Netanyahu: A Nuclear Iran is the biggest threat to the world.

[elvis]

http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=194512

 

[Sallow]

What a nut..

 

[elvis]

it may be the biggest threat.

 

[Modbert]

it may be the biggest threat.

It would be a threat if they decide to use it, however it's not the biggest by far.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0734664/quotes

The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, to be found only in the minds of men. For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all of its own - for the children, and the children yet unborn. And the pity of it is that these things cannot be confined to the Twilight Zone.- Rod Serling, The Twilight Zone

 

[MelissaD]

How does a nuclear Iran threaten anyone but Israel and maybe a few neighboring countries and MAYBE the US military in the region?

 

[HinduPatriot]

An unstable Pakistan is the biggest threat to the world.

We should deal with Iran AFTER having dealt with Pakistan.

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

How does a nuclear Iran threaten anyone but Israel and maybe a few neighboring countries and MAYBE the US military in the region?

Maybe the US military should'nt be in the region?

 

[Marc39]

How does a nuclear Iran threaten anyone but Israel and maybe a few neighboring countries and MAYBE the US military in the region?

Maybe the US military should'nt be in the region?

Monkey Brain, I don't see Arab countries demanding the US dismantle their military bases.

Nor, did Kuwait turn down the US bailing out their weak Arab asses against Iraq.

Eat a banana, Monkey Brain.

 

[Marc39]

How does a nuclear Iran threaten anyone but Israel and maybe a few neighboring countries and MAYBE the US military in the region?

You're not the brightest bulb. The US State Dept classifies Iran as a terrorist state.

Iran supports Hizballah that murdered 300 Marines in Beirut.

Iran also controls Persian Gulf oil.

Dumbass.

 

[CMike]

How does a nuclear Iran threaten anyone but Israel and maybe a few neighboring countries and MAYBE the US military in the region?

Because they also support terrorist groups that they can give nukes too.

 

[Dr Grump]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes
3) They are not a threat to the US or the world
4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have
5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

 

[Marc39]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes
3) They are not a threat to the US or the world
4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have
5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

Iran is a threat to the US, birdbrain. Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism whose leaders subscribe to the apocalyptic ithna ashariyyah belief that calls for world destruction in order to make way for the messiah.

Now, you know

 

[Trajan]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes

I am curious how you came to those conclusions or one that is, one conclusion and a 'probably not'?

3) They are not a threat to the US or the world

agreed, to an extent.

4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have

with us on their doorstep, not many for now that they will act on.

5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

I'd say they qualify as a threat right now to Israel with the development of a nuke weapon thats a definite ratcheting up.

 

[Marc39]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes
3) They are not a threat to the US or the world
4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

Birdbrain, Iran occupies Abu Musa and the Tunb Islands.

Iran, by its proxy Hizballah, controls Lebanon.

Now, you know.

 

[Dr Grump]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes
3) They are not a threat to the US or the world
4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have
5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

Iran is a threat to the US, birdbrain. Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism whose leaders subscribe to the apocalyptic ithna ashariyyah belief that calls for world destruction in order to make way for the messiah.

Now, you know

Gimme a break numbskull, you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Dr Grump]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes
3) They are not a threat to the US or the world
4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

Birdbrain, Iran occupies Abu Musa and the Tunb Islands.

Iran, by its proxy Hizballah, controls Lebanon.

Now, you know.

Oh, they support their interests in the region as does the US. But expansionist? Hardly...

 

[Dr Grump]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes

I am curious how you came to those conclusions or one that is, one conclusion and a 'probably not'?

3) They are not a threat to the US or the world

agreed, to an extent.

4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have

with us on their doorstep, not many for now that they will act on.

5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

I'd say they qualify as a threat right now to Israel with the development of a nuke weapon thats a definite ratcheting up.

1) There is a tendancy to believe that Iran is some sort of Super Terrorist supporter. You have to realise, they see Hizzbollah as liberators, not terrorists. That aside, there are many political factions in Iran and the mullahs do not have the hold they once had. Don't get me wrong, it is still reasonably strong. However, they are still a civilisation - it's not like they are Somalia - there is a chain of command. It is not in their interests to give 'terrorists' nuclear capability.

2) The US has a bug up its butt with regard to Iran due to the US having its arse handed to them on a plate in 1979, they have not forgiven how they looked to the rest of the world. It is in Washington's best interests to make Iran out to look bad - especially conservative Washington - Axis of Evil anyone? Pakistan is by far a greater threat because its govt is a lot less stable. The govt only controls the cities, and hardly any of the countryside and even then, their hold on power is tenuous. IOW, I think this whole "Iran is a danger to the world" serves conservative American and Israel. Most Iranians in power may be full-on Muslims, but they are not stupid - Israel already has nukes.

4) What do you mean with "you on the doorstep?" You think if the US wasn't in SA or Iraq they would expand? Why? Iran has never shown any tendacy to, so why would they start?

5) Israel bombed the Iraq reactor in 1981....if they feel the threat, they'll do it again...

 

[Trajan]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes

I am curious how you came to those conclusions or one that is, one conclusion and a 'probably not'?



agreed, to an extent.






with us on their doorstep, not many for now that they will act on.

