Your assuming that the leadership of Iran is governed by rational people. That is a mistake on your part. Anyone who has kept up with the hard news knows that the leader of Iran intends to bring about the Apocalypse to usher in the 12th Imam..

This is not rumor or innuendo. This is FACT, drawn from his own statements.

It's also a fact that the Iranian president stated he thinks that Israel should be wiped off the face of the map..

And THIS is the leader you want to give a nuclear weapon to???

No one is going to give him the bomb, they are going to make them. Nothing is going to stop that short of a full scale invasion of Iran. And you will have to occupy the country and fight an insurgency for the next 50 years. Who is prepared to do that?

quote:

Originally posted by Kurtz_:
No one is going to give him the bomb, they are going to make them.

By allowing them to make them, we are, in effect, giving them..

quote:

Originally posted by Kurtz_:
Nothing is going to stop that short of a full scale invasion of Iran.

And you will have to occupy the country and fight an insurgency for the next 50 years. Who is prepared to do that?

I disagree. Massive bombardment of their facilities. Tactical nuclear strikes, if necessary. Bomb them back into the stone age. No occupying force necessary..

As to who is willing to do that?? When you consider the alternative of a nuclear armed demagouge with delusions of bring about the apocalypse, I would say that any sane country/leader would be willing to do it.

There are instances where world leaders' statements should be taken at face value. Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel since he took office, including a call for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and claiming that the Holocaust never happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

Ahmadinejad has never directly said that Iran will nuke Israel. But does he have to? Do we really need to give Iran the benefit of the doubt here?

This is the same type of attitude that led to WWII. No one wanted to do anything about Nazi Germany. They tried to make deals and appease Hitler, instead of using pre-emptive action. And 50 million people (military and civilian) died because of it.

Kurtzs, this may shock you but not everything is on the Internet. I never bothered to get links for things that I personally heard or read.

Rafsanjani said quite plainly what his intentions were, and he further said that collateral damage of millions of dead Muslims is irrelevant because there are more Muslims than Jews. He's still a major player in Iran, and is considered to be be considerably more moderate than the current Iranian president. Iran wants to destroy Israel, and that is clear.

The taking of the Embassy was not spontaneous, Khomeini said as much as did a number of the hostages. Some of them are friends of mine.

Iran can be stopped fairly swiftly, but action is required.

There are repercussions for any military action. If Iran is attacked, it can and will hit every US military base in the gulf with conventional and chemical tipped intermediate range missiles. There isn't the political will for any president to attack Iran in such a way. We lived for 50 years with the threat of nuclear war with Russia. There are some things you just have to live with.

Iran isn't the Soviet Union. The Soviets weren't interested in dying due to MAD, but Ahminedhejad and the Guardian Council could care less about it and are again on record as saying that it wouldn't matter. Their goal is the Islamic apocalypse, and they can not be considered to be rational actors the same way that the Soviets were.

This is not an equivalent situation. Iran isn't yet capable of hitting the US, but is more than capable of hitting their stated target of Israel.

Mutually Assured Destruction is pretty worthless when your opponent thinks that they also win by dying.

If it came down to Iran possessing nuclear weapons or a tactical nuclear strike on Iran....???

I would think that the US would do it. I also think it could/would be done in conjunction with allies. At least the British. Definitely the Israelis... Possibly the French. (Slight possibility, granted)

quote:

Originally posted by SODsniper:
If it came down to Iran possessing nuclear weapons or a tactical nuclear strike on Iran....???

I would think that the US would do it. I also think it could/would be done in conjunction with allies. At least the British. Definitely the Israelis... Possibly the French. (Slight possibility, granted)

I don't think the US would unless we had absolute hard data that they had a complete weapon. The only allies we would have in this might be the British, and we would ask Israel to stay out of it for political reasons. Israel will still end up being attacked.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3303129,00.html


Very good article above.... It SHOULD be a wake up call for the world..

Unfortuantly, based on posts over at Arianna's site, the looney left now believes there isn't much of a threat to the US from Terrorism

quote:

Originally posted by MDS_Geist:
Israel will still end up being attacked.

Al Qaeda stated yesterday that they are beginning a campaign of terror attacks against Israel and Gulf States..

The US will be hard-pressed to keep Israel out of the fight.

quote:

Originally posted by SODsniper:

quote:

Originally posted by MDS_Geist:
Israel will still end up being attacked.

