|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Will the US attack Iran? |
| Never/Not in the foreseeable future |
|
27% |
[ 8 ] |
| No. Not during this White House Term |
|
27% |
[ 8 ] |
| I dont know/don't care |
|
6% |
[ 2 ] |
| Yes. Some time next year |
|
6% |
[ 2 ] |
| Yes. In the latter half of 2007 |
|
13% |
[ 4 ] |
| Yes. Before the end of June |
|
17% |
[ 5 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 29 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 4:51 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Go here to sign a petition designed to stop the BushCrimeFamily from going again:
http://stopiranwar.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
regicide:
| Quote: |
| My biggest beef with you others on this forum is your attempts to stifle debate |
I haven't attempted to stifle it. I mock it because I feel it warrants mockery. You see, for most of us who live in 2007 and not 1963 the subject is a non-starter. Decades ago I too entertained other scenarios in a mostly titillating effort to believe another, more sensational explanation for what went down in Dealey Plaza that late autumn day. I came to my own conclusions and moved on.
Your shouting into a prevailing wind. |
You prefer to believe that one young man, acting alone, was able to snuff out the lives of our champions rather than face the possibility that some group had been actively killing off the peace-seeking politicians in this country. I do not.
Dealy Plaza should be recognized as a highly effective assault on civilian control over the military.
Correspondingly, the Warren Commission can be seen as a delegation of the civilian leaders of our country accepting the terms laid down to them by the military. The military conceded one condition which clearly was in the initial planning; they dropped their requirement for an invasion of Cuba. Beyond that concession, the assassination and the inquiry are best recognized for what they were: a military takeover of the United States. It was nothing less.
If we are to understand and bring under control the forces which are shaping today's America and are endeavoring to shape our future, we cannot rest with the official version of the killing of John Kennedy. The model of explanation offered here explains the available data. We must employ this tool of analysis until or unless another one is offered which better explains the evidence.
If we cannot have the truth once and for all about the government's murder of John Kennedy, if the warfare interests in our government are so powerful that they cannot be questioned about such things, then let us have an end to the pretense that this is a government of the people.
If the American people choose to do nothing about what was done to John Kennedy and about the subtle conversion of their country from a democracy into a thinly disguised version of the warfare state, then the republic is lost and we will never see it again in our time.
In any event, we need no longer pretend that there is any mystery left about the assassination of John Kennedy. The cold war was the biggest business in America, worth eighty billion dollars a year as well as tremendous power to men in Washington. The President was murdered because he was genuinely seeking peace in a corrupt world. As tired as we are of the horror of the subject, all of us must address ourselves honestly to the meaning and implications of the assassination of John Kennedy, or all of us will pay the price of living in tyranny. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
Go here to sign a petition designed to stop the BushCrimeFamily from going again:
http://stopiranwar.com/ |
So I suppose you are Ok with Iran going nuclear and the inevitable horrifying consequences that would follow suit? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NAVFC:
You posed a rhetorical question (I suppose you know that) because Hite is a leftist who cares little about the fallout, literally, to the U.S.
Amazing isn't it how much the Left likes to demonize GW Bush. And now he's lumping in the father, too, who even Bill Clinton admires. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:40 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| So I suppose you are Ok with Iran going nuclear and the inevitable horrifying consequences that would follow suit? |
Nav, are you OK with Iran going nuclear? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Am I ok with Iran going nuclear ? I am not okay with Iran enjoying strategic benefits of having nuclear weapons.
If the US deploys such a system then they US will be able to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons anytime, for any reason and there is no counter measure against it. Iran won't be able to threaten US forces with nuclear weapons , nor will Iran be able to deter the US by the possession of nuclear weapons. Iran can have nuclear weapons but they can not be permitted to have the strategic benefit of possessing them.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:29 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| regicide wrote: |
You prefer to believe that one young man, acting alone, was able to snuff out the lives of our champions rather than face the possibility that some group had been actively killing off the peace-seeking politicians in this country. I do not.
Dealy Plaza should be recognized as a highly effective assault on civilian control over the military.
Correspondingly, the Warren Commission can be seen as a delegation of the civilian leaders of our country accepting the terms laid down to them by the military. The military conceded one condition which clearly was in the initial planning; they dropped their requirement for an invasion of Cuba. Beyond that concession, the assassination and the inquiry are best recognized for what they were: a military takeover of the United States. It was nothing less.
