Iranian nuclear weapon intentions continue to crystallize

[Byng]

I do agree that much of the general population of Iran is what you say, and is not a problem. However, their de facto leadership consists of a religious theocracy. The fact that there are doubts about what the true intentions of this religious theocracy are is what has Israel and other countries concerned All it takes is one madman who will not think things through rationally to unleash armageddon

You have to think the problem through by questioning the intentions of both Iran and Israel when you speak of unleashing "armageddon" on the region!

The question then becomes, not whether Iran should be permitted by the West to develop nuclear weapons. The true question is whether Israel really believes that Iranian possession of nuclear weapons poses an existential threat to Israel or just a threat to Israel power and control over the region.

If Israel really believes that Iran's possession of a nuclear weapon threatens its actual existence as a State then it will conduct a unilateral military attack on Iran which might in itself include the use of Nuclear weapons, if not in the initial attack, for the retaliation by Iran in the aftermath of such an attack which really could threaten Israels existence.

What you have to take into consideration when calling for military action against Iran, is that Israels nuclear arsenal is the only nuclear arsenal in the world that is not just for deterrent purposes. If Israel thinks they are best served by using a nuclear bomb, they will not think twice about doing it and that even makes them more dangerous than a country like Pakistan, who's nuclear weapons are defensive to deter India and have no offensive use. This is what makes Israel far more dangerous and unpredictable than any other country in the region if not the world.

[bmore_ken]

What you have to take into consideration when calling for military action against Iran, is that Israels nuclear arsenal is the only nuclear arsenal in the world that is not just for deterrent purposes. If Israel thinks they are best served by using a nuclear bomb, they will not think twice about doing it and that even makes them more dangerous than a country like Pakistan, who's nuclear weapons are defensive to deter India and have no offensive use. This is what makes Israel far more dangerous and unpredictable than any other country in the region if not the world.

The holocaust may seem like a long ago event to most of us, but it's still very fresh in the minds of Jews who weren't even alive then

[Wizard777]

You have to think the problem through by questioning the intentions of both Iran and Israel when you speak of unleashing "armageddon" on the region!

The question then becomes, not whether Iran should be permitted by the West to develop nuclear weapons. The true question is whether Israel really believes that Iranian possession of nuclear weapons poses an existential threat to Israel or just a threat to Israel power and control over the region.

If Israel really believes that Iran's possession of a nuclear weapon threatens its actual existence as a State then it will conduct a unilateral military attack on Iran which might in itself include the use of Nuclear weapons, if not in the initial attack, for the retaliation by Iran in the aftermath of such an attack which really could threaten Israels existence.

What you have to take into consideration when calling for military action against Iran, is that Israels nuclear arsenal is the only nuclear arsenal in the world that is not just for deterrent purposes. If Israel thinks they are best served by using a nuclear bomb, they will not think twice about doing it and that even makes them more dangerous than a country like Pakistan, who's nuclear weapons are defensive to deter India and have no offensive use. This is what makes Israel far more dangerous and unpredictable than any other country in the region if not the world.

This is another thing that Israel is not taking into account. If Iran does develope a nuclear weapon and a means of delivering it to Israel. Using 235-U it will be a gun type bomb. Israels small size actually become a benefit. This is why. We have Iran surrounded. But Iran has Israel surrounded. That's the deterant to Iran. They cannot nuke Israel without also taking out all their allies surrounding Israel. Because of that inefficient nature of a gun type bomb. If the initial blast doest doesn't get them. The nuclear fall out will. Iran will have to have a minimum of 140 lb's of 235-U to achieve critical mass. Out of that 140 lb's of 235-U the amount of the 235-U that achieves critical mass is about the size of a penny. The rest of the 140 lb's of 235-U is blown away and becomes nuclear fall out. You may have always wondered what nuclear fall out was, where it came from and how it worked. Now you know.

Judging by current events in Syria. When it comes to being killed en masse by friend, allies or even fellow country men. They appear to be highly against that. I also think Hezbolla in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza will also be equally against that notion. So I'm not going to buy even the notion of an argument that they would all gladly go to their deaths if that's what it took for Iran to destroy Israel with a nuclear bomb. Uh huh.......

