let's for a moment assume that in all these links, there is some thread of truth. it all seems very logical and plausible. does anyone else get the feeling that this administration is just hell-bent on pursuing these sorts of goals, despite the myriad of potential disasterous outcomes for our country? i'd like to hear some more about informed views on the agenda of this administration globally. any good links for this? i thought clinton was bad with the double-talk, but this admin is right up there.
iran war
- Thread starter carlrodd
- Start date
- Status
progunner1957
member
GUNS UP, Israel!!
I hope if he keeps beating his babymaker on his chest, Israel smokes him.
We sold Israel those F15's for a reason...
I wouldn't blame them either. Iran's "leader," Mahmoud - is just plain batdoodoo in the head. A psycho, antisemite bigot hell-bent on destroying a whole nation, and who has nuclear weapons. Greaaaaaaaat - just what the world needs.
I hope if he keeps beating his babymaker on his chest, Israel smokes him.
We sold Israel those F15's for a reason...
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
The torpedo is vastly easier. You can create a cavity in water by blowing a bubble (which is what the Shkval does; it is a rocket that pipes a small percentage of its exhaust forward to a second, annular exhaust in the nose, creating a bubble that the missile travels in).
When you invent a cheap, low-energy way to blow bubbles in solid rock, the supercavitating ground penetrator will be a reality. (And basements and tunnels will get a lot cheaper!)
One of the largest natural gas deposits in the world sits off the Gulf Coast of Florida, but Florida won't drill it because they don't want the existence of over-the-horizon gas wells to "offend the tourists." So Florida just complains about high gas and oil prices instead.
We have lots of resources we choose not to use. But that's largely a domestic political problem, not a geostrategic one.
Don't forget about the oil locked up in shale. An estimated 1200 billion barrels. Add that to ANWR and untapped offshore fields will go a long way to providing all domestic consumption at current levels. Of course, the price will go up, at least initially, but that price increase will also lower demand and consumption.
As far as any U.S. nuclear strike on Iran, that would be complete folly (barring some cataclysmic attack on U.S. soil by the government of Iran). There are other ways to bring Iran into compliance and deter them from aggressive activities. (Mine, blockade their harbors; destroy oil fields and production facilities, etc.) We have no business killing millions of Iranian civilians and any U.S. President who ordered a nuclear attack on Iran should be turned over the the World Court or some other international body for trial and summary execution along with any members of Congress who authorized such an attack.
GoRon
Member
While the link is an interesting thought exercise.....
The fact that this guy and his book were featured on Coast to Coast with Art Bell leads me to take it all with a pound of salt.
I read through this thread and was struck by something.
Everyone is so anxious to discuss the minutae of "oil economies" and "global oil conspiracies" and other such stuff that the elephant in the room gets no mention at all.
No one on this thread seems to understand or appreciate the ugly, blatant truth about the fundamentalist Islamists running Iran.
They do want a war.
They do want a confrontation.
They want war because they are convinced, and are busy trying to convince everyone in their country, that they are really Holy Warriors who will win a miraculous victory by the grace of Allah over the evil, decadent, corrupt West.
Read the book "Reading Lolita In Tehran" for a look inside the mindset of such a regime.
To Iran, getting nukes is sort of like Crusaders following a piece of the "true cross" into battle.
The mullahs think that Iran will get nukes because Allah wants them to get nukes and wipe out Israel and the decadent West, especially the Great American Satan.
When you are a jihadi fighting in the service of Allah, nit-picky things like reality don't get in your way.
Or have you not noticed the jihadi insurgency in Iraq?
Nit-picky realities like helicopter gunships or determined Marines with machine guns don't matter a whole lot when you are a jihadi bent on martyrdom............
Or the jihadist suicide attacks in London and in Beslan and on the WTC and in Bali, and everywhere else?
Driving children in front of your troops to blow up minefields isn't cruel.....all the kids who got killed got to go to heaven as martyrs!!!!!!!!!
Folks, realize the potency of Islamic fundamentalism at work here.
When the mullahs say they want to destroy Israel and for conservative Islam to dominate the world.....they friggin' mean it.
