User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:54:18 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I didn't ask you but are you an expert? You are the one disputing the claim. Prove it. I'll wait. History says otherwise. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are you an expert on the ME? You don't need to be an expert on the ME to support an assertion if it's not just mindless blather. Still waiting. I didn't ask you but are you an expert? You are the one disputing the claim. Prove it. I'll wait. History says otherwise. It's not at all surprising that you are unable to support your argument that the Iranian regime is not rational, since your assertion is wrong. The Iranian regime is rational. Iran desiring nuclear weapons is rational. Sunni Pakistan to their east has nukes. A nuclear power occupied two other nation-states on Iran's borders recently. That same nuclear power stated that Iran was part of an "Axis of Evil" That same nuclear power imposed regime change upon and occupied the Axis member with the least developed nuclear weapons program. Iran's regional adversary, Israel, has nuclear weapons. So, Iran's nuclear desires are rational. Iran, for years has had the ability to strike Israel with ballistic missiles. Iran has WMD in the form of chemical and biological weapons. It's reasonable to assume that they have experimented fitting these payloads to their MRBMs. Iran has had the ability to provide chem/bio weapons to terrorists capable of striking Israel, but they have not. Why not? Iran knows Israel has a second strike capability, therefore striking Israel with either chem/bio nuclear weapons would not be rational since it would invite nuclear retaliation. Israel has deterred Iran, which requires a rational calculus. So, please go ahead and support your assertion with something besides a moronic *rolleyes*. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:55:22 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The problem with bombing is that it's kinda like sucking dick. You can't do it a little and hope the guy will be a little less horny. If you're gonna start, you gotta keep sucking until the job's done, otherwise the outcome is the opposite of what you intended. Same with bombing. are you an expert at dick sucking? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:56:38 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are the one disputing a statement that is pretty obvious. . If that statement is so obvious, it should be very easy to support with evidence, Larry. Still waiting... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:56:39 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wouldn't be the first time for us to do that... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We'd be better off fomenting regime change subversively in Iran. Wouldn't be the first time for us to do that... Lol not sure if serious? Our Obama regime LOVES the Iranian regime. Hell they are busy trying to overthrow the Israeli regime ( well tried...and failed) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:57:50 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol not sure if serious? Our Obama regime LOVES the Iranian regime. Hell they are busy trying to overthrow the Israeli regime ( well tried...and failed) Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
We'd be better off fomenting regime change subversively in Iran. Wouldn't be the first time for us to do that... Lol not sure if serious? Our Obama regime LOVES the Iranian regime. Hell they are busy trying to overthrow the Israeli regime ( well tried...and failed) You're not sure if I'm serious whether or not the US has fomented regime change in Iran? LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:58:44 AM EDT
[#6]
I have a friend of a friend that knows a guy's brother-in-law twice removed that says we will be hitting targets soon.
