Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Welcome to the forum → The Lounge → Iran's Nuclear Facilities

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 01:24 AM
New Britain
February 09, 2026, 02:32 PM
What music are you listen...
by zeca
February 09, 2026, 09:48 AM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
February 06, 2026, 05:38 PM
Is Iran/Persia going to b...
by zeca
February 06, 2026, 05:27 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
February 06, 2026, 06:38 AM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
February 02, 2026, 11:54 AM
Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
January 31, 2026, 01:09 PM
ركن المتحدثين هايد بارك ل...
by akay
January 18, 2026, 02:48 PM
What's happened to the fo...
January 09, 2026, 12:03 PM
Excellence and uniqueness
by akay
January 05, 2026, 10:14 AM
Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 05, 2025, 11:34 PM

Theme Changer

 Poll

  • Question: What options should the UN/West take?
  • Nothing
  • Keep monitoring
  • Impose further sanctions
  • Bomb the nuclear facilities

 Topic: Iran's Nuclear Facilities

 (Read 5427 times)
  • 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     OP - September 26, 2009, 01:07 PM
    In light to the "secret facilities" I'm on "Impose further sanctions" but am getting close to bombing the nuclear plants. Nothing to do with media fear, rather that I'm pretty concerned about a leader who denies the holocaust, hatred for Jews/West to have the possibility of developing such missiles within a few years.
    Hear ye -->> DONATE TO CEMB

    Relativism | Cognitive dissonance | Cognitive biases | Memeplex | Consequentialism
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #1 - September 26, 2009, 01:19 PM
    Sanctions wont do anything. Bombing them would only start a war and that's the last thing the Iranian citizens need. I get the feeling it's going to errupt into a war sooner or later.
    ~My story~
    ~Collection of unethical hadiths/surahs~
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #2 - September 26, 2009, 02:04 PM
    It would be nice if the CIA launched a reversal coup and avoid a war, for (what I think) was a mistake by them back in 1953. Ah, wishful thinking ...
    Hear ye -->> DONATE TO CEMB

    Relativism | Cognitive dissonance | Cognitive biases | Memeplex | Consequentialism
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #3 - September 26, 2009, 02:26 PM
    I'm not sure that they are seeking to immediately weaponize, as that's not necessarily in their interests. Merely having the ability to is good enough both for their own purposes and for the US and Israel to react.

    If Israel has nuclear weapons there's no reason why Iran shouldn't. There's a naked double-standard here. Israel - obviously - doesn't want to be challenged as the foremost power in the region, and the Saudis don't want that and the US doesn't want that, which is why they'd probably destroy Iran if they could. Iran is one of the few countries there with a real national project and those are the ones that come into conflict with American interests.
    "...every imperfection in man is a bond with heaven..." - Karl Marx
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #4 - September 26, 2009, 02:40 PM
    Well, i dont think Iran is in any fit state to go to war with the west. Its already at war, with itself.
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #5 - September 27, 2009, 05:22 PM
    Quote from: Glen on September 26, 2009, 02:40 PM
    Well, i dont think Iran is in any fit state to go to war with the west. Its already at war, with itself.


    Agreed Glen, I get the feeling that this sabre rattling is an attempt to unite Iran against her enemies. And if Ahmadinejad has his way, its a perfect way to discredit the opposition. All you have to do is draw a line from western influenced Iranis to the "evil" West.
    Maliki yawm ul LULZ
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #6 - September 28, 2009, 12:28 AM
    Quote from: panoptic on September 26, 2009, 02:26 PM
    If Israel has nuclear weapons there's no reason why Iran shouldn't. There's a naked double-standard here.

    Translation: if someone relatively sane has a gun there's no reason why a raving lunatic shouldn't also have a gun.  Roll Eyes
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #7 - September 28, 2009, 03:42 AM
    Quote from: osmanthus on September 28, 2009, 12:28 AM
    Translation: if someone relatively sane has a gun there's no reason why a raving lunatic shouldn't also have a gun.  Roll Eyes


    If I were to accept the use of such an analogy in international relations in the first place, Israel hardly appears to me as 'relatively sane' in comparison with Iran (whose ruling ideology is no worse/better, as far as I am concerned). Meanwhile, Netanyahu is a picture of level-headed stability.  Roll Eyes

    But in reality, they are calculating players engaged in the same 'game'. Iran's rulers cultivate this 'mad' image they have, you know.

    "We should not be calculable and predictable to them" - Amir Mohebian.

    Let's look at it this way: Iran has never used nuclear weapons; Israel has. Israel is an expansionist state, with the backing of the world's superpower. So which one is more likely to use those weapons? And which country has actually been threatened with attack so far?