That's what makes them so flippin' dangerous.
With the Soviets, there was at least the chance to play a game based on logic and reason.
With fundamentalist jihadis seeking martyrdom as the highest good, you can flat out forget that whole "logic and reason" stuff immediately.
hillbilly
Everyone is so anxious to discuss the minutae of "oil economies" and "global oil conspiracies" and other such stuff that the elephant in the room gets no mention at all.
No one on this thread seems to understand or appreciate the ugly, blatant truth about the fundamentalist Islamists running Iran.
They do want a war.
They do want a confrontation.
They want war because they are convinced, and are busy trying to convince everyone in their country, that they are really Holy Warriors who will win a miraculous victory by the grace of Allah over the evil, decadent, corrupt West.
Read the book "Reading Lolita In Tehran" for a look inside the mindset of such a regime.
To Iran, getting nukes is sort of like Crusaders following a piece of the "true cross" into battle.
The mullahs think that Iran will get nukes because Allah wants them to get nukes and wipe out Israel and the decadent West, especially the Great American Satan.
When you are a jihadi fighting in the service of Allah, nit-picky things like reality don't get in your way.
Or have you not noticed the jihadi insurgency in Iraq?
Nit-picky realities like helicopter gunships or determined Marines with machine guns don't matter a whole lot when you are a jihadi bent on martyrdom............
Or the jihadist suicide attacks in London and in Beslan and on the WTC and in Bali, and everywhere else?
Driving children in front of your troops to blow up minefields isn't cruel.....all the kids who got killed got to go to heaven as martyrs!!!!!!!!!
Folks, realize the potency of Islamic fundamentalism at work here.
When the mullahs say they want to destroy Israel and for conservative Islam to dominate the world.....they friggin' mean it.
That's what makes them so flippin' dangerous.
With the Soviets, there was at least the chance to play a game based on logic and reason.
With fundamentalist jihadis seeking martyrdom as the highest good, you can flat out forget that whole "logic and reason" stuff immediately.
hillbilly
Let me put it this way.........
If there was not a single solitary drop of oil in Iran, the mullahs would still want to nuke each and every single person reading this thread precisely and exactly because you aren't a fundamentalist Muslim.
hillbilly
If there was not a single solitary drop of oil in Iran, the mullahs would still want to nuke each and every single person reading this thread precisely and exactly because you aren't a fundamentalist Muslim.
hillbilly
Yup... +1.
The Socialists in Europe and England, as well as our home-grown radical left Democrats always believe they can talk...talk...talk, and everything will come out right. They won't think otherwise until some mushroom clouds appear... :banghead:
The Socialists in Europe and England, as well as our home-grown radical left Democrats always believe they can talk...talk...talk, and everything will come out right. They won't think otherwise until some mushroom clouds appear... :banghead:
Old Fuff said:
agreed, but that mushroom cloud might be from us. apparently there is no middle ground/road EVER in our country. it's either people on one side that have no backbone and refuse to stand up to the international community, or it's people reacting against that, or just plain being hawkish, and unable to consider the consequences of aggression. there IS middle ground. you can deal VERY firmly with other countries while not being negligent and repeatedly putting the welfare of your nation at risk. this administration is UNBENDABLE....kudos for that, but a number of its agendas and plans within plans have been ill-concieved....at best.
Lucky
Member
What about supporting a pliable strong-man in power in Iraq to form a sort of balance-of-power between the two states. Would that work?
I suppose strong-men are like puppies though, if you stop paying attention to them they do something to get attention, pee on the furniture, or invade Kuwait. But they're so cute
I suppose strong-men are like puppies though, if you stop paying attention to them they do something to get attention, pee on the furniture, or invade Kuwait. But they're so cute
I think middle ground requires a willingness to stand for a moment in another's shoes and really be able to feel that experience ... tough to do when ones 1st thought is the other side (us-them) is out to beat us. We have fractionated our great nation all by ourselves I'm thinking ... and getting more like a tribal nation all the time.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Jumping back in: It's less an air-pollution problem than it is a lack-of-water problem. The Piceance Creek area's oil shale is in a rather water-poor area. I forget which of the El Gigantico oil companies has a pilot program to heat the shale underground to liquify the oil.