  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:59:14 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Iraqis will treat us as liberators. That means we didn't use enough violence against the ones who didn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:59:31 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're not sure if I'm serious whether or not the US has fomented regime change in Iran? LOL Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
We'd be better off fomenting regime change subversively in Iran. Wouldn't be the first time for us to do that... Lol not sure if serious? Our Obama regime LOVES the Iranian regime. Hell they are busy trying to overthrow the Israeli regime ( well tried...and failed) You're not sure if I'm serious whether or not the US has fomented regime change in Iran? LOL I was referring to the original quote you quoted about us being better off doing so. I know we have already done so in the past. I am talking about currently Mr. Obama has been deep throating the Iranian regime and asking for more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:59:43 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We'd be better off fomenting regime change subversively in Iran. lol Anybody worth a fuck already get got by the IRGC in 2009. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:00:28 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I heard a guy say there are 4 known facilities right now, that if hit with ordnance we have now, would put them back as much as 10 years. Eta: some of it is already under ground. And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant. It actually does, as opposed to potentially getting bombed by them. Can't let those crazy assholes have THE bomb. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:01:13 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You don't need to be an expert on the ME to support an assertion if it's not just mindless blather. Still waiting. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Are you an expert on the ME? You don't need to be an expert on the ME to support an assertion if it's not just mindless blather. Still waiting. Maybe you could explain why the philosophy of the "twelvers" is not applicable here? You seem to have all the answers, and to you, everyone else is wrong including the words of the leaders in iran. (when they state they will wipe Israel off of the map) iirc, they believe they have to start a world wide war for the "Twelfth imam" to appear and create paradise for them or some such shit. This group in power now is so radical in their thinking that their "sect" was banned under the Ayatollah Khomeini. I'm just going from memory here so please correct me if I'm wrong. (as if you need an invite for THAT. lol) I eagerly await reading your words of wisdom and enlightenment on this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:05:28 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IF we intend to stop Iran from developing a nuke, the only real solution is to blow shit up. If blowing shit up is too much a stretch we'd better get used to a nuclear armed Iran, and that leads to a nuclear armed Saudi Arabia too. this |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:21:07 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryHahahahahaha...ill be singing that all day! Too funny 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:21:39 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
are you an expert at dick sucking? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The problem with bombing is that it's kinda like sucking dick. You can't do it a little and hope the guy will be a little less horny. If you're gonna start, you gotta keep sucking until the job's done, otherwise the outcome is the opposite of what you intended. Same with bombing. are you an expert at dick sucking? Perhaps not, compared to you, but enough to know that a half-blown guy tends to be irritable. Same as a half bombed country. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:22:51 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps not, compared to you, but enough to know that a half-blown guy tends to be irritable. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The problem with bombing is that it's kinda like sucking dick. You can't do it a little and hope the guy will be a little less horny. If you're gonna start, you gotta keep sucking until the job's done, otherwise the outcome is the opposite of what you intended. Same with bombing. are you an expert at dick sucking? Perhaps not, compared to you, but enough to know that a half-blown guy tends to be irritable. That was an odd smiley face for him to use. Awfully accusatory, and not in a good way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:26:20 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That was an odd smiley face for him to use. Awfully accusatory, and not in a good way. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The problem with bombing is that it's kinda like sucking dick. You can't do it a little and hope the guy will be a little less horny. If you're gonna start, you gotta keep sucking until the job's done, otherwise the outcome is the opposite of what you intended. Same with bombing. are you an expert at dick sucking? Perhaps not, compared to you, but enough to know that a half-blown guy tends to be irritable. That was an odd smiley face for him to use. Awfully accusatory, and not in a good way. That's what I thought. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:26:50 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There isn't one, at least not militarily. Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, regardless of what we do. Technology progresses. Weaponry gets more potent. The ease with which nations can produce nuclear weapons will continue to increase. Edit: Best bet is to continue the campaign of killing scientists and sabotaging equipment. