An Iranian bomb would be a MAJOR threat to YOUR security

[burdell]

Originally Posted by waffleiron1968

The military is the reason we are so far ahead of others. Europe is rich - no one cares what the EU says as they have no muscle to back up their words. We need that huge military to maintain our standing as the global hyperpower.

IF that's true, and I believe it's more MIC self-aggrandizing hyperbole than anything else, the cost/benefit ratio is too obscenely high to continue with. Our alleged standing and $1.00 won't even get you a decent cup of coffee most places

Originally Posted by waffleiron1968

I do not believe in bullying other states, but states should know that if they don't take the silver, we can give them lead.

IF at this point we can't give anyone the lead it's painfully obvious our most threatening enemy is the MIC and the royal screwing they've been giving us.

[waffleiron1968]

^

I just believe in keeping our options open.

[chicagogeorge]

Originally Posted by greywar

Yes in 1980 they mattered a lot more then they do today. We are not as dependent on oil from that area as much these days. Welcome to 2015.

Doesn't matter that most of our i,ported oil comes from Canada (Saudi Arabia second). Oil is globally traded commodity. A regional war in the Middle East would cause oil prices to skyrocket

It would hurt the global economy (and via that, us), but if the global economy is worried, I might suggest they get off their butts and deal with it instead of assuming we will.

The "global economy" is not one entity, but many players all fighting for scarce resources. At the same time we are all intertwined. If China's economy crashes because their supply of oil is hurt, that would have a ripple effect here.

Turns out that most of them want to negotiate.

Who's most? Definitely not the countries that border Iran. Saudi Arabia already stated that if Iran goes nuclear so will they

[DCforever]

Originally Posted by spectator11040

Many of the comments here are focused on the threat (or according to some, lack of such) of a nuclear weapon in the hands of a radical Islamic regime towards Israel.
The Obama policy is not just endangering Israel. The Iranian regime already has ballistic missiles designed to be fitted with a nuclear warhead. The range of these missiles currently covers all of the Middle East as well as southern, eastern, and central Europe. At the current rate of development, the regime will have an ICBM in the not too distant future.
So a bomb in the hands of a jihadi, theocratic, apocalyptic regime is a lethal threat to populations well beyond Israel, including the US.

[yawn] Really? [/yawn]

[burdell]

Originally Posted by chicagogeorge

The "global economy" is not one entity, but many players all fighting for scarce resources. At the same time we are all intertwined. If China's economy crashes because their supply of oil is hurt, that would have a ripple effect here.

And history supplies ample proof the so-called experts are so often wrong in their predictions of how different events will affect the world that those predictions are hardly reasons for war.

[TrexDigit]

Originally Posted by spectator11040

Many of the comments here are focused on the threat (or according to some, lack of such) of a nuclear weapon in the hands of a radical Islamic regime towards Israel.
The Obama policy is not just endangering Israel. The Iranian regime already has ballistic missiles designed to be fitted with a nuclear warhead. The range of these missiles currently covers all of the Middle East as well as southern, eastern, and central Europe. At the current rate of development, the regime will have an ICBM in the not too distant future.
So a bomb in the hands of a jihadi, theocratic, apocalyptic regime is a lethal threat to populations well beyond Israel, including the US.

Nuttybooboo's been banking on it for years. There's money in fear!

“If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,” adding that, “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”

That gem was from '96.

In his '95 book, he said 3-5 years.

In '02, he told Congress that Iraq was running “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”

2009? "1-2 years away."

2012? "A few months away."

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by spectator11040

The FACT is that no country in the world threatens to destroy another country, EXCEPT IRAN.

The US. The US even considered using nukes in some conflicts against non-nuclear powers.

Originally Posted by Speleothem

My point? Is it not obvious?
Iran cannot be allowed to be armed with nuclear weapons.

Then stop arming them.

Originally Posted by waffleiron1968

There has never been a state as far ahead in cumulative power as the US is relative to other states in the system.

No State ever emerged from a World War fully intact with 100% of its production capacity.

No State ever had a Bretton Woods Agreement.

No State ever conspired with another State to block global currency trading for its perceived Enemies.

No State ever had a currency that was the de facto international currency of trade.

No State ever had a currency that was the de facto international reserve currency.

No State ever had the manpower or military to force other States to surrender their Capital & Wealth.

Originally Posted by waffleiron1968

China is closing the gap slowly but for now we are untouchable.

Your "untouchable" only to the extent you can continue to rape other States of their Capital & Wealth, and to the extent that you can maintain the Petro-Dollar.

I might point out that Realists are not Ethnocentrists, like you.

Originally Posted by chicagogeorge

—Jimmy Carter, state of the union address, Jan. 23, 1980

JAH

Yeah, what about it?

I lived it, what did you do?

Carter wasn't just talking, he actually set up an RDF consisting of 23 combat brigades, including 2 marine amphibious brigades, the 6th Air Attack Brigade (III Corps) and most of the units from the 18th Airborne Corps.

Reagan later cut the RDF back to 16 brigades.

In part, you can thank me for that, since I proved a reinforced brigade with air support could sit at the Eastern Approach indefinitely (in Iran where the Iranian Plateau meets the Coastal Plain right at the foothills of the Zagros Mountains).

You should know that the Liberals have revised history and renamed the Carter Doctrine in honor of Bush to the Bush Doctrine.

Originally Posted by greywar

Yes in 1980 they mattered a lot more then they do today. We are not as dependent on oil from that area as much these days. Welcome to 2015.

GDP + All Global USD denominated transactions = US Money Supply

Originally Posted by burdell

Being #1 as in:

Highest per capita healthcare costs in the world?

The reason hospitals price-gouge Americans is because hospitals have a monopoly.

Congress cannot legally do anything, but your State legislators can.

Originally Posted by burdell

Spending as much on our military as the next 8-10 countries combined yet still fearing puissant nations like Iran?

It's not fear, rather it's practical military necessity borne out of Machiavellian politics.

The US Empire must expand and enslave the Central Asian States or the Empire will collapse.

Apolitically...

Mircea

[greywar]

Originally Posted by Mircea

GDP + All Global USD denominated transactions = US Money Supply

Always love when Mircea quotes me out of context.

Mircea, I recommend you go read what I typed AFTER that.
IE:
"It would hurt the global economy (and via that, us), but if the global economy is worried, I might suggest they get off their butts and deal with it instead of assuming we will. Turns out that most of them want to negotiate."