Remind us again how Iran is not...

[Gunny]

Do you think it is more reasonable- AND SAFE, for Israel to have them??? I sure as hell don't. they are a powder keg.

Nobody should have them, to include us. When everyone in the world gives them up, we should too.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Do you think it is more reasonable- AND SAFE, for Israel to have them??? I sure as hell don't. they are a powder keg.

Have they EVER used them? have they EVER threatened to use them? Having them has in fact stopped wars. No more mass attacks from Syria, Egypt and Jordan aided by Libya. In fact just the possibility they may have them has stopped wars. Egypt and Jordan finally made peace with Israel and I suggest it has to do with Israel having or supposedly having the bomb.Look to history, from 1948 to 1973 there were 4 wars of aggression against Israel, since Israel has been rumored to have the bomb? Not one in over 30 years. I guess that is just coincidence?

 

[doniston]

Have they EVER used them? have they EVER threatened to use them? Having them has in fact stopped wars. No more mass attacks from Syria, Egypt and Jordan aided by Libya. In fact just the possibility they may have them has stopped wars. Egypt and Jordan finally made peace with Israel and I suggest it has to do with Israel having or supposedly having the bomb.Look to history, from 1948 to 1973 there were 4 wars of aggression against Israel, since Israel has been rumored to have the bomb? Not one in over 30 years. I guess that is just coincidence?

..

1. No.

2. They surely have implied they will use them. Now if they don't have them, it is an empty threat. If they do have them, is is a threat. You can suggest all you want. I simply don't beleive that. In fact I think they are the biggest threat to world peace of any.

 

[ReillyT]

Do you think it is more reasonable- AND SAFE, for Israel to have them??? I sure as hell don't. they are a powder keg.

I think both Israel and Iran are reasonable in wanting to have nuclear weapons.

It don't think safety is enhanced by either country having them, although I am more concerned (from a US point of view) about Iran having them than I am about Israel having them.

However, Israel (in all likelihood) already has them, and Iran doesn't. We can take steps (peaceful hopefully) to make sure Iran doesn't get them, while I seriously doubt that Israel will ever voluntarily give them up.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Have they EVER used them? have they EVER threatened to use them? Having them has in fact stopped wars. No more mass attacks from Syria, Egypt and Jordan aided by Libya. In fact just the possibility they may have them has stopped wars. Egypt and Jordan finally made peace with Israel and I suggest it has to do with Israel having or supposedly having the bomb.Look to history, from 1948 to 1973 there were 4 wars of aggression against Israel, since Israel has been rumored to have the bomb? Not one in over 30 years. I guess that is just coincidence?

Again in this thread, we see you throwing out erroneous and unsubstantiated claims.

Google is your friend. It would take you ten seconds to find out that as far back as the 1960s, Israel was "rumoured" to have a nuclear weapons program, and at least a few nuclear bombs. That didn't stop either the 1967 or the 1973 wars.


What ended the conventional land wars, was peace treaty between Egypt and Israel in 1978. Egypt was the only arab neighbor of israel that could even come remotely close to challenging israel's conventional military force. Without egypt, it was game over for the other arab states in the region. They couldn't possibly challenge israel's conventional military power, without egypt. Without egypt, the threat of conventional land wars against israel were effectively over.

And certainly egypt waged war against israel in 1973, a time which israel WAS rumoured (your word) to have the bomb. The fact that egypt signed a peace deal with israel was because of a forward thinking and unique arab leader - Anwar Sadat.

 

[Annie]

Again in this thread, we see you throwing out erroneous and unsubstantiated claims.

Google is your friend. It would take you ten seconds to find out that as far back as the 1960s, Israel was "rumoured" to have a nuclear weapons program, and at least a few nuclear bombs. That didn't stop either the 1967 or the 1973 wars.


What ended the conventional land wars, was peace treaty between Egypt and Israel in 1978. Egypt was the only arab neighbor of israel that could even come remotely close to challenging israel's conventional military force. Without egypt, it was game over for the other arab states in the region. They couldn't possibly challenge israel's conventional military power, without egypt. Without egypt, the threat of conventional land wars against israel were effectively over.

And certainly egypt waged war against israel in 1973, a time which israel WAS rumoured (your word) to have the bomb. The fact that egypt signed a peace deal with israel was because of a forward thinking and unique arab leader - Anwar Sadat.

I concur with the 'rumors' of Israel being nuclear in the late 60's. However, you must note that even Egypt felt there was not the threat of the 'bomb' being used, as long as the other side was 'conventional.' Instead, Israel reacted as expected, conventionally. The surprise element of the Arab states failed to produce the desired outcome, that was all.

 

[DeadCanDance]

working on the bomb. And of course claim that you know this because the Bush Administrartion is liars and frauds, Further remind us how the UN watchdog has made no claim the Iranians are working on a bomb...

Okay.

From today the head of the IAEA reports:

If Iran answers all outstanding questions, and the IAEA can verify that Iran's program is peaceful, ElBaradei said that "could create the conditions for a comprehensive and durable solution."

He also reiterated comments he made Sunday that he had no evidence Iran was working actively to build nuclear weapons and expressed concern that escalating U.S. rhetoric could bring disaster — a stance likely to anger Washington.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iRqjZV1Meppj40hTs8IBOv4DdsQwD8SJ2PBO0

Now would be a good time for you to retract your false statement that the UN IAEA has said iran is building nulcear weapons.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Okay.

