[Al_U_Card]

vuroth, on Apr 14 2008, 03:04 PM, said:

Al_U_Card, on Apr 13 2008, 07:08 AM, said:

Before the next generation of "Death to America" comes of age in the middle east, just withdraw and send money on a monthly basis (I figure at a billion per, you will save a bundle!) 

Let the Iraqis have their country back to do with as they see fit.

I think that's how the paragon of virtue and stability we call Saudi Arabia was created. You know, the birthplace of Wahhabi Islam.

Don't knock Saudi Arabia!!!

They are the US' 2nd best ally in the region!

[Al_U_Card]

luke warm, on Apr 14 2008, 05:25 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Apr 14 2008, 04:57 PM, said:

Quote

Let me use a crazy silly example:

Iran maybe trying to get a nuclear bomb the next 4 years.

The IAEA says that Iran is compliant and is not engaging in weapons building.
Our own N.S.E. said that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

How about I use a crazy silly example of my own:

How about everyone stop the innuendo about Iran seeking bombs until someone can turn up actual proof?

good idea... what do you think should happen if such proof is turned up?

How about we treat them at least as badly as we did Pakistan....and India and.....ISRAEL? (To say nothing of the other 4.)

I fear the US more than Iran as far as Nukes and the use of aggressive force is concerned.

[blackshoe]

The US has had nukes for more than 60 years. If we were going to use them unilaterally, don't you think we would have done so already?

[Winstonm]

Quote

good idea... what do you think should happen if such proof is turned up?

If such proof turns up, we should subtract the "if" from the question. Now the question would be: Iran is making nuclear weapons. What should the U.S. do about it?

Answer: I don't know.

A related question back at you. India, Pakistan, Israel, China, and Russia all have nuclear weapons - should the U.S. have done something when those countries began their quests for nukes?

[Al_U_Card]

blackshoe, on Apr 14 2008, 05:42 PM, said:

The US has had nukes for more than 60 years. If we were going to use them unilaterally, don't you think we would have done so already?

Well, there are still Marvin and Jeb and Neil to come......only takes one lunatic to make a mess.

[Al_U_Card]

Well, apart from the OBVIOUS motivations concerning greed there is still parsimony not to mention obstinacy.....The US is in decline and the rich are sucking what life is left out of it as fast as they can. The Chinese are next and then, who knows or cares, all one in the same.

[luke warm]

Winstonm, on Apr 14 2008, 06:12 PM, said:

Quote

good idea... what do you think should happen if such proof is turned up?

If such proof turns up, we should subtract the "if" from the question. Now the question would be: Iran is making nuclear weapons. What should the U.S. do about it?

Answer: I don't know.

A related question back at you. India, Pakistan, Israel, China, and Russia all have nuclear weapons - should the U.S. have done something when those countries began their quests for nukes?

i'm not sure how israel factors into the discussion re: those countries... probably it would be best to just sit back and let israel handle iran, if it comes to it, but i think the us sees iran as a direct military threat with the bomb... i know *you* don't see the threat (or al, or maybe even me) but that doesn't mean there is no threat - to us and/or israel

[Winstonm]

luke warm, on Apr 15 2008, 05:19 AM, said:

Winstonm, on Apr 14 2008, 06:12 PM, said:

Quote

good idea... what do you think should happen if such proof is turned up?

If such proof turns up, we should subtract the "if" from the question. Now the question would be: Iran is making nuclear weapons. What should the U.S. do about it?

Answer: I don't know.

A related question back at you. India, Pakistan, Israel, China, and Russia all have nuclear weapons - should the U.S. have done something when those countries began their quests for nukes?

i'm not sure how israel factors into the discussion re: those countries... probably it would be best to just sit back and let israel handle iran, if it comes to it, but i think the us sees iran as a direct military threat with the bomb... i know *you* don't see the threat (or al, or maybe even me) but that doesn't mean there is no threat - to us and/or israel

If the deciding factor is a military threat, then the argument must have been that China, Russia, Israel, Pakistan, and India posed no military threat.

However, I happen to believe that warfare should be a last resort option.

[gwnn]

russia doesnt want to invade washington.

baghadad doesnt want to invade washington.

no country wants to invade washington.

where's the war?

[kenberg]

blackshoe, on Apr 14 2008, 05:42 PM, said:

The US has had nukes for more than 60 years. If we were going to use them unilaterally, don't you think we would have done so already?

Well, actually, we have. But I take your meaning and (mostly) agree with it.

I regard the fact that since Nagasaki no one has dropped one on anyone as something of a miracle. Korea could have gone either way. Cuba in 1962 was close. Goldwater contemplated the use of nuclear weapons in Viet Nam. I don't actually believe in miracles, I don't think a higher power watches over us, I am not all that confident of the future, I think we need all the wisdom we can get. From all sides.

To quote Tom Lehrer: The Lord's my shepherd says the psalm, but just in case, we better get a bomb. Who's next?

[Al_U_Card]

Tom says

Be prepared
Thats the Boy Scouts marching song
Be prepared
As through life you march along

Be prepared to hold your liquor pretty well
Don't write naughty words on walls....if you can't spell
Be prepared

If you're looking for adventure
of a new and different kind
and you come across a girl scout who is similarly inclined
don't be nervous
don't be flustered
don't be scared

Nuke Iran!!! (that was me, tee hee)