Al Qaeda stated yesterday that they are beginning a campaign of terror attacks against Israel and Gulf States..

The US will be hard-pressed to keep Israel out of the fight.

Against Al Qaida? Israel is already in that fight. I was talking about direct exchanges with Iran. I would expect that as in 1990/1991 the US will ask and put heavy pressure on Israel to stay on the sidelines.

How can I put this..

There will come a time, in the not so distant future when fighting will erupt on a world wide scale that will pit the forces of freedom and democracy against the forces of Islamic Facism. It won't be Iran against the US, or Hezbollah against Israel or Al Qaeda against the US...

To lay it out in stark terms (although I hate to resort to biblical terms) it will be the forces of good (USA, Israel, Western Democracies) against the forces of evil (ALL of the Islamic Facist world (Iran, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, etc etc).

That was what I was referring to when I said it would be hard pressed to keep Israel out of that fight..

Again, Israel is already in that fight and has been in that fight longer than anyone else. But Israel is also very sensitive to the political realities, and if there is a coalition against Iran than Israel will likelyt stay out of it to keep the coalition together just as they did in 1990/1991. Had Israel responded to any of the Iraqi missile attacks it would have given the rest of the Muslim world immediate pre-text to attack Israel in the name of solidarity. Same thing with Iran. No matter what action is taken against Iran, Israel will be attacked. Whether or not and how Israel responds aren't as clear cut.

Not sure if this is an appropriate thread, but I didna want Ms Kleaneasy to whack my wee wee for starting another one.

Anyways... Big talk over on the HUFFINGTON Blogs about the "torture issue". Of course, I am wiping the floor with the whiney liberals..

Anways, one post really stuck out and I wanted to share it with ya'all...


"Those who advocate torture always seem to start with the same premise: "But this guy knows where the ticking bomb is hidden, and we've got precious little time left to save lives! We've got to torture the information out of him!"

As simple rhetoric, it looks okay to a disturbingly large number of Americans. My questions would be: "Who let this guy plant this bomb so close in the first place? Where was our advanced technology and powerful miltary? Where should the buck stop?"

In the Bush administration, the buck doesn't stop anywhere. It's already been spent.

By: CoyoteHowling on September 15, 2006 at 06:15pm


Isn't that JUST LIKE a whiney Liberal!? Danger is imminent and massive and tragic loss of life is at hand..

And the LIBERALS want to stop everything and try and figure out WHO IS TO BLAME!!!

God help the US if Liberals ever get into power!!

Sorry I don't visit this forum often enough, been busy with school.

I looked up some of the statements I recalled hearing about in the news about nuking Israel they were from Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani whom Geist mentioned. He was the president of Iran until 1997, but is not current Iranian president. My statement was a mistake on my part I mistook a former Iranian president for the current Iranian president. You'll have to cut me some slack I heard it on the news on a car radio so I wasn't exactly taking notes. President Ahminedhejad has made statements that are not much better, however.

quote:

Originally posted by MDS_Geist:
Kurtzs, this may shock you but not everything is on the Internet. I never bothered to get links for things that I personally heard or read.

Rafsanjani said quite plainly what his intentions were, and he further said that collateral damage of millions of dead Muslims is irrelevant because there are more Muslims than Jews. He's still a major player in Iran, and is considered to be be considerably more moderate than the current Iranian president. Iran wants to destroy Israel, and that is clear.

The taking of the Embassy was not spontaneous, Khomeini said as much as did a number of the hostages. Some of them are friends of mine.

Iran can be stopped fairly swiftly, but action is required.

Laughable.

No wonder your information is 100% inaccurate 100% of the time then. Where do you "hear" these little gems, at the American Supremacists convention? The old drunk codger at the bowling alley?

The internet may not be the only source of information in the world, or even the best one, it is however one you have instant access to, right this second, at your fingertips. If you can't even make the effort to validate your information when queried, you run the serious risk of never knowing anything about anything all through your entire life.


This is what Rafsanjani ACTUALLY said. (14th of December 2001).

"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world"

I am not your teacher. Your parents are not paying me.
May I suggest you do your own research before you post instead of just inventing history to suit your agenda. It is your responsability as an adult to educate yourself before opening your mouth, not for me to correct you afterwards.

You are a very tedious person.

