| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 6:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| W.T.Carl wrote: |
| Your right. They have chosen NOT to go nuclear. If Iran or any other country wants to, THEY WILL. |
Yes, of course, this is incredibly obvious. The interesting bits are all the things that you left out, such as why nuclear capable countries, which there are many, decide not to. For example, many people point to the NPT as part of the reason why.
Are you advocating invading Iran, yes or no? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
W.T.Carl
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| No. Stand back and let the Israelis do what they gotta do. Well, that is unless Iran develops and working ICBM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| W.T.Carl wrote: |
| No. Stand back and let the Israelis do what they gotta do. Well, that is unless Iran develops and working ICBM. |
You do realize that the Mossad and the Israeli army basically realizes that they do not have the capability to use force to end the Iranian nuclear program, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| My impression was the Israel's expectation was that the US would do the dirty work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| W.T.Carl wrote: |
| No. Stand back and let the Israelis do what they gotta do. Well, that is unless Iran develops and working ICBM. |
You're telling us its naive to believe Iran is negotiating in good faith, but believing Netanyahu is reasonable given his track record?
Iraq:
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/diplomania/iraq-2002-iran-2012-compare-and-contrast-netanyahu-s-speeches-1.468213
http://www.lobelog.com/remember-bibis-wisdom-on-iraq-11-years-ago/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpQdg4D78Jc
| Quote: |
| “There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking and is working and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons – no question whatsoever,” Netanyahu, then a private citizen, told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on September 12, 2002. “And there is no question that once he acquires it, history shifts immediately.” |
Iran:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-crying-wolf-iranian-nuclear-bomb/
| Quote: |
Almost two decades ago, in 1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,” adding that, “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”
Almost 20 years later that deadline has apparently still not passed, but Netanyahu is still making dire predictions about an imminent Iranian nuclear weapon. Four years before that Congressional speech, in 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
In his 1995 book, “Fighting Terrorism,” Netanyahu once again asserted that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in “three to five years,” apparently forgetting about the expiration of his old deadline. |
Netanyahu's credibility is total shit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W.T.Carl
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you think that Israel and the Jewish people, who less than a generation ago came damned close to being rendered into soap, will stand for a nation whose leaders believe in the Twelfth Imam' developing nukes, then you are very sadly mistaken. Netanyahu isn't Benes and this sure as hell ain't 1938.
And if you think that the Jews will trust Obama to protect them, you're just plain nuts. They have to capacity to destroy Iran and will not hesitate to do so if pushed to the edge even if it means turning Tehran into a 'glow in the dark' parking lot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| W.T.Carl wrote: |
If you think that Israel and the Jewish people, who less than a generation ago came damned close to being rendered into soap, will stand for a nation whose leaders believe in the Twelfth Imam' developing nukes, then you are very sadly mistaken. Netanyahu isn't Benes and this sure as hell ain't 1938.
And if you think that the Jews will trust Obama to protect them, you're just plain nuts. They have to capacity to destroy Iran and will not hesitate to do so if pushed to the edge even if it means turning Tehran into a 'glow in the dark' parking lot. |
So basically screw the Persians? Nuke them even though the current consensus is that they are actually meeting IAEA guidelines? It's looking like Netanyahu might not even be in power much longer, so I wouldn't be so sure that the Israelies are quite as gung-ho as you imagine, and if they were then they would be a bigger threat than Iran (but they are not like you describe them). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| W.T.Carl wrote: |
If you think that Israel and the Jewish people, who less than a generation ago came damned close to being rendered into soap, will stand for a nation whose leaders believe in the Twelfth Imam' developing nukes, then you are very sadly mistaken. Netanyahu isn't Benes and this sure as hell ain't 1938.
And if you think that the Jews will trust Obama to protect them, you're just plain nuts. They have to capacity to destroy Iran and will not hesitate to do so if pushed to the edge even if it means turning Tehran into a 'glow in the dark' parking lot. |
The Jews or Israelis? De Blasio likes to point out that there are more Jews in New York City than in Tel Aviv.
In any case, if you mean the Israelis, then mutual assured destruction doctrine applies, and Israeli's 100 nuclear weapons will protect them in case diplomacy fails and Iran develops a handful of nuclear weapons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W.T.Carl
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I really don't think you have a concept of what the "Twelfth Imam" stands for. MAD only works for rational people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 14, 2015 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nothing the Iranian government has done would indicate it is irrational. Quite the contrary in fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 14, 2015 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Nothing the Iranian government has done would indicate it is irrational. Quite the contrary in fact. |
This. Dramatic, perhaps, but certainly not irrational (speaking in IR parlance here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
W.T.Carl
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
You've got me there. Every rational person believes a 9th century Imam is alive and living in well near Qum.  And every rational government routinely threatens another country with annihilation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| W.T.Carl wrote: |
| You've got me there. Every rational person believes a 9th century Imam is alive and living in well near Qum. And every rational government routinely threatens another country with annihilation. |
These pathetic complaints fail to justify pre-emptive war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yodanole
Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: La Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not a lawyer but some have mentioned this in relation to any possible Logan Act transgressions ....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desuetude |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 15, 2015 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sure. One of a dozen reasons why the Courts will not prosecute half of the Senate. Also, it is a political question, Senators have qualified immunity. Most importantly, the Courts would not apply the Logan Act in this way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
