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.
Let's face the facts:
War helps military contractors and weapons manufacturers.
War just might improve the economy.
And last, but not least, and most important: War is fun!!
To be honest, I don't believe for a minute that Iran is within 10 years of having a nuclear weapon.
We should just keep in line with the UN and keep out of the fray on this one.
You do know Israel has a monster lobby and is in control of lots of banks. If Israel feels threatened they pull some stings and the puppet, (the US) has to do as told or else. Iran is NO threat to the US. Even if they had nukes, they have to be able to deploy them all the way from there to here. Good luck with that.
I personally could care less if they have nukes or whatever. Pakistan has them. Israel has them. Lots of countries have them. Who cares?
The fear machine is great though. What other country spends over a trillion a year on military? We sure could have it nice if we cut that in half. Oh and we would still have the biggest military budget in the world.
Let's look at that one, shall we? Now, we're talking about the vaunted Iraqi WMD complex, the machine of mass destruction that was so much of a threat that we couldn't wait for the UN inspectors to finish the job, because "the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud over one of our own cities".
And what was their last hurrah? An utterly bungled attempt at dropping (perhaps as many as) 32 warheads.
Now, as we may recall, something else happened between 1991 and 1998: UNSCOM drove around Iraq and had a grand old time breaking the Iraqi WMD program into little, unrecognizable bits. They had results.
But that didn't fit the narrative, so we got wild stories about underground factories and the infamous aluminum-tubes-of-doom, when the reality was that Iraq's WMD program - in 2003 - pretty much consisted of plans to one day get one.
Sadam was always a shrewd survivor. He couldn't afford to be caught with WMD's but at the same time he didn't want to look weak to Iran or other middle eastern powers so.....he wasn't fully transparent with the UN inspectors. He figured he could be just obstructionist enough to the process to maintain his "street cred" without triggering any real reprisal.
He was pretty much 100% correct in his plan with regards to the UN. Unfortunately for everyone involved, Bush II and friends didn't follow the play book and decided to push ahead with war.
This was a big mistake but we have to recognize that Sadam was playing a game and basically underestimated the extent of our resolve to be stupid.
To be honest, I don't believe for a minute that Iran is within 10 years of having a nuclear weapon.
We should just keep in line with the UN and keep out of the fray on this one.
I saw Zbigniew Brzezinski interviewed recently and he said essentially the same thing. He noted that Israel, in particular, has been making this same claim since 1994 and so far nada, zip, zilch.
My takeaway was that some factions are crying wolf and have been for years.
And quite frankly, so what if Iran is close. India is nuclear, Pakistan is nuclear and IMHO the latter is much more of a threat but we just keep playing 'footsie' with them as if they are our allies (!)
Makes no kind of sense to me.
Neo- conservatives = they get money from the defense industry
Crazy Christians (you have to be crazy to want war) = War with Isreal will bring Jesus back
Defense Contractors = $$$$$$$$$$
Oil Speculators = $$$$$$$$$
Ironically none of these folks have a vested interested in NOT having a war. I wonder if any of them are willing to go to fight in a war or send their children? Proably not, this is why the draft will never be reinstated
Just funny hearing you describe Israel as the only country out to get Iran....whom of course is innocent of all things and is just being picked on.
Guess you don't know about the Saudi vs Iran grudge. But hey, Saudi Arabia has no strong ties with the US and are a poor resourceless country lacking any influence in the world.
This why Iraq was so important to the stability of the middle east. Rather you like Sadam or not he kept Iran in check, and now he is gone the Iranians are runing into Iraq at will and threatening(?) Saudi Arabia
No WMD in Iraq, but now I'm supposed to believe that Iran has Nukes?
Yes. Drink the Kool-Aid and sit back and watch the blinding light show.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger
To be honest, I don't believe for a minute that Iran is within 10 years of having a nuclear weapon.
It only takes 6 months.
The US, UK, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and South Africa all slapped a nuke together in 6 months. Of course, I'm talking about a uranium-based nuclear weapon, not a plutonium-based weapon.
To produce plutonium, you enrich uranium to 3%-5% and load it into the reactor. What does the IAEA say?
The IAEA says Iran is enriching uranium to 20%, ergo solid proof Iran is not intending to produce plutonium.
As far as uranium-based weapons go, all the 'tards on this forum that flap their lips are too damn stupid to understand that the cheapest and easiest way to separate U238/U235 is by magnetic separation. A technology older than the freaking hills and something an 8th-grader could set up. Well, an 8th-grader in any country except the US.
Iran sits on its own deposits of uranium ore. If Iran wanted nukes, they could have built them 15 years ago. They don't need gas centrifuges for that, but the US propaganda machine is really good at whipping the willfully ignorant into a frenzy.
Atomically...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
It's unfortunate that at this late date, people don't know that Iraq did have WMD. Deployed against the Iranians, the Kurds,and unsuccessfuly against the Shiites. Don't you people watch PBS?
No, I don't watch PBS, because I don't have a TV. I'm curious why you forgot to tell the good people that those were US made chemical weapons.
Is that because you didn't know, or because you are trying to be deceptive?
Look at the bright side, US chemical warheads work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
I'm surprised at the lack of knowledge.
I've actually seen chemical weapons, have you? No. Hurry, run off to GlobalSecurityStooges.com and catch yourself up to speed (snicker).
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
Iraq used WMD against both the Iranians and Kurds. He tried against the Shiites but there was an ignition failure.
An ignition failure. Really. Okay, whatever. Those were US, French, Czech and probably North Korean chemical warheads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
Even Saddam's own generals believed that he had a stash of WMD up until the invasion of 2003, as confirmed by the CIA.
Yeah, so what? His generals were as stupid as he was. The infrastructure for nuclear, biological and chemical weapons has a huge foot-print. You cannot possibly miss it. If it is there, you'll see it, and it wasn't there in Iraq.
Sure, you can see it before the Gulf War, but not before the 2003 Invasion.
Surprising...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo
Chemical weapons are not weapons of mass destruction.
WMD is just an Orwellian buzz-phrase; a nebulously vague and ambiguous term that means nothing and everything simultaneously. But it gets Hate Week going. The popes would be proud.
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Quoting Orwell...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden
I think the idea is that they have the ability to do it.
Every country on Earth has the ability to do it.
Look, you do not need a nuclear reactor to produce nuclear weapons. You only need a nuclear reactor if you want to produce plutonium-based nuclear weapons.
Why is it so goddam difficult for people to understand that?
Enriching...
Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet
Hard to pick who to go with , your assessment or most of the world.
In this case I would lean to the worlds assessment
Then you would be wrong, but at least you can jump over the cliff like the rest of the lemmings.
To be honest, I don't believe for a minute that Iran is within 10 years of having a nuclear weapon.
We should just keep in line with the UN and keep out of the fray on this one.
The neocons and the MIC have been beating the war drums into Iran for a decade now. The same lies, the same propaganda and the same idiots that got us into Iraq are now leading us into Iran. Obama may take a "gee golly whiz why can't we just talk to people" persona but that's just a front. If he gets reelected I foresee us in Iran within a year or two.
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.
But hey, Saudi Arabia has no strong ties with the US and are a poor resourceless country lacking any influence in the world. 