Again: With conventional oil production, the input energy for production and transport is roughly 1/30th of the oil's energy. Such as oil shale production is about 1/5th of the oil's energy. Ergo, available but costly.
In 1975-ish, oil shale was thought to be competitive at $40/bbl of crude oil. In 2006 dollars, that's around $80 to $100/bbl for crude. Say $4/gallon at the pumps for gasoline.
Art
Again: With conventional oil production, the input energy for production and transport is roughly 1/30th of the oil's energy. Such as oil shale production is about 1/5th of the oil's energy. Ergo, available but costly.
In 1975-ish, oil shale was thought to be competitive at $40/bbl of crude oil. In 2006 dollars, that's around $80 to $100/bbl for crude. Say $4/gallon at the pumps for gasoline.
Art
Oh yes.....how silly of me....to not take some sort of "middle ground" stance and consider things from Iran's point of view.
How silly of me to not think of empathizing and understanding a regime that has used herds of children as cost-effective land mine detonation devices.....
How silly of me to seek some sort of middle ground with the man who gave the following speech........
Again, the speech below is not the rantings of some whacko with an obscure blog, he's not some shadowy talk-radio figure......he's not even some guy in a backwater "militia" organization.
The man who gave the speech below is none other than the friggin' president of a country that's about to get nuclear weapons.
Tell me where the "Middle Ground" is in the speech below.........Please, tell me.
I don't want more war.
But this guy is going to bring it whether we want it or not.
Even if the US went into total isolationism, the guy who gave the speech below would still wind up with nukes.
Read his speech, and think about that for a bit...........
hillbilly
http://mysite.verizon.net/rogmios/id79.html
The Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA), published the full text of Ahmadinejad's speech. The following is a translation of excerpts from ISNA's report and from the speech. [1]
"Prior to his statement, Ahmadinejad said that if you plan to chant the slogan 'Death to Israel,' say it in the right and complete way.
"The president warned the leaders of the Islamic world that they should be wary of Fitna [civil strife]: 'If someone is under the pressure of hegemonic power [i.e. the West] and misunderstands something is wrong, or he is naïve, or he is an egotist and his hedonism leads him to recognize the Zionist regime – he should know that he will burn in the fire of the Islamic Ummah [nation]…'
"Ahmadinejad articulated the real meaning of Zionism: '...We must see what the real story of Palestine is... The establishment of the regime that is occupying Jerusalem was a very grave move by the hegemonic and arrogant system [i.e. the West] against the Islamic world. We are in the process of an historical war between the World of Arrogance [i.e. the West] and the Islamic world, and this war has been going on for hundreds of years.
"'In this historical war, the situation at the fronts has changed many times. During some periods, the Muslims were the victors and were very active, and looked forward, and the World of Arrogance was in retreat.
"'Unfortunately, in the past 300 years, the Islamic world has been in retreat vis-à-vis the World of Arrogance… During the period of the last 100 years, the [walls of the] world of Islam were destroyed and the World of Arrogance turned the regime occupying Jerusalem into a bridge for its dominance over the Islamic world...
"'This occupying country [i.e. Israel] is in fact a front of the World of Arrogance in the heart of the Islamic world. They have in fact built a bastion [Israel] from which they can expand their rule to the entire Islamic world... This means that the current war in Palestine is the front line of the Islamic world against the World of Arrogance, and will determine the fate of Palestine for centuries to come.
"'Today the Palestinian nation stands against the hegemonic system as the representative of the Islamic Ummah [nation]. Thanks to God, since the Palestinian people adopted the Islamic war and the Islamic goals, and since their struggle has become Islamic in its attitude and orientation, we have been witnessing the progress and success of the Palestinian people.'
"Ahmadinejad said: 'The issue of this [World without Zionism] conference is very valuable. In this very grave war, many people are trying to scatter grains of desperation and hopelessness regarding the struggle between the Islamic world and the front of the infidels, and in their hearts they want to empty the Islamic world.
