Let’s assume Trump declares victory then leaves

[Zavulon]

No experts say that. Why do you rely so much on bullshit you simply make up out of whole cloth?

Of course they say it and even write it in the articles.

What is the sentence you failed to understand?

 

[BackAgain]

Of course they say it and even write it in the articles.
View attachment 1240100

What is the sentence you failed to understand?

Hey, stupid: the key words (which you mindlessly elect to ignore) are these “In the past” ….

 

[Zavulon]

Hey, stupid: the key words (which you mindlessly elect to ignore) are these “In the past” ….

In what dialect of English, the word "Currently" (the very first word in my quotation) means "in the past"?

 

[BackAgain]

In what dialect of English, the word "Currently" (the very first word in my quotation) means "in the past"?

The snippet you quoted has those words in the final paragraph, you idiot.

I don’t know why you quote material if you don’t understand what it says.

 

[Zavulon]

The snippet you quoted has those words in the final paragraph, you idiot.

Currently, the USA and UK and Russia use High Enriched Uranium as fuel for their naval reactors.

In the past, there were also High Engriched Uranium powered nuclear reactors for other uses.

Ergo, there are possible uses of Highly Enriched Uranium other than making bombs.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Unlike your Islamofascist allies the US does not target civilians ..

We already did!

Our “Greatest Ally” in this potentially civilization ending debacle proudly and unashamedly does!

 

[Mac-7]

We are not talking about me. I'm really insignificant. Other religious people (from Russia, Iran, Saudi, Rome) are those who should be convinced.
And right now there is a loophole in your logic between words "God is real" and "We should bomb Iran". Like actually big loophole. And if you want to convince them, that you are following some kind of logic, not just voices in your head - you'd better to explain the whole chain.

These “religious leaders” from the places you named ate not my responsability

If you believe that the word of God in the Bible is true thats all that matters

And the Bible makes it clear that the mass of humanity will be unbelieving heretics like you at the end of the Church Age

Only the return of Jesus - the Second Coming - can save humanity from total destruction

Each time the lib media gleefully reports the decline of Christianity in one form or another, along with the growth of Islam ir atheism, they are unknowingly announcing that we’re one step closer to the end of the world as we know it today

 

[Correll]

They were just sitting there. What actions are you referring to?

Their action of closing the strait. THey did that. They attacked innocent people, who had nothing to do with hte us military.


Are they responsible for those actions that they did, or are they more like retarded children that need to be controlled by medical professionals?

 

[Correll]

No, it is because they told the world….You fuk with us, this will happen

Explain how them stating that they would do an action, means that they are not responsible for that action.


Morally speaking, also, LOGICALLY speaking, your argument is utterly wrong.

 

[Correll]

And Russians are chanting "death to America" and "return our Alaska" for much longer time. So what? Does it mean that you should attack Russia immediately and commit mass-murder&suicide?

Please don't play retard like the American libs.

That a situation is a good reason for a certain response, is not a REQUIREMENT that that response is the only possible response.


When you act retarded, it makes you LOOK like a retard.


Have some self respect. Don't do that.

 

[rightwinger]

Explain how them stating that they would do an action, means that they are not responsible for that action.


Morally speaking, also, LOGICALLY speaking, your argument is utterly wrong.

War is like that
Unintended consequences

Trump did not have a clue. When Gabbard was asked if she informed Trump of the potential closing of the Strait, she refused to answer

 

[Zavulon]

These “religious leaders” from the places you named ate not my responsability

If you believe that the word of God in the Bible is true thats all that matters

But the most of people who believe that the word of God in the Bible is true, believe that America and Israel are run by the enemies of God and humanity and should be, at least, stopped and educated, or totally eliminated if necessary. And they can explain the whole line of reasoning. There are dogmatic parts and theologumenian parts.

