Nuke Iran

You are the idiot. Are you a member of congress?

0 Replies

Dips
Yeah, I figured you would not know how to look it up. So:

wikipedia.org

Hummus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the biological matter in soil, see Humus; for the band, see Humus (band). For the Palestinian political movement, see Hamas.

Hummus with oil and lemon juice
Classic hummus, Yemeni dishHummus (Arabic: حُمُّص‎; Hebrew: חוּמוּס or חִמצָה; Armenian համոս translit: hamos; also spelled houmous, hommus, hummous or humus) is a dip made of chickpea paste and tahini (sesame seed paste), with flavorings such as olive oil, garlic, lemon juice, and paprika.
****************

DUH.

0 Replies

http://www.aldoukan.com/dk/images/food/chick_pea.jpg

I love it when a plan comes together!

0 Replies

International observers, led by the U.S. National Democratic Institute, deemed the election "free and fair." In its report following the election, NDI stated, "through the high turnout in these elections and in the 2005 Presidential election, as well as the notable participation in five rounds of municipal elections in the last year, Palestinians have clearly demonstrated a commitment to democratic elections." So much for the canard that Arabs are somehow inherently resistant to free voting.
******************
SO, ORALLOY THE MOUTH WHO KNOWS NOTHING, GOT ANYTHING TO REFUTE THAT THEY WEREN'T DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED BESIDES YOUR STUPID EMOTIONS?

AND THE REST OF YOU CHIMPS WHO ADVOCATE BLOWING EVERYONE UP KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HAMAS AND HUMMUS. GEE, YOU LEARN SOMETHING EVERY DAY DON'T YA?

0 Replies

Iran's right to nuclear enrichment
FROM: THE SECURITY COUNCIL www.un.org

IRAN'S RIGHT TO ENRICH URANIUM AS SET FORTH BY THE SECURITY COUNCIL

Iran's right to enrich uranium was recognized under the NPT, he said. And, upholding the right of State parties to international regimes was as essential as ensuring respect for their obligations. Those regimes, including the NPT, were sustained by a balance between rights and obligations. Threats would not sustain the NPT or other international regimes, but ensuring that members could draw rightful benefits from membership, and that non-members were not rewarded for their intransigence, did. Yet, today, the world was witnessing a dangerous trend. While members of the NPT were denied their rights and punished, those who defied the NPT, particularly the perpetrators of the current carnage in Lebanon and Palestine, were rewarded by generous nuclear cooperation agreements. "This is one awkward way to safeguard the NPT or ensure its universality", he said.

END

Well looks like OC gets an "F" and so does oralloy. Iran, according to the Security Council DOES have the right to enrich uranium.

But you idiots know more than the Security Council. Of course.

At least someone in the Security Council recognizes Israel's intransigence as is clearly stated in the last paragraph.

Americans will have to come up with another bogus reason to invade another country. Iran is doing nothing wrong. You got a problem with that, take it up with the Security Council. Go pick on Israel.

Up uranium.

0 Replies

I hate chick pea dip.

0 Replies

Chick pee dip isn't very good either.

The news today is...

Soon After US Ends Excercise, Iran fires Missiles

snippet of article wrote:

Iran fired several missiles with a range of more than 1,000 miles today during a military maneuver that started just days after the United States and several allies, including Persian Gulf states, held exercises in the same area.

Iran fired several missiles with a range of more than 1,000 miles today during a military maneuver.

Iranian news outlets reported that "dozens" of missiles were fired, including the Shahab-3, which has a range of about 1,000 miles and is capable of carrying cluster warheads, and the shorter range Shahab-2. The Iranian news agency ISNA posted photographs of what it said were the missiles, shown billowing smoke as they were launched, in the so-called "Great Prophet" exercises involving air, naval and ground forces.

The agency quoted a senior official as saying that the launchings were not linked to any developments in the nuclear issue. But it said that the launchings showed that Iran had reached an international level of achievement in its ballistic missile program.

"The first and main goal of this exercise is to demonstrate power and national determination to defend the country against any possible threat, and show Iran's missile capability which has increased the country's defense capability," the ISNA report said.

0 Replies

candidone1 wrote:

oralloy wrote:
candidone1 wrote:
If the marker by which the western world determines who should and who should not have nukes is their historical record for responsible use of them, why is the US permitted to have nukes and Iran or the DPRK not?

Because of the fact that our track record indicates quite clearly that we handle them responsibly, and the fact that Iran and North Korea have a track record that raises serious doubts that they would be responsible with them.

Please define "using them responsibly", and provide me with some examples of when, where and under what circumstances North Korea has used nuclear weapons on a military or civilian target that has made them a questionable bearer of said weapons.

The fact that we used nuclear weapons only at the end of WWII, where their use was justified by the circumstances of the war, and then haven't used them since, shows that we have the necessary restraint to be responsible with them.

North Korea and Iran have not yet used them on any target. That does not change the reality that their track records indicate that they are not likely to be responsible with them.

0 Replies

oralloy wrote:

The fact that we used nuclear weapons only at the end of WWII, where their use was justified by the circumstances of the war...

you used a plutonium bomb and a uranium bomb as an experiment on virgin cities to see what they would do and to impress the Russians. It was a callous act justified by the cloak of war time.

0 Replies

Israel and irresponsible behavior
Israeli Cluster Munitions Hit Civilians in Lebanon

Israel Must Not Use Indiscriminate Weapons

(Beirut, July 24, 2006) - Israel has used artillery-fired cluster munitions in populated areas of Lebanon, Human Rights Watch said today. Researchers on the ground in Lebanon confirmed that a cluster munitions attack on the village of Blida on July 19 killed one and wounded at least 12 civilians, including seven children. Human Rights Watch researchers also photographed cluster munitions in the arsenal of Israeli artillery teams on the Israel-Lebanon border.