"'... They [ask]: 'Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?' But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved…
"'When the dear Imam [Khomeini] said that [the Shah's] regime must go, and that we demand a world without dependent governments, many people who claimed to have political and other knowledge [asked], 'Is it possible [that the Shah’s regime can be toppled]?'
"'That day, when Imam [Khomeini] began his movement, all the powers supported [the Shah's] corrupt regime… and said it was not possible. However, our nation stood firm, and by now we have, for 27 years, been living without a government dependent on America. Imam [Khomeni] said: 'The rule of the East [U.S.S.R.] and of the West [U.S.] should be ended.' But the weak people who saw only the tiny world near them did not believe it.
"'Nobody believed that we would one day witness the collapse of the Eastern Imperialism [i.e. the U.S.S.R], and said it was an iron regime. But in our short lifetime we have witnessed how this regime collapsed in such a way that we must look for it in libraries, and we can find no literature about it.
"'Imam [Khomeini] said that Saddam [Hussein] must go, and that he would be humiliated in a way that was unprecedented. And what do you see today? A man who, 10 years ago, spoke as proudly as if he would live for eternity is today chained by the feet, and is now being tried in his own country...
"'Imam [Khomeini] said: 'This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.' This sentence is very wise. The issue of Palestine is not an issue on which we can compromise.
"'Is it possible that an [Islamic] front allows another front [i.e. country] to arise in its [own] heart? This means defeat, and he who accepts the existence of this regime [i.e. Israel] in fact signs the defeat of the Islamic world.
"'In his battle against the World of Arrogance, our dear Imam [Khomeini] set the regime occupying Qods [Jerusalem] as the target of his fight.
"'I do not doubt that the new wave which has begun in our dear Palestine and which today we are also witnessing in the Islamic world is a wave of morality which has spread all over the Islamic world. Very soon, this stain of disgrace [i.e. Israel] will be purged from the center of the Islamic world – and this is attainable.
"'But we must be wary of Fitna. For more than 50 years, the World of Arrogance has tried to give recognition to the existence of this falsified regime [Israel]. With its first steps, and then with further steps, it has tried hard in this direction to stabilize it.
"'Regrettably, 27 or 28 years ago... one of the countries of the first line [i.e. Egypt] made this failure [of recognizing Israel] – and we still hope that they will correct it.
"'Lately we have new Fitna underway… With the forced evacuation [of Gaza] that was imposed by the Palestinian people, they [the Israelis] evacuated only a corner. [Israel] declared this as the final victory and, on the pretext of evacuating Gaza and establishing a Palestinian government, tried to put an end to the hopes of the Palestinians.
"'Today, [Israel] seeks, satanically and deceitfully, to gain control of the front of war. It is trying to influence the Palestinian groups in Palestine so as to preoccupy them with political issues and jobs – so that they relinquish the Palestinian cause that determines their destiny, and come into conflict with each other.
"'On the pretext of goodwill, they [Israel] intended, by evacuating the Gaza strip, to gain recognition of its corrupt regime by some Islamic states. I very much hope, and ask God, that the Palestinian people and the dear Palestinian groups will be wary of this Fitna.
"'The issue of Palestine is by no means over, and will end only when all of Palestine will have a government belonging to the Palestinian people. The refugees must return to their homes, and there must be a government that has come to power by the will of the [Palestinian] people. And, of course those [i.e. the Jews] who came to this country from far away to plunder it have no right to decide anything for the [Palestinian] people.
"'I hope that the Palestinians will maintain their wariness and intelligence, much as they have pursued their battles in the past 10 years. This will be a short period, and if we pass through it successfully, the process of the elimination of the Zionist regime will be smooth and simple.
"'I warn all the leaders of the Islamic world to be wary of Fitna: If someone is under the pressure of hegemonic power [i.e. the West] and understands that something is wrong, or he is naïve, or he is an egotist and his hedonism leads him to recognize the Zionist regime – he should know that he will burn in the fire of the Islamic Ummah [nation]…
"'The people who sit in closed rooms cannot decide on this matter. The Islamic people cannot allow this historical enemy to exist in the heart of the Islamic world.
