150 blind sheep

ahahah, how bad does your world suck when you have to jump through all these hoops to look right?

here's a clue, halfwit, there's no such thing as the "muslim race" regardless of how much you wish it.

now go jerk yourself off to your next dictionary interpretation.........usually.:1orglaugh

me 3 this is getting boring my only point to this thread was more of a global concern over launching nukes not the invasion of iran..and its ethical and moral dilema's

The president of iran seems a tad off his rocker.. if they are making nukes they need to be stopped , but along with the power of making sure that takes place HAS to be the destruction of ones own nukes.. and are they relly making nukes.. they couldnt even fnd some fake evidence in iraq.. zip zero nada, they could have sent one sharpshooter to iraq accomplished the sme thing for trillions less $$ and alot less dead people

12 clicks right ..
dictionary wrong..

i bet the muslims were behind it , they prob planted that on dictionary.com to make you look foolish..


hey look they planted it in the dictionary i have at home too those sneaky bastards ..

maybe i should be on your side.. those sneaky bastard snuck in and changed a 20 year old oxford dictionary right under my nose..:winkwink:

I say let 'em fight it out. Sometimes, a nuclear attack is the only answer.

If you "preemptive strike" you ARE the aggressor - peroid. Poland in WW2, Desert Storm war were helping to free unfairly captured nations and were necessary IMHO. :2 cents:

Nukes are so gay..

Nukes are so gay..
http://www.evangelicalright.com/fris...n_moveon_2.jpg

lol I understand the country needs to be stopped but what is wrong with using non-nuclear weapons? When people use nuclear weapons there is a lasting effect and also spreads panic of a full blown nuclear war. What is wrong with normal bunker buster bombs? I am sure they would do the trick you would possibly need more bombs but fuck nuking to stop nukes? does not make sense to me really. I ain't hating on them because they are jews but fuck they do bring up about the holocaust and now they want to start a nuclear holocaust? I watched a program about a famous "whisteblower" a while back http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Vanunu basicly he told the world about Israel having an illegal nuclear weapons program and was jailed for telling the world. So Israel broke international laws prohibiting countrys from having these weapons and now they take it upon themselves to make sure Iran does not have them. This one rule for Israel and another for the rest seems to pop up time after time.

VEry true this could get so fucked up

common sense has no place on gfy )


you must be an anti-semite.. .. didn't you know hitler gassed the jews.. you must be on the muslims side.. damn you thor....

having nuclear weapons today, is not about war and not about using them.. its about increasing the prestige of your country on the world political stage... in this case, on behalf of the whole middle east. i seriously doubt they would consider using them... its just a way to stand up and say "ok, we matter now... so your going to listen to what we have to say"

I think the Iran prez is talking big because he is scared of what we did in iraq.They dont want t be next and those cultures love to bluff. Saddam had nothing it was all talk.

I really wish that was all there was to it, but it's not.

We're talking Islamic Fundies here. Given the opportunity, the Iranians might first seek to blackmail the west, but failing that they wouldn't even blink an eye before they started firing those puppies off like firecrackers on the 4th of July.

yeah, they wouldn't blink an eye before killing every man woman and child in their own country. quite frankly... who wouldn't?

thanks for your insight. you have conviced me... i too will start calling the psychic hotline for more facts about the future for only $4.95/min.

If the Israeli's do do it the civilized world will owe them a huge debt of gratitude.

lazonby, you are a constipated cowfucker, everything i read from you is contradictory and baseless seeing as thogh your only oppinion is to get a reaction. I am just wondering, seeing as though I am new to the industry, is this the way you generate all your funds to pay for stayin in ya muma's basement?

Define agressor. Is it actually waiting to be bombed? In this case, Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the planet. I don't know if that is your idea of aggressive but if someone comes up to me and says "I'm going to kill you", I'd probably take my shot while I could.

no thanks .. civilized isnt letting a country who itself broke the exact same u.n. resoultion and had a secret nuclear program , use those nukes to attack innocent people.. not sure what planet you live on but here on earth thats murder.. if you murder people who arent threatning you , havent threatned you and dont posses any means to threaten you thats cold blooded murder..

hasn't iraq taught you a lesson .. presuming a bunch of shit because the spin doctors tell you to leads to problems.. like invading a country for no reason , in the process killing thousands and thousands of innocent people..

did you happen to read the context that was said ?


"Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out,"


thats reality for you .. not nearly as catchy as what you said. :)

How many people were killed when the soviet union was "wiped out " ?

context is very important..

Who wouldn't? Well, most anybody other than a religious fanatic wouldn't. Problem is we're discussing the Iranian government here.


No need to run up your phone bill, just do a little reading on the subject of Islamic fundamentalism.

your argument makes no sense. with or without a nuclear weapon.. if they were capable or willing to go that far (using your logic that they want to meet Allah as soon as possible) then they can do it at any time. but they don't do they?

seems you're the one who should be doing a little reading.

Nobody's talking about bombing Iranian population centers. We're talking about a possible preemptive strike against military facilities.


Apples and oranges. Saddam was a ruthless SOB but he wasn't a wild-eyed fundie. He rather liked being alive and IMO he would never have initiated a nuclear war for that very reason. Unfortunately, George Bush didn't see things quite that way; but that's another whole issue.

people will do anything to survive.
iran says they are going to kill all that is israel.....
the whole world thinks its a big joke, israel doesnt.

im 100% behind israel. you cant negotiate and/or reason with a government ran by wolves.

great posts, well said

Iran has enough oil to last it another 50-100+ years
However Iran's oil infrastructure is so poor, that they're a net oil importer and not a net exporter. Imagine that ?

using what ? nukes ..

and who would be using these nukes ? israel

a country who themselves were banned from making nukes but secretly built them anyways despite the rest of the worlds objections..

hmm your logic is faulty

and what makes you believe iran would.. ?

other than the fact it was mostly a bunch of bullshit.. i agree :1orglaugh

you think it was necessary for israel to defy the u.n and have a secret nuclear weapons program to "defend" itself , and by defending itself it will attack another country doing the EXACT same thing with 3 nuclear weapons..

what the fuck are you smoking seriously. pass the pipe..

Because unlike the Baathist regime in Iraq, they are wild-eyed fundies.

well yeah dipshit. its necessary when you are surrounded by countries that have tried to wipe you off the map, have zero intention of establishing diplomatic relationships, don't recognize your right to exist and are basically autocratic theocracies guided by the belief that all jews must die.. it would make sense that they prepare to defend themselves by any and all means available.

its not like the UN does a single fucking thing to help anyone... anywhere...ever. the UN is totally useless... and shouldn't be dictating anything to anyone unless they are 100% willing to get in the game and back it up... which they don't. the UN watched 2,000,000 Rwondans get butchered to death and wouldn't call it "genocide" because it would have to get involved by law. so don't pretend that the UN has anyones best interests in mind.

As I understand it Allah's not too keen on "pointless" suicides. If you want to get your hands on those virgins you gotta take a bunch of infidels with you.

good... fucking nuke Iran already please

If you have 2 adversaries standing knee deep in a room full of gasoline both ready to strike a match does the first guy to strike his match win?

I have to side with Smokey on this arguement.

Iran just switched all foreign trade to Euros, is now trading its oil in Euros and now determines it country's wealth in Euros (as well as local).

Sounds much like Iraq all over again...

bbc source

this turned into a drama thread fast

No, bunker busters have been around a very long time. They, along with SRAM's, were the primary nuclear weapons I worked on in the Air Force back in 1982 (I was a Nuclear Weapons Specialist).

I sincerely doubt that Israel would use a nuclear weapon for demolishing/eradication of these type targets though. The state of political and military unrest in this area makes a nuclear attack unwise and unnecessary. Do not forget that Israel is a nation of 6.X million surrounded by over 100 million Muslims. A nuclear attack would surely be reprized by an invasion of Israel - the likes the world has never seen and in sheer numbers, would overtake Israel - nuclearly defended or not.

This however may be a bit of political over-posturing on Israel's part - threaten to use a nuclear device and then launch a conventional one so the political fallout would be much less. Instead of focusing solely on the attack itself, people would be apt to discuss how they got off lucky cause Israel said they were going to use a nuclear device instead...

