[Changleen]

It seems that people in Iran are actually trying to figure out ways to make sure they get bombed by the west!

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/003200602191406.htm

Iranian fatwa approves use of nuclear weapons

London, Feb. 19 (PTI): Iran's influential hard-line spiritual leaders have issued a fatwa or holy edict, sanctioning the use of atomic weapons as a "countermeasure" against other nuclear powers.

The fatwa, which for the first time questions the theocracy's traditional stance that Sharia law forbade the use of nuclear weapons, signals Tehran's stiffening resolve on the nuclear issue, 'The Sunday Telegraph' reported today.

According to it one senior cleric it is "only natural" to have nuclear bombs as a "countermeasure" against other nuclear powers, thought to be a reference to America and Israel.

The pronouncement is particularly worrying because it has come from Mohsen Gharavian, a disciple of the ultra-conservative Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah-Yazdi, who is widely regarded as the cleric closest to Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi's group opposes virtually any kind of rapproachement with the West and is believed to have influenced President Ahmadinejad's refusal to negotiate over Iran's nuclear programme.

The comments, which are the first public statement by the Yazdi clerical cabal on the nuclear issue, will be seen as an attempt by the country's religious hardliners to begin preparing a theological justification for the ownership - and if necessary the use - of atomic bombs.

Crazy religious freaks.

 

[surfinguru]

So, do you still think we shouldn't be doing anything about this and just let them develop a nuclear bomb? I know the comment was stated as "to be used as retaliation" but how long do you think it would be before they decided, "m'eh, it's ok to use it against the Satanist infidels to teach them a lesson."

 

[fluff]

So, do you still think we shouldn't be doing anything about this and just let them develop a nuclear bomb? I know the comment was stated as "to be used as retaliation" but how long do you think it would be before they decided, "m'eh, it's ok to use it against the Satanist infidels to teach them a lesson."

I not for nuclear proliferation in any way but isn't this the basis for any country having nuclear weapons? If your enemies knew that you weren't prepared to use them what would be the point in having them?

Why do we have them?

 

[LordOpie]

So, do you still think we shouldn't be doing anything about this and just let them develop a nuclear bomb? I know the comment was stated as "to be used as retaliation" but how long do you think it would be before they decided, "m'eh, it's ok to use it against the Satanist infidels to teach them a lesson."

exactly!

Chang, et. al who've defended Iran's rights really need to reconsider the simple fact that they're defending the criminally insane.

If I'm not mistaken, the PotUS cannot use a nuke on another country unless that country has nukes in the air heading for us. Yes, this admin has tried (and been unsuccessful) in getting unilateral authority to use nukes when they want, but that will likely never happen.

However, does Iran and countries like them have such safeguards? I seriously phucking doubt it. And that's why they shouldn't be allowed to have them.

 

[fluff]

criminally insane.

How so?

 

[Changleen]

So, do you still think...

Uh, When did I say I thought it was OK for them to have a nuke? I have in the past defended their right to peaceful nuclear technology but under their present leader it is only too clear they want the weapon technology.

However, I will state (again) that bombing them will most likely unleash a **** storm in the middle east. It is NOT the most productive way to handle it. If Bush + Blair hadn't been such wankers over the past 5 years we might have a chance of using diplomacy to resolve this. Right now it really doesn't look like we have much chance at that.

 

[Changleen]

Chang, et. al who've defended Iran's rights really need to reconsider the simple fact that they're defending the criminally insane.

Jew need to pay attention.

 

[Transcend]

So, do you still think we shouldn't be doing anything about this and just let them develop a nuclear bomb? I know the comment was stated as "to be used as retaliation" but how long do you think it would be before they decided, "m'eh, it's ok to use it against the Satanist infidels to teach them a lesson."

It's called MAD. It was developed by the USA and Russia during the cold war... It works - for the most part.

It is basically what kept missiles from being launched during the missile crisis. If they didn't theink they would be turned into the worlds largest miror, they would have launched.