[cprenegade]

I'm glad to hear that you'll be voting for Obama.

Let me guess. You're thinking Huh, where did that come from? Simple deductive reasoning. If you truly believe that theocracies present a threat to world security. We now have that threat emerging right here in America. Romney, Santorum and Gingrich are trying to get elected President so they can run America as a theocracy. There is a raging debate as to whether Santorum wants to be President, Pope, or God. So the only real way to prevent America from becoming a theocracy, that will present a major threat to world security, is to vote for Ron Paul or Barack Obama. Considering that the republicans will not elect Ron Paul as their candidate. That only leaves Barack Obama for you to vote for to prevent America from becoming a theocracy. It's really that simple.

Actually this argument could be turned against you quite easily. You argue vehemenently against Israel and for Iran, yet you are going to cast your vote for a candidate who has already stated he will use military force to stop Iran from getting a bomb. Unless you believe he is lying, and why would anyone vote for someone who they think is lying?

[Wizard777]

The holocaust may seem like a long ago event to most of us, but it's still very fresh in the minds of Jews who weren't even alive then

The fact that some political factions try to scar the minds of each new generation of Jews with the nightmares of the halocaust is beyond sick and twisted. Children definately shouldn't be exposed to it. Especially when you consider that adults can have a very hard time with the utter depravity of heart and mind that created and executed it.

[Byng]

The holocaust may seem like a long ago event to most of us, but it's still very fresh in the minds of Jews who weren't even alive then

For anyone to deny the Holocaust like the present leader Of Iran puts a huge question mark over their sanity. But Israel, and anyone defending Israel that immediately runs to the Holocaust to justify anything that the Israeli leadership decides to do in 2012, is equally tiresome!

[Wizard777]

Actually this argument could be turned against you quite easily. You argue vehemenently against Israel and for Iran, yet you are going to cast your vote for a candidate who has already stated he will use military force to stop Iran from getting a bomb. Unless you believe he is lying, and why would anyone vote for someone who they think is lying?

I, like most of America and even Israel, believe that when we have proof Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon that we should use military force to prevent that. But not until we have proof. So Obama is not lying or bluffing. America is not going to do a repeat of Iraq with Iran. Iran is not the toothless lion or paper tiger that Iraq was. Also with Putin winning the election. Things just got very interesting. Because Russia's stated position is that the conflict with Iran will be settled Peacefully. I wonder if Obama is going to sing for Netanyahu?

Btw, that zoom you heard was a point sailing right over your head.

[Wizard777]

For anyone to deny the Holocaust like the present leader Of Iran puts a huge question mark over their sanity. But Israel, and anyone defending Israel that immediately runs to the Holocaust to justify anything that the Israeli leadership decides to do in 2012, is equally tiresome!

Ironically enough, If Ahmadinejad were in America instead of Iran. It would be his First Amendment right to do that. Frankly, I don't care what it is. If you tell me I MUST believe something. I'm going to question it and deny it until you provide me with irrefutable proof. You give me a Sacred Cow and I will give you Holy Meatloaf. Also keep in mind I will refute from inside and outside the box just so I can't be pigeon holed. Because we all know Gravity is not a fact. But Centrifugal Force is. The world is flat and round. It also spins so quickly it creates the illusion of being a sphere. Just like a quarter spining on it's edge. Yada yada yada

[regularguy]

We didn't use military force to keep the Stalin's USSR from getting the bomb... or Mao's China... or crazy Pakistan... or belligerent Israel. Why would we start a war now, when our economy is already exhausted by the burden of two decade-long wars that accomplished almost nothing that was positive?

Israel has an immense deterrent in its large nuclear arsenal. They aren't going to be nuked by Iran, because Iran would be incinerated immediately.

Obama: Don't start another war in the Middle East. Hear me?