Cluster munitions are unacceptably inaccurate and unreliable weapons when used around civilians. They should never be used in populated areas.

Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch

Off Target: The Conduct of the War and Civilian Casualties in Iraq
Report, December 3, 2003

Fatally Flawed: Cluster Bombs and Their Use by the United States in Afghanistan
Report, December 3, 2002

Ticking Time Bombs: NATO's Use of Cluster Munitions in Yugoslavia,"
Report, December 16, 1999
******************************

Since Israel is irresponsible with their use of weapons, which the Security Council (UN) has noted, they should be inspected for weapons and also for their Human Rights violations.

Iran has no such record. They do not threaten the US.

Your paranoia is showing, yanks.

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

oralloy wrote:
The fact that we used nuclear weapons only at the end of WWII, where their use was justified by the circumstances of the war...

you used a plutonium bomb and a uranium bomb as an experiment on virgin cities to see what they would do and to impress the Russians. It was a callous act justified by the cloak of war time.

We used a plutonium and a uranium bomb primarily to try to shock Japan into surrendering.

We already knew what the bombs would do, and we dropped them because we wanted to do it.

It was indeed a callous act. And it was indeed justified by the cloak of wartime.

0 Replies

Re: Israel and irresponsible behavior

pachelbel wrote:

Israeli Cluster Munitions Hit Civilians in Lebanon

I was going to note that the US uses those very same cluster munitions in civilian areas too.

But I see you already noted it:

pachelbel wrote:

Off Target: The Conduct of the War and Civilian Casualties in Iraq
Report, December 3, 2003

Fatally Flawed: Cluster Bombs and Their Use by the United States in Afghanistan
Report, December 3, 2002

Ticking Time Bombs: NATO's Use of Cluster Munitions in Yugoslavia,"
Report, December 16, 1999

0 Replies

But of course the US is justified for whatever they do. They are above any and all laws.

As is Israel.

Got to keep that God almighty Military Industrial Complex alive and well.
Lots of Repubs making $$$ from the manufacture of military weapons. Of course they are going to have perpetual war; it's just business.

Despite the fact that the UN Security Council disparages countries who use cluster bombs in civilian areas, the US & Israel will continue to do so. It is despicable and unwarranted.

Have you ever seen photos of children in Lebanon who have been killed or hurt from these? If you have any humanity left, those photos should bother you.

0 Replies

fool
you fool nuking iran would result in nuclear fallout and we would all die

0 Replies

Re: fool

Apollo wrote:

nuking iran would result in nuclear fallout

Yes.

Apollo wrote:

and we would all die

No.

(Not that I want to nuke Iran.)

0 Replies

Welcome to the Forum Apollo.

You are, however, very wrong to suppose that a few nuclear blasts in South Asia would "kill us all". U.S. nuclear devices and doctrine can greatly reduce the fallout, even in the region. Loss of life directly from Blast/Heat effects would also probably not be much greater than if conventional munitions were used, though the destructive power of small nuclear explosions are very much greater. If the U.S. were to use nuclear warheads against Iran's nuclear weapons facilities, very few would be needed to prevent Iran from obtaining an effective nuclear arsenal for many, many years to come. Still, I don't believe that the United States will exercise a nuclear first strike anywhere in the world today.

The danger of unrestrained nuclear war between India and Pakistan is far greater, though both have been slowly stepping back from the brink. If those two countries started a nuclear exchange, millions would die in India and Pakistan. We could expect targeting of population centers, rather than remote military related facilities and echelons. Both countries have relatively small arsenals of limited yield warheads. Unfortunately, neither countries weapons are particularly clean, and ground bursts are greatly probable if an exchange were to occur. Even so, the fallout would be almost insignificant outside the region, and would depend greatly on the direction and force of the winds.

This discussion wouldn't be taking place, if Iran was a responsible, non-threatening government. They pose a danger to maritime shipment of oil from the region to Europe and Japan. Iran is more dedicated to the spread of radical Islam throughout the region and world, than it is to peaceful co-existence with the non-Islamic world. Iran gives sanctuary to Islamic terrorists, and provides support for terrorists throughout the region and around the world. They are determined to lead the Islamic World, and have vowed to annihilate Israel. The danger that Iran would transfer nuclear weapons/materials to terrorists to be delivered onto targets in the United States and Europe is unacceptable.

Iran, in my opinion, is perhaps the most dangerous country in the world at this time in terms of potential for starting a major world conflict.

0 Replies

Asherman wrote:

Iran, in my opinion, is perhaps the most dangerous country in the world at this time in terms of potential for starting a major world conflict.

Well, your opinion differs slightly from people in some other countries, all allies of the USA, btw :wink:

0 Replies

Just goes to show you what propaganda can do, huh Walter? Did they poll you? What would your response have been?

0 Replies

I have almost zero faith in popularity polls. It is really easy to slant poll results by the way a question is posed, which questions are asked, how random the sample. and other faults that might even be unnoticed, or intended. Most people are frightfully ignorant of even the most critical elements necessary to evaluate policies, or politicians. Emotion is transient and often has little to do with realties.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Just goes to show you what propaganda can do, huh Walter? Did they poll you? What would your response have been?

I gave the link to that report. And when you would follow it, you'd noticed that in Germany no-one was polled but in the UK, Israel ...

A-loch.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know