The American Gov't doesn't like it because it means Iran will have a very large stick to use in defence if they get invaded by mr empire builder himself.

You don't build a nuke not to potentially use it, duh. Cheney jacks his jaw just as much as the Iranians; "Every option is on the table", only the US media doesn't spin into a frenzy at that.

If the US has the right to nukes, so does everyone else. Why can't you get that through your heads? NPT my ass, the us is breaking it just as much as everyone else.

 

[Changleen]

It's pretty obvious to me that we wouldn't be anything like this situation at all if Bush and Blair hadn't invaded Iraq. In fact I'd even go as far as to say that Ahmadinejad wouldn't even be in power if the US and UK hadn't been so bellicose.

Extremism creates extremism. Violence creates violence.

 

[Transcend]

It's pretty obvious to me that we wouldn't be anything like this situation at all if Bush and Blair hadn't invaded Iraq. In fact I'd even go as far as to say that Ahmadinejad wouldn't even be in power if the US and UK hadn't been so bellicose.

I agree 100%. You made your own bed...now lie in it.

The best part about all the posturing, is that Iran has no real delivery capabilities that extend beyond Israel. They also know that if they were to EVER set off a nuke, their entire country would be turned to glass within 30 minutes.

 

[Changleen]

I agree 100%. You made your own bed...now lie in it.

The best part about all the posturing, is that Iran has no real delivery capabilities that extend beyond Israel. They also know that if they were to EVER set off a nuke, their entire country would be turned to glass within 30 minutes.

Yeah. I think that's pretty much right. Unfortunatley for us and moreso the regular people of Iran, Israel and Bush are not going to let things get to that stage.

Iran also supposedly has a missile that could possibly reach Greece or even Italy, but realistically you're right that Israel is their likely strategic 'target'.

 

[jaydee]

I'm just dreading the day when Israel (or the US) gets terminally irritated by all this Islamic fundamentalist posturing and saber-rattling in Iran and decides that the best defense is a good offense. The world will have a new ocean in the Mideast about the size and shape of Iran and we'll all have a nice big holy war.

 

[Silver]

Extremism creates extremism. Violence creates violence.

Invading a country without nukes because they are low hanging fruit creates a sense of "We need nukes, quick!"

 

[Changleen]

If I'm not mistaken, the PotUS cannot use a nuke on another country unless that country has nukes in the air heading for us. Yes, this admin has tried (and been unsuccessful) in getting unilateral authority to use nukes when they want, but that will likely never happen.

Have a look at:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-1776250,00.html
which was written after the draft document - which I cannot seem to confirm or deny whether it was actually signed or not, but then:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=RUP20060102&articleId=1705
Which seems to suggest maybe it was, or at least the military seem to be acting as if it was.

Also good:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=SMI20060209&articleId=1928

By scoffing at the notion of nuclear disarmament in practice, by modernizing its nuclear capability, and by embracing an aggressive first-strike policy, Washington is not only violating the NPT but is contributing toward the proliferation of nuclear weapons. “Nothing could be more calculated to goad other nations into nuclear proliferation,” is how Jonathan Schell put it.

 

[TheMontashu]

Ok, he says it's ok to use nukes, lets play fair now and turn iran into green glass. They want to use nukes FINE but there country will be one big heroshima.

 

[surfinguru]

... and we'll all have a nice big holy war.

Open your eyes my friend, we're already in one.

More fun reading:
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Missile/3367_3368.html

 

[Transcend]

Hardly.

You'll know when you are when the daily car bombings, assasination attempts and suicide bombings in malls begin.

When you see triangular green flags starting to fly, then you should worry. Until then, way to live in that typical US government created culture of fear.

 

[manimal]

"duck and cover...duck and cover..."

 

[surfinguru]

Hardly.

You'll know when you are when the daily car bombings, assasination attempts and suicide bombings in malls begin.

When you see triangular green flags starting to fly, then you should worry. Until then, way to live in that typical US government created culture of fear.

