Originally posted by PawnokeyholeAll you have to do is look at North Korea. Their entire nuclear program is based on the premise of deterring the U.S. And it seems to be working. You don't hear Bush talking up that "Axis of Evil" anymore. It's full speed ahead on Iran and Iraq.
In pursuing its current unilateral course, the U.S. is ironically increasing, not decreasing, the probability of nuclear proliferation. Countries that oppose the U.S. desire a deterrent against US aggression; and the only effective deterrent is nuclear. So naturally such countries will strive to obtain nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, without internation ...[text shortened]... dle class would appreciate your designation of their homeland as a crappy third-world country.
Originally posted by princeoforangeNuclear Schmuclear dude....
Perhaps the fact that you give credit to a website named "socialist worker" partially explains your ignorant and naive assumption that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program.
Remind me again: Which is the only nation to ever have used them in combat?
See...
Swings and roundabouts. What goes around, comes around.
Anyway, the point the article is making is not whether Iran is making nuclear weapons or not, but that the US is saying they shouldn't, while, under the same obligations, actively is.
It's about hypocrisy.
Look it up in a big book of "word meanings" if you don't know what it means.
Originally posted by shavixmirThe person who thought up a name like that must have a small willy.
Hahahahaha...
As Iran is currently under international scrutiny over it's non-existent nuclear weapons programme, this next tidbit of information becomes all the more amusing...
----------
George Bush is pushing for a multi-billion dollar programme to develop a new generation of nuclear weapons.
The Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) programme wi ...[text shortened]... ridiculously cartoonesque names for them as well...
hahahahaha
hahahah
hahahahahahah
Originally posted by scottishinnzWell my argument about Iran goes like this: The population there is under 70 million, they have enough oil to last themselves 1000 years so what real motive do they have to be pressing for peacefull nuclear technology? For one thing, Russia offered to do the enrichment for them and they refused. Smells to me more like they want nobody to know exactly how much nuclear material they have. If that is the case, they must have more on the agenda than nuclear power plants.
oh yes, been there and seen it yourself, have you?
We all know what the president of Iran said about wishing to destroy Israel and the US. Of course what he really fears is the fact that Israel has nukes and he doesn't. So by pursuing enrichment on their own, they tip their hand.
Originally posted by scottishinnzLook lad, it does not take a rocket scientist to work out that Iran are actively seeking to develop nuclear weapons. One day they say they want Israel "wiped off the map" and within a week they state that they are resuming their nuclear program (expecting us to believe the big lie that it is for peaceful purposes). Furthermore they have recently developed a ballistic missile system which, according to a BBC reporter backed by experts, does not work effectively with conventional warheads. Therefore, by simply putting two and two together, it is obvious to anyone with a scrap of common sense that Iran is developing nuclear weapons for offensive purposes, despite the scepticism of the respected and reputable "socialist worker".
oh yes, been there and seen it yourself, have you?
Originally posted by shavixmirOh, that caught me, I had never heard that one before! This old and ridiculous enquiry merely shows up your ignorance of WWII history and the Pacific War. Please do a little research and work out why America used a nuke in 1945 and why Iran wants one today, spot the difference and don't post anything else which shows up your ignorance.
Which is the only nation to ever have used them in combat?
Originally posted by sonhouseNuclear power would be more economical for Iran as they will be able to sell their oil.
Well my argument about Iran goes like this: The population there is under 70 million, they have enough oil to last themselves 1000 years so what real motive do they have to be pressing for peacefull nuclear technology? For one thing, Russia offered to do the enrichment for them and they refused. Smells to me more like they want nobody to know exactly how mu ...[text shortened]... t Israel has nukes and he doesn't. So by pursuing enrichment on their own, they tip their hand.
Originally posted by shavixmirThat money is probably mostly for anyone in the US military or 'intelligence' services who can come up with a decent acronym.
Congress has agreed to spend $15.5 million to develop a nuclear bunker-buster called the “Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator”.
my copyright suggestion is Terminating Underground Reactor Destroyer
by the way Shav, shouldn't you update your location from Sewers of Holland to Bangkok Ladyboy Brothel?
Originally posted by SiskinThat would already be passe.
That money is probably mostly for anyone in the US military or 'intelligence' services who can come up with a decent acronym.
my copyright suggestion is Terminating Underground Reactor Destroyer
by the way Shav, shouldn't you update your location from Sewers of Holland to Bangkok Ladyboy Brothel?
I'm now in Darjeeling freezing my nipples off and in a few days I'll be back in Goa, incommunicado from the RHP forums.
I'll miss you all though!
Originally posted by sonhouseThey don't sell that oil and they will starve and be to poor to be able to extract it.
Well my argument about Iran goes like this: The population there is under 70 million, they have enough oil to last themselves 1000 years so what real motive do they have to be pressing for peacefull nuclear technology? For one thing, Russia offered to do the enrichment for them and they refused. Smells to me more like they want nobody to know exactly how mu ...[text shortened]... t Israel has nukes and he doesn't. So by pursuing enrichment on their own, they tip their hand.
I really think that the best sign the USA could give would be a stern warning , the offer of non-military aid and disarm their own nukes to say they will never use them again.
USA - Has nukes, Has declared war on other countries recently, has used nukes in the past.
Iran - May or may not not have nukes but may be on the way to getting them, Has threatened but not invaded other countries in the last few years, never used nukes.