5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

I'd say they qualify as a threat right now to Israel with the development of a nuke weapon thats a definite ratcheting up.

1) There is a tendancy to believe that Iran is some sort of Super Terrorist supporter. You have to realise, they see Hizzbollah as liberators, not terrorists.

well, Hezbollah is a terrorist org. So is Iran......the EU et al all agree, not just us. IF Iran thinks they, Hezbollah are an oppressed liberator, well, that really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things, heck, Hitler thought the Sudetenland should be part of Germany... it doesn't matter and Hezbollah did start a war 4 years ago. Their charter is pretty clear vis a vis Israel......so is Hamas's.

That aside, there are many political factions in Iran and the mullahs do not have the hold they once had. Don't get me wrong, it is still reasonably strong. They are still a civilisation - they are not Somalia, so there is a chain of command. It is not in their interests to give 'terrorists' nuclear capability. Due to the US having its arse handed to them on a plate in 1979, they have not forgiven how they looked to the rest of the world. It is in Washington's best interests to make Iran out to look bad - especially conservative Washington - Axis of Evil anyone?

So, in short you see them as a governing body that though there is some power struggles amongst the councils, Quds, the Rep gd. etc. they will always make the civilized decision as say the USSR did and not proliferate wmd or first strike? I wish I had your faith. I don't see them as a pragmatic lot by comparison, at all. And axis of evil, I don't object to that term, you do realize then sent hit men to kill translators of The Satanic Verses were in Norway, Italy and in Japan, one was murdered. In Turkey they burned down a hotel killing 37 people...

Pakistan is by far a greater threat because its govt is a lot less stable. The govt only controls the cities, and hardly any of the countryside and even then, their hold on power is tenuous. IOW, I think this whole "Iran is a danger to the world" serves conservative American and Israel. Most Iranians in power may be full-on Muslisms, but they are no stupid - Israel already has nukes.

yes I agree with that by and large. Israel does have nukes yet they are governed by a pluralistic representative gov. Iran is not.

4) What do you mean with "you on the doorstep?" You think if the US wasn't in SA or Iraq they would expand? Why? They have never shown any tendacy to, so why would they start?

The Kurds, the disputed area they went to war over with Iraq back in the 80's. The questions is, when they have nukes, what will they do then? The regional sunni nations are asking themselves the same. And there in lies a huge danger, that the rest that can which is due to oil wealth doable, then develop their own nukes to counter Iran.

5) Israel bombed the Iraq reactor in 1981....if they feel the threat, they'll do it again...

I am beginning to think they won't.

 

[elvis]

1) Iran would never give nukes to terrorist groups
2) They are very likely not going to make nukes
3) They are not a threat to the US or the world
4) Can anybody name an expansionist tendancies they have
5) They might be a threat to Israel and some neighbours, but not hte world

if they're a threat to Israel, they are a threat to the entire middle east, and therefore, the world.

 

[Dr Grump]

well, Hezbollah is a terrorist org. So is Iran......the EU et al all agree, not just us. IF Iran thinks they, Hezbollah are an oppressed liberator, well, that really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things, heck, Hitler thought the Sudetenland should be part of Germany... it doesn't matter and Hezbollah did start a war 4 years ago. Their charter is pretty clear vis a vis Israel......so is Hamas's.


So, in short you see them as a governing body that though there is some power struggles amongst the councils, Quds, the Rep gd. etc. they will always make the civilized decision as say the USSR did and not proliferate wmd or first strike? I wish I had your faith. I don't see them as a pragmatic lot by comparison, at all. And axis of evil, I don't object to that term, you do realize then sent hit men to kill translators of The Satanic Verses were in Norway, Italy and in Japan, one was murdered. In Turkey they burned down a hotel killing 37 people...

yes I agree with that by and large. Israel does have nukes yet they are governed by a pluralistic representative gov. Iran is not.

The Kurds, the disputed area they went to war over with Iraq back in the 80's. The questions is, when they have nukes, what will they do then? The regional sunni nations are asking themselves the same. And there in lies a huge danger, that the rest that can which is due to oil wealth doable, then develop their own nukes to counter Iran.


I am beginning to think they won't.

1) Well, I consider them a terrorist organisation, too. I wonder what light US Black Ops troops from the 1980s are seen in by certain central American citizens?

2) Well, you are right about sending out hit squads, but people tend to lump the whole people into that basket. That was probably one govt dept that was responsible -and who knows who they were responsible to? If it was the Minister of the Interior, then I don't see it as much of a problem. If it was the whole Islamic Council or govt, then that is more of a problem. You can't blame the whole US govt or people for the overthrow of Allende in Chile in '73, even though the CIA had a hand in it.

3) As far the kurds go, that has little to do with expansionism. That is a Turkey/Iraq/Iran problem and has been going on ad infinitum. As for the Iran/Iraq war, that was at the complete instigation of Iraq, with it proxy the US egging them on. So no, both of those arguments fail IMO.

4) Of course Israel won't- they want the US to do their dirty work for them. And not because they are cowards either - but the backlash from the Arab world would be incredible...