1  2  3  4  5 ... 10  Next

Iran is probably the single greatest State sponsor and director of terrorist cells that the world has ever seen making CIA and KGB efforts appear amateurish by comparison. From Lebanon, to Israel to Iraq hundreds of civilians die every day as a result of coordinating terrorism efforts by Tehran.

Iran has been cozying up to North Korea and also been making inroads into Africa and even the Americas with their new partnership with Venezuela.

This is a country which formally coordinated the World Holocaust Deniers Conference, pays no attention to human rights, hosted a global anti-Jewish cartoon contest, has a leader who repeatedly talks about wiping Israel off the map and generally carries on in actuality, like many on the far left believe America and Bush behave....the only difference is the Iranian threat is real.

Now Iran is anywhere from 1-5 years away from possessing a nuclear bomb and associated technology that if moderates can somehow stop Ahmadinejad from martyring himself and Iran, it is unlikely that they will prevent the vast network of Iranian terror cells from being given small nukes to detonate in Israel, the Americas or Europe.

   

Well Bush tried but he misspelled and came up with Iraq.

   

I loled hard at that.


And what we can do? Carpet bomb them. Destroy the reactor, and the rest of the Iranian military. I don't think the US Air Force would have any challenge. We didn't in Iraq, I'm sure it won't change with Iran...plus we control the waters of the Persian Gulf.

Sanctions suck, so a few hundred airstrikes, with Israeli hitting the reactor, while we get the other shit, it'll work well as long as we don't kill civvies

   

Before or after the "war" would end and the occupation beggins?

Civies die in any war, it's inevitable. Only thing u can do is kill as few as possible.

   

Only thing you can do? Couldn't you also try to, oh I don't know, not start a war?

   

Sometimes war might be a good thing. In the case of a nuclear Iran there are some pretty good arguments for killing a few civilians to spare the lives of thousands of others.

   

Making a nuclear devise is a simple but costly enterprise. North Korea proved that!
I for one am not terribly concerned that 5 years from now that iran will have a nuke the size of a cargo container. The real trick is to make a smaller one which works.

   

well Bush wants to attack Iran.... (he loves war) so doubt much will happen until after the US election...... pray the republicans dont get in.. or it will be more of the same crap..

   

I haven't seen so many factually incorrect statements in one post on this forum until reading the first one for this topic.

The CIA was definitely the most successful organization when it comes to sponsoring terrorism (or freedom fighters, anti-leftists, whatever lexicon you use is irrelevant). To be quite honest, right here I almost stopped reading your post because of the complete incorrectness of that statement, but I will continue because there are some more factual inconsistencies that need to be explained for the benefit of other people reading this thread. A good primer to educate yourself would be to read about Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRGC and especially the Quds forces. To supplement your reading, feel free to read about the Contras, Bay of Pigs Invasion, PBSUCCESS, Operation Charly, the Chadian Civil War, Operation Brother Sam, Operation Condor, Congo Crisis, and especially the Taliban and Operation Ajax - these are just the ones I can name off the top of my head.

To say the Quds force is the most successful sponsor of terror is giving them way too much credit and hardly enough credit to the CIA. Both countries sponsor groups that serve their perceived national interests. The Quds force is limited to regional groups and has little control over the ones that they are affiliated with.

Yes, Iran has had diplomatic relations with Venezuela, but I have no idea what this has to do with anything. The only thing the two countries have in common is their hatred for American foreign policy, and if you read about the operations I listed, it isn't hard to understand why. Also, Venezuela has a much freer political system than Iran does.

North Korea on the other hand, successfully tested a nuclear weapon and the US offered them swathes of goodies in return for shutting down their nuclear program. When looking at how Pakistan and North Korea were treated after acquiring nuclear weapons, it seems you would have to be crazy not to have nukes. All this is besides the point however, because there is no evidence that Iran is currently pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

I agree that hosting the "International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust" was in bad taste and did nothing useful.

As for hosting an anti-Jewish cartoon contest, realize that this was a childish response to the Muslim cartoons published in Denmark. I support freedom of speech in all respects, including cartoons that may poke fun at religions.

Lastly, the quote about wiping Israel off the map is a fiction, please read the actual translation from the source speech.

I always find the talk about handing off a nuclear weapon to a terrorist group funny, because although it sounds somewhat plausible, there is absolutely no evidence at all to back up such a notion. I would like to have my politicians make their policy decisions on factual, hard evidence, not wild speculation about "what if" and I hope you would as well. If you are honestly worried about nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, you should be paying more attention to Pakistan than Iran.