Nah, I don't live my life in government created fear - far from it. I'm too tired to argue the point any longer this evening. Maybe tomorrow..

 

[fluff]

Hardly.

You'll know when you are when the daily car bombings, assasination attempts and suicide bombings in malls begin.

When you see triangular green flags starting to fly, then you should worry. Until then, way to live in that typical US government created culture of fear.

There are daily car bombings in Iraq, along with assasination attempts (and successes) and suicide bombings, what more do you need? It does not make it a 'holy war' per se though it certainly has religious undercurrents. Just because the battlefield is thousands of miles way doesn't mean it's not a war.

 

[SJ10]

Hardly.

You'll know when you are when the daily car bombings, assasination attempts and suicide bombings in malls begin.

When you see triangular green flags starting to fly, then you should worry. Until then, way to live in that typical US government created culture of fear.

Yes, I'm sure that none of the people who went into work on the morning of 9/11 were afraid. Same with the airlines. I mean really, why be afraid that there are people who practice years and years to essentially kill thousands of innocent civilians in dramatic fasion. It never occured to me that I could leave go to work and never return home becasue some sexually frustrated, fundamentalist decided he was going to be captain for a day. Sure fear can be used as a control tool just as it has in other countries in years past but to say that until there are car bombs, assasinations, etc needed to indicate a holy war is to be ignorant of historical facts and to underestimate the intentions of sworn enemies.

You speak of the rights to have nukes like they are a god given right. How can that be? This isn't an issue of rights. This is all about survival, both national and individual, pure and simple. Those who have the means to ensure their survival get to make the rules. Letting Iran have nukes to ensure their survival is not a right because doing so is essentially giving up our right to survival (and the rights of most civilized nations). Who would willingly do that? This idea that we can somehow all just get along doesn't seem to fit very well with human nature and with history. People as individuals or as countries become very nasty when things are on the line. Most countries and people have some sort of self preservation. It worked well with the Soviets but the mutual truce is based on wanting to survive. When you enter someone into the equation that doen't have that self preservation (suicide bombers, radical clerics, whatever...) then there is no reason for a truce to be formed.

Sure, you can bash the the US. That's a luxury that you can exercise. But the irony is that luxury was paid for by the US. So I say go ahead, bite the hand that feeds your freedom. Every time you write your self described e-bully posts to satisfy one of your multiple insecurities, you have to feel just a wince of hypocrisy.

 

[fluff]

Yes, I'm sure that none of the people who went into work on the morning of 9/11 were afraid. Same with the airlines. I mean really, why be afraid that there are people who practice years and years to essentially kill thousands of innocent civilians in dramatic fasion. It never occured to me that I could leave go to work and never return home becasue some sexually frustrated, fundamentalist decided he was going to be captain for a day. Sure fear can be used as a control tool just as it has in other countries in years past but to say that until there are car bombs, assasinations, etc needed to indicate a holy war is to be ignorant of historical facts and to underestimate the intentions of sworn enemies.

There is always a chance that you will not go home but the chances of being a victim of a terrorist attack are less than those of being run down by a car or shot by a mugger.

You speak of the rights to have nukes like they are a god given right. How can that be? This isn't an issue of rights. This is all about survival, both national and individual, pure and simple. Those who have the means to ensure their survival get to make the rules. Letting Iran have nukes to ensure their survival is not a right because doing so is essentially giving up our right to survival (and the rights of most civilized nations). Who would willingly do that? This idea that we can somehow all just get along doesn't seem to fit very well with human nature and with history. People as individuals or as countries become very nasty when things are on the line. Most countries and people have some sort of self preservation. It worked well with the Soviets but the mutual truce is based on wanting to survive. When you enter someone into the equation that doen't have that self preservation (suicide bombers, radical clerics, whatever...) then there is no reason for a truce to be formed.

