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.
I was asking anyone to post something from an actual source, not you Been keeping up just fine though! Thanks!
Then perhaps you're unaware that you can post without randomly quoting. Depending on how your browser renders pages, there is a button generally located to the top left of the page above the thread that will not include any quoted responses. That way you can avoid confusion by not directing questions to the wrong respondent.
Then perhaps you're unaware that you can post without randomly quoting. Depending on how your browser renders pages, there is a button generally located to the top left of the page above the thread that will not include any quoted responses. That way you can avoid confusion by not directing questions to the wrong respondent.
The nuke 'em part was directed at you.
The post legitimate article part was directed at anyone that could dig one up.
That's not how you do it, and everybody knows that.
There's two options: Either develop the capacity, but half-heartedly deny that you've ever completed a weapon. (Model "Israel".)
Or detonate a device underground, then let the rest of the world figure it out. (Model "India", "Pakistan".)
You don't claim to have nuclear capability if there's the slightest doubt that you do so. That's getting the worst of both worlds: Apart from the massive condemnation, you will be added to to the superpowers' short list of "countries to be flattened if they launch a missile".
And it's a stupid tactic for Iran, to boot.
US attacks Iran, Iran nukes New York: Iran is bombed/invaded by an infuriated world and put under administration - at best. At worst, they're radioactive glass.
US attacks Iran, Iran uses nuclear weapon tactically: Massive US losses, Iran plays as underdog forced into impossible decision by the attack, probably survives as nation.
My Rhodesian Ridgeback knows there is no point in barking back at a Chihuahua and engage in a p-ing contest of the kind. I wish many Americans were at least as smart.
And if the piece is even remotely true, it simply reinforces the idea that right wing modus operandi is universally acceptable: "you attack us, we will nuke you". Except that this time it comes from Iran.
But of course... Israel thinks Americans will help continue God's task, no questions asked.
Last edited by EinsteinsGhost; 04-14-2010 at 05:35 PM..
This warning, along with an announcement that Iran would join the world's nuclear club within a month, raised the pitch of Iranian anti-US rhetoric to a new high Tuesday, April 13, as 47 world leaders gathered in Washington for President Barack Obama's Nuclear Security Summit. The statement published by Kayhan said: "If the US strikes Iran with nuclear weapons, there are elements which will respond with nuclear blasts in the centers of America's main cities." For the first time, debkafile's military sources report, Tehran indicated the possibility of passing nuclear devices to terrorists capable of striking inside the United States.
I would take this link seriously if a side bar didn't have the star of David dancing around and inviting me to click on the box to donate to Israel!
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.
Been keeping up just fine though! Thanks!
That way you can avoid confusion by not directing questions to the wrong respondent.
That's not how you do it, and everybody knows that.
