| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| chickenpie wrote: |
| rusty1983 wrote: |
| chickenpie wrote: |
I would love to see true democracy in the M.E. I'm sure all the people there with their vote would love to accept israel  |
Yes we'll have less of your sneering, and also less of your sarcasm to the above with the one million dollars comment. Please, there are some serious people operating here. |
Seems more like about 12 people circle jerking each other. |
+1 one trick pony. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chickenpie
Joined: 24 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rusty1983 wrote: |
| chickenpie wrote: |
I would love to see true democracy in the M.E. I'm sure all the people there with their vote would love to accept israel |
Yes we'll have less of your sneering, and also less of your sarcasm to the above with the one million dollars comment. Please, there are some serious people operating here. |
True though isn't it.
The vast majority of people living in the M.E. hate Israel, if all governments in the M.E. were democratically elected Israelis days would be numbered.
Bring on true democracy for the M.E.  Bye bye Israel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And your beef with Israel is?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chickenpie
Joined: 24 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| And your beef with Israel is?? |
Any country that murders men women and children for political reasons, i.e. "We are just about to have an election, kill as many people as we can so we stay in power." Deserve nothing more that to be wiped of the map. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chickenpie wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| And your beef with Israel is?? |
Any country that murders men women and children for political reasons, i.e. "We are just about to have an election, kill as many people as we can so we stay in power." Deserve nothing more that to be wiped of the map. |
And when casting your lazy eye around the region, you see only one state that deserves to be wiped off the map? Just a bunch of Sweden's + Nazi Germany, the modern muslim world + Israel is, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| And when casting your lazy eye around the region |
I like that line. I'm gonna steal it and use it at some point in the future. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sure, but I expect an APA style citation.
Mises, 2009. Tehran Has Reached Nuclear-Weapons Breakout Capability. Daves ESL Cafe, pp.2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
Sure, but I expect an APA style citation.
Mises, 2009. Tehran Has Reached Nuclear-Weapons Breakout Capability. Daves ESL Cafe, pp.2 |
(caniff jots down the info...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asylum seeker
Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Location: On your computer screen.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The economic consequences of a strike by Israel would be pretty horrific though. Oil prices would rocket up and that's the last thing the world needs right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4afb85d6-01e0-11de-8199-000077b07658.html
| Quote: |
Nuclear Iran? Decision time is here
Barack Obama�s foreign policy team knew that sooner or later they would face a crisis over Iran. Unfortunately for the new US president, the crisis is already upon them.
On Friday, the Financial Times reported that �Iran has built up a stockpile of enough enriched uranium for one nuclear bomb�. That same day, Benjamin Netanyahu was invited to form Israel�s next government.
Mr Netanyahu thinks that the Iranian government is �preparing another Holocaust for the Jewish state�. He has said: �It is 1938 and Iran is Germany.� Mr Netanyahu said this in 2006, so logically it is now 1941 � but the intervening years have not calmed him down. He thinks that an Iranian nuclear weapon would be a mortal threat to Israel.
As for President Obama, he has promised to �do everything in my power� to prevent Iran getting nuclear weapons. But how can he stop them?
A huge clue to the administration�s approach was given by Gary Samore in a speech in Israel on December 18. Shortly afterwards, it emerged that Mr Samore would handle the non-proliferation job in the Obama White House. His words carry weight.
Mr Samore said there was �a growing sense in the region and more broadly that Iran�s nuclear effort is unstoppable�. But he gave three reasons why an Obama diplomatic initiative might just work. The most important is the collapse in world oil prices, which makes Iran more vulnerable to economic sanctions. The second is that Mr Obama can make a credible offer of much better relations with the US. And third, Mr Obama�s popularity overseas will make it easier for him to line up international support for sanctions.
But Mr Samore was far from sanguine that this would be enough. He noted that �Moscow and Beijing basically don�t share our concern about Iran�s nuclear programme�, and that Iran�s leadership �probably value the acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability much more than better relations with the US�. He said: �We have to be realistic, and stopping Iran at this point is going to be a very difficult challenge.� The Iranians, he predicted, would attempt to �drag out negotiations . . . while they continue to build up their enrichment capability�. So the US should set a deadline for the suspension of enrichment. The initial deal should trade suspension of enrichment for suspension of sanctions.
