Iran's peaceful nuke intentions?

[777 fixer]

According to USA, their stated intention is that they are seeking nuclear power, not weapons. Although I would not be surprised if they join the nuclear bomb club within the next 10 years or sooner. If other nations can join, why not them? Not like we have the ability to stop them.

You leave out one very important fact. When you look at countries like China, India, Pakistan, France, Great Britain they have one thing in common. The leaders of these countries did not advocate genocide against countries that have done nothing to it. Iran on the other hand has done so.

 

[KCFlyer]

You leave out one very important fact. When you look at countries like China, India, Pakistan, France, Great Britain they have one thing in common. The leaders of these countries did not advocate genocide against countries that have done nothing to it. Iran on the other hand has done so.

And ain't it a shame that we felt that Iraq posed a bigger threat.

 

[local 12 proud]

And ain't it a shame that we felt that Iraq posed a bigger threat.

The truth is we will probably never know the true extent of the threat posed due to the failure of Intel.

Im anxious to see how the Left will handle the bigger threats.

 

[777 fixer]

I forgot to add that when someone like Ahmadinejad
makes threats he fully intends to carry them out.

 

[Seatacus]

I forgot to add that when someone like Ahmadinejad
makes threats he fully intends to carry them out.

The proper word for those threats is promises

 

[777 fixer]

The proper word for those threats is promises

Good point.

 

[777 fixer]

According to USA, their stated intention is that they are seeking nuclear power, not weapons. Although I would not be surprised if they join the nuclear bomb club within the next 10 years or sooner. If other nations can join, why not them? Not like we have the ability to stop them.

Ahmadinejad is having his little Holocaust denial festival is Tehran. Really like the picture of him shaking hands with David Duke. He has changed his tune a little bit by saying that Israel should be wiped off the map like the USSR was. Well we all know what he really means.

 

[Garfield1966]

The proper word for those threats is promises

I would say it is a hope or a wish rather than a promise.

He has to realize that if Iran were to make a move against Israel there would be retaliation. If Iran were stupid enough to escalate to nukes, Israel would do the same. In a one on one match, Israel always wins, Iran has read the history books, they know the level of armament that Israel holds and they know the level of training that Israel has. Given the fact that
he has not made any moves (other then shooting off his mouth) I would argue that Israel has far bigger worries in Syria, Lebanon, Hezbala (sp?), Gaza ...etc.

Most bullies tend to be quite vocal in front of a friendly crowd. Ahmadinejad is playing to his audience (like any politician would) while it is possible that he has a suicide wish (I doubt it) my guess is he is not interested in seeing a battle on his home front.

I saw the article on his holocaust review. May the flat earth people will join in and they can review both policies. I was always suspicious of the claim that someone can actually fly from Miami to Miami with out turning around.



777fixer,

While Iran may have stated that want to wipe Israel out, they are still a sovereign nation and as far as I am aware, may do as they see fit with in their own borders. While we may not like what we see, there is nothing that we can do. Especially given the fact that a bulk of our military is bogged down in Iraq chasing ghosts.

BTW, Ahmadinejad is not the one you have to worry about. While he may be the ‘elected’ head of state, the clerics are the ones running the show. Ahmadinejad is like Snow for Bush, just a talking head.

 

[777 fixer]

I would say it is a hope or a wish rather than a promise.

He has to realize that if Iran were to make a move against Israel there would be retaliation. If Iran were stupid enough to escalate to nukes, Israel would do the same. In a one on one match, Israel always wins, Iran has read the history books, they know the level of armament that Israel holds and they know the level of training that Israel has. Given the fact that
he has not made any moves (other then shooting off his mouth) I would argue that Israel has far bigger worries in Syria, Lebanon, Hezbala (sp?), Gaza ...etc.

Most bullies tend to be quite vocal in front of a friendly crowd. Ahmadinejad is playing to his audience (like any politician would) while it is possible that he has a suicide wish (I doubt it) my guess is he is not interested in seeing a battle on his home front.

If every leader took into account possible retaliation chances are there never would be any wars. You must also remember that he's a firm believer in the "12 Imam". Basically a Shite version of the end of the world.

777fixer,

While Iran may have stated that want to wipe Israel out, they are still a sovereign nation and as far as I am aware, may do as they see fit with in their own borders. While we may not like what we see, there is nothing that we can do. Especially given the fact that a bulk of our military is bogged down in Iraq chasing ghosts.

Yes they can do what they want within thier own borders. But does that mean the rest of us should not be concerned when he starts advocating genocide?

BTW, Ahmadinejad is not the one you have to worry about. While he may be the ‘elected’ head of state, the clerics are the ones running the show. Ahmadinejad is like Snow for Bush, just a talking head.

Yes I realize that the clerics are the ones running the dog and pony show. That's why I'm concerned when Ahmadinejad talks about wiping countries off the face of the earth and having Holocaust denial festivals. Afterall, if the clerics did not subscribe to this non-sense he would'nt be doing it now would he.