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I heard a guy say there are 4 known facilities right now, that if hit with ordnance we have now, would put them back as much as 10 years. Eta: some of it is already under ground. And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant. I'M ALL EARS WHAT'S YOUR PLAN? There isn't one, at least not militarily. Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, regardless of what we do. Technology progresses. Weaponry gets more potent. The ease with which nations can produce nuclear weapons will continue to increase. Edit: Best bet is to continue the campaign of killing scientists and sabotaging equipment. But we shouldn't use bombs to accomplish this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:28:42 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But we shouldn't use bombs to accomplish this? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant. I'M ALL EARS WHAT'S YOUR PLAN? There isn't one, at least not militarily. Iran will acquire nuclear weapons, regardless of what we do. Technology progresses. Weaponry gets more potent. The ease with which nations can produce nuclear weapons will continue to increase. Edit: Best bet is to continue the campaign of killing scientists and sabotaging equipment. But we shouldn't use bombs to accomplish this? Compared to the other methods, it generates a huge political risk (essentially declaring war on a nation), without guarantee that it would even work. Even the best case is that the program is delayed by a number of years, and that's assuming we have perfect intel on every site and the conventional capability of hitting them all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:28:53 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Weaksauce argument based on vapor. Iran isn't going to start nuking Israel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I heard a guy say there are 4 known facilities right now, that if hit with ordnance we have now, would put them back as much as 10 years. Eta: some of it is already under ground. And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant. Weaksauce argument based on vapor. Iran isn't going to start nuking Israel. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:31:13 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Khrushchev banged his shoe on the table at the UN and shouted 'WE WILL BURY YOU!' No one felt the need to wet their pants and press the red button. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
When your enemy tells you exactly what they are going to do to you, when they are capable, it behooves you to listen and believe them. Khrushchev banged his shoe on the table at the UN and shouted 'WE WILL BURY YOU!' No one felt the need to wet their pants and press the red button. Khruschev wasn't speaking of nuclear war. The evidence I see indicates that Khruschev was right..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:32:05 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Irrelevant. Hitler was actually invading countries when Chamberlain made his error. Iran has the ability to do what the say and haven't been using it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Israel sure is being rocked by all those chemical weapons attacks right now, aren't they. No, I can not see that scenario. Not realistically. Neville Chamberlain had the same problem. Irrelevant. Hitler was actually invading countries when Chamberlain made his error. Iran has the ability to do what the say and haven't been using it. Do you mean to tell me that there are no Iranians in Iraq or Syria? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:40:00 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That was an odd smiley face for him to use. Awfully accusatory, and not in a good way. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The problem with bombing is that it's kinda like sucking dick. You can't do it a little and hope the guy will be a little less horny. If you're gonna start, you gotta keep sucking until the job's done, otherwise the outcome is the opposite of what you intended. Same with bombing. are you an expert at dick sucking? Perhaps not, compared to you, but enough to know that a half-blown guy tends to be irritable. That was an odd smiley face for him to use. Awfully accusatory, and not in a good way.  reference was over your head I suppose. About 3 posts above his from the purse swinging argument where Mr. LarryG basically says if you're not an ME expert you somehow can't have any valid opinion on the matter..
Quoted:
Are you an expert on the ME? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:40:48 PM EDT
[#23]
Everyone that wants to go to war with Iran, line up over here and we'll start issuing you your gear.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:42:31 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Everyone that wants to go to war with Iran, line up over here and we'll start issuing you your gear. Yeah because boots on the ground it the only way to wage war amiright? Fuck that multi billion dollar bomber and fighter fleet we have. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:48:02 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah because boots on the ground it the only way to wage war amiright? Fuck that multi billion dollar bomber and fighter fleet we have. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Everyone that wants to go to war with Iran, line up over here and we'll start issuing you your gear. Yeah because boots on the ground it the only way to wage war amiright? Fuck that multi billion dollar bomber and fighter fleet we have. I can't think of a single war that was won with air power alone. Sending a cruise missile their way or dropping a smart bomb on a few buildings accomplishes very little. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:48:07 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Irrelevant. Hitler was actually invading countries when Chamberlain made his error. Iran has the ability to do what the say and haven't been using it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Israel sure is being rocked by all those chemical weapons attacks right now, aren't they. No, I can not see that scenario. Not realistically. Neville Chamberlain had the same problem. Irrelevant. Hitler was actually invading countries when Chamberlain made his error. Iran has the ability to do what the say and haven't been using it. Iran knows they would catch a nuclear counter strike for their trouble if they used chem weapons. It's not that they aren't willing to take that strikes. It's that they aren't going to stick their necks out for it until they have something that can really do the job on Israel. Israel would survive and recover from a mass chem attack. They probably won't recover from a mass nuclear attack. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:50:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Iran knows they would catch a nuclear counter strike for their trouble if they used chem weapons. It's not that they aren't willing to take that strikes. It's that they aren't going to stick their necks out for it until they have something that can really do the job on Israel. Israel would survive and recover from a mass chem attack. They probably won't recover from a mass nuclear attack. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Neville Chamberlain had the same problem. Irrelevant. Hitler was actually invading countries when Chamberlain made his error. Iran has the ability to do what the say and haven't been using it. Iran knows they would catch a nuclear counter strike for their trouble if they used chem weapons. It's not that they aren't willing to take that strikes. It's that they aren't going to stick their necks out for it until they have something that can really do the job on Israel. Israel would survive and recover from a mass chem attack. They probably won't recover from a mass nuclear attack. So Iran's leaders are crazy enough to die in order to kill Israel, but not crazy enough to die in order to mortally wound Israel. That's a very specific level of crazy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:50:50 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Right. We can't invade Iran. We can't bomb Iran. We can't rely on any deal with Iran. Sanctions will not stop them. So, we need to improve our Ballistic Missile Defense Shield in the region, in Europe, and here at home. We also need a more viable deterrent than our own nuclear weapons. We need Kinetic Energy Space Based Weapon Platforms. Time to get busy and defend America. The reality is that not only will Iran go nuclear, but other nations will as well in the future. In the next 50 years we should see probably at least two or three additional nuclear powers. I agree My only caveat being we bomb Iran to set them back to give us more time to build our defenses |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:53:30 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So Iran's leaders are crazy enough to die in order to kill Israel, but not crazy enough to die in order to mortally wound Israel. That's a very specific level of crazy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Neville Chamberlain had the same problem. Irrelevant. Hitler was actually invading countries when Chamberlain made his error. Iran has the ability to do what the say and haven't been using it. Iran knows they would catch a nuclear counter strike for their trouble if they used chem weapons. It's not that they aren't willing to take that strikes. It's that they aren't going to stick their necks out for it until they have something that can really do the job on Israel. Israel would survive and recover from a mass chem attack. They probably won't recover from a mass nuclear attack. So Iran's leaders are crazy enough to die in order to kill Israel, but not crazy enough to die in order to mortally wound Israel. That's a very specific level of crazy. I wouldn't call it crazy at all. If your goal really is to destroy Israel (and I don't have a good reason to think that's not their goal as of yet), you wait until you are actually able to do so before attempting it. Chem weapons probably won't get it done. Nukes probably will in sufficient numbers. If it also came to atomic throwdown between Israel and Iran, I wouldn't count on us being left out of that. It's best we just not go there if it can be helped. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:57:54 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Weaksauce argument based on vapor. Iran isn't going to start nuking Israel. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I heard a guy say there are 4 known facilities right now, that if hit with ordnance we have now, would put them back as much as 10 years. Eta: some of it is already under ground. And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant. Weaksauce argument based on vapor. Iran isn't going to start nuking Israel.  , you willing to bet your life and children's life on that????? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:03:52 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
, you willing to bet your life and children's life on that????? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I heard a guy say there are 4 known facilities right now, that if hit with ordnance we have now, would put them back as much as 10 years. Eta: some of it is already under ground. And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant. Weaksauce argument based on vapor. Iran isn't going to start nuking Israel. , you willing to bet your life and children's life on that????? Lolwut? Even if Iran nuked Israel, how would that threaten his life or the life of his child? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:10:54 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was referring to the original quote you quoted about us being better off doing so. I know we have already done so in the past. I am talking about currently Mr. Obama has been deep throating the Iranian regime and asking for more. Copy and I retract my LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:12:33 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