The Obama administration will do its utmost. But if the diplomatic effort fails, Mr Samore thinks that the US will be left with �two unappetising choices of either trying to manage Iran with a bomb or bombing Iran�.
Iran�s nuclear progress means that the US may have to face this �unappetising choice� rather sooner than the Obama team anticipated. The latest news from Iran suggests that the Iranians could produce material for a single bomb within months � although that would require a very public and detectable reconfiguration of their nuclear facilities.
So what should the Americans do? Mr Netanyahu will tell them that there is only one choice � bomb. His argument is based on the assumption that the Iranian government is run by genocidal maniacs, who would actively welcome Armageddon. Given the religious rhetoric of the Iranian regime, this possibility cannot be entirely dismissed. But most strategic experts � even in Israel � do not think that Iran is bent on nuking Israel.
Ephraim Kam, of the Jaffe Centre for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, is fairly typical in arguing that a combination of Israeli and US nuclear deterrence would mean that �Iran will not use nuclear weapons, not against us and not against any other country.�
In common with many strategic thinkers across the Middle East, Mr Kam�s biggest fear is not that Iran will become a fundamentalist suicide-bomber state. He and others worry instead about a resurgent Persian empire, bent on regional domination.
An Iran with nuclear weapons could destabilise the region in numerous ways. It could back radical Islamist movements such as Hizbollah and Hamas with more energy and less fear of reprisals. It could threaten and intimidate the oil states of the Gulf. It could frighten more of the educated and mobile Israeli middle class into emigrating. And it could precipitate a destabilising arms race across the region � as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Gulf States and Turkey all rushed to go nuclear.
All of those developments would be deeply unappealing. But is it worth going to war to stop them? That question, in turn, breaks down into a number of subsidiary questions. Would a military attack work � or would Iran be able to rebuild swiftly? Would Iranian retaliation lead to a broader military conflict across the Gulf region � the home of US military bases and much of the world�s oil? Would Israel attack if Washington held back?
The US would have a much better chance than Israel of really setting back Iran�s nuclear programme, because � unlike the Israelis � the US could mount a sustained bombing campaign. But such a campaign would also be much more likely to broaden into a wider regional war. At that point, the war would have brought about the result it was launched to prevent � the destabilisation of the entire Middle East.
The world has already had to learn to live with a nuclear Pakistan and a nuclear North Korea. If it comes to it, we will have to live with a nuclear Iran. But nobody can be casual about that prospect. It is time for the Obama administration to launch a last big push to head off the Iranian bomb � and for the rest of the world to line up in support of that effort. |
Tough decision.. I'm glad I'm a Monday morning quarterback on this one. To bomb, or not to bomb.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chickenpie wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| And your beef with Israel is?? |
Any country that murders men women and children for political reasons, i.e. "We are just about to have an election, kill as many people as we can so we stay in power." Deserve nothing more that to be wiped of the map. |
Oh yes, as if the 300-400 rockets that hit Israel in a span of two weeks had absolutely nothing to do with why Israel decided to engage Hamas in gaza right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aquaponics08
Joined: 22 Dec 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:00 pm Post subject: Re: Tehran Has Reached Nuclear-Weapons Breakout Capability |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON -- Iranian scientists have reached "nuclear weapons breakout capability," according to a new report based on findings of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency...
Iran has consistently denied the weapons allegations, calling them "baseless" and "fabricated." |
Either such analyses as this one are simply wrong or Tehran will soon be exposed as lying to the international community on this issue. In the latter scenario, we will all learn the truth when and if Tehran test-detonates a warhead.
CNN Reports |
Their technology is more than 60 years old. Pretty much the same as the US had in WWII. Iran has signed and abided by all nuclear treaties, whereas Israel has as many as 200 (or more) nukes and has signed or abides by NONE! More propaganda, Israel has been screaming that Iran is 6 months away from having a nuke since the 1990's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Iran likely has enough material to make a nuclear weapon, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told CNN's John King Sunday.
"We think they do, quite frankly," Mullen said on "State of The Union."
"Iran having a nuclear weapon, I believe, for a long time, is a very, very bad outcome for the region and for the world," he said... |
CNN Reports |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Again, a single uranium Hiroshima-style weapon is not enough.
If Iran taps the tech to get highly-enriched uranium/plutonium, then I'd be worried. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
