The bottom line as regards Iran...according to President Bush
 

...during the O'Riely interview. Diplomacy first...all options are open...and Iran will not be allowed to develope a Nuke.

in other words, Iran your next.

Great, here we go again :ak47:

Well that puts them in the targets, as they are developing nuclear tech that can go either way.

I never thought we would allow them 2... :2 cents: And it's not just the USA,

Most of these terrorist in Iraq are coming from Iran. I've read that's where these guys are being armed and funded as well. It's in Irans best interest to keep The Americans bogged down in Iraq. Bin Laden also said that's it's plans are to get the Americans involved in different conflitcs all over the world costing billions of dollars and bleeding you dry. Just things that make me go hmmmmm..

i think it is not fucking amerikan business, how other countries develop! :2 cents:

Will this lead to invasion of a country for weapons they don't have?.. Wait, that sounded familiar.

theKing:

You know the whole world is backing ya on this - 100%

Who the fuck is "O'Riely"?? Who cares....

I like whores when they are assertive - "and Iran will not be allowed to develope a Nuke." :1orglaugh

Verbal spew - also known as Pig Shit...

:1orglaugh

are you serious?

O'Riely has the largest audience for his type of show in the United States...so it is apparent that millions care. I take it that you think Iran will be allowed to develop a nuke...where as I think they will not be allowed to do so...and I suspect the preparations are already being made to take out their nuclear facilities (if diplomacy fails)...and it may be via our ally and surrogate...Israel...since we are currently supplying them with 5,000 smart bombs of various size...including bunker busters. Israel took out Iraq's nuclear facility...if you recall.

theKing:

Ah.. thank you for this info.

Now I know why it just does not matter - who cares what the fuck anyone in the US thinks???

Clean up the other two countries ya started wars in already and then, stop and mind your own fucking business...

It isn't America deciding how Iran develops.

Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. If they break it, they invite themselves to being fucked by the entire UN.

It is very apparent that you do...as you daily bash the government of the US and the American people.

Sorry..but you do not have any input into the decisions made by the US government and/or the American people. Now :321GFY you foreign piece of trash.

BRISK:

Sure! Tho I don't hear Iceland, Japan, Canada, Brazil - in fact, any continent - running around talking shit about "enemies" and how they are gonna blow the fuck outta them - this is, of course, after "diplomacy first" :1orglaugh

The US has *no diplomacy* on any subject - WTF are they talking about?

The rest of the world is far more capable of handling this problem - tho others make the assumption of superiority in this area. Fuck knows why..

I am in favour of Iran developing nuclear weapons.

It would be good to see an arab nation with some serious leverage.

Might actually keep the USA in check.

If it can be proven that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon, I fully support any UN countries that decide to take action to destroy Iran's ability to develop nukes.

However, destroying a countries ability to develop nukes is one thing, but using that as an excuse to institute all out war for the purpose of regime change is another thing.

I think the vast majority of UN countries (especially those that have signed the non-proliferation treaty) have expressed concern over Iran developing nukes.

WHOEVER IS IN CHARGE OF IRAQ ISN'T TOO FUCKING BRIGHT.

How many US soliders are currently in Iraq right next door to Iran? Sounds like a really great time TO PISS US OFF.

You think they're going to pull 1000s of troops out of Iraq to kick some Iranian ass? They have their hands full in Iraq right now as it is. Iran is also a more powerful country than Iraq was. It would take more troops to fight Iran than to fight Iraq. Much more. Which is why UN support is critical. For America to do it alone would probably require a draft. There are people talking about a draft being necessary just to handle the Iraq situation.

theKing:

I "do" when it fucks up others, tho I sure don't give one fuck about some TV or radio program in the US that offers "opinions". The world is not "managed" by some US discussion program.

Hence... verbal spew or pig shit.

Thank hell for that. I'd slit my throat if I was actually responsible for all that bullshit..


You'd actually think, even after all the current crap, some would have at least some clue, - but no - sheesh, ya got a "superiority complex" that sure is miles above reality :1orglaugh

I've never heard so much bullshit for *ANY* nation on this earth as comes from some imbeciles in the US. Makes you think there must be something in the air that causes this...

Ya just don't matter a fuck King ... nada cred.

Just take a tip on "subtlety" and shut your stupid mouth - it sounds VERY ignorant to "foreign" trash like me...

theKing:

By the way.. the "foreign trash" are of course, "enemies of the state" - ya gotta hate someone!! :1orglaugh

Hell.. pathetic! :-)

BRISK:

Yea.. Tho I think I'd rather have them pressuring Iran, than a load of bombs dumped on the place as a "solution" :glugglug

It was not the opinion of O'Reily...it was a statement made by the President...who was being interviewed by O'Reily. Maybe you suffer with the same lack of comprehension as Centurion.



Sorry but it is you that does not matter as you have zero say in the decisions made by the US government where as I do. BTW...you are not now and have never been in my chain of Command...thus I do not take orders from you...and really could care less what anything that I say "sounds" to you...wee Webby of the fantasy Webbyland.