   

Come on, that's not always an option. If war happens, you want to limit civilian causalities.

BTW That quote everyone was attributing to PluggyRug is actually mine

   

Iran cannot get it's hands on a nuclear weapon period and this is not a USA problem, it's a world problem (all of us) and we need to make sure it doesn't ever happen. That country has proven over and over it cannot be trusted (It's leaders/Army).

Any country that uses the rhetoric to wipe out other nations completely should be of concern to everyone on the planet. IMHO

   

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... ran108.xml

Iran drew condemnation from around the world today by announcing it had begun installing new facilities to produce uranium in defiance of United Nations sanctions.

At a ceremony to mark Iran's nuclear day, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that work had started to set up lines of 6,000 centrifuges, capable of refining nuclear material at a facility in Natanz.



The French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, said the announcement demonstrated that Iran was a "dangerous" country and called for "reinforced" sanctions against the theocratic state.

"I fear that we will have to continue on the road of sanctions if there is no response from the Iranians," he said.

"If that continues these sanctions must be reinforced but at the same time we must have dialogue."

Greg Schulte, America's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iran was determined to defy the international community in pursuit of a nuclear breakthrough.

"Today's announcement reflects the Iranian leadership's continuing violation of international obligations and refusal to address international concerns," he said.

"This approach has not brought Iran international respect or accolade but rather increasing censure and sanction."

The Foreign Office in London also expressed its disappointment: "Iran has not only failed to suspend enrichment but has chosen to ignore the will of the international community by announcing the installation of new centrifuges.

"This is despite the fact that Iran's enrichment programme has no apparent civilian purpose, and shows that Iran is making no effort to restore international confidence in its intentions."

While the new equipment is thought to be more advanced than previous devices installed at Natanz, nuclear analysts report that Iran has not yet surmounted technical difficulties in getting the machines to operate at optimum capacity.

Concern over Iran's nuclear programme centres on accusations that the country intends to create a production facility that can manufacture material for use in a nuclear bomb.

Precision engineered centrifuges are steel tubes arranged in a connected production line that spin at speeds of 1,000 metres per second.

To make weapons grade material the uranium gas must be refined to a 90 per cent concentration.

Iran celebrates a national day of nuclear technology every April 8.

President Ahmadinejad, an outspoken hardliner, will make a speech later today in which he is expected to outline the country's nuclear ambitions.

On arrival he warned there were more claims to come.

He said: "In addition to installation of 6,000 new centrifuges, there are also reports about other new achievements."

A semi-official news agency announced today that Iran's former nuclear negotiator, Hossein Moussavian, had been given a two-year suspended jail sentence for "harming national security".

Mr Moussavian was arrested for having social contacts with former British officials.

   

If Iran is building WMD's, which they apparently can now. You are saying, we shouldn't start a war to inflict less Iranian civilian casualties? That would be great if the chance Iran isn't building WMD's is true. However there is still a 50% chance that they are building them. By not starting a war, and if they do got WMD's which it apparently seems that way since they constantly violate UN rulings, and don't let UN investigate what they are doing. Then you would see a lot more civilian blood then you would have with the war, only problem is. It's going to be Israel's blood, then after them. U.S.'s Blood, which would include Canada as any WMD going to America would also be hitting Canada. Either by how big the explosion radius is, or if the U.S. decided to shoot them down (Most likely), and if any get shot over Canada. All that would be sprinkling over Canada.

I believe some countries still have WMD's, like the U.S.
It's hard to get them get rid of them when they got it in there pockets. Can't quite invade them without the risk of them using it. However, when you get a country like Iran who has all signs of building them. Then you take it out before they can do it, what the world doesn't need is another country's with WMD's in there pockets. Expecially a Middle East country.

   

Those are not words from my keyboard.

   

Gee, where have I heard this song and dance before.... oh yea, in Iraq where sanctions were working and there were no WMD. That's right, sanctions were working. Did some stuff slip through? Yup, always does. Bottom line, the sanctions were working well enough to keep Saddam out of the WMD market. In fact, he was further away from WMD capability than he was after desert storm.

I like how in the poll it says sanctions = nothing, that's funny. Sanctions = country going broke. It is not a small deal.

War is not always avoidable, but it should always be the last resort.

   

1  2  3  4  5 ... 10  Next