What do you guys think about this trip to lebanon, palestine, israel, syria and iran? I personlly support this trip 100% and I believe that it will bring out some good results *like the UN peacekeeping force thats a perfect sucess until now*.

I support it as well. Good efforts and I hope it goes well.

Can't see who wouldn't support this.....

And to answer the question in your sig - that's fucking ignorant.

No its not ignorant, its the facts.

Not on topic but, if you think about who would be more likely to use nuclear weapons, Iran would. Considering their leadership is a fucking wacko.

Define wacko lol, Bush falls under my definition of wacko

(this was a joke by the way)

Bush is crazy, but not "let's drop a nuke on someone" crazy. There is a difference, I believe.

Who fucking said Iran is willing, or even has enough money to produce nuclear weapons. If you're worried about Israel, they would NEVER (if they had the ability) nuke Israel because it will strongly contaminate and effect the entire Middle Eastern region. Lebanon and Palestine would go like that!

Secondly, If you're worried about USA, they have defence systems that will blow any ICBM in a second before reaching US lands (or seas). ( not to mention the spies lurking in every government out there (even in their allies's governments)

Thirdly, have you even thought about the US reaction towards Iran if it even attempts to drop a bullet from the sky on US soil? they will nuke the shit out of Iran, think of Hiroshima and Nagasaki x20!

All in all, I fully support nuclear energy, and I find it so disrespectful that the US treats other countries like Iran like puppets. These countries have presidents, and have officials that can run their country without the need of any superpower declaring weather or not they are allowed to have nuclear energy or weapons.

What I do not understand is that if Iran really just wanted nuclear energy, why are they not accepting the deals? They'd save millions on research which they do not really need AND they'd be more than capable of building their reactors without international concern.

However by behaving like that they only prove they want the opposite. They do not want nuclear energy. They want otherwise. This is not the US being a bully, this is the entire international comunity worried about obvious military goals in mind. This is also Europe, China and Russia, within others who show concern.

Other countries have nuclear reactors and do not enrich uranium nor they have the technology to do so. Why is Iran so obsessed about it? There is only one answer.

As to wackos, Bush certainly is one, but at least he is accountable for his actions and thus he would never use a nuke. I have my doubts the same holds true for a government such as Iran's.

Ding Ding

I think the question isn't about nuclear technology, but rather about the question whether Iran has the right for a nuclear weapon. Mainly in view that India, Pakistan and Israel (all current US allies and all near-neighbouring countries of Iran) have them.

Iran clearly wants to take up the role as regional superpower in the Middle-East (look at Iraq, Lebanon), and a nuclear weapon is needed in order to do this: since Israel has them, you need to swing the balance of power again if you want to become a true (regional) superpower. (And of course Israel will do whatever it takes to prevent that balance of power shift).

And never forget: this is a weapon that is DEFENSIVE (most people forget this), not offensive (only Russia and the USA have the amounts to use it in an offensive way).

By the way: it's really a bit bloated to call an entire governement "wacko"... Yes, Achmadinejad has a sort of nutcase attaitude going on, but that doesn't mean his entire administration, or the entire country for that matter, are idiots. The first reports have surfaced that top governement officials and top army officers have made it clear to him that he has to turn down the volume on the entire "the holocaust never happened" and "Europe needs to make a country for jews" idiocy. Which he then did.

So it's a little more complicated then "will Achmadinejad launch nukes towards Israel the moment he has the ability".

I disagree wholeheartedly. It is a weapon capable of massive destruction. Any weapon can be considered offensive, unless it can only attack other weapons.

A nuke is a nuke is a nuke. Any way you cut it, it is a very dangerous weapon that can cause death and destruction that can last for decades.

President wacko over there has expressed many times his hatred and disdain for Israel. He has expressed that it needs to be wiped off the map. Etc.
Just because he is quieter about it doesn't mean he doesnt still mean it and wants to act on it. I actually preferred when he did spout his mouth off. Then we know how it all is laid out.

Well, i hope that i can see any useful action from Annan.

If Iran wants to produce nuclear weapons, they will. No-one can stop them unless its a means of war. Since Ahmedinejad is a "wacko", then he would of clearly said he wants to nuke Israel. And I agree with K2, if, and only if, Iran produces nukes, it will be defensive. And just for the record. I can tell you for fact that Iran does not have the ability to produce nukes offensively. If Ahmedinejad is such a "wacko" then he would of said "Yes, I provide Hezbollah with weapons". If you havn't noticed, he doesn't give two fucks about what the international world think of him or his views. With US's current stance, they cannot attack Iran unless Iran attempts to attack them. He can say whatever he wants, in any subject or issue, he can produce whatever he wants, it is no one's business. He is not going agaisnt any pact or arsenal limiting agreement he signed his country to. In my point of view, what he's doing is totaly legitimate and no one, and I mean no one, can do anything about it. The US should be the last to complain about other countries producing nukes. Hell, they support Pakistan and India! Pakistan, a WACKED country with a dictatorship government. India, if any "muslim extremists" are going to come out, they'll come out of there. Im showing the hipocrisy in this situation. Iran has an almost clean history compared to the region, and they have every right to produce whatever they please. Besides, Ahmedinejad said this is nuclear energy only, and I think he'll stick to his word.