And the Bible makes it clear that the mass of humanity will be unbelieving heretics like you at the end of the Church Age

Most of Christians believe that there will be no end of the Church Age at all, or to be more correct, the Church is etheral and will exist even after the End of our world.

Only the return of Jesus - the Second Coming - can save humanity from total destruction

Who told you this, or how did you come to this conclusion? Did you read Bart D. Erhman's book "Armageddon: What the Bible Really Says about the End"?
The author is former Evangelist and his point of view (at least about biblical things) are more or less common knowledge in bibleistic. Not that I like his new "snowflake approach", but at least he actually describe the problem and difference between "world's christianity" and certain, very limited groups of "American Evangelists".

Most of Christians in the world believe that Christ is already with them, and there is no need to invite anti-christ (and then - Christ) to destroy our world.

Each time the lib media gleefully reports the decline of Christianity in one form or another, along with the growth of Islam ir atheism, they are unknowingly announcing that we’re one step closer to the end of the world as we know it today

You see... The problem is, that American protestants (especially some little rustic cults) don't know the world at all. When your world is made of a farm, gas station and bar - literally anything can destroy it. Orthodox Christianity or Roman Catholic Church (say nothing about certain groups of Jewish traditions) with their two millenia history and cultural baggage collected from different epochs and cultures, are much more calm and lesser hysterical.

 

[Zavulon]

Please don't play retard like the American libs.

As if American "cons" are somehow smarter.

That a situation is a good reason for a certain response, is not a REQUIREMENT that that response is the only possible response.

So, did the situation around Iran actually demanded immediate military actions? If yes - explain why.

When you act retarded, it makes you LOOK like a retard.

Do you mean Trump? As for me, he actually looks like a hysterical retard.

 

[Mac-7]

But the most of people who believe that the word of God in the Bible is true, believe that America and Israel are run by the enemies of God and humanity and should be, at least, stopped and educated, or totally eliminated if necessary. And they can explain the whole line of reasoning. There are dogmatic parts and theologumenian parts.



Most of Christians believe that there will be no end of the Church Age at all, or to be more correct, the Church is etheral and will exist even after the End of our world.




Who told you this, or how did you come to this conclusion? Did you read Bart D. Erhman's book "Armageddon: What the Bible Really Says about the End"?
The author is former Evangelist and his point of view (at least about biblical things) are more or less common knowledge in bibleistic. Not that I like his new "snowflake approach", but at least he actually describe the problem and difference between "world's christianity" and certain, very limited groups of "American Evangelists".

Most of Christians in the world believe that Christ is already with them, and there is no need to invite anti-christ (and then - Christ) to destroy our world.




You see... The problem is, that American protestants (especially some little rustic cults) don't know the world at all. When your world is made of a farm, gas station and bar - literally anything can destroy it. Orthodox Christianity or Roman Catholic Church (say nothing about certain groups of Jewish traditions) with their two millenia history and cultural baggage collected from different epochs and cultures, are much more calm and lesser hysterical.

But the most of people who believe that the word of God in the Bible is true, believe that America and Israel are run by the enemies of God and humanity and should be, at least, stopped and educated, or totally eliminated if necessary. And they can explain the whole line of reasoning. There are dogmatic parts and theologumenian parts.

There are many fake Christians in Western society who disagree with me

And most are more learened than I am

So at various times, snd increasingly so, America may be run by enemies of God

We dont seem to disagree about that
There are plenty of fake Christians in Western society But the most of people who believe that the word of God in the Bible is true, believe that America and Israel are run by the enemies of God and humanity and should are dogmatic parts and theologumenian parts.

 

[BackAgain]

Currently, the USA and UK and Russia use High Enriched Uranium as fuel for their naval reactors.

Link. And when were those naval reactors built?

In the past, there were also High Engriched Uranium powered nuclear reactors for other uses.

Yes. In the past.

Ergo, there are possible uses of Highly Enriched Uranium other than making bombs.

False and an invalid syllogism.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

Again, false. Your grasp of logic is non existent.