 

[delldude]

Most bullies tend to be quite vocal in front of a friendly crowd. Ahmadinejad is playing to his audience (like any politician would) while it is possible that he has a suicide wish (I doubt it) my guess is he is not interested in seeing a battle on his home front.



While Iran may have stated that want to wipe Israel out, they are still a sovereign nation and as far as I am aware, may do as they see fit with in their own borders. While we may not like what we see, there is nothing that we can do. Especially given the fact that a bulk of our military is bogged down in Iraq chasing ghosts.

BTW, Ahmadinejad is not the one you have to worry about. While he may be the ‘elected’ head of state, the clerics are the ones running the show. Ahmadinejad is like Snow for Bush, just a talking head.

Ahmadinejad wants to speed up the timetable for the Biblical confrontation and return of Allah...he's on record saying this...it is his intention.And Israel's demise is very high on his agenda.Take it to the bank 😉

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday lambasted Israel and Zionism and quoted the late Ayatollah Khomeini calling for Israel to be "wiped out from the map."

Hes only kidding

Is it just me, er what?

 

[local 12 proud]

I would say it is a hope or a wish rather than a promise.

Seems alot of people said the same about Hitlers ambitions.

While Iran may have stated that want to wipe Israel out, they are still a sovereign nation and as far as I am aware, may do as they see fit with in their own borders. While we may not like what we see, there is nothing that we can do. Especially given the fact that a bulk of our military is bogged down in Iraq chasing ghosts.

You must have a top secret security clearance since you have knowledge we lack the capability of being able to remove the threat, I gather your also an expert on weapons and tactics since you know (presume?) we dont have anything in our arsenal besides ground forces?

 

[Garfield1966]

Well, lets review. Given that the military is concerned about sustainable troop levels in Iraq (according to night line) most troops are on their 2nd or 3rd rotation into the combat zones. I am not sure how you think we can go into Iran. Most military leaders I have hear and read indicate that a pure air assault will not conquer Iran. But hey, if you know better than the experts, knock your self out. Seeing as there are ground troops in Iraq (are you implying that the problems in Iraq could/can be solved with out ground troops) and Iraq was/is far less powerful than Iran I fail to see your logic unless you are implying that the current administration went into Iraq with ground forces when they were not needed? Are you implying that the 3,000 dead soldiers did not need to die?

Do you actually think before you post or is it like shooting a Uzi in a barn hoping you hit something?

 

[local 12 proud]

Well, lets review. Given that the military is concerned about sustainable troop levels in Iraq (according to night line) most troops are on their 2nd or 3rd rotation into the combat zones. I am not sure how you think we can go into Iran.

So ABC news nightline is the credible news source you speak of?

2nd and 3rd rotation with an all volunteer force, oh the inhumanity of it all. I can't believe those men/women would re-inlist or accept another deployment to defeat the enemy.

Most military leaders I have hear and read indicate that a pure air assault will not conquer Iran. But hey, if you know better than the experts, knock your self out.

Post your military sources of those saying we could'nt knock out Irans nuclear sites, hell Israel alone could do it if we gave them the green light. you liberal nail biters under estimate our might and resolve.

Seeing as there are ground troops in Iraq (are you implying that the problems in Iraq could/can be solved with out ground troops) and Iraq was/is far less powerful than Iran I fail to see your logic unless you are implying that the current administration went into Iraq with ground forces when they were not needed?

Would you agree or not that Japan was more powerful in WII than Iraq/Iran? Did we not bring them to their knees with Two Bombs and the Enola Gay? Am I suggesting Nukes, not necessarily but to say we dont have the means is a lie.

Are you implying that the 3,000 dead soldiers did not need to die?

Death is part of war, 3,000 innocent civilians paid the price on 9/11 in a few hours and 3,000 brave troops have paid the price in five years. You be the judge!

Do you actually think before you post or is it like shooting a Uzi in a barn hoping you hit something?

Dude I don't need an uzi to make my mark! 😉

 

[Garfield1966]

ABC was one reference. I’ll be happy to dig up a reference from the DOD if you would like. The implication of the 2nd and 3rd rotation with in a 3 year period indicates that we do not have the necessary troops to do a proper rotation. My understanding is time off is to be double that of the rotation. You do the math and let me know how you make the current rotations work. I’ll wait for you to get out your abacus if you need it.

Perhaps it was a misinterpretation on my part. When you stated "remove the threat" I thought you meant to conquer Iran, not level the entire country. I thought I remember hearing a DOD rep say that the Iranians have built their Nuke program with assault in mind. The sites are well under ground, spread all through the country (some under mountains) and it would be very difficult for the US to eliminate them. If they have a weapon which they could have bought on the black market, what do you think they will do with it?