Thats not true. But international UN standards, providing weapoins to terrorists is considered terrorism and can be punished. So he does have much to fear. And President Wacko is also smart enough to know that if he keeps quiet, he'll cause less rucus.

Another one of those facts I was taking about before.

I suggest you forward these facts to the UN, this information would certainly put the international community at ease. Why have you been holding out on us? And to think this whole situation could have been avoided if you had only provide these facts in a more timely manner.
Unless once again these facts are coming out of your head.

bleh, anyone who insists that nuclear weapons are an offensive weapon, and not just a tool used to shift balance of power in a political way, tell me this:

Over decades of cold war the following got established: You can only use nukes in an offensive way IF you are able to wipe out all nuclear weapons of the enemy in one first strike. So Russia and the USA started a weapons race to have 1) enough protected silo's and nuclear submarines to make sure no one can destroy them all in a first strike (and you can retaliate), 2) enough ICBM's to launch a devastating first launch, 3) technology to use nukes in a offensive tactical way (meaning: surgical types, not the full blown attacks).

So again, the nuclear weapon in this era is a political weapon, one that gives you protection. That is why India and Pakistan have it (against each other), that is why Israel has it. And that is exactly why Israel is so scared (and right they are!): at this moment there will never be a full blown war between Middle-Eastern nations and Israel, since these nations know that if they would be on the verge of winning it, Israel can always revert to the "last option".

If and when Iran would acquire the bomb, that option would be *woosh* gone. When 2 enemies both have nukes, the benefit of having them is totally gone. This entire debate is about Irans position in the Middle-East. The idea that America itself would be in danger is absurd. Where would Iran get the ICBM's from?

Do we agree that *IF* Iran would acquire the bomb, and use it, that it gets wiped from the earth?

And can we agree that a nation that is smart enough to make nuclear weapons, is NOT dumb enough for full and total self-destruction? If your answer is "I'm not so sure", then you have the ego the size of Jupiter , and I urge you to try and get in into your head that Iranian people aren't idiots and that a president with wacko ideas doesn't represent millions of citizens.

The fear is that Iran getting a nuclear weapon would make the Middle-East so unstable that the state it is in today would seem like a picknick in the park. Nobody knows what it will do to the region if Shi'ites all around suddenly have a nuclear country backing them up. That is why the Sunni regimes in the area really wouldn't mind some Israeli F16's bombing the place. Openly they will condemn the zionist bastards, in their offices they will be relieved.

listen you single balled little prick, fuck off. YES THAT IS FACT, Fuck man, you don't belong in this sub-forum! Iran does NOT, I repeat, DOES NOT, have the economic or scientific capabilities to launch a nuke offensively, meaning on other land. Iran has a GPD of $552.8 billion as of 2005. USA has a GDP of $12.373 trillion. USA spent over (way over) $5.5 trillion on nukes. Thats 10x of Iran's entire economy. So again, you have been pushed into a corner where you still make up fucking nonsense. So in conclusion, Iran does not have the nuclear capability to produce energy yet! They are in the baby steps of implenting legal, and cleaner nuclear energy not bombs. I am saying that if, and only if, they make nukes, then they would never have the ability to use them offensively.

So again, fuck off.


Both. They can be used in both offensivly and in an arms race fashion. In this case, its more of a political shift, a well needed one if you ask me.

Ofcource. As i've said before, Ahmedanjad is not that stupid.

@k2...normally, people wouldnt use them offensively for fear of being erradicated. We've seen time and time again that death is not a fear for muslim extremists. They are so devout to their cause that they WOULD be willing to sacrifice themselves, and their nation if they though they were completing allahs work.

@Micro...The USA may have spent over 5.5 trillion on nukes, but thats plural. And over time. A single nuke would be significantly cheaper, especially if you're doing it 'in house'.

And VR and Micro...calm down both of you. You can make your points without the language

No language in any of my posts. But you just allowed Micro to flame me in the Political Sanctuary.



I have how ever asked for links for these facts, but the continued responses do not have them.

Oh and Microshit,

Here are some Facts about U.S. Nuclear Weapons

And Based on 2005 GDP, Pakistan 118,472, Israel 123,526, Iran 196,409. (U.S. Millions)

So what do these figures tell you about your FACTS? both Pakistan's and Israel's GDP is 40% less than Iran's GDP.

So again, you have been pushed into a corner where you still make up nonsense.