Four times in a row you refused to check your sources. Knowledge is not something you are just born with.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: baff6,

quote:

Originally posted by WhiteKnight77:
blah blah blah

Well done, you were in an army. Congratulations.
Has it got you very far in life?
Sense of achievement maybe, self confidence, some happy memories. Kudos. A pension. A mansion. Early retirement. The cutest wife. Guest list to all the local nightclubs. Restaurents for free.

I'm no stranger to uniforms or guns or having them pointed at me. If the real world means telling worse and worse lies about people I've never met until no one minds if someone bombs thousand after thousand of complete strangers to death for doing nothing wrong, I'm willing to stand up and fight the "real world".
With or without a uniform.

All your freedom comes at gunpoint. You live in the most legislated society with highest proportional imprisonment on the planet, and you talk about knowing what to do to remain free?

Kim Jong Il knows more about freedom than your lot.


With regards to freedom in Korea, now that the North has the bomb, you can go home. Since you can't conquer the place anymore, and both South and North want unification, why don't you allow them to be free?

Free of you.

It's the same freedom Iran wants.

In the case of Iran, that goes against my financial intrests. A sharp airstrike would suit my agenda.

So if you are intelligent and aware, you know what the fight is, what needs to be done, and have spent as much time as you can learning about the situation; you might be of use to me. But if you are just a hate mongering racist out to kill some raghead for past grievances unrelated to the issue at hand, wanting to show the world your moral superiority, I want nothing to do with you.
Sooner or later in fact, if that's your style, master race or not, I'm going to be forced to risk it all to stop you.

The thing about having allies pointing guns at you when you are in the wrong position, is that at that point you have to trust that your ally isn't an idiot.

If the U.S. army is populated by the types of fine mind found in this forum, that explains why more of your allies die to U.S. fire than to enemy.

quote:

Originally posted by baff6:

All your freedom comes at gunpoint. You live in the most legislated society with highest proportional imprisonment on the planet, and you talk about knowing what to do to remain free?

Talk about asleep at the wheel, but I digress.

Baff, your reply, weeks late, shows that you did not read what I wrote by this statement that you emboldened.

If you think that North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, knows what freedom is, then ask him why he spends so much money on weapons and military programs than feed his own people. All of the South Koreans I have ever talked to enjoy the lifestyle they have and while many think that unification is a good thing, they do not want to live in a Communist version of Korea under Kim. They want a place like they have now. Maybe then could we leave Korea which we have agreed to defend if needed.

Now as far as your bit about me serving in an army, again, you are off base. I have no pension, no stipend and not even an early retirement. I rarely do bring up my time in the military unless needed, such as this thread. Again you act as if you are superior as I said before. You aren't.

I am not a hatemonger, but I do think that statements by those who disagree with the life I choose to lead and have acted on statements of such (witness 9/11 or even the recent attack on Israel), then by all means, it is better to deal with them in whatever means neccessary. I am well aware of what is happening and what is said by leaders of nations or entities that dislike how I live. Note that it is you that actually use a racist remark.

quote:

Originally posted by baff6:
But if you are just a hate mongering racist out to kill some raghead,,,

Nowhere have I said or used such a term to describe anyone. Pot, meet kettle.

Friendly fire has been around since wars began. It is an unfortunate part of war that will be around til time ends. More is being done to alleviate such events with each passing year. Your right, some restraint is needed than just mindlessly shooting or bombing something due to it looking like a target.

Don't argue with baff6. Clearly he knows everything and has experienced it all, from foreign policy, to what it's like to be an American, live in the U.S. and serve in its armed forces. His vast, unrivaled knowledge makes him far superior to any who frequent this board, especially Americans, who his self worth far exceeds. After all, Americans really haven't done anything for this world, past or present. They haven't invented anything worthwhile or at all useful. They have never offered up their sons to fight and die in foreign wars that really had nothing to do with the U.S., and don't provide more international and humanitarian aid than any other country on the planet.

Again, he KNOWS EVERYTHING. Don't argue with him.

</sarcasm> (In case it wasn't obvious).

His elitist attitude is typical of the left. They think they are better than you and smarter than you, especially if you are of a conservative mindset. I get some elitism from reading Danger's posts, but nothing like what flows from baff6's posts. But that's ok. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it means you have to degrade people and arrogantly try to establish yourself as part of an elite social class to get your point across. Afterall, they ARE better than us "simple" people, right?