[Mitchum]

We aren't going to use military force to keep Saudi Arabia from getting the bomb either.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/07/wo...ince-says.html

[Wizard777]

We didn't use military force to keep the Stalin's USSR from getting the bomb... or Mao's China... or crazy Pakistan... or belligerent Israel. Why would we start a war now, when our economy is already exhausted by the burden of two decade-long wars that accomplished almost nothing that was positive?

Israel has an immense deterrent in its large nuclear arsenal. They aren't going to be nuked by Iran, because Iran would be incinerated immediately.

Obama: Don't start another war in the Middle East. Hear me?

If Israel uses their nukes against Iran. They will be incinerated by proxy.

[Balt Observer]

Obama sharply escalated his warnings to Tehran that the use of force is very much "on the table," as the foreign policy cliché goes, in a possible response to its nuclear program. But he paired that rhetorical ramp-up with a detailed plea for patience with diplomacy and bluntly charged that "too much loose talk of war" has helped, not hindered, the Islamic republic.

"There should not be a shred of doubt by now: When the chips are down, I have Israel's back," the president told AIPAC, listing a wide range of actions he's undertaken — like rescuing Israeli diplomats in Cairo, boosting security and intelligence cooperation.

"I will only use force when the time and circumstances demand it," said Obama, but "Iran's leaders should know that I do not have a policy of containment; I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/c...184525416.html

There we go...the policy is that Iran cannot possess nuclear weapons. Let's see if Iran will back down.

[cprenegade]

I, like most of America and even Israel, believe that when we have proof Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon that we should use military force to prevent that. But not until we have proof. So Obama is not lying or bluffing. America is not going to do a repeat of Iraq with Iran. Iran is not the toothless lion or paper tiger that Iraq was. Also with Putin winning the election. Things just got very interesting. Because Russia's stated position is that the conflict with Iran will be settled Peacefully. I wonder if Obama is going to sing for Netanyahu?

Btw, that zoom you heard was a point sailing right over your head.

Ok, then we are in agreement. As for proof, I would suggest that there is more proof out there than you or I or anyone else on this board knows about. Otherwise, why would President Obama even waste his time making statements that could paint him into a corner? I hope Putin is right, and the situation with Iran is indeed settled peacefully. That could start with Iran opening all of it's facilities up to international inspectors. Perhaps they could begin with the ones that they refused access to just recently.

[WKDWZD]

There we go...the policy is that Iran cannot possess nuclear weapons. Let's see if Iran will back down.

Well there you go... if you believe that statement at face value, don't worry about whether Iran backs down or not, start building your nuclear bunker.

[Byng]

There we go...the policy is that Iran cannot possess nuclear weapons. Let's see if Iran will back down.

The more interesting viewing is whether Israel will back-off rather than if Iran will back down!

[Balt Observer]

The more interesting viewing is whether Israel will back-off rather than if Iran will back down!

Not a chance, in my opinion. I think that Israel will launch an airstrike sometime soon. Then we'll see where things fall from there.

[Byng]

Not a chance, in my opinion. I think that Israel will launch an airstrike sometime soon. Then we'll see where things fall from there.

Any prediction?

[Balt Observer]

Any prediction?

Too many variables. I think it's probably about 50-50 whether the US gets involved.

[Wizard777]

There we go...the policy is that Iran cannot possess nuclear weapons. Let's see if Iran will back down.

Inder the NPT no they may not possess nuclear weapons. But the NPT also gives them a treaty right to a Civilian uses nuclear program that both we and Israel must respect. If we are going to enforce the no nuclear weapon part of that treaty by military force upon Iran. Then we also have to enforce the right to a civilian uses nuclear program upon Israel.......by military force if need be.

But we currently have no evidence that they are pursuing a nuclear weapon and our intelligence says they are not pursuing a nuclear weapon. So currently the circimstances do not demand the use of military force.

[Byng]

Too many variables. I think it's probably about 50-50 whether the US gets involved.

It is 100% that the US gets involved, because Iran will lash out at everybody in general and Israel and the United States in particular. That is what Israel, quite rightly is banking on!