Damn, you are really ignorant. Don't you know that both Pakistan and Israel are extremely close US allies? Most of the nuclear weapons produced "in" Israel are US made. They provide the resources, materials and the engineers to assemble them for both Israel and Pakistan!

So tell me, since Israel is so independant and produces its own nukes, where the hell would they even begin to test them? in the Mediterannean? on Gaza? Israel is exactly 20,770 sqkm . Nevada is 110,561 sqkm. See the difference?

Israel does not even have the physical ability to produce their own nukes.

For the nuclear reactor, French made.
For the raw resources (such as uranium), US + South African provided.

Hell, Egypt has triple the GDP that of Israel, and it doesnt have a nuclear arsenal because of three reasons, lack of political support, lack of money to produce it idividually (same problem with Iran), and finally lack of scientific studies in that feild.

All in all, US spoonfeeds Israel its nukes, and Israel basically claims they made it on their own.

Why you ask US is supporting this country (Israel)? Its in their interest to have a puppet in the Middle East that will say and do whatever it wants, whenever it wants in the name and strength of the US.
My sources:
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/farr.htm
http://cytations.blogspot.com/2005/08/does...have-nukes.html
http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/...el/uranium.html
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/
---

dk said:

I don't support it, but in my opinion, that's more powerful than any nuke you can produce. Not risking, but giving your life to attain a goal.

Micro and VR....because this is the political forum, things get tense and heated up. Previous was my only warning. Anymore flaming of any kind will result in warning levels going up and this thread being closed.



Pakistan didn't become a major USA 'ally' until Bush named them one in the last 5 years or so.



To that....

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/farr.htm




http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/

]

Iran has plenty of studies going on. Lots of scientists, and I don't doubt an 'underground' program.


A puppet in the middle east? C'mon? Israel is the TINIEST spec of land in the Middle East. USA could find a better puppet than that if thats what they truely wanted. Do you think it could at all just be that they are supporting Israel becuase its a small country trying to live peacefully thats surrounded by other countries that hate it?


To your first source:
The guy refers to the jews as Zionists. Gives you a pretty good understanding of his views.

Your second source is the biggest pile of bullshit I have ever seen. That fact that you cite that and read any of that trash really suprises me...

The third and fourth seem legit.


I'm suprised you don't suspect that President Wacko may not have some underground stuff going on. That he isn't dealing with terrorists, who are working just as hard to get a Nuke.

But don't you see dk that that remark is highly patronising? You are calling the entire population of Iran muslim extremists.

Do you see anybody saying the risk got bigger that the USA launches nukes because a born-again christian is the president?

Let's assume for a minute that Achmadinejad is as crazy as some think (although the retoric is for a big part meant to impress the local Mohammed on the streets in the Middle East), he is not the one guy that will decide whether Iran will wipe away Israel from the world (and thus be wiped away itself). There are a lot of other people who have to agree... and they will not, because not everybody is a "muslim extremist".

Even you will have to admit that it's one thing to support suicide bombers as a legitimate way of defending yourself against Israel, but it's another to think you have the right to "suicide" your own +70 million people.

The "wiping away Israel" will NEVER happen. The only thing Israel fears is an enemy having the same weapon as they have AND there is the question what Sunni regimes in the region will do: will they feel compelled to get nukes as well, just like the case with India and Pakistan, they both have nukes because they felt the other party wanted them).

@Pakistan: You are actually wrong there: Pakistan has always been an allied nation of the USA in the cold war, because India was considered to be in the Soviet camp. Only after the cold war the relationship got worse, with the total freeze coming when Pakistan suddenly said it had nukes. After 9/11, the relationship
got better again (well, with dictator Musharraf that is, not with the population itself )

I am not calling all of Iran to be muslim extremists. But when 1 man is, and has his finger on the button, its not the entire nation you have to worry about. And Bush is hardly a born again christian. He's a methodist. Either way, he's VERY conservative and lets religion guide him. But not to the point of genocide or murder. You have to go see some people in Tennesse for that.



Rational thoughts don't come from irrational people. That logic makes sense to you and me, but not to someone who believes that martyrdom is the way. For someone who believes that Allah WANTS them to kill the Jews (zionists to the muslims), the nuke is the best way to do it. And if anyone retaliates to it, the they are going against Allah's will, and should be punished. Not every muslim believes to the extreme, but it just takes the leaders to believe so.


Israel fears not having peace. They fear constantly being persecuted and hunted constantly. Thats why they've given up so much land in the past in the name of peace, and attack so hard when they're hit. They need to flex a little so that the nations that hate them don't just try to roll them over.


But after the cold war is when Micro was referencing Pakistan giving Israel nukes. But otherwise, yes, they were allies.

I am amazed you provided those links, did you actually read through all that information, if you had, you would not have provided them because they refute almost every argument you have presented. LMAO