Nuke Iran

Don't you know what Nuclear Winter would mean for the future of the earth? Nothing is worth causing that!

Yes. It would be a moderately large extinction event. Probably not as big as the one 65 million years ago, but quite substantial nonetheless.





If the scenario of "all of the billion Muslims attacking us" comes about, we aren't going to put up with it.

MarionT,

I am not up to speed on current, nuclear weapons technology, but I agree that it would be a very "goofy" idea to try to eradicate Islam. Problem is, how do you convince a goofball that an idea is goofy? Sometimes, the only way a person will learn is by f*cking up. (Well, some people still think Iraq was a good idea, so I guess some people have to f*ck up a lot.) So, what can we do about it? Am I supposed to make a sign and go protest? Geez.

Hey, kiwimac, why hasn't your country overthrown the Bush White House, yet? How can you just sit there on your arses while they terrorize the world? Come free us!

You fear what you do not understand. You have more to fear from your own government, America, than you do from any Muslim country.

This is an example of how your American media demonizes other countries, Iran especially:

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was portrayed not just as dangerous but as a madman. This is the goal behind the myth that on October 26 last year he called for 'wiping Israel from the map".

The Manchester Guardian, in an article on June 2, 2006, took the trouble to have a Farsi translator look at Ahmadinejad's infamous speech. He said no such thing.

He was actually quoting from a statement by Ayatollah Khomeini that 'this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time", pointing out that the US backed Shah's regime in Iran didn't last forever.

Ahmadinejad was not making a military threat. Only by portraying him as a madman willing to rish muclear annihilation (by Israel and/or the US) could this claim be made credible. In fact, according to American historian and journalist Gareth Porter, the Bush Adm. refused numerous opportunities to talk with Iran, beginning in 2001. These conciliatory overtures - on nuclear development and on recognizing Israel - were rejected out of hand. The Bush Adm. ignored them because diplomacy does not fit its permanent 'war on terror'.

Let's get past the lies, distortion and war-mongering of George Bush and Co. and look at what Iran is actually doing.

First, Iran has the right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to enrich uranium to three percent - the concentration needed for nuclear power. NO INTELLIGENCE AGENCY CLAIMS THAT IRAN IS MAKING WEAPONS-GRADE URANIUM (83% CONCENTRATION). Even US 'experts' including Nat'l Intelligence Director John Negroponte-- have said the country could not make even a single crude nuclear weapon until five to 10 years from now.

But if Iran is intent on developing nuclear weapons, why would it do so? To attack Israel and ensure nuclear incineration by Israel's 200 atomic and hydrogen bombs? No, Iran would seek such weapons for the same reason others have: to deter a nuclear attack. And Iran just happens to be surrounded by most of those powers: Israel, Pakistan, India, China and Russia - not to mention the US.

If you are with Bush, you will be seen to be against Islam - with all the attendant consequences.

Incinerating the planet? What a great legacy for the children of the world to imagine.

and oralloy, where do you think you'll be in a nuclear winter? In your safe bomb shelter eating canned beans? You'll be vaporized, man, in a flash. So will your kids & grandkids.

This whole incident is about Euro dollars versus US dollars - Iraq wanted to go Euro and so does Iran - but America can't allow that. Gotta keep the Almighty dollar and your SUV gas sucking 'American way of life' at any and all costs and at the expense of young GI's. Oh well, as long as your sorry arses aren't out there fighting for nothing, what do you care.

Your apathy is showing America.

If the Moslems got us mad enuf
we cud retaliate by using nuclear fusion boms
(a/k/a Hydrogen boms ) to extinguish huge groups
of Moslems.
Thay tend to hang around together in groups.

We cud begin our retaliation
by nuking Mecca, moving on to
do it again in Medina
and continue on to other places
that the Moslems value.

Laden and Atta appear to have
forgotten that, on 9/11.

It is not necessary to wipe out every last Moslem.
The overwhelming majority of them are
dirt poor, constituting no threat to us.

My god, all my favorites from various lunatic fringes are represented here. How cool!

Of course, a2k's very own Ann ("I'm so bad") Coulter created the thread...

Well, when's a new thread starting?

D'Artagnan- Which lunatic fringe do you belong to? or are you telling us that you are one of the few who is really rational? Who told you that?

Thanks for the compliment. Ann isn't always right, but she makes libs squirm, and for that I thank her.

Then what are you worried about, dufus?
No, the majority of them don't sit on their haunches in the dirt next to their camels. What a stupid stereotype. You are an ignorant blowhard, and I have a suggestion where you could put that silly little water pistol. It's people like you that keep this planet on the edge of extinction. You haven't the brains to begin dialogue to solve a problem. Your solution is to kill innocent human beings. Who are you? God? What gives you the right to condemn people to death? Course in your case you'd be doing the planet a favour by removing yourself from the gene pool.

Good post, pachelbel. This must be the second or third time I have agreed with you. Too bad dufus won't get it.

Pachy, did you finally get that wifi setup working on your camel?

Gorby was grasping at straws as his world collapsed around him. The wall is down OE - get over it.

Oh, I'm happy that the wall is down, cjhsa. But I agree with Gorby that something like a superiority complex exists in the post-cold war USA - especially the attitude that America has the god-given right to militarily intervene in whatever country it wants to as well as the ability to reach the results it favors. This attitude persists, but there's the possibility that Iraq could change this. The USA have so far not been able to establish a stable democracy. After three and a half years, all we really see in Iraq is a civil war - well-intended efforts to the contrary (the so-called "good news from Iraq") nonwithstanding.

I've sometimes wondered about the quite recent inability of Americans to see the limits of even the most powerful nation on Earth, and the unwillingness to cooperate with the other 6.4 billion people in order to tackle problems we are facing.

Then why does everyone want to move here if we are so horrible?

Probably in the hope that the U.S. will not bomb the U.S.

The people who are so eager to see hundreds of thousands of people vapourised, are truly in need of heavy analysis. It would be comical if what they were entertaining were not so horrendous.

I'm glad you understand the psyche of the terrorists.

My prediction: Islamic terrorists will launch an international nuclear strike against a western state, originating from an unexpected place, likely an ally of the west. It is the perfect tactic for them, sort of like stocking a mosque with weapons then hiding inside.