"'Oh dear people, look at this global arena. By whom are we confronted? We have to understand the depth of the disgrace of the enemy, until our holy hatred expands continuously and strikes like a wave.'"
How silly of me to not think of empathizing and understanding a regime that has used herds of children as cost-effective land mine detonation devices.....
How silly of me to seek some sort of middle ground with the man who gave the following speech........
Again, the speech below is not the rantings of some whacko with an obscure blog, he's not some shadowy talk-radio figure......he's not even some guy in a backwater "militia" organization.
The man who gave the speech below is none other than the friggin' president of a country that's about to get nuclear weapons.
Tell me where the "Middle Ground" is in the speech below.........Please, tell me.
I don't want more war.
But this guy is going to bring it whether we want it or not.
Even if the US went into total isolationism, the guy who gave the speech below would still wind up with nukes.
Read his speech, and think about that for a bit...........
hillbilly
http://mysite.verizon.net/rogmios/id79.html
The Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA), published the full text of Ahmadinejad's speech. The following is a translation of excerpts from ISNA's report and from the speech. [1]
"Prior to his statement, Ahmadinejad said that if you plan to chant the slogan 'Death to Israel,' say it in the right and complete way.
"The president warned the leaders of the Islamic world that they should be wary of Fitna [civil strife]: 'If someone is under the pressure of hegemonic power [i.e. the West] and misunderstands something is wrong, or he is naïve, or he is an egotist and his hedonism leads him to recognize the Zionist regime – he should know that he will burn in the fire of the Islamic Ummah [nation]…'
"Ahmadinejad articulated the real meaning of Zionism: '...We must see what the real story of Palestine is... The establishment of the regime that is occupying Jerusalem was a very grave move by the hegemonic and arrogant system [i.e. the West] against the Islamic world. We are in the process of an historical war between the World of Arrogance [i.e. the West] and the Islamic world, and this war has been going on for hundreds of years.
"'In this historical war, the situation at the fronts has changed many times. During some periods, the Muslims were the victors and were very active, and looked forward, and the World of Arrogance was in retreat.
"'Unfortunately, in the past 300 years, the Islamic world has been in retreat vis-à-vis the World of Arrogance… During the period of the last 100 years, the [walls of the] world of Islam were destroyed and the World of Arrogance turned the regime occupying Jerusalem into a bridge for its dominance over the Islamic world...
"'This occupying country [i.e. Israel] is in fact a front of the World of Arrogance in the heart of the Islamic world. They have in fact built a bastion [Israel] from which they can expand their rule to the entire Islamic world... This means that the current war in Palestine is the front line of the Islamic world against the World of Arrogance, and will determine the fate of Palestine for centuries to come.
"'Today the Palestinian nation stands against the hegemonic system as the representative of the Islamic Ummah [nation]. Thanks to God, since the Palestinian people adopted the Islamic war and the Islamic goals, and since their struggle has become Islamic in its attitude and orientation, we have been witnessing the progress and success of the Palestinian people.'
"Ahmadinejad said: 'The issue of this [World without Zionism] conference is very valuable. In this very grave war, many people are trying to scatter grains of desperation and hopelessness regarding the struggle between the Islamic world and the front of the infidels, and in their hearts they want to empty the Islamic world.
"'... They [ask]: 'Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?' But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved…
"'When the dear Imam [Khomeini] said that [the Shah's] regime must go, and that we demand a world without dependent governments, many people who claimed to have political and other knowledge [asked], 'Is it possible [that the Shah’s regime can be toppled]?'
"'That day, when Imam [Khomeini] began his movement, all the powers supported [the Shah's] corrupt regime… and said it was not possible. However, our nation stood firm, and by now we have, for 27 years, been living without a government dependent on America. Imam [Khomeni] said: 'The rule of the East [U.S.S.R.] and of the West [U.S.] should be ended.' But the weak people who saw only the tiny world near them did not believe it.
"'Nobody believed that we would one day witness the collapse of the Eastern Imperialism [i.e. the U.S.S.R], and said it was an iron regime. But in our short lifetime we have witnessed how this regime collapsed in such a way that we must look for it in libraries, and we can find no literature about it.