are you an expert at dick sucking? Perhaps not, compared to you, but enough to know that a half-blown guy tends to be irritable. That was an odd smiley face for him to use. Awfully accusatory, and not in a good way. reference was over your head I suppose. About 3 posts above his from the purse swinging argument where Mr. LarryG basically says if you're not an ME expert you somehow can't have any valid opinion on the MEUh, guy ... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:13:09 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree My only caveat being we bomb Iran to set them back to give us more time to build our defenses Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Right. We can't invade Iran. We can't bomb Iran. We can't rely on any deal with Iran. Sanctions will not stop them. So, we need to improve our Ballistic Missile Defense Shield in the region, in Europe, and here at home. We also need a more viable deterrent than our own nuclear weapons. We need Kinetic Energy Space Based Weapon Platforms. Time to get busy and defend America. The reality is that not only will Iran go nuclear, but other nations will as well in the future. In the next 50 years we should see probably at least two or three additional nuclear powers. I agree My only caveat being we bomb Iran to set them back to give us more time to build our defenses I'd support bombing if covert actions were deemed not to be a viable solution (assassinations of scientists and sabotage). One thing we could do is truly back the Kurds with military weapons and encourage them to invade Northern Iran where they could create one hell of an insurgency if properly supplied by the USA, but Turkey would probably have a heart attack if we did that. That option should at the very least be used as a stick at our negotiations. Northern Iran has a great deal of ethnic Kurds living there. Not that I expect any deal we would ever work out with them would be honored, but the more inspection rights we had the greater the difficulty at least and that could buy us time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:14:21 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Uh, guy ... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
are you an expert at dick sucking? Perhaps not, compared to you, but enough to know that a half-blown guy tends to be irritable. That was an odd smiley face for him to use. Awfully accusatory, and not in a good way. reference was over your head I suppose. About 3 posts above his from the purse swinging argument where Mr. LarryG basically says if you're not an ME expert you somehow can't have any valid opinion on the MEUh, guy ... All women on the internet are men. Or FBI agents. You know this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:14:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Delusional Liberals keep proving that they are delusional.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:15:05 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Compared to the other methods, it generates a huge political risk (essentially declaring war on a nation), without guarantee that it would even work. Even the best case is that the program is delayed by a number of years, and that's assuming we have perfect intel on every site and the conventional capability of hitting them all. Of course our intel is perfect. Look how quickly we rolled up all those Iraqi nuclear weapons sites. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:20:57 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can't think of a single war that was won with air power alone. Sending a cruise missile their way or dropping a smart bomb on a few buildings accomplishes very little. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Everyone that wants to go to war with Iran, line up over here and we'll start issuing you your gear. Yeah because boots on the ground it the only way to wage war amiright? Fuck that multi billion dollar bomber and fighter fleet we have. I can't think of a single war that was won with air power alone. Sending a cruise missile their way or dropping a smart bomb on a few buildings accomplishes very little. That really only depends on the payload now, doesn't it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:22:05 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So Iran's leaders are crazy enough to die in order to kill Israel, but not crazy enough to die in order to mortally wound Israel. That's a very specific level of crazy. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Neville Chamberlain had the same problem. Irrelevant. Hitler was actually invading countries when Chamberlain made his error. Iran has the ability to do what the say and haven't been using it. Iran knows they would catch a nuclear counter strike for their trouble if they used chem weapons. It's not that they aren't willing to take that strikes. It's that they aren't going to stick their necks out for it until they have something that can really do the job on Israel. Israel would survive and recover from a mass chem attack. They probably won't recover from a mass nuclear attack. So Iran's leaders are crazy enough to die in order to kill Israel, but not crazy enough to die in order to mortally wound Israel. That's a very specific level of crazy. No, it is a group of determined people, following their religious beliefs to the letter. A wounded Israel does them no good, a destroyed Israel is what they need. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:23:13 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
, you willing to bet your life and children's life on that????? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I heard a guy say there are 4 known facilities right now, that if hit with ordnance we have now, would put them back as much as 10 years. Eta: some of it is already under ground. And in 5 years, when they've rebuilt and are working again, what do we do? Bomb them again? Perpetual bombing. This plan seems brilliant. Weaksauce argument based on vapor. Iran isn't going to start nuking Israel. , you willing to bet your life and children's life on that????? I am pretty sure he is willing to risk yours and my kids over his assumptions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:24:09 PM EDT
[#41]
So, what happens if all of you people who think Iran won't use a nuke are wrong?