If we are to understand and bring under control the forces which are shaping today's America and are endeavoring to shape our future, we cannot rest with the official version of the killing of John Kennedy. The model of explanation offered here explains the available data. We must employ this tool of analysis until or unless another one is offered which better explains the evidence.
If we cannot have the truth once and for all about the government's murder of John Kennedy, if the warfare interests in our government are so powerful that they cannot be questioned about such things, then let us have an end to the pretense that this is a government of the people.
If the American people choose to do nothing about what was done to John Kennedy and about the subtle conversion of their country from a democracy into a thinly disguised version of the warfare state, then the republic is lost and we will never see it again in our time.
In any event, we need no longer pretend that there is any mystery left about the assassination of John Kennedy. The cold war was the biggest business in America, worth eighty billion dollars a year as well as tremendous power to men in Washington. The President was murdered because he was genuinely seeking peace in a corrupt world. As tired as we are of the horror of the subject, all of us must address ourselves honestly to the meaning and implications of the assassination of John Kennedy, or all of us will pay the price of living in tyranny. |
Oliver Stone, is that you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
Go here to sign a petition designed to stop the BushCrimeFamily from going again:
http://stopiranwar.com/ |
So I suppose you are Ok with Iran going nuclear and the inevitable horrifying consequences that would follow suit? |
What makes you think they don't already have some? It's safe to say Iran began trying to develop nuclear weapons in the early 80s. If a couple of Brits, Canadians, and Americans could do it in a couple of years over 60 years ago, I can't see how it would be so difficult for modern scientists to do the same. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
Go here to sign a petition designed to stop the BushCrimeFamily from going again:
http://stopiranwar.com/ |
So I suppose you are Ok with Iran going nuclear and the inevitable horrifying consequences that would follow suit? |
What makes you think they don't already have some? It's safe to say Iran began trying to develop nuclear weapons in the early 80s. If a couple of Brits, Canadians, and Americans could do it in a couple of years over 60 years ago, I can't see how it would be so difficult for modern scientists to do the same. |
The Manhattan Project would have cost $20 billion in 1996 US dollars. It would probably cost less to replicate the results, but it would take more than simply developing a bomb for Iran to become a credible nuclear threat. It would also have to advance its missile systems to accomodate nuclear weapons. Possible, but expensive, and most importantly, subject to estimation by foreign intelligence services. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
Go here to sign a petition designed to stop the BushCrimeFamily from going again:
http://stopiranwar.com/ |
So I suppose you are Ok with Iran going nuclear and the inevitable horrifying consequences that would follow suit? |
What makes you think they don't already have some? It's safe to say Iran began trying to develop nuclear weapons in the early 80s. If a couple of Brits, Canadians, and Americans could do it in a couple of years over 60 years ago, I can't see how it would be so difficult for modern scientists to do the same. |
The Manhattan Project would have cost $20 billion in 1996 US dollars. It would probably cost less to replicate the results, but it would take more than simply developing a bomb for Iran to become a credible nuclear threat. It would also have to advance its missile systems to accomodate nuclear weapons. Possible, but expensive, and most importantly, subject to estimation by foreign intelligence services. |
very good point there. Iran might be rolling in the petro dollars right now, but it still has a fast-growing population, most of which is stuck in poverty. And even the Iranian gov't can't afford to pour such a high % of its revenues into such a project w/out putting itself at risk with its citizens.
And yes, there is the whole missle aspect. Even if Iran were to develop nukes, it wouldn't be able to come close to hitting the US. Yes, it would be able to use them against our interests in the region (say, our base in Qatar for example) but that would be a really big waste of a nuke, don't you think? Suicidal as well.
I'm not saying Iran carrying nukes is a good thing, but we do need to keep things in perspective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
Go here to sign a petition designed to stop the BushCrimeFamily from going again:
http://stopiranwar.com/ |
So I suppose you are Ok with Iran going nuclear and the inevitable horrifying consequences that would follow suit? |
What makes you think they don't already have some? It's safe to say Iran began trying to develop nuclear weapons in the early 80s. If a couple of Brits, Canadians, and Americans could do it in a couple of years over 60 years ago, I can't see how it would be so difficult for modern scientists to do the same. |
The Manhattan Project would have cost $20 billion in 1996 US dollars. It would probably cost less to replicate the results, but it would take more than simply developing a bomb for Iran to become a credible nuclear threat. It would also have to advance its missile systems to accomodate nuclear weapons. Possible, but expensive, and most importantly, subject to estimation by foreign intelligence services. |
You forget one very important factor: everything is cheaper in third world countries, such as North Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