 

[Zavulon]

Link. And when were those naval reactors built?

Are you banned in google?

Start with this:

U.S. Naval Reactors

If anyone wants a compact reactor (for any use) he should use Highly Enriched Uranium. That's simple physic.

Yes. In the past.

And still nowadays.
Anyway, it's up to Iran (as it was up to Brazil and India) to decide if he wants to use 93%, 60%, or 25% enriched Uranium as fuel for its nuclear reactors. After all, America decided to sell some 93% enriched Uranium to Australia as fuel for future Astralian submarines (or as material for future Austalian nuclear bombs).
Making HEU fuel for nuclear reactors is allowed. Making bombs - doesn't.

 

[BackAgain]

Are you banned in google?

Start with this:

U.S. Naval Reactors

View attachment 1240238

If anyone wants a compact reactor (for any use) he should use Highly Enriched Uranium. That's simple physic.



And still nowadays.
Anyway, it's up to Iran (as it was up to Brazil and India) to decide if he wants to use 93%, 60%, or 25% enriched Uranium as fuel for its nuclear reactors. After all, America decided to sell some 93% enriched Uranium to Australia as fuel for future Astralian submarines (or as material for future Austalian nuclear bombs).
Making HEU fuel for nuclear reactors is allowed. Making bombs - doesn't.

You’re a dopey useless clot.

Again, I already cited valid authority.

Your refusal to recognize actual present day evidence is a you problem.

 

[Zavulon]

You’re a dopey useless clot.

Again, I already cited valid authority.

Your refusal to recognize actual present day evidence is a you problem.

Ok. There are some simple questions
.
Q: What kind of fuel use US naval reactors now?
A: It's 93% enriched Uranium.

Q: Is selling 93% enriched uranium to Australia violation of NPT or not?
A: It's not, because Australia isn't going to use it to make bombs. Australia is going to use it as fuel in their future submarines.

Q: Do China like idea of USA, selling 93% Uranium to Australia?
A: No, China doesn't like this idea, at least because it will demand some additional spending on espionage and keeping close eye on the things in Australia (and the USA).

Q: Should China bomb Australia for buying 93% enriched uranium?
A: No, China shouldn't. While it's not exactly friendly act, and it increase tensions in Pacific region, it's definitely not an aggressive attack on China.

Q: What should China do, if it got real intelligence with proves, that Australia is going to make the bomb?
A: First of all, China should contact America and provide them this info. If America wants nuclear Australia (for any possible weird reason) - China can't prevent it by limited bombing Australia. If America doesn't want nuclear Australia - America have a lot of leverages to stop Australian nuclear program.

 

[yidnar]

We already did!

Our “Greatest Ally” in this potentially civilization ending debacle proudly and unashamedly does!

treasonous leftwing enemy propaganda ..

 

[BackAgain]

Ok. There are some simple questions
.
Q: What kind of fuel use US naval reactors now?
A: It's 93% enriched Uranium.

Q: Is selling 93% enriched uranium to Australia violation of NPT or not?
A: It's not, because Australia isn't going to use it to make bombs. Australia is going to use it as fuel in their future submarines.

Q: Do China like idea of USA, selling 93% Uranium to Australia?
A: No, China doesn't like this idea, at least because it will demand some additional spending on espionage and keeping close eye on the things in Australia (and the USA).

Q: Should China bomb Australia for buying 93% enriched uranium?
A: No, China shouldn't. While it's not exactly friendly act, and it increase tensions in Pacific region, it's definitely not an aggressive attack on China.

Q: What should China do, if it got real intelligence with proves, that Australia is going to make the bomb?
A: First of all, China should contact America and provide them this info. If America wants nuclear Australia (for any possible weird reason) - China can't prevent it by limited bombing Australia. If America doesn't want nuclear Australia - America have a lot of leverages to stop Australian nuclear program.

The Iranian navy are now all submarines.