    However, as I have suggested for a long time, it is probably a red-herring, anyway. I think they're going the same route as Japan did with its nuclear programme.
    "...every imperfection in man is a bond with heaven..." - Karl Marx
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #8 - September 28, 2009, 08:37 AM
    Well we have different opinions on the "ruling ideology". Give me a secular state (and Israel is basically secular in practice) over a bunch of shariaphilic mullahs any day.

    And since when has Israel used nuclear weapons? They haven't been used since WW2. And what makes you think Israel has not been threatened with attack FFS? The whole reason they're so paranoid is because they are constantly threatened with attack.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #9 - September 28, 2009, 09:29 AM
    Hey panoptic, nice delivery system they're developing here. Wink

    Iran test-fires Shahab 3 missile: state TV

    TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran test-fired a missile on Monday which defense analysts have said could hit Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf region, state television reported.

    English-language Press TV said the surface-to-surface Shahab 3 missile was tested during maneuvers by the elite Revolutionary Guards that began on Sunday.

    The drills coincide with increased tension in Iran's nuclear dispute with the West, after last week's disclosure by Tehran that it is building a second uranium enrichment plant.

    Press TV estimated the range of the Shahab 3, which was last tested in mid-2008, at between 1,300 km and 2,000 km (800-1,250 miles), without making clear the range of the actual missile tested on Monday.

    "Iran successfully test-fires long-range Shahab 3 missile," Press TV said in a breaking news headline.

    Television footage showed a missile soaring into the sky in desert-like terrain, to shouts of Allahu Akbar (God is Greatest).

    Iranian officials and representatives of six major powers are due to meet in Geneva on Thursday.

    The United States and its Western allies have made clear they will focus on Iran's nuclear programme at the meeting. Iran has offered wide-ranging security talks but says it will not discuss its nuclear "rights."
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #10 - September 28, 2009, 09:38 AM
    Quote from: PeruvianSkies on September 26, 2009, 01:19 PM
    Sanctions wont do anything. Bombing them would only start a war and that's the last thing the Iranian citizens need. I get the feeling it's going to errupt into a war sooner or later.


    That prick, Netanyahu, has already threatened Iran with war.
    Religion - The hot potato that looked delicious but ended up burning your mouth!

    Knock your head on the ground, don't be miserly in your prayers, listen to your Sidi Sheikh, Allahu Akbar! - Lounes Matoub
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #11 - September 28, 2009, 09:39 AM
    Quote from: osmanthus on September 28, 2009, 12:28 AM
    Translation: if someone relatively sane has a gun there's no reason why a raving lunatic shouldn't also have a gun.  Roll Eyes


    I wouldn't call the most warmongering nation in the middle-east relatively sane. And how do we decide who is allowed nuclear weapons and who isn't?
    Religion - The hot potato that looked delicious but ended up burning your mouth!

    Knock your head on the ground, don't be miserly in your prayers, listen to your Sidi Sheikh, Allahu Akbar! - Lounes Matoub
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #12 - September 28, 2009, 09:43 AM
    Put it this way: I wouldn't want more nukes in that area. It is far too volatile already.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #13 - September 28, 2009, 12:55 PM
    If there is one area in the world where I wouldn't want nukes at all, it is the middle east.
    Religion - The hot potato that looked delicious but ended up burning your mouth!

    Knock your head on the ground, don't be miserly in your prayers, listen to your Sidi Sheikh, Allahu Akbar! - Lounes Matoub
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #14 - September 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
    The IDF used depleted uranium in Gaza.

    Iran has been threatened by Israel; not the other way around. But Iran has just as much interest in defending itself.

    South Africa was/is secular too.

    Quote from: osmanthus on September 28, 2009, 09:29 AM
    Hey panoptic, nice delivery system they're developing here. Wink

    Iran test-fires Shahab 3 missile: state TV

    TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran test-fired a missile on Monday which defense analysts have said could hit Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf region, state television reported.

    English-language Press TV said the surface-to-surface Shahab 3 missile was tested during maneuvers by the elite Revolutionary Guards that began on Sunday.

    The drills coincide with increased tension in Iran's nuclear dispute with the West, after last week's disclosure by Tehran that it is building a second uranium enrichment plant.

    Press TV estimated the range of the Shahab 3, which was last tested in mid-2008, at between 1,300 km and 2,000 km (800-1,250 miles), without making clear the range of the actual missile tested on Monday.

    "Iran successfully test-fires long-range Shahab 3 missile," Press TV said in a breaking news headline.

    Television footage showed a missile soaring into the sky in desert-like terrain, to shouts of Allahu Akbar (God is Greatest).

