Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
According to recent reports provided by U.N. officials, Iran has definitely been pursuing nuclear weapons for the past several years. In fact, Iran is supposedly capable of building a nuclear weapon already.
So given this, should there now be military action, either collateral or unilateral, against Iran? What do you think?
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,827,481 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer
According to recent reports provided by U.N. officials, Iran has definitely been pursuing nuclear weapons for the past several years. In fact, Iran is supposedly capable of building a nuclear weapon already.
So given this, should there now be military action, either collateral or unilateral, against Iran? What do you think?
Of course. This would fit perfectly in Obama's sinister plan / wanting our energy prices to go higher. As the recovery is based on the costs of energy, it will fulfill his plan to turn America into a flaming wasteland of poverty and despair. Because what happens when you attack Iran? Gas prices. Think about gas prices. Now, think about where gas comes from. Now think about a place called the Persian Gulf. Now, why in God's name should we care about .... wait a second....
Iran’s recently-concluded war games concentrated on preparations to block the Persian Gulf and wreck Western economies in the event that the United Nations Security Council tries to place harsh sanctions against it. Forty percent of the world’s oil and gas sails through the Persian Gulf, and an Iranian blockade would cause an inflationary spike in energy prices and a fuel shortage that could cause catastrophe for the West, which is dependent on Iranian crude to fuel their gas-hungry economies.
*******************
So yeah, let's go ahead and attack them. It's not like they can retaliate in any meaningful, crackpot way.
Should there be military action against Iran now that they're proven to have nuclear weapons capability?
Should there be military action against USA now that they're proven to have nuclear weapons capability...especially when the USA have been/are involved in more wars than Iran?
Should there be military action against Israel now that they're proven to have nuclear weapons capability....especially when they have illegally invaded and occupied another country?
see this is why approving the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada is a good idea because it will help cut the US thirst from ME oil and we are a stable country and well represent energy security for North america
According to recent reports provided by U.N. officials, Iran has definitely been pursuing nuclear weapons for the past several years. In fact, Iran is supposedly capable of building a nuclear weapon already.
So given this, should there now be military action, either collateral or unilateral, against Iran? What do you think?
I guess they don't want to end up like Iraq and Libya.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
