10
   

Paul Wolfowitz says, don't harm the Iranians

 
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 05:56 pm
Quote:
Cicerone said: No Muslim country is going to throw any "first punch by using nukes." That's all fable and ignorance, because they know it'll be their last "punch" if they tried such a foolish thing

Ah, but muslim fanatics WON'T CARE if they and the muslim world get nuked by Israel in return because they'll regard themselves as "martyrs" like all suicide bombers do.
The Koran already puts them up to it -
[Koran 5.82] "Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity to be the Jews and those who are polytheists"
[Koran 9.123] "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness"


Muslim extremists dream of having weapons of mass destruction just like Bin Laden dreamt-

"Acquiring weapons for the defense of Muslims is a religious duty.
If I have indeed acquired these weapons, then I thank God for enabling me to do so.
And if I seek to acquire these weapons, I am carrying out a duty.
It would be a sin for Muslims not to try to possess the weapons that would prevent the infidels from inflicting harm on Muslims"
- (Bin Laden Responding to the question "are you trying to acquire chemical and nuclear weapons?" in
Time Magazine Dec 1998)
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 06:31 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
You,
Quote:
Ah, but muslim fanatics WON'T CARE if they and the muslim world get nuked by Israel in return because they'll regard themselves as "martyrs" like all suicide bombers do.


That's not an answer; it's total speculation on your part. Show some solid evidence for your opinion that they will use nuke against Israel or anybody else. Do you understand the definition of "evidence?"
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 07:16 pm
Go figger-

"And if I seek to acquire these weapons, I am carrying out a duty.
It would be a sin for Muslims not to try to possess the weapons that would prevent the infidels from inflicting harm on Muslims"" -Bin Laden speaking about WMD's

That's why there's such a hoo-hah about Irans nuclear plants which could produce nuke bomb making ingredients. Even if Iran has no intention of making nukes, they could still secretly hand out stuff to terror groups around the mid east so they could make them.

I'm not talkimg about making big complicated nuclear missiles, I'm talking about suitcase-sized nukes that could be smuggled into Israel or America or anywhere else in backpacks or car trunks and then detonated.
Saddam spelt it out- "Does America realize the meaning of every Iraqi becoming a missile that can cross to countries and cities?"

My gut feeling is that the Muslim world is biding its time til it gets suitcase nukes, then it'll really hit the fan
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 07:56 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Bin Laden is dead. One muslim does not speak for all muslims; it's the same with any politics. One person never speaks for all in their party.

Your gut feeling is wrong - by about 100%. Mr. Green
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 08:07 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Quote:
My gut feeling is that the Muslim world is biding its time til it gets suitcase nukes, then it'll really hit the fan


The dummy you are arguing with denies everything Islam and Islamists have said. Considering that, how can he even have any input?
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 08:12 pm
Quote:
Cicerone said: @RF- Your gut feeling is wrong - by about 100%.

They said Billy Mitchell's gut feeling in 1925 was wrong too..Wink

"A Pacific war will start with a Japanese air and sea attack upon the U.S. military bases at Pearl Harbor in the Hawaiian Islands"- Maj. Gen Billy Mitchell 1925
http://liberty-virtue-independence.blogspot.co.uk/2008/12/major-general-billy-mitchells-1925.html

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 09:06 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Different era, different thinking, different military makeup - worldwide.

In addition to "all that," Admiral Kimmel in charge in Hawaii ignored all the warnings.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 09:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Different era, different thinking, different military makeup - worldwide.


And look how he backs that up,NOT!
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 09:16 pm
Another thing:- The currently most powerful terrorist weapon is the bomb and we hear of them going off somewhere in the world on a regular basis.
So when they eventually get their hands on suitcase-sized nuke bombs they're not going to suddenly stop but will simply switch to using nukes.

PS- and there's no guarantee that they'll use them against Israel first; they might decide instead to hit America first with suitcase nukes, and get round to hitting Israel later.
After all, they chose to fly airliners into the WTC and Pentagon on 9/11 instead of into buildings in Israeli cities.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 09:55 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
CLUE/FACT: There is no way to build a suitcase nuclear bomb. That's another one of your fantacies that has no basis in fact.
Do you know how difficult it is to create enough nuclear material to create one bomb?
I worked with nukes in the USAF for four years - as a team leader.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 10:04 pm
Quote:
I worked with nukes in the USAF for four years - as a team leader.


Yes they need a team to clean the bathrooms. You must have been a "urinal Colonel".

