Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/30/2004 7:57:52 PM EST
I was half-listening after an hour, caught him saying stuff Kim Jong-Il and the Mullahs dream an American president saying, but I didn't hear anything about giving the Iranians nuke fuel. I know Kerry's foreign policy advisors think this is a great idea, but did the fool actually say it in the debates? I'm not clear on this.
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 7:58:09 PM EST
YES
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 7:58:58 PM EST
That's a big roger.
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 7:59:10 PM EST
Holy shit. HOLY FUCKING SHIT.
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 8:03:29 PM EST
He said he would to make sure that they are using it for power, not a large mushroom cloud. Like I would believe any Mullah......
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 8:11:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By CFII:
He said he would to make sure that they are using it for power, not a large mushroom cloud. Like I would believe any Mullah......



What happens when they happily take the fuel, but go on refining uranium and make a bomb anyway?

What then, oh Botoxed One?
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 8:12:40 PM EST
yes he did, i couldn't believe it either
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 8:16:41 PM EST
Yep. Expect it in RNC commercials before the weekend is out. Insane, especially after his pathetic attempted slam about Bush supposedly NOT fighting nuclear proliferation.
Even better - what's to stop Iran from handing their Shiite / Hezbollah terrorists enough Uranium for a very Dirty Bomb?
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 8:16:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By CFII:
He said he would to make sure that they are using it for power, not a large mushroom cloud. Like I would believe any Mullah......



True, thats what the asshole said! BUT, that statement says too me "I'll make easier for the terrorist to kill us, I'll give them WMD"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link Posted: 9/30/2004 8:31:26 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 7:49:47 PM EST by NYPatriot]
This thread needs to be tacked to the top of GD till Election Day!!!

This one statement transcends political posturing & cheer leading for one's prefered candidate.

Kerry has served notice that he is a clear & present danger to the security of this nation!

Seriously, this isn’t just rhetoric anymore... Kerry is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS!!!


Link Posted: 9/30/2004 8:45:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By NYPatriot:
Kerry is EXTREMELY DANGEROUES!!!






Word...
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 9:19:58 PM EST
Bump.

Link Posted: 9/30/2004 9:34:07 PM EST
kerry is such a tool
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 9:38:52 PM EST
He also misspoke about Lubyanka in Moscow, he said Treblinka which was a Nazi death camp. He also mentioned the NYC subways shut down for the Republican Conv, which only Penn station shut down not the subways, all he is is a good bullshitter....
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 10:08:56 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/30/2004 10:09:57 PM EST by Notorious]
From now on, Kerry should be concidered a terrorist and a WMD!!!
Link Posted: 9/30/2004 10:10:45 PM EST
KERRY ALSO SAID HE WOULD NOT DEVELOPE ADVANCED BUNKER BUSTING NUCLEAR WEAPONS, & HE WOULD LEGITIMIZE NORTH KOREA'S DESPOTIC REGIEM BY NEGOIATING WITH THEM AS EQUALS!!!
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 4:11:45 AM EST
KERRY:

With respect to Iran, the British, French, and Germans were the ones who initiated an effort without the United States, regrettably, to begin to try to move to curb the nuclear possibilities in Iran. I believe we could have done better.

I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together. The president did nothing.



See the full text of the debate here: www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134152,00.html

THis nice little nugget appears about 3/4 of the page down.



Link Posted: 10/1/2004 4:18:06 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 4:26:37 AM EST

Originally Posted By Arc_Angel:
KERRY:

With respect to Iran, the British, French, and Germans were the ones who initiated an effort without the United States, regrettably, to begin to try to move to curb the nuclear possibilities in Iran. I believe we could have done better.

I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together. The president did nothing.



See the full text of the debate here: www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134152,00.html

THis nice little nugget appears about 3/4 of the page down.






Jeezum crow! Read that part I put in blue.

If we GIVE them the fuel.

And then they're "not willing to work a deal,"

Doesn't that mean we're basically fucked?