"'Imam [Khomeini] said that Saddam [Hussein] must go, and that he would be humiliated in a way that was unprecedented. And what do you see today? A man who, 10 years ago, spoke as proudly as if he would live for eternity is today chained by the feet, and is now being tried in his own country...
"'Imam [Khomeini] said: 'This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.' This sentence is very wise. The issue of Palestine is not an issue on which we can compromise.
"'Is it possible that an [Islamic] front allows another front [i.e. country] to arise in its [own] heart? This means defeat, and he who accepts the existence of this regime [i.e. Israel] in fact signs the defeat of the Islamic world.
"'In his battle against the World of Arrogance, our dear Imam [Khomeini] set the regime occupying Qods [Jerusalem] as the target of his fight.
"'I do not doubt that the new wave which has begun in our dear Palestine and which today we are also witnessing in the Islamic world is a wave of morality which has spread all over the Islamic world. Very soon, this stain of disgrace [i.e. Israel] will be purged from the center of the Islamic world – and this is attainable.
"'But we must be wary of Fitna. For more than 50 years, the World of Arrogance has tried to give recognition to the existence of this falsified regime [Israel]. With its first steps, and then with further steps, it has tried hard in this direction to stabilize it.
"'Regrettably, 27 or 28 years ago... one of the countries of the first line [i.e. Egypt] made this failure [of recognizing Israel] – and we still hope that they will correct it.
"'Lately we have new Fitna underway… With the forced evacuation [of Gaza] that was imposed by the Palestinian people, they [the Israelis] evacuated only a corner. [Israel] declared this as the final victory and, on the pretext of evacuating Gaza and establishing a Palestinian government, tried to put an end to the hopes of the Palestinians.
"'Today, [Israel] seeks, satanically and deceitfully, to gain control of the front of war. It is trying to influence the Palestinian groups in Palestine so as to preoccupy them with political issues and jobs – so that they relinquish the Palestinian cause that determines their destiny, and come into conflict with each other.
"'On the pretext of goodwill, they [Israel] intended, by evacuating the Gaza strip, to gain recognition of its corrupt regime by some Islamic states. I very much hope, and ask God, that the Palestinian people and the dear Palestinian groups will be wary of this Fitna.
"'The issue of Palestine is by no means over, and will end only when all of Palestine will have a government belonging to the Palestinian people. The refugees must return to their homes, and there must be a government that has come to power by the will of the [Palestinian] people. And, of course those [i.e. the Jews] who came to this country from far away to plunder it have no right to decide anything for the [Palestinian] people.
"'I hope that the Palestinians will maintain their wariness and intelligence, much as they have pursued their battles in the past 10 years. This will be a short period, and if we pass through it successfully, the process of the elimination of the Zionist regime will be smooth and simple.
"'I warn all the leaders of the Islamic world to be wary of Fitna: If someone is under the pressure of hegemonic power [i.e. the West] and understands that something is wrong, or he is naïve, or he is an egotist and his hedonism leads him to recognize the Zionist regime – he should know that he will burn in the fire of the Islamic Ummah [nation]…
"'The people who sit in closed rooms cannot decide on this matter. The Islamic people cannot allow this historical enemy to exist in the heart of the Islamic world.
"'Oh dear people, look at this global arena. By whom are we confronted? We have to understand the depth of the disgrace of the enemy, until our holy hatred expands continuously and strikes like a wave.'"
lowracer
Member
The Solution to the Problem of Iran...
...Lies in our stockpile of some 350+ neutron bombs.
Neutron bombs, for those who do not remember their 1970's history, kill people with intense neutron radiation, but do not substantially harm buildings and other infrastructure. The neutron radiation is very short-lived as well, so that the bombed area becomes usable very quickly, once the bodies are disposed of.
Now the USA will never use these terrible neutron weapons against anyone, because we will be afraid of what the rest of the world would say about us, especially the French.
However, it would not be expensive at all to ship 350+ neutron bombs to Israel under cover of night. The Israelis have the means and the motive to deliver them, and deliver them all. Our GPS system could help them place these weapons right on target.