Oh, yeah, tens of thousands of people will die instantly, and tens of thousands more will die slowly. That sounds like a risk worth taking... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:24:32 PM EDT
[#42]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBGPw_LBiRA
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:24:36 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The West does not have the stomach to solve non-western problems. We will win every battle in the ME but lose every war because we will refuse to do what is necessary to win the war because it offends our western morals. BOOM! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:31:19 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lolwut? Even if Iran nuked Israel, how would that threaten his life or the life of his child? Yep. It's a good thing Iran hasn't figured out how to make ballistic missiles that have intercontinental capabilities, not to mention developing reentry vehicles for a payload. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:33:14 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
It would be bloody, destabilizing and help drive Tehran’s nuclear program underground Iran hawks are playing with fire. We are close to a nuclear deal with Iran, but opponents continue to step up attacks aimed at torpedoing efforts to reach a settlement. They insist that we must walk away from the negotiating table, and that there’s a better deal to be had.
That belief is a fantasy Vice President Dick Cheney even once said, “We don’t negotiate with evil; we defeat it.” The results? Negotiations collapsed and Iran went from only a few installed centrifuges at the beginning of the Bush administration to about 6,000 by the end Bottom line is that Iran, and many other countries, learned the lessons of Osirak quite well. Disperse, hide, and harden. We should have been bombing and not negotiating and they would not have reached 6,000 centrifuges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:38:03 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, what happens if all of you people who think Iran won't use a nuke are wrong? Oh, yeah, tens of thousands of people will die instantly, and tens of thousands more will die slowly. That sounds like a risk worth taking... Exactly. So why take any risks? Why count on half measures and diplomacy? We need to start developing counter-measures to protect our nation and our interests. Missile Defense needs to be put on steroids and we need a more viable deterrent like Kinetic Energy Weapons. Time for God Rods. If we developed each to a suitable level we could even withdraw from certain areas around the globe, because we'd be able to hit conventionally without the need for bases around the world. Between that and our Navy/Marine Corps we'd be fine. Switch the US Army to a largely national guard and reserve force along with the Airforce. Increase SOCOM and Covert Activities. Space based weapons buy us a WHOLE lot for the money. If anyone screws with us be they a single terrorist or an entire nation we can pinpoint squash them like bugs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:42:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Again, you've got to show that Ayatollah Khomeini is willing to become a Martyr. Thats what it would mean for him to order the release of a nuclear weapon - he would be vaporized. So lets forget about the death of countrymen, soldiers, enemies, and everyone else in the universe and focus on the guy who would have his finger on the button. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The question is, do the members of the regime believe they would pay the price personally for such a decision, or do they think they can use a nuclear device-even by proxy-to achieve a desired end-state and survive? Do they value the lives of their countrymen, or are they willing to martyer them believing in their minds they will go to Paradise? I don't buy into the "rational actor" sales pitch justifying a "do nothing" approach by this or any other administration. Again, you've got to show that Ayatollah Khomeini is willing to become a Martyr. Thats what it would mean for him to order the release of a nuclear weapon - he would be vaporized. So lets forget about the death of countrymen, soldiers, enemies, and everyone else in the universe and focus on the guy who would have his finger on the button. I won't pretend to know what's going on in the minds of the regime, but under the circumstances and given the words that have been spoken publicly on the world stage, I believe it's prudent to assume the worst and act accordingly. It's one thing if they miscalculate and we suffer a hit because the regime didn't take the U.S. serioulsy as a threat to their existance. It's entirely another if we miscalulate because we weren't proactive when we should have been and ignored the warning signs resulting in mass casualties either here or abroad. Negligence of that order of magnatude would be criminal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:42:38 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly. So