I'm sure the whole UN has been pressuring Iran. The International Atomic Energy Agency has been investigating Iran for a while now because many countries suspect it is in the process of developing nukes. At the moment, Iran isn't doing much to dispel that suspicion.

What I think is important now is the proof that gets brought forward. The CIA has no credibility anymore, so any proof that is found is going to need to be verified by a number of countries (and Isreal doesn't count :winkwink: )

theKing:

Oh hell... All the more reason to dismiss them :1orglaugh

Do you seriously listen to the ramblings of a Texas Village Idiot who dresses up as some "Commander in Chief", has only around 50% support of the US people, is totally despised by the rest of the world, is a liar and deviant??

If you think this great man has done one fucking iota of good for the US, or anyplace else - you are clearly insane! :1orglaugh

Sheesh... ya actually listen to him seriously, when he's at the height of lying to procure another term of office and ensure the US gets fucked even further???

Na... Forget any response... I've listened to enough pig shit from you for this day :-)

BRISK:

Yep! IAEA obviously knows a lot on this. The EU has already started pressuring. Unless some asshole gets in the middle and explodes the scenario... I'm sure Iran will cool off or some deal done.

BTW.. It is now obvious that IAEA "knew" very well that no nukes existed in Iraq. They made this known even before the US invasion, but, "we refused to listen" for some reason :-) Can't think why....

CIA? *lol* What's that - sounds like more of these three-letter-word US bullshit orgs :-) Kinda ironic the only source of CIA intelligence in Iraq was from IAEA - nuff said!

Not that I'm supporting the invasion, but it should be noted that nukes aren't the only form of WMDs. The IAEA is only concerned with nukes, not other forms of WMDs. So having the IAEA say there are no nukes in Iraq wasn't enough to disqualify the invasion. Had there been proof that other WMDs existed....well....you know the rest. :winkwink:

If he's serious about not knowing who O'Reilly is, I'm envious.

is Iran capable of developing a nuke?

Many countries are very capable of developing nukes, it's whether they actually are or not that is the question.

:eek7

Hmm...I think we should have Iraq attack Iran AGAIN!
They fought a 10 year war last time and about killed everyone in both countries.

That would at least keep them occupied!

Oopps..wrong word to use in that part of the world!

Hey..just give Saddam a two week pass and he'll get that Republican Guard back into fighting order and go after those Iranians again!

The scary thing is..that's not as ridiculous as it sounds since we seem to be handing major parts of Iraq over to the insurgents.

Hey Uno!!

How much for gayjpeg.com?? :)

It was an 8 year war, and it didn't "about kill everyone in both countries" unless you consider 2% of the combined population of both countries to be "everyone"

Well granted it didn't kill 98%..it was a general term of course, but you have to admit, it was a bloodbath on both sides!

send me an email at webmaster -at- gayjpgs.com

If you continue to use such "general" and grossly exagerated statements, everything you say will lose any credibility that you might have.

And of course, MOST threads & post on here are FULL of a great deal of credibility. :1orglaugh

Credibility is an individual issue, some people on GFY have more than others, some people have none. What would you prefer?

You're really beating the dead old horse here.

:glugglug

You guys if you think US can beat IRAN in a war without using Nukes against them, you're totally idiot.

Iran is a big country, everyone in iran is a single folk. Not like iraq, they are not divided to 3 groups.

Iran has some nice russian-made weapons, air force and more. They also have oil and gas reserves, they are not poor such as Iraq.

And, russia won't allow US attack to Iran anyway. I'm sure if bush do, russia will support iran with lots of weapons.

Funny stuff...Iran fought Iraq for eight years and could not defeat Iraqs military...it took the US 24 days. So even it is true that Iran's forces are better...hmm...34 days sound about right to you?

I think the US would win in a war against Iran without using nukes, but it would cost more than the war with Iraq, it would take longer, and more people would probably die.

But defeating the Iranian military is one thing, controlling the country's population and installing a new government without it going to shit or being overthrown the second you leave the country is the hard part.

Typically Zionist bullshit. Israel is as dangerous with nukes as Iran will be. That must be why, as a Zionist, you love George Bush so much. Regardless though, there is no way there would ever be peace in the middle east for the next 50+ years if America further invaded Iran.

Zionists and neo-Conservatives (basically the same thing) try and talk about old military victories in which they would simply beat the army and destroy the Government and it was over. People need to realise this is what the 'terrorists' want. Destroy their Government, bring instability, and they will bring jihadi's for the next 100 years to kill themselves for the cause.

Well...I personally do not think that a "war" will be fought...but I do think that if Iran continues on the path that it "seems" to be taking...their Nuclear power plant and facilities will be taken out via air strikes...and I suspect that it may be Israel that does it...just as they took out Iraq's Nuclear power plant and facilities...with unofficial approval from the US of course.

In the Iran-Iraq war, Iraq was heavily supported and financed by countries like the US, Britain, France, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc...

I don't think you can compare the state that Iraq was in during the Iran-Iraq war, with the state it was in during the recent invasion.

I do not fall under either of your classifications...except maybe in your imagination.