    Iranian officials and representatives of six major powers are due to meet in Geneva on Thursday.

    The United States and its Western allies have made clear they will focus on Iran's nuclear programme at the meeting. Iran has offered wide-ranging security talks but says it will not discuss its nuclear "rights."


    Their surface to surface ballistic technology is of little value militarily. Defensive systems against them are well developed.

    Anyway, launching an attack against Israel is off the cards. Nukes or not, it's not an option for them.

    It's funny how the revelation about the plant came about due to a letter they sent to IAEA. There's overwhelming support for the nuclear programme in Iran, and the people believe in the right of their country to have nuclear weapons. So the regime draws support from making it look they're trying to build one. It also gives them a bargaining chip. At the same time, the USA, Britain, Israel etc. have seized upon it "here look at this!".
    "...every imperfection in man is a bond with heaven..." - Karl Marx
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #15 - September 28, 2009, 05:37 PM
    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
    Iran has been threatened by Israel; not the other way around.

    "Israel is a disgraceful stain on the Islamic world that needs to be wiped from the pages of history."

    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 03:42 AM
    Iran has never used nuclear weapons; Israel has.

    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
    The IDF used depleted uranium in Gaza.

    Which is not the same as using nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are: "Weapons of mass destruction that are powered by nuclear reaction. Types of nuclear weapons include atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, fission bombs, and fusion bombs." Hence weapons that use depleted uranium are not nuclear weapons; in this case depleted uranium is in used because of its density (like tungsten was used in WW2), widespread availability and the fact that it?s a cheap by product.

    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
    Their surface to surface ballistic technology is of little value militarily. Defensive systems against them are well developed.

    Please do enlighten me on these defensive systems. You are not talking about MEADS missiles such as Patriot are you? In case you are you might want to review the effectiveness of these systems in the first Gulf war; they were widely deployed and much in use back then.

    I do hope you are right as far as the rest of your post is concerned even though to me your position seems a bit naive and simplistic. Israel survived six "assassination" attempts and I really don?t blame them for being a bit paranoid about their safety.  




  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #16 - September 28, 2009, 06:41 PM
    Quote from: Kenan on September 28, 2009, 05:37 PM
    "Israel is a disgraceful stain on the Islamic world that needs to be wiped from the pages of history."


    That's not a threat, that's a hope. Rabble-rousing hot-air. They've said all kinds of shit in the past, without doing anything.

    Quote
    Which is not the same as using nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are: "Weapons of mass destruction that are powered by nuclear reaction. Types of nuclear weapons include atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, fission bombs, and fusion bombs." Hence weapons that use depleted uranium are not nuclear weapons; in this case depleted uranium is in used because of its density (like tungsten was used in WW2), widespread availability and the fact that it?s a cheap by product.
    Please do enlighten me on these defensive systems. You are not talking about MEADS missiles such as Patriot are you? In case you are you might want to review the effectiveness of these systems in the first Gulf war; they were widely deployed and much in use back then.

    I do hope you are right as far as the rest of your post is concerned even though to me your position seems a bit naive and simplistic. Israel survived six "assassination" attempts and I really don?t blame them for being a bit paranoid about their safety.  


    They're not paranoid. They don't really think that Iran would use a nuke against them they just don't want Iran to have one, because Iran is a rival and the Israelis want to remain the sole nuclear power there.

    All those analysts who have arrived at the same position as mine for all this time must be naive, then? The media coverage of 'those mad Iranians are building a bomb, and he says bad stuff about Israel...' is what is misleading and simplistic. A cold study of the rivalry and foreign policies of both countries supports my position.

    The nuclear programme is a distraction. Iran is asserting itself as a regional hegemonic power. As a rival, that is unacceptable to Israel. But things have worked out for Iran, and they might just force fuller recognition from the US.
    "...every imperfection in man is a bond with heaven..." - Karl Marx
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #17 - September 28, 2009, 09:22 PM
    Fine by me if Iran's nuclear research is for peaceful gains. Being a theocratic state with a leader as such just makes me nervous.

    I think it is fine for Israel to have nuclear power. It's a free country, democratic, capitalistic with over 15% of the population as Muslims. Not sure if Israel would destroy Iran if it could though. I don't always agree with Israel's approach to Palestine, but for the most part I think Israel is a trustworthy/better nation.

    Iran is at odds with the West because of it's hatred towards the west, theocratic regime, oppression of the opposition, etc. All this is a strong sign of future terrorism to the West if it isn't dealt with now, purely from the Islamically-anti-West meme (btw, this is an opinion, not fact).