1940 verses 2006 does not work for me and I do not feel it is relevant. Japan did not have the bomb and we knew it. We hope Iran does not have the bomb but we do not know for a fact that they do not. Also, I recall a small skirmish prior to the dropping of the bomb. I think they called it WWII. I could be wrong. I’ll check my history books when I get home. Point being that Japan had nothing left. Their Pacific fleet was on the ocean floor. Their airforce was either on the ground in a smoldering pile or on the ocean floor right by their ships. They were at the end of the rope. The Japanese while ardent fighters and big on the honor thing, were not (aside from the kamikazes) suicidal. They knew it was over and gave up. The Iranians (at least the radicals who run the funny farm) very well may be suicidal. We can threaten all we want to drop a nuke and their response has and will be "bring it on". If they do not have a nuke, you can be damned sure they will find one and bring it right to our front door.

My hypothesis was based on going into Iran to remove a regime and liberate the country (as we tried and failed to do in Iraq). That by it’s very nature requires boot on the ground. It failed in Iraq and we do not have the troops to carry out a second parallel operation in Iran. Going in and nuking Iran is an entirely different ball of wax and this country, much less the rest of the world (of which we are a part of) would never accept such an action and Iran knows that.

 

[local 12 proud]

The implication of the 2nd and 3rd rotation with in a 3 year period indicates that we do not have the necessary troops to do a proper rotation. My understanding is time off is to be double that of the rotation. You do the math and let me know how you make the current rotations work. I’ll wait for you to get out your abacus if you need it.

Well according to the DOD we have a total of 2,685,713 total armed forces (ranked 2nd), with 1,426,713 troops on active duty (ranked 2nd) which leaves a grand total 1,259,000 which could be drawn upon if need be. Case in point according to my abacus we are more than well manned, of course we may need to tell alot of our allies we will no longer be watching your back and redeploy those men/women. I mean after all we know we could depend on most of europe to watch our back right?

Perhaps it was a misinterpretation on my part. When you stated "remove the threat" I thought you meant to conquer Iran, not level the entire country.

Did I say to level the whole country? did we level japan when we bombed hiroshima and nagasaki? Quit reading so much in to it man.

I thought I remember hearing a DOD rep say that the Iranians have built their Nuke program with assault in mind. The sites are well under ground, spread all through the country (some under mountains) and it would be very difficult for the US to eliminate them.

Difficult perhaps, but not impossible. do you cower from all challenges in life because they are prone to be an inconvenience?

If they have a weapon which they could have bought on the black market, what do you think they will do with it?

So your saying we should just appease and refrain because he may actually carry out his threats if we flex some muscle? How do you know he does'nt already have capabilities?

1940 verses 2006 does not work for me and I do not feel it is relevant.Japan did not have the bomb and we knew it. We hope Iran does not have the bomb but we do not know for a fact that they do not. Also, I recall a small skirmish prior to the dropping of the bomb. I think they called it WWII. I could be wrong. I’ll check my history books when I get home. Point being that Japan had nothing left. Their Pacific fleet was on the ocean floor. Their airforce was either on the ground in a smoldering pile or on the ocean floor right by their ships. They were at the end of the rope. The Japanese while ardent fighters and big on the honor thing, were not (aside from the kamikazes) suicidal. They knew it was over and gave up.

Does'nt matter whether or not it works for you, it is still very much relevant. We took it to an enemy who was defiant and unwilling to accept defeat, They were just as emboldened and radical as the current Regimes who are hell bent on our demise.

The Iranians (at least the radicals who run the funny farm) very well may be suicidal. We can threaten all we want to drop a nuke and their response has and will be "bring it on". If they do not have a nuke, you can be damned sure they will find one and bring it right to our front door.

Yea Yea, Neville Chamberlain thought appeasement and Patty cake would quinch hitlers thirst too, look what that accomplished. They (ISLAM) plan to bring it to our front door anyway man, Thats what this whole friggin war on terrorism is about. They plan to rule the world thru Sharia Law, and bring about the second coming of their hidden imam to rule with an iron fist. They do have a death wish, remember the 19 hijackers? Do you really think that was just an isolated incident? I can't believe how out of touch with reality you liberal minds really are.

My hypothesis was based on going into Iran to remove a regime and liberate the country (as we tried and failed to do in Iraq).

We did in fact remove a regime in Iraq and liberate them from a brutal dictatorship, We just did'nt expect the insurgency and civil unrest that has followed and yes that is our governments fault for lack of planning and preparation. But we can not always approach war as a no win situiation as you suggest, because wheter you asscribe to it or not there will always be wars with winners and losers. I think I know which side you are willing to be on!

Going in and nuking Iran is an entirely different ball of wax and this country, much less the rest of the world (of which we are a part of) would never accept such an action and Iran knows that.

Well what you, me, the rest of the world are willing to accept is going to be put to the test whether you like it or not, Just depends on who calls the bluff first. 😉