Too bad he is missing these Sad
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 10:53 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Another thing:- The currently most powerful terrorist weapon is the bomb and we hear of them going off somewhere in the world on a regular basis.
So when they eventually get their hands on suitcase-sized nuke bombs they're not going to suddenly stop but will simply switch to using nukes.

PS- and there's no guarantee that they'll use them against Israel first; they might decide instead to hit America first with suitcase nukes, and get round to hitting Israel later.
After all, they chose to fly airliners into the WTC and Pentagon on 9/11 instead of into buildings in Israeli cities.

Any rudimentary suitcase nuke would only be able to give off a strong pulse of radiation -- bad if set off in a dense crowd, but nothing like a regular nuclear weapon.

If the terrorists stepped their rudimentary nuke up to a truck bomb size, they could probably manage an explosive fizzle. That would also be bad, but still nothing like a real nuke.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 11:00 pm
@oralloy,
RF wrote,
Quote:
PS- and there's no guarantee that they'll use them against Israel first; they might decide instead to hit America first with suitcase nukes, and get round to hitting Israel later.


Just how will they get those suitcase nukes into the US? It seems you have never traveled through airports.

BTW, how will the carrier protect himself/herself from the radiation?
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2013 11:49 pm
Interesting suitcase nukes article here-
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2002/01/roland-watson/the-destructive-effects-of-a-nuclear-suitcase-bomb/

He says they're probably around only 1 kiloton strength (Hiroshima was 10 kt), but can still do a lot of damage. For example they can flatten a city centre out to about half a mile from ground zero, killing everybody in that radius with the fireball and blast wave, and the fallout will kill more for several miles downwind. He estimates a total of 20.ooo people will die.
Because suitcase nukes are so small and light he says they can be easily flown over a city in a light aircraft and dropped out.

Just to add my two cents- the muslim droppers would be prepared to get caught in the blast themselves and die as "martyrs", but they might opt for a parachute release instead, dropping the bomb from high altitude, then getting away at full throttle before it hit the ground.
Alternatively they could smuggle the bomb ashore by rubber boat from a submarine or innocent-looking merchant ship, set its time fuse and then get back to the sub or ship.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 29 Nov, 2013 12:04 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
He says they're probably around only 1 kiloton strength

Maybe if they were built by Russia or the US.

Any suitcase device that a terrorist builds will deliver a pulse of radiation with no explosive yield other than whatever conventional explosives are in the device.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 29 Nov, 2013 12:18 am
Let's not get too sidetracked with suitcase nukes anyway, as I'm sure terrorists would prefer to get their hands on full-sized nukes.
One scenario would be for a sub to deposit one on the seabed just off any coastal city with a time fuse, then skedaddle before it went off, leaving the blast, shock wave, tsunami and fallout to swamp the city-

UNDERWATER NUKE TEST


A backup still from the vid in case the vid don't work-
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/Baker-test.gif
"And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name" (Revelation 13:1)
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Nov, 2013 09:56 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
LOL Mr. Green Drunk Drunk Drunk Drunk
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 30 Nov, 2013 06:28 am
This is one of Iran's two Kilo-class subs, it could creep up submerged to any coastal city in America or the world and either drop a big super-duper nuke bomb on the seabed with a time fuse, or surface at night and launch suicide squads in fast motorised dinghies carrying suitcase-nukes or conventional explosives-
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/Iranian-kilo.gif


and this is one of Iran's dozen midget subs, they could be launched from an innocent-looking merchant ship and sail submerged up the Hudson or Thames rivers or into San Francisco Bay-
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/ghadir-sub.gif

PS- North Korea has also got midget subs

izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Nov, 2013 07:14 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
I doubt there's anyone in Iran stupid enough to carry out such a ridiculous thing. America has got more nukes and submarines, and would retaliate in kind.

For a Christian you really can't abide the notion of peace on Earth and goodwill to all men. Perhaps you should try worshipping a deity more conducive to your own beliefs, like Moloch.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sat 30 Nov, 2013 10:20 am
Although "moderate" muslims would never dare nuke America or Israel, there are extremist muslim factions that would, regardless of the consequences.
They hate America because America has been propping up Israel for many years with cash and super-duper weaponry, and America paid the price by getting hit with 9/11.
American citizens should start asking "Hey, why are our our tax dollars going to Israel and making muslims hate us as Israel's friend? What has Israel ever done for us?"
Anyway Israel is a big boy bristling with nuke weapons and well able to look after herself.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/27/2021 at 03:26:45