From today the head of the IAEA reports:





Now would be a good time for you to retract your false statement that the UN IAEA has said iran is building nulcear weapons.

He said that he does NOT know. Quit different from what your claiming, FURTHER he has stated that they are as close as 3 years away from having a bomb, hardly good news. But do spin it any way you want.

 

[DeadCanDance]

He said that he does NOT know. Quit different from what your claiming, FURTHER he has stated that they are as close as 3 years away from having a bomb, hardly good news. But do spin it any way you want.

So you agree there's no EVIDENCE of an active nuclear weapons program. Although we can't rule out, that they may or may not be doing something.

And you wanted us to go to war based on no EVIDENCE??

LOL

No wonder you got suckered into bush's iraq war

 

[DeadCanDance]

This isn't quite what you were saying in the first post of the thread:

UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Sunday he had no evidence that Iran is building nuclear weapons and accused US leaders of adding "fuel to the fire" with recent bellicose rhetoric.

"We haven't received any information there is a parallel, ongoing, active nuclear weapon program," the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency told CNN.

"Second, even if Iran were to be working on nuclear weapons ... they are at least (a) few years away from having such weapon," he said, citing Washington's own intelligence assessments.

 

[Gunny]

So you agree there's no EVIDENCE of an active nuclear weapons program. Although we can't rule out, that they may or may not be doing something.

And you wanted us to go to war based on no EVIDENCE??

LOL

No wonder you got suckered into bush's iraq war

What do you consider "evidence?" A mushroom cloud over a US city or military base? That the IAEA sees no evidence, being the typical, appeasing, international ostrich-types they are, means NOTHING.

 

[Annie]

So you agree there's no EVIDENCE of an active nuclear weapons program. Although we can't rule out, that they may or may not be doing something.

And you wanted us to go to war based on no EVIDENCE??

LOL

No wonder you got suckered into bush's iraq war

I don't want to go to war, neither so far does the administration. How many false rabbits can you raise? The administration, backed by El Bardaei, as lame as he is, recognizes the threat. So they have put in place sanctions, the cure all via diplomacy. What is it you wish?

 

[doniston]

He said that he does NOT know. Quit different from what your claiming, FURTHER he has stated that they are as close as 3 years away from having a bomb, hardly good news. But do spin it any way you want.

You are dead wrong. he said there is NO EVIDENCE that they are building the bomb. If you are going to go along with COULD BEs, then it Could be that the world will end tomorrow.

YOU are the one who is doing the spinning.

 

[doniston]

What do you consider "evidence?" A mushroom cloud over a US city or military base? That the IAEA sees no evidence, being the typical, appeasing, international ostrich-types they are, means NOTHING.

and the fact that you disagree with them also means ABSOLUTLY NOTHING>

 

[Gunny]

and the fact that you disagree with them also means ABSOLUTLY NOTHING>

Your statement is just downright stupid, and pointless.

 

[DeadCanDance]

What do you consider "evidence?" A mushroom cloud over a US city or military base? That the IAEA sees no evidence, being the typical, appeasing, international ostrich-types they are, means NOTHING.

Oh Gawd, thanks Condi. Here we go with the mushroom cloud argument again.

You may want another trillion dollar war based on assumptions and suppositions. Not me.

I don't think we should trust iran, but I see no need for war at this point. If north korea and libya can be negotiated with on nukes, I suspect a competent president could do the same with Iran.

 

[DeadCanDance]

I don't want to go to war, neither so far does the administration. How many false rabbits can you raise? The administration, backed by El Bardaei, as lame as he is, recognizes the threat. So they have put in place sanctions, the cure all via diplomacy. What is it you wish?

How is ElBaradai lame? The dude should get a freakin' medal. He was RIGHT about iraq. Bush was wrong. ElBaradai said there was no evidence of a nuclear program in iraq, before bush invaded. BushCo. said there was a nuclear program in iraq.

Guess who I'll be trusting from now on? ElBaradai, not Bush.

We should continue with aggresive diplomacy. I see no need for another war at this point.

 

[Gunny]

Oh Gawd, thanks Condi. Here we go with the mushroom cloud argument again.

You may want another trillion dollar war based on assumptions and suppositions. Not me.

I don't think we should trust iran, but I see no need for war at this point. If north korea and libya can be negotiated with on nukes, I suspect a competent president could do the same with Iran.

A mushroom cloud argument is no more nor less valid than a "I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist," ostrich argument.

You may want to let radical, militant islamists have nuclear weapons. Not me.

 

[DeadCanDance]

A mushroom cloud argument is no more nor less valid than a "I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist," ostrich argument.

You may want to let radical, militant islamists have nuclear weapons. Not me.

If there's no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran, I fail to understand what exactly you want to bomb.

If Bush had evidence, or knew where it was, they would share that intel with IAEA inspectors.

 

[Gunny]

If there's no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran, I fail to understand what exactly you want to bomb.

If Bush had evidence, or knew where it was, they would share that intel with IAEA inspectors.

And I will again point out I have not said one word about wanting to bomb anything. For some reason you seem stuck on that idea.

I want a viable solution. I have not demanded nor promoted a specific one.

You're being ridiculous. You know damned-good-and-well Iran wants nuclear power to produce nuclear weapons. No one can actually be THAT blind.