How exactly does Iran threaten the US? The US could destroy Iran in an afternoon. Your argument is that those who can build nukes should, in which case Iran is doing exactly what you suggest. They are not building suicide nukes, they are building a deterrent. They really aren't that different from you and me.

Sure, you can bash the the US. That's a luxury that you can exercise. But the irony is that luxury was paid for by the US. So I say go ahead, bite the hand that feeds your freedom. Every time you write your self described e-bully posts to satisfy one of your multiple insecurities, you have to feel just a wince of hypocrisy.

The US does what is best for the US, no more, no less. They are not interested in Transcends freedom or mine. As a non-US national I could be incarcerated without charge and tried without recourse to a lawyer, who is the US defending my freedom?

 

[bigdrop05]

Russia is just playing the waiting game,waiting for USA to overextend itself & then ? I don't trust Russia{good'ol mother Russia},China{remember Los Alamos they stole out secrets},or North Korea{extremely communist & unpredictable}.
I'm not worried about these crazy little islamic places shooting a nuke over to the US. But although if i lived in Europe or somewhere over there closer,it would be a different story.

All i have to worry about is: democraps & creeping gutless socialism in the USA!

 

[valve bouncer]

Russia is just playing the waiting game,waiting for USA to overextend itself & then ? I don't trust Russia{good'ol mother Russia},China{remember Los Alamos they stole out secrets},or North Korea{extremely communist & unpredictable}.
I'm not worried about these crazy little islamic places shooting a nuke over to the US. But although if i lived in Europe or somewhere over there closer,it would be a different story.

All i have to worry about is: democraps & creeping gutless socialism in the USA!

I'm glad you post here. Every forum needs a raving lunatic without even a tenuous link to reality. Good job Slim Pickens.

 

[fluff]

I'm glad you post here. Every forum needs a raving lunatic without even a tenuous link to reality. Good job Slim Pickens.

I was impressed by the 'extremely communist' bit. Makes you realise that China (and before them the USSR) and even Cuba are only slightly communist.

 

[Transcend]

There are daily car bombings in Iraq, along with assasination attempts (and successes) and suicide bombings, what more do you need? It does not make it a 'holy war' per se though it certainly has religious undercurrents. Just because the battlefield is thousands of miles way doesn't mean it's not a war.

There wouldn't be anty talk of a "holy war" (Jihad) if the US hadn't invaded a muslim country. It is currently one country defending it's home soil anyway they can. No one can say they would not do the same.

If someone invaded Canada, I can freely admit that I would be blowing up their **** and assasinating their officers on a daily basis.

It will be a true holy war when the attacks begin on the infidels soil. Until then, it's just a people defending themselves.

 

[Transcend]

Yes, I'm sure that none of the people who went into work on the morning of 9/11 were afraid. Same with the airlines. I mean really, why be afraid that there are people who practice years and years to essentially kill thousands of innocent civilians in dramatic fasion. It never occured to me that I could leave go to work and never return home becasue some sexually frustrated, fundamentalist decided he was going to be captain for a day. Sure fear can be used as a control tool just as it has in other countries in years past but to say that until there are car bombs, assasinations, etc needed to indicate a holy war is to be ignorant of historical facts and to underestimate the intentions of sworn enemies.

You speak of the rights to have nukes like they are a god given right. How can that be? This isn't an issue of rights. This is all about survival, both national and individual, pure and simple. Those who have the means to ensure their survival get to make the rules. Letting Iran have nukes to ensure their survival is not a right because doing so is essentially giving up our right to survival (and the rights of most civilized nations). Who would willingly do that? This idea that we can somehow all just get along doesn't seem to fit very well with human nature and with history. People as individuals or as countries become very nasty when things are on the line. Most countries and people have some sort of self preservation. It worked well with the Soviets but the mutual truce is based on wanting to survive. When you enter someone into the equation that doen't have that self preservation (suicide bombers, radical clerics, whatever...) then there is no reason for a truce to be formed.