    It's pretty bull headed to try and change these oppressive regimes to free, democratic, capitalistic states (seeing how much struggle there is with Afghanistan/Iraq right now), but I think if it can be done, it should be for the benefit of the future. The US occupied Japan, Panama for the better, and in the same way it's needed in the Middle East.
    Hear ye -->> DONATE TO CEMB

    Relativism | Cognitive dissonance | Cognitive biases | Memeplex | Consequentialism
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #18 - September 28, 2009, 09:31 PM
    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
    The IDF used depleted uranium in Gaza.

    Iran has been threatened by Israel; not the other way around. But Iran has just as much interest in defending itself.

    South Africa was/is secular too.

    Their surface to surface ballistic technology is of little value militarily. Defensive systems against them are well developed.

    Anyway, launching an attack against Israel is off the cards. Nukes or not, it's not an option for them.

    It's funny how the revelation about the plant came about due to a letter they sent to IAEA. There's overwhelming support for the nuclear programme in Iran, and the people believe in the right of their country to have nuclear weapons. So the regime draws support from making it look they're trying to build one. It also gives them a bargaining chip. At the same time, the USA, Britain, Israel etc. have seized upon it "here look at this!".

    Kenan has already eviscerated this post so I wont bother with too much detail, but claiming that anti-tank shells are nuclear weapons is ridiculous.
    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #19 - September 29, 2009, 09:40 AM
    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 06:41 PM
    That's not a threat, that's a hope. Rabble-rousing hot-air. They've said all kinds of shit in the past, without doing anything.

    Do you think its possible that given a chance (having adequate military hardware would do) they would try and a bit of substance to their threats? After all Iran has been indirectly involved in war with Israel through a proxy - Hezbollah. Are you aware of to what extent the Muslims (Arabs and Persians alike) in the region see the very existence of Israel as the origin and  symbolic stand-in for all their misfortunes, to the extent that the victory over Israel is the sine qua non o of Arab self-assertion?

    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 06:41 PM
    They're not paranoid. They don't really think that Iran would use a nuke against them..

     
    Arab neighbours of Israel tried to wipe it out not once but six times, I do think that Israel has more than enough reasons to be apprehensive.

    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 06:41 PM
    All those analysts who have arrived at the same position as mine for all this time must be naive, then?

    It?s quite possible that they are wrong. I mean really, do you always "know" that your position is the right one?

    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 06:41 PM
    The media coverage of 'those mad Iranians are building a bomb, and he says bad stuff about Israel...' is what is misleading and simplistic.

    That indeed is simplistic. But you are not suggesting that those are my words are you?

    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 06:41 PM
    A cold study of the rivalry and foreign policies of both countries supports my position.

    Hopefully this study of yours is of a better quality then the one claiming that:
    Quote from: panoptic on September 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
    Their surface to surface ballistic technology is of little value militarily. Defensive systems against them are well developed.

    On a serious note try adding a cold study of the irrationality of parties involved, the theological justifications of their acts, the Sunni/Shia rivalry (the main Iranian rival in the region is not Israel but Saudi Arabia), and the humiliation that the very existence of Israel poses to the Arab/Persian self-assertion and you might arrive at a different conclusion.

  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #20 - September 29, 2009, 09:57 AM
    Quote from: HighOctane on September 28, 2009, 09:22 PM
    The US occupied Japan, Panama for the better...

    True, you can also add (West) Germany to the same group. Funny is it not, basically same people, same culture and values. One was occupied by Americans the other by Russians. After 50 years they were totally different countries, one a thriving democracy, the other a failed state.
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #21 - September 29, 2009, 04:12 PM
    Quote from: Kenan on September 29, 2009, 09:40 AM
    Do you think its possible that given a chance (having adequate military hardware would do) they would try and a bit of substance to their threats?


    That's pure fantasy.

    Iran would get shit-canned.

    Quote
    Arab neighbours of Israel tried to wipe it out not once but six times, I do think that Israel has more than enough reasons to be apprehensive.


    Well, this is about Iran.

    But the Arabs did not try and wipe out Israel six times (you mean five times). Not even one time. That is a myth.

    Zionism was instrumentalized, and Israel created, by the imperial powers in opposition to Arab nationalism. The Arab countries made the most ethical choice by rejecting the partition (and remember not all of them initially did). This rejection has been used to sell Israel's aggressive war as 'defensive' ever since. Ditto the subsequent ones.

    Quote
    But you are not suggesting that those are my words are you?


    To be fair, that seems to be what you are saying, so far.

    Quote
    On a serious note try adding a cold study of the irrationality of parties involved, the theological justifications of their acts, the Sunni/Shia rivalry (the main Iranian rival in the region is not Israel but Saudi Arabia), and the humiliation that the very existence of Israel poses to the Arab/Persian self-assertion and you might arrive at a different conclusion.