Iran: "Fuck you and your sanctions, we just built these nukes here, see!"

And what if whe "worked a deal" before giving them the fuel. We're just going to TRUST them to abide by that deal? A lot of fucking good that approach did in N. Korea!?

Link Posted: 10/1/2004 4:32:55 AM EST
This is why i say ...

PATIENCE PEOPLE


the "knockout punch" will come out on the campaign trail.

Sure Kerry was slicker and more polished, but Americans understand slik and polished doesn't win wars.

Kerry gave us 100' feet of rope to hang him with - and even formed the noose last nite.


Patience.....

Link Posted: 10/1/2004 4:39:48 AM EST

Originally Posted By gaspain:

Originally Posted By NYPatriot:
Kerry is EXTREMELY DANGEROUES!!!






Word...



He could well be dangerous but I doubt if he is "dangeroues".
Thanks !
~The Spelling Nazi
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 8:35:07 AM EST
Why doesn't Kerry just mail the Mullahs a bunch of our surplus nukes???

GunLvr
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 8:35:38 AM EST
Yes
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 8:41:27 AM EST
hehe that may come back and bite him in the ass, but truthfully that is what we need to do.

Iran is building breeder reactors whose main purpose is producing additional fuel. There are several types of reactors that do not produce additional fuel. It would make it harder for them to produce bombs to give them non-breeder ractors. Not easier.

They already have the nuclear material, its the type of reactors they are constructing that is worrisome.



Link Posted: 10/1/2004 8:45:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By Dino:
hehe that may come back and bite him in the ass, but truthfully that is what we need to do.

Iran is building breeder reactors whose main purpose is producing additional fuel. There are several types of reactors that do not produce additional fuel. It would make it harder for them to produce bombs to give them non-breeder ractors. Not easier.

They already have the nuclear material, its the type of reactors they are constructing that is worrisome.






yah it would be nice if soemoen would mention the fact that there is NO PEACEFUL USE for the powerplants they are building. They are nowhere near any powergrids....
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 8:47:35 AM EST
Kerry is a jerk off .
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 8:50:41 AM EST

Kerry has served notice that he is a clear & present danger to the security of this nation!

So when Bush recommends that, it's ok, but when Kerry does you call him a "clear & present danger?" Talk about a double-standard here! Come-on guys, be a little more mature.z
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 9:01:35 AM EST

Originally Posted By raven:
I was half-listening after an hour, caught him saying stuff Kim Jong-Il and the Mullahs dream an American president saying, but I didn't hear anything about giving the Iranians nuke fuel. I know Kerry's foreign policy advisors think this is a great idea, but did the fool actually say it in the debates? I'm not clear on this.



Rush is about to discuss this ater the break

Link...Look for Listen Live Button
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 9:04:22 AM EST
Iran is sitting on top of a huge percentage of the world's energy supply. They have more natural gas than they know what to do with -- and burn it off.

Why do they all of a sudden need nuclear power?
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 9:06:50 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 9:19:20 AM EST
Can anyone tell me what the four points of his plan for Iraq were? I know he went on and on about having four points, but he never (as far as I can remember) said "point one..., point two..., point three..., point four..." he simply rambled about how badly he thought Mr Bush's plan was.
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 9:21:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By BenDover:
Iran is sitting on top of a huge percentage of the world's energy supply. They have more natural gas than they know what to do with -- and burn it off.

Why do they all of a sudden need nuclear power?



A big +1 on that one.

With oil and natural gas, why in the world would the Iranians need a nuclear reactor???
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 9:24:35 AM EST

Originally Posted By BenDover:
Iran is sitting on top of a huge percentage of the world's energy supply. They have more natural gas than they know what to do with -- and burn it off.



Yep, all that natural gas would work great in gas turbine power plants which are cheap to build, run and pollute very little.

GunLvr
Link Posted: 10/1/2004 9:56:25 AM EST
What was GW's response to Kerry's statement? I was downshifting at the time and didn't hear it?
Top Top