calling for Iran's invasion/destruction all the damn time too... yet you think we should invade a country cause their politicians talk # on Isreal's current government sometimes, just like ours talk # on Iran and various other countries? Countries puff out their chests and make hollow boasts/threats all the time, it's just a big pissing contest, nothing to take too seriously, the US does it more than anyone.

And Isreal is hardly an angel in the first place, they have done plenty to earn the dislike of other countries, and hell the American people would dislike Isreal too if they actually got the real story about Isreal's disturbing intelligence operations and manipulation of the US instead of being brainwashed by pro-Isreal propaganda all the damn time.

Iran is not retarded. They are not going to attack the US or Isreal first. They do not want to get nuked and wiped the # out in the blink of an eye. Thus, the ONLY way Iran poses any threat to Isreal (they pose none to the US..) is if Isreal or the US attack them first, if they are going to get wiped out anyway then obviously they are going to go out fighting. So just leave them the hell alone, and they will leave Isreal the hell alone. Isreal's problems, which they create for themselves, should not be our responsibility in the first place though...

In conclusion, your posts are completely hypocritical, just like all the warmongering politicians in the US that get us in these stupid wars with countries that have 0 capability and desire to actually invade the US and thus should not be invaded by us. If talking # was reason enough to invade/bomb a country, then pretty much every country in the world would be in ruins right now, also pretty much half of people on the internet would be dead from talking # too. I'm all for invading/bombing a country that tries to invade/attack us, or goes about trying to conquer the world like Germany did, but otherwise we should just leave countries the hell alone just like we expect to be left the hell alone.
edit on 29-2-2012 by darkest4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 
Okay, we will pretend he said some of that... No, he said all of that, just like that in caps. Shouting, like a madman, calling for destruction (nevermind the fact I can't find any videos of him saying this).

Has he done any of it? That's my point.

As far as Iranian influence in Iraq during the campaign... I won't disagree it wasn't occurring to some degree, however,

There is no evidence the Iranians have directly attacked U.S. troops in Iraq, intelligence officials said. *



posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by darkest4
 

The point is not that Iran *will* attack anyone first. The point is that Iran's president has called for the destruction of Israel and the West... while simultaneously pursuing nuclear technology in an oil-rich country. First, Iran has so much oil that it really doesn't *need* nuclear technology. Second, nuclear technology is easily weaponized. So, if you connect the proverbial dots, a country with a president who calls for death and destruction of Israel and the West is pursuing a technology for "energy purposes" while they have an *abundance* of natural energy raises eyebrows.

This is like an angry child shouting for death and destruction while slowly loading his flamethrower with fuel in a library filled with innocents. How long should good people wait before removing the child's capability for death and destruction?

The situation would be FAR DIFFERENT if Iran's president would not have been announcing his hostile intentions for Israel and the West in public forums. In reply to those who ignore this by claiming they can't find youtube video of him saying this? I have a link to one such video if you scroll back through this thread. OR you can youtube it yourself. To say you can't find a video is pure denial and laziness.



posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 


do you actually believe your own post? or where you forced at gunpoint to write it?

The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program.
If you are an oil rich country, you sell the oil, not burn it, why on earth would you burn up an asset?

as for the threats about wiping out Israel,I see plenty of headlines about Israel and the US debating who will shoot first one day and then distancing themselves the second.



posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   
I don't think they are anymore mad than NK

If we can sleep at night knowing NK has the bomb, I'm sure we will sleep just as well knowing Iran does, too.



posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
let them have them... the psychotic bastards in d.c and tel aviv already have nukes and are a far greater threat than iran ever will be.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by munkey66
reply to post by GhostLancer
 


do you actually believe your own post? or where you forced at gunpoint to write it?

The nuclear program of Iran was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program...

I do believe that Iran was under *DIFFERENT* leadership at the time of the supposed launching of its nuclear program. In fact, relations with Iran were considered "pretty good" until the Shaw was overthrown and a new "Supreme Leader" took power. I believe, at that point, ANY AND ALL alliances evaporated. I do believe, at that point, ANY AND ALL joint programs and/or past agreements vanished because of the overthrow of the Shaw. I do believe, at that point, the MADNESS began to grow and fester, ushering Iran into a revenge-based and hateful leadership that alienated it from the Western world.

So, while you bring up something from the 1950s, you also *ignore* the fact that it was under a different regime. C'mon.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by NowIsThe
I don't think they are anymore mad than NK

If we can sleep at night knowing NK has the bomb, I'm sure we will sleep just as well knowing Iran does, too.

