Obama Bows to Muslim King !

[Freedom4all]

You really think the US is going to drop a nuke as a first strike weapon? Do you think Iran is scared of that possibility? Really?

Not with Obamy, the most he can muster is a strongly worded letter....that'll show them! :down:

 

[Garfield1966]

Not with Obamy, the most he can muster is a strongly worded letter....that'll show them! :down:

Bush had the opportunity with Iraq, Iran and Korea. Was he a coward as well? You are advocating that the US use a nuke as a first strike. Are you out of your ever loving mind?

 

[Garfield1966]

No I don't but then we have a gutless moron pretending to be Leader of the Free World.


The idea is not to drop the bomb, the idea is to make them THINK we might.

Bush and Cheney were willing to start wars and they did not drop one on Korea, Iran or Iraq. Was they a gutless morons as well? Are you even listening to what you are saying? Reagan joked about it with Russia but even he was not stupid enough to think it was a viable option. Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev signed a INF treaty.

For someone who makes sense most of the time, you certainly have lost your mind on this one. No one believes the US or any other major power will drop a nuke unless they are nuked first. I believe that was the whole idea behind MAD. You try and kill me and we all die in a fiery blaze. There is no leader who would use a nuke as a first strike weapon. You even try and threaten that and you would be laughed off the podium. The only way the US will launch a nuke is if we see them in the air coming our way. There is no way to make anyone THINK we will launch a nuke under any other circumstances because we will not launch one under any other circumstances. Once nukes start flying it's all over. Most people understand that. Apparently some are a bit slow in learning that.

 

[Garfield1966]

We will never know what made Gorbachev come to his senses. I suspect it was more the realization that it was time for change. The people were not going to tolerate the dictatorship much longer and that wasting money trying to keep up with the US for decades was a waste. Whether Reagan had anything to do with it or not I do not know. I doubt it personally.

Israel making a surgical strike is a far more potent encouragement to come to the table or cease and desist than the US making empty threats that we will nuke you. No one wants a nuke to fly. The mere thought of using a nuke as a first strike weapon is ludicrous. If you want to convince Iran to come to the table and put the nukes on the table, you will have to convince them that it is in their best interest to do so. Israel is able to carry out their threats effectively. They have nukes. Why do you think they have not used them? They obviously have the convictions to do what is necessary for survival.

Nukes are a last resort. The only time you will see them fly out of their silos is about 10 min before you die, if you are lucky. Using them as a threat will not work. You might as well threaten to turn them into a pillar of salt via witch craft.

The bottom line is the US screwed up. Afghanistan should be in a op up situation right now. Iraq should never have happened. Right now we do not have enough troops to carry out those missions much less open up a third front in Iran. Iran knows this. Iran knows there is not a damn thing that we can do to them. They also know that our economy depends on oil. Most of which comes from the ME. Do you want to take a chance on nuking Iran and see what happens to the oil prices coming out of the ME? That's assuming the US would get any oil out of the ME. I would be willing to bet that we would be hoping for $150 a barrel oil becasue we very ell mght be looking at $200 or $300 a barrel. China can probably afford to write off the US losses so I doubt they would care. They would be more than happy to buy what ever oil is left and leave us high and dry.

If all you can come up with is a nuke to threaten the ME with then you have nothing because the whole world knows damn well that will never happen. I doubt you would find a politician in the US or would be politician in the US who would advocate the use of a nuke as a first strike weapon.

 

[southwind]

No I don't but then we have a gutless moron pretending to be Leader of the Free World.


The idea is not to drop the bomb, the idea is to make them THINK we might.

Last time I checked it's was called a "DETERENT" !

Just point one at IRAN, make sure they know it and tell them that if one drop of american blood is spilled on their behalf, it's nighty-night time ! !

 

[Garfield1966]

Last time I checked it's was called a "DETERENT" !

Just point one at IRAN, make sure they know it and tell them that if one drop of american blood is spilled on their behalf, it's nighty-night time ! !

It's only a deterrent if they think there is a likely hood of one being used. Since we are trying to prevent them from getting one in the first place, aiming one of ours at them will not deter them from obtaining one. The only thing pointing one at them will do is deter them from launching theirs once they get it. And even then, that deterrence will only work as long as they value their existence like we value ours. Should they not value their own lives then pointing one or 100 hundred at them will do no good. Launching a nuke at Iran (or any where else for that matter) as a first strike will never happen. You would not find a politician or military leader who would sanction that action. Nukes will only fly from this nations silos after nukes have landed on US soil or they are en route.

To use the idea of a nuclear assault on Iran as a deterrent is laughable. They know it won't happen. Everyone has seen the pictures from Nagasaki and Hiroshima. No one wants to be the one to press the button. I do not think the Iranians are that nuts. I am pretty sure Al Queda is not even that nuts. I doubt it is that difficult to get your hands on a nuke these days much less chemical weapons. I think there is a reason why the attacks have been kept at a conventional level. The first one to cross that line will lose all support. OBL uses chemical weapons and his money pool will dry up real quick.

nukes are messy business. No one wants Iran to get one but there is very little anyone can do to prevent them from getting it if they want it. Israel can go in and take out a few sites but they will not get them all. The stuff I have read indicates that the site are spread out all over Iran and most of them are well below ground level and hardened.

Welcome to the nuclear world.

 

[777 fixer]

I am pretty sure Al Queda is not even that nuts. I doubt it is that difficult to get your hands on a nuke these days much less chemical weapons. I think there is a reason why the attacks have been kept at a conventional level. The first one to cross that line will lose all support. OBL uses chemical weapons and his money pool will dry up real quick.

IMO the only reason Al Queda has not used nuclear weapons is that they do not have them.

 

[Garfield1966]

IMO the only reason Al Queda has not used nuclear weapons is that they do not have them.

Hopefully that theory will never be tested.

 

[dapoes]

Hopefully that theory will never be tested.

Dont be so sure, we have returned to pre 911. Our eye is off the ball, wrapped up in trivial events thanks to the new administration.

 

[EastUS]

Hopefully that theory will never be tested.

"Hopefully"..Now; THERE'S a fully reasonable strategic basis for any well thought out notions on national defense

 

[southwind]

Hopefully that theory will never be tested.

Well , as the Taliban inches their way towards Pakistans capital and a possible transfer of power, "INCLUDING" nuclear weapons, of course I'm sure the Taliban and Al Queda have nothing in common, you might see it tested a lot sooner than you think !

Of course the tried and true handshakes, bowing and general contempt of Americans Obama has been using will thwart the use of nuclear weapons by "ISLAMIC" terrorist !

 

[Garfield1966]

No, I think going into Afghanistan and cleaning out the Taliban would have been a better plan but that never happened now did it?

Since Nuking is not an option, what else would you sugest?

 

[UAL_TECH]

IMO the only reason Al Queda has not used nuclear weapons is that they do not have them.

'THAT' is the single most factual statement in this whole discussion!

 

[Garfield1966]

No. It's an opinion based on his perceptions. Whether his opinion is right or wrong is any ones guess. Facts can be proven.

 

[UAL_TECH]

No. It's an opinion based on his perceptions. Whether his opinion is right or wrong is any ones guess. Facts can be proven.

Thanks, I'll keep this quote for future reference.....