    The parties aren't so irrational. They operate in the same way as other states, with much the same interests. What they say and how they act are often inconsistent with each other. Religion is part of the superstructure of capitalist society, reflected by the way its leaders talk. It serves the interests of the ruling class.

    Saudis are an American client lined up behind Israel. The role of Sunni-Shia rivalry is overstated, something that has emerged (conveniently) from certain fault lines, where there is a need to undermine Iran's popularity among Sunni-majority populations, and where it is useful to create division.
    "...every imperfection in man is a bond with heaven..." - Karl Marx
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #22 - September 29, 2009, 05:38 PM
    Quote from: panoptic on September 26, 2009, 02:26 PM
    I'm not sure that they are seeking to immediately weaponize, as that's not necessarily in their interests. Merely having the ability to is good enough both for their own purposes and for the US and Israel to react.

    If Israel has nuclear weapons there's no reason why Iran shouldn't. There's a naked double-standard here. Israel - obviously - doesn't want to be challenged as the foremost power in the region, and the Saudis don't want that and the US doesn't want that, which is why they'd probably destroy Iran if they could. Iran is one of the few countries there with a real national project and those are the ones that come into conflict with American interests.

    Iran does not want the weapons for israel, iran wants the weapons primarily because they are scared of their own people. They want the prestige and legitimacy that comes with nooks.
    "Ask the slave girl; she will tell you the truth.' So the Apostle called Burayra to ask her. Ali got up and gave her a violent beating first, saying, 'Tell the Apostle the truth.'"
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #23 - September 29, 2009, 05:59 PM
    Quote from: Baal on September 29, 2009, 05:38 PM
    Iran does not want the weapons for israel, iran wants the weapons primarily because they are scared of their own people. They want the prestige and legitimacy that comes with nooks.


    They arguably have as much interest as Israel in non-proliferation. But if they could effectively become a nuclear power because they're able to build one at any moment, maybe that will do for them.

    They ultimately have to fear their own people. The rupture in the ruling formation that has taken place is a hint at that possibility. My suspicion is that rupture has something to do with them getting somewhere. In the last three years an attack on Iran has become increasingly less likely.
    "...every imperfection in man is a bond with heaven..." - Karl Marx
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #24 - September 29, 2009, 07:43 PM
    Quote from: Kenan on September 29, 2009, 09:57 AM
    True, you can also add (West) Germany to the same group. Funny is it not, basically same people, same culture and values. One was occupied by Americans the other by Russians. After 50 years they were totally different countries, one a thriving democracy, the other a failed state.


    Exactly, even visually, one side of Berlin is much uglier than the other ... architecture requires freedom & creativity to design well.

    It's not fashionable to be a neoconservative from 35,000 ft (thought of as war mongering, gun tooting, racist, close minded who don't want to seek the truth) but from a intellectual level, it really does make sense. Fingers crossed now on Iraq & Afghanistan - such huge populations to enforce such a system to - and especially people that have been oppressed for quite some time.
    Hear ye -->> DONATE TO CEMB

    Relativism | Cognitive dissonance | Cognitive biases | Memeplex | Consequentialism
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #25 - October 31, 2010, 01:32 PM


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuEhhPbAAdA

    Nothing much seems to have happened since this thread was started a year ago.

    Have we waited too long as the song says ?
    Like a compass needle that points north, a man?s accusing finger always finds a woman. Always.

    Khaled Hosseini - A thousand splendid suns.
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #26 - October 31, 2010, 01:50 PM
    What about the Stuxnet virus? If the intelligence agencies can used something as smart and peaceful as that - go for it I say. EDIT: Also if talks can be made that ensures there is a process to check the reactors are being used for peaceful means, then that too is a good compromise. There is mass media and then there is intelligence which us mortals would not know about until after the fact.
    Hear ye -->> DONATE TO CEMB

    Relativism | Cognitive dissonance | Cognitive biases | Memeplex | Consequentialism
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #27 - October 31, 2010, 02:55 PM
    Other
    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #28 - October 31, 2010, 05:32 PM
    Bomb the nuclear facilities got only 4 votes ,

    i would seriously consider that option , shiaa are insane
  • Re: Iran's Nuclear Facilities
     Reply #29 - October 31, 2010, 05:37 PM
    IMO I believe Irans nuclear ability has nothing to do with a supposed weapon and everything to do with a removal of the reliance on oil.
    A nuclear program would technically give Iran the largest oil reserves in the world (due to limited necessity to use it) and if other countries followed suit, the petro dollar would fail and America would be