Well, North Korea has a watchdog to keep things *mostly* under control: China. It's true, the madness is there (NK's people are eating WOOD for goodness sake, they are so poor), but it's also apples and bananas. In the case of NK, if NK starts a nuclear war, China is in the area of effect --without the US even being involved. In the case of Iran, if there is a nuclear war, no Western nation is as close as China is to NK. No Western nations border Iran. So, a nuclear war (if contained in the Middle East) would not greatly affect the West. China does not want a nuclear conflict in a border nation like NK. Thus, China would probably "encourage" NK to stand down.

There is no such neighbor for Iran. There are some partner countries with vested interest in Iran, though: China, Russia, perhaps France. These countries have huge investments in Iran and would not like to see them evaporate in the form of mushroom clouds. However, Iranian leadership has proven that it is beholden to none. People who want to destroy COUNTRIES probably don't have much consideration for foreign allies. Iranian leadership has proven to be unstable and bloodthirsty. They are responsible for the majority of the bombings that killed the "millions" others attributed to the US in Iraq. Iranian agents and al'Qaida are responsible for the massive bloodshed and bombings that took place in Iraq ---to make the US look bad.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by GhostLancer

Originally posted by NowIsThe
I don't think they are anymore mad than NK

If we can sleep at night knowing NK has the bomb, I'm sure we will sleep just as well knowing Iran does, too.

Well, North Korea has a watchdog to keep things *mostly* under control: China. It's true, the madness is there (NK's people are eating WOOD for goodness sake, they are so poor), but it's also apples and bananas. In the case of NK, if NK starts a nuclear war, China is in the area of effect --without the US even being involved. In the case of Iran, if there is a nuclear war, no Western nation is as close as China is to NK. No Western nations border Iran. So, a nuclear war (if contained in the Middle East) would not greatly affect the West. China does not want a nuclear conflict in a border nation like NK. Thus, China would probably "encourage" NK to stand down.

There is no such neighbor for Iran. There are some partner countries with vested interest in Iran, though: China, Russia, perhaps France. These countries have huge investments in Iran and would not like to see them evaporate in the form of mushroom clouds. However, Iranian leadership has proven that it is beholden to none. People who want to destroy COUNTRIES probably don't have much consideration for foreign allies. Iranian leadership has proven to be unstable and bloodthirsty. They are responsible for the majority of the bombings that killed the "millions" others attributed to the US in Iraq. Iranian agents and al'Qaida are responsible for the massive bloodshed and bombings that took place in Iraq ---to make the US look bad.




The neighbors of Iran have been taken over. Look at the amount of US bases. To think that Iran hasn't had a target on its back for a very long time is crazy.



posted on Mar, 6 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487

Originally posted by GhostLancer

Originally posted by NowIsThe
I don't think they are anymore mad than NK

If we can sleep at night knowing NK has the bomb, I'm sure we will sleep just as well knowing Iran does, too.

Well, North Korea has a watchdog to keep things *mostly* under control: China. It's true, the madness is there (NK's people are eating WOOD for goodness sake, they are so poor), but it's also apples and bananas. In the case of NK, if NK starts a nuclear war, China is in the area of effect --without the US even being involved. In the case of Iran, if there is a nuclear war, no Western nation is as close as China is to NK. No Western nations border Iran. So, a nuclear war (if contained in the Middle East) would not greatly affect the West. China does not want a nuclear conflict in a border nation like NK. Thus, China would probably "encourage" NK to stand down.

There is no such neighbor for Iran. There are some partner countries with vested interest in Iran, though: China, Russia, perhaps France. These countries have huge investments in Iran and would not like to see them evaporate in the form of mushroom clouds. However, Iranian leadership has proven that it is beholden to none. People who want to destroy COUNTRIES probably don't have much consideration for foreign allies. Iranian leadership has proven to be unstable and bloodthirsty. They are responsible for the majority of the bombings that killed the "millions" others attributed to the US in Iraq. Iranian agents and al'Qaida are responsible for the massive bloodshed and bombings that took place in Iraq ---to make the US look bad.




The neighbors of Iran have been taken over. Look at the amount of US bases. To think that Iran hasn't had a target on its back for a very long time is crazy.

Iranian leadership has been publicly calling for the destruction of Israel and the West. This is FACT. When a neighbor threatens to kill you, people in the neighborhood tend to blink a few times then prepare to defend themselves. Again, a madman is swinging a machete threatening to kill people. How long should others wait to take action? The time has come. Also, *again*, it's not the Iranian people. It's their leadership. It's all about CONTEXT.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join