• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

those darn iranians...

there was also some sh*t talking from iran about the us and israel, talking trash about how the us is going to build a weapons defense system over there.


i wonder how many minutes it will take for iran to be wiped off the map if they fire a missile at an american target? or a nuclear weapon at israel? 30 minutes? lol


its times like these i am glad i live in the usa
 
I would be happy if they would put their fingers in their noses.:biggrin:
 
"We want to tell the world that those who conduct their foreign policy by using the language of threat against Iran have to know that our finger is always on the trigger and we have hundreds and even thousands of missiles ready to be fired against predetermined targets," Gen. Hossein Salami, commander of the Revolutionary Guard ground forces, said on state TV.

That was the most delicious threat I've ever heard.
 
Don't underestimate the unpredictability of war, and those that declare war.

Remember when Osama declared fatwa, we said, literally, "you and what army?" HAHAHAHA.

A few points to ponder:
**Russia has warned against attacking Iran - remember, they have nukes..
**They have missles that can hit Iraq, Israel, the Gulf, people would very well die.
**Irans presidents ideaology is looking for a world war, and may very well sacrifice his country for it. A war that he could engulf tha majority of muslims and muslims to rise up against the West.
**A third front in the ME would be extremely straining on the US Military and National Security. A national crisis may ensure, the draft may come into play, NK, Cuba, Russia, all of our enemies could see it as an opportunity to take us out while we are tied up.
***Finally..a war with Iran would be good for McCain :) oh never mind..

I know these are doomsday, but real risks.
 
i would be interested in what an expert on the ME - and armadenijad (sp?) in particular - would have to say about their recent behavior and in particular, the firing of these missiles.

he could well be playing to "the crowd" - his people and entire ME population.

he could be saber rattling to simply get our / allies / others attention.

he could actually be warning us / our allies

to some extent, likely all of the above and then some.

these things said, it seems unlikely to me that israel (in particular) will sit on their hands forever.

could be some grumpy times ahead.
 
i would be interested in what an expert on the ME - and armadenijad (sp?) in particular - would have to say about their recent behavior and in particular, the firing of these missiles.

he could well be playing to "the crowd" - his people and entire ME population.

he could be saber rattling to simply get our / allies / others attention.

he could actually be warning us / our allies

to some extent, likely all of the above and then some.

these things said, it seems unlikely to me that israel (in particular) will sit on their hands forever.

could be some grumpy times ahead.

Considering the fact that he was part of the hostage taker during the late 80's, he never like the US. He will probably go soon. I have never seen a leader of a nation act like that and last for long. If the US/Israel don't take him out, his own people will.
 
technicaly i think the us has already been working on that, trying to start a civil war in iran

Revolution is a more appropriate term. They had one not too long ago!!
 
looks like cnn is finally catching up with the bloggers:

Iran did not conduct new missile tests today, despite Iranian media reports that it did, a senior U.S. military source tells CNN.
 
The fact tha Iran could get such weapons or the nuclear weapon do not worry me more than North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, Russia and the USA have them. Whoever use it first will end pretty bad for the world. And for the time, historically, only one country used it...

Ahmadinejad is some crazy man. But for shure he knows the problematic of Iran having this weapon. This just gives him a little more weigh in the international scene.

I think we can compare him with Kim Jong-Il who confessed to one of his japanese cook (now abroad) that he was not so stupid and knew that he would be defeated faster than saying it if he would try to use such a weapon. This just give him a little weight and some international immunity or relative protection to its mafia (= support to terrorism activity).
 
Last edited:
Considering the fact that he was part of the hostage taker during the late 80's, he never like the US. He will probably go soon. I have never seen a leader of a nation act like that and last for long. If the US/Israel don't take him out, his own people will.
What hostages were those?
 
The fact tha Iran could get such weapons or the nuclear weapon do not worry me more than North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, Russia and the USA have them. Whoever use it first will end pretty bad for the world. And for the time, historically, only one country used it...

Dude, 100% different scenario and world stage. The two dont even compare. Plus the two bombs dropped, Fat Man and Little Boy, were uranium enriched bombs. Current nuclear bombs are plutonium enriched. The level of critical mass destruction and nuclear fallout between the two is vastly different.

So, lets not play that "well the US is the only one to ever use nuclear bombs" crap. If you can understand why it was used, and how many millions of lifes that it saved, then you would understand.

Dont get me wrong, all nuclear weapons should be destroyed. The good part is that the countries that do have them, know that if they drop them then the world wil pretty much end. Countries like Iran, Syria, and Jordan dont care if the world ends, because of their misguided interpretation of the Qu'ran.
 
Actually Nathan, Fat Man was a plutonium bomb, Little Boy was Uranium. Both are sufficiently destructive. The real distinction comes into play when you upgrade from fission to fusion (hydrogen bombs). Adding hydrogen to the mix is a bit like turbocharging an NSX, it turns an underpowered exotic into something downright scary:wink: .
 
Actually Nathan, Fat Man was a plutonium bomb, Little Boy was Uranium. Both are sufficiently destructive. The real distinction comes into play when you upgrade from fission to fusion (hydrogen bombs). Adding hydrogen to the mix is a bit like turbocharging an NSX, it turns an underpowered exotic into something downright scary:wink: .

Yep....my mistake there. I actually went an double checked myself AFTER i typed my message. You are correct about the upgrade from fission to fusion. It is a scary (devasting) upgrade.

Either way, the point was that why we dropped the bomb then can not be translated into today's world. The rhyme and reason, imo, will never be the same.
 
So, lets not play that "well the US is the only one to ever use nuclear bombs" crap. If you can understand why it was used, and how many millions of lifes that it saved, then you would understand.

These 2 bombs help the Allies to make the Japanese capitulate without engaging their forces further on the ground. This saved soldiers lives (especially soldiers). But the civil population of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have slightly prefered another option. Anyway, Japan would have capitulated at this time of the war, no matter the option choosed. We cannot compare this time when the US were the only to have a reliable atomic bomb.

Countries like Iran, Syria, and Jordan dont care if the world ends, because of their misguided interpretation of the Qu'ran.

This is shortcuts. I fear the theories of islam extremists and they have a big ascendancy in these countries. But they are brought to the forefront (especially by our media) and hide all the business mafias that lead the politic of these countries. Not less than in our countries, business takes often precedence over ideology.
 
Back
Top