why take any risks? Why count on half measures and diplomacy? We need to start developing counter-measures to protect our nation and our interests. Missile Defense needs to be put on steroids and we need a more viable deterrent like Kinetic Energy Weapons. Time for God Rods. If we developed each to a suitable level we could even withdraw from certain areas around the globe, because we'd be able to hit conventionally without the need for bases around the world. Between that and our Navy/Marine Corps we'd be fine. Switch the US Army to a largely national guard and reserve force along with the Airforce. Increase SOCOM and Covert Activities. Space based weapons buy us a WHOLE lot for the money. If anyone screws with us be they a single terrorist or an entire nation we can pinpoint squash them like bugs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, what happens if all of you people who think Iran won't use a nuke are wrong? Oh, yeah, tens of thousands of people will die instantly, and tens of thousands more will die slowly. That sounds like a risk worth taking... Exactly. So why take any risks? Why count on half measures and diplomacy? We need to start developing counter-measures to protect our nation and our interests. Missile Defense needs to be put on steroids and we need a more viable deterrent like Kinetic Energy Weapons. Time for God Rods. If we developed each to a suitable level we could even withdraw from certain areas around the globe, because we'd be able to hit conventionally without the need for bases around the world. Between that and our Navy/Marine Corps we'd be fine. Switch the US Army to a largely national guard and reserve force along with the Airforce. Increase SOCOM and Covert Activities. Space based weapons buy us a WHOLE lot for the money. If anyone screws with us be they a single terrorist or an entire nation we can pinpoint squash them like bugs. Ah, expensive solutions at their finest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:46:40 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe you could explain why the philosophy of the "twelvers" is not applicable here? You seem to have all the answers, and to you, everyone else is wrong including the words of the leaders in iran. (when they state they will wipe Israel off of the map) iirc, they believe they have to start a world wide war for the "Twelfth imam" to appear and create paradise for them or some such shit. This group in power now is so radical in their thinking that their "sect" was banned under the Ayatollah Khomeini. I'm just going from memory here so please correct me if I'm wrong. (as if you need an invite for THAT. lol) I eagerly await reading your words of wisdom and enlightenment on this. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are you an expert on the ME? You don't need to be an expert on the ME to support an assertion if it's not just mindless blather. Still waiting. Maybe you could explain why the philosophy of the "twelvers" is not applicable here? You seem to have all the answers, and to you, everyone else is wrong including the words of the leaders in iran. (when they state they will wipe Israel off of the map) iirc, they believe they have to start a world wide war for the "Twelfth imam" to appear and create paradise for them or some such shit. This group in power now is so radical in their thinking that their "sect" was banned under the Ayatollah Khomeini. I'm just going from memory here so please correct me if I'm wrong. (as if you need an invite for THAT. lol) I eagerly await reading your words of wisdom and enlightenment on this. Your position requires baseless conjecture and placing weight on rhetoric that the Iranians have been using for 20 years without any actions to back them up. If Iran (back then or today) was as fanatically motivated as you and others keep suggesting, they would have attacked Israel directly a long time ago because their religion REQUIRED it. Anything less would be a violation of their religious beliefs, but religious fanatics won't do that, right? You can't have it both ways, either Iran is ruled by religious fanatics who have a religious mandate to destroy Israel and the world regardless of their own lives, or it is ruled by rational actors who spew bombastic platitudes to keep the populace distracted while oppressing them. Given Iran's history, which do you think is more likely? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:49:03 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This man makes sense. I like it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The West does not have the stomach to solve non-western problems. We will win every battle in the ME but lose every war because we will refuse to do what is necessary to win the war because it offends our western morals. This man makes sense. I like it. Yep, he is correct. Our losses will have to become very great before we have the resolve to do anything. And when that point is reached the losses required to act will be greater still. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