Yes many innocent people will be killed. It's simply the cost of war. This war would be won in a matter of hours. Iran would cease to exist.
Any nation which protested this would be quietly reminded that we actually have a lot more than 350 neutron bombs on stockpile.
...Lies in our stockpile of some 350+ neutron bombs.
Neutron bombs, for those who do not remember their 1970's history, kill people with intense neutron radiation, but do not substantially harm buildings and other infrastructure. The neutron radiation is very short-lived as well, so that the bombed area becomes usable very quickly, once the bodies are disposed of.
Now the USA will never use these terrible neutron weapons against anyone, because we will be afraid of what the rest of the world would say about us, especially the French.
However, it would not be expensive at all to ship 350+ neutron bombs to Israel under cover of night. The Israelis have the means and the motive to deliver them, and deliver them all. Our GPS system could help them place these weapons right on target.
Yes many innocent people will be killed. It's simply the cost of war. This war would be won in a matter of hours. Iran would cease to exist.
Any nation which protested this would be quietly reminded that we actually have a lot more than 350 neutron bombs on stockpile.
CAnnoneer
Member
I too like fusion bombs, but they should be our Option B.
We can still get our internal and external affairs in order, without wiping countries off the map. However, time is running out and the soft approach requires immediate action, if Option B is to be avoided.
We can still get our internal and external affairs in order, without wiping countries off the map. However, time is running out and the soft approach requires immediate action, if Option B is to be avoided.
carlrodd:
I don’t think there is much of a middle ground when you are dealing with fanatics, and that was the point “Hillbilly” and I were trying to make. If you believe otherwise I think you are naïve.
As a child my memory goes back to World War Two. Hitler was by most everyone’s perception a classic fanatic. During the late 1930’s many people, in and out of various European governments thought that “war in out times” could be prevented through negations – that after all was what the League of Nations was for, and Hitler after all was… well… reasonable.
Franklin Roosevelt knew better, as did Winston Churchill, and history proved them to be right. World War Two ended with Unconditional Surrender, and not a “middle ground” deal, because with Nazism and the Japanese Empire there was no middle ground, only total defeat.
Harry Truman followed Roosevelt, and while he ended World War Two with 2 Atomic Bombs, he (and The United Nations) ended the Korean War with a negotiated settlement, and we have been stuck there ever since.
At least in the above examples the leaders didn’t have nuclear weapons, but that might change shortly – in both Iran and North Korea. Both countries are ruled by fanatics who have no interest in any middle ground, but see negotiating over it as an excellent way to stall for time, while they go forward in their plans to become nuclear powers.
The Socialists in Europe, and their counterparts in the United States are slow learners. They believe that any country’s leaders can be brought to the table and that discussions will ultimately lead to a fair “middle ground” solution. I highly doubt it. It should be remembered that the Japanese were negotiating a settlement of this kind with Roosevelt’s State Department when their bombers struck Pearl Harbor. Hopefully that taught us something.
Countries such as Iran and North Korea are often (and accurately) described as “Rouge States.” If we think that negotiations, sanctions, U.N. resolutions, and even threats and ultimatums will blunt their insane ambitions and intentions we will likely see the day when New York, Washington D.C., or perhaps Los Angeles are converted to radioactive rubble under a mushroom cloud.
If there are any survivors you can explain to them about middle ground…
I don’t think there is much of a middle ground when you are dealing with fanatics, and that was the point “Hillbilly” and I were trying to make. If you believe otherwise I think you are naïve.
As a child my memory goes back to World War Two. Hitler was by most everyone’s perception a classic fanatic. During the late 1930’s many people, in and out of various European governments thought that “war in out times” could be prevented through negations – that after all was what the League of Nations was for, and Hitler after all was… well… reasonable.
Franklin Roosevelt knew better, as did Winston Churchill, and history proved them to be right. World War Two ended with Unconditional Surrender, and not a “middle ground” deal, because with Nazism and the Japanese Empire there was no middle ground, only total defeat.