Their plan sucks , no way thats going to happen

lol now your just making shit up out of thin air.. who tried to wipe who off the map ?
again you seem to think making facts up out of thin air somehow bolsters your argument.

seriously how hard is it to understand what defense means.. its not defense when you attack a country with nukes who hasnt/isnt attacking you.. anyone could "potentially" attack you.



your right about that , they were useless the hordes of u.n. resolutions isreal broke while starting an illegal unsanctioned secret nuclear program.


sound familiar ?

I was mistakingly thinking about the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator

God, I hope so

dude... personally, i dont give a fuck about isreal or palestine or iran. its just not my problem. i just thank god that you are not in charge of anyones national security. your logic is so fucking backwards in defending a losing argument that there is just no reason to continue. you are trying so hard to argue a point and already stretched things so far that you now are forced to argue that you just can't understand that iran poses a threat to isreal and one that isreal as a nation, has to take quite seriously.

try to wrap your brain around this genius. there are two perspectives. two countries, two conflicting ideas of national interests, national security and most definately, two arguments. if you can only see and understand one, then you stop and think about that for a while.

automatically being opposed to X in any and every situation and continually lying in wait to lash out about them using any and all opportunities and arguments, is hardly the behavior of a rational, reasonable and intelligent human being.

so far you have repeated that iran is a threat to israel yet you have yet to produce one single thing that would lead you to believe this... thats called cowardice.. you cant answer a single question posed, instead making up some inane chatter about how attacking a country is "defense" go look the damn word up in the dictionary im sick of illiterate fools who don't understand the meaning of words.


my rules apply for both countries.. yours do not , maybe you should think about that ..

I dont think either country should have nukes.. both of them defied the u.n. and the rest of the world . we KNOW israel has a secret weapons program and is NOT part of the npa , iran DOESN'T have nuclear weapons get it..

By your theory that attacking a country with nukes is a "defensive" measure for something they "might" have YEARS from now is beyond stupid..


listen to your ignorance..


lets say X is child porn.. so by me automatically opposed to it is irrational unreasonable ? get a clue crackhead..

lets say X is nuclear weapons..

lets say x is poison..

Your argument holds no water

by your theory child porn is open to debate and anyone who thinks thereis NO ROOM for it is ignorant
NEXT....

Make love not WAR ,
World Peace everybody! PEACE!

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

That sucks :(

Hopefully for all of us this is just bullshit posturing.

Although it makes me laugh to hear ppl talk about nuclear weapons like they are no big deal.

I dont think Israel will attack Iran. They have a lot more to lose.

But if they did, the first thing I would do is go out and find myself a zionist fucker and repay him.

I agree with the president of Iran. We need to wipe out israel from worldmap.

Its good. Euro is more stable. There is a new oilmarket in Iran now where you can buy and sell oil for only euro.
I heard a few other countries around Iran will also join that new market...

Have you considered saying "could you stop throwing rocks? its dangerous"?

Im not saying its the -best- idea, because i havent analyzed all the potential ideas (shooting him in the face, breaking his arms, throwing rocks at his loved ones and so forth) but I will claim its a far better idea than doing nothing.

You mean "to prove my point, i will throw some rocks at you so you will experience, first hand, exactley how dangerous it is".

Theres no substitute for experience, im sorry to say.

they arent throwing rocks..


they iran dont even have the rocks yet much less using them. israel is the only one with rocks ( nukes)


no. using that theory iran would also get to nuke israel to show it exactly how dangerous it is.. and for that matter so would every other country



heres a great analogy..

Israel and iran are next door neighbours , israel bought an illegal gun . Iran complained to the mayor (u.n.) that israel has an illegal gun... israel admits it has an illegal gun but wont show anyone or hand it over despite pressure from other neighbours to give the gun up.. now the neighbour with the illegal gun wants to run over with 3 guns and attack iran's house simply because they mentioned they want to buy a gun for self defense knowing their whacky next door neighbour now has several illegal guns.. and often mention using them..