Sure, you can bash the the US. That's a luxury that you can exercise. But the irony is that luxury was paid for by the US. So I say go ahead, bite the hand that feeds your freedom. Every time you write your self described e-bully posts to satisfy one of your multiple insecurities, you have to feel just a wince of hypocrisy.

You are so out of touch with reality, it is insane. At no point has the USA EVER been responsible for my freedom here in Canada. Get off your high horse. Don't be bitter of the fact that when Iran has Nukes, you will have to take them seriously.

There was no truce with Russia, there was mutually assured destruction. Completely different, and is exactly what Iran is trying to procure for itself. It would only be a matter of time (decades maybe) before they had a delivery method that was able to reach the US.

Also, the attacks would stop if you, you know, STOP INVADING OTHER COUNTRIES.

You made your bed, lie in it and shut up.

 

[Changleen]

Misinformed crap

:wonky2: I *think* that was supposed to be a joke?

 

[DRB]

Also, the attacks would stop if you, you know, STOP INVADING OTHER COUNTRIES.

What was that 9/11 timeline again?

 

[Changleen]

What was that 9/11 timeline again?

1) Said Qutub is tortured by Egyptians trained by the CIA. He is pissed.
2) He invents and then teaches radical Islamism to Osama's 'teacher'.
3) Osama becomes a CIA asset during Bush 1
4) NeoCons get back in power and arrange Pearl Harbour 2 w. Osama who is now a 'radical'.
5) Radical Islam is blamed giving the US a great excuse to get all Imperial on the ME.
6) Iran gets the bomb and the ME turns into WW3.

Is that the one you mean?

 

[DRB]

1) Said Qutub is tortured by Egyptians trained by the CIA. He is pissed.
2) He invents and then teaches radical Islamism to Osama's 'teacher'.
3) Osama becomes a CIA asset during Bush 1
4) NeoCons get back in power and arrange Pearl Harbour 2 w. Osama who is now a 'radical'.
5) Radical Islam is blamed giving the US a great excuse to get all Imperial on the ME.
6) Iran gets the bomb and the ME turns into WW3.

Is that the one you mean?

No the other one.

 

[Changleen]

No the other one.

Where have you been anyway?

 

[fluff]

No the other one.

LOL - POTD.

 

[DRB]

Where have you been anyway?

Throwing rocks at Iran from across the Gulf.

 

[Changleen]

Throwing rocks at Iran from across the Gulf.

Rocks with Cartoons on?

 

[DRB]

Rocks with Cartoons on?

I just wrote WWMD on them.

 

[Changleen]

?krow ti diD​

 

[DRB]

?krow ti diD​

My magic eight ball says "outlook not so good"

 

[fluff]

?krow ti diD​

Someone get Bletchley Park on the phone...

 

[SJ10]

You are so out of touch with reality, it is insane. At no point has the USA EVER been responsible for my freedom here in Canada. Get off your high horse. Don't be bitter of the fact that when Iran has Nukes, you will have to take them seriously.

There was no truce with Russia, there was mutually assured destruction. Completely different, and is exactly what Iran is trying to procure for itself. It would only be a matter of time (decades maybe) before they had a delivery method that was able to reach the US.

Also, the attacks would stop if you, you know, STOP INVADING OTHER COUNTRIES.

You made your bed, lie in it and shut up.

I realize it's something you can't accept, but seriously think of where Canada would be without the US. What would Canada do if it was threatened? Use their 15 US made F-16's, launch a torrent of mounties? Canada is completely dependent on the US for their national security and thus so is your freedom. Not invading someone doesn't mean attacks will stop or that you won't be attacked because history proves otherwise. You want to hug and share flowers with people that hate you and I say go ahead. Just don't complain when you are screaming "Uncle!" and no one comes to your side.
I'm not bitter that Iran has or wants nukes. I've always considered them a threat, even more so than Iraq. Get off your short-man horse, get in your yellow Miata, drive down to the library, and pick up a history book. I know that when someone tells me to "shut up" on the internet, that I have won my arguement.