Harry Truman followed Roosevelt, and while he ended World War Two with 2 Atomic Bombs, he (and The United Nations) ended the Korean War with a negotiated settlement, and we have been stuck there ever since.
At least in the above examples the leaders didn’t have nuclear weapons, but that might change shortly – in both Iran and North Korea. Both countries are ruled by fanatics who have no interest in any middle ground, but see negotiating over it as an excellent way to stall for time, while they go forward in their plans to become nuclear powers.
The Socialists in Europe, and their counterparts in the United States are slow learners. They believe that any country’s leaders can be brought to the table and that discussions will ultimately lead to a fair “middle ground” solution. I highly doubt it. It should be remembered that the Japanese were negotiating a settlement of this kind with Roosevelt’s State Department when their bombers struck Pearl Harbor. Hopefully that taught us something.
Countries such as Iran and North Korea are often (and accurately) described as “Rouge States.” If we think that negotiations, sanctions, U.N. resolutions, and even threats and ultimatums will blunt their insane ambitions and intentions we will likely see the day when New York, Washington D.C., or perhaps Los Angeles are converted to radioactive rubble under a mushroom cloud.
If there are any survivors you can explain to them about middle ground…
Joejojoba111
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,056
lowracer said:
See? You all thought it was inconceivable that anyone but the lunatic president of Iran could think like that. Lowracer has shown you how very easy it is to think in such a manner, I bet a great many of you read his post objectively, and took quite a while before you realized he was performing a political satire on us.
Because if anyone tries to convince me that such a war is 'right' or 'wrong', they are wasting their time. There's no place for morals in such a conflict, anyone who pretends there is scares me as they are clinically delusional.
If you want to propose nuclear war, propose it because it can be won. Propose it because it can be profitable, because it will be entertaining, any legitimate reason. But don't waste our time with righteousness.
Incidentally, it can't be won. Aiui neutron bombs are not that simple, and the one's from the 1970's don't exist anymore, etc etc there are many factual problems. However, even if the situation were possible, 2 immediate problems loom. #1 Retaliatory strikes by major powers. #2 side effects on allies.
Don't kid yourself, if you launch at Iran you should be prepared for warheads to impact every city, base, and installation on the North American continent. If you aren't prepared to destroy 95% of all life on Earth in less than a decade's time, then it's unwise to suggest state A using nuclear weapons on State D which aquires nuclear weapons from state B to respond to State C who was given nuclear weapons by state A who was in a prolonged brinksmanship with state B.
If Iran launched at Israel, would the US respond? Ok, that answered, now ask, if Israel launched at Iran, is it possible that someone else might respond? Nuclear warfare is a completely different ballgame VERY different.
CAnnoneer
Member
Joejojoba111 said:
These arguments have been given before on this board. So, as usual, I am posing the question:
If A nukes B before B acquires nukes to likely nuke A and C, why would C or D even consider nuking A?
CAnnoneer
Member
Joejojoba111 said:
This is the first time I hear we no longer have neutron/hydrogen/fusion bombs or that there are problems with them. Please elaborate.
Lobotomy Boy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Messages
- 2,449
Though I am but a simple liberal arts major who has never taken a college level algebra course, I'm going to give this a whirl.
Let's see:
A-B(B-N)=CD+N(CD+N-A)
I think the math would be far more complex than that. Iran is in the hands of religious fundamentalist nut jobs, to be certain. Hillbilly suggests that there can be no middle ground because of this, and he is correct to assume that there is no compromise possible with a religious fundamentalist nut job. But he does not consider the geopolitics of oil in his assessment of the situation, so his equation is far too incomplete to yield a solution.
Yes, the Middle East is run by religious fundamentalist nut jobs. And yes the turmoil in the region is ultimately all about the oil. To arrive at some sort of reasonable solution, you cannot consider one fact in the absence of the other.
CAnnoneer
Member
Biker said:
Then we are screwed already. There will be no MAD stalemate with these jokers. But, AFAIS from media reports, that is not the case yet. Also, a maniac like them would immediately boast about having nukes if he did, for a number of reasons.
Who are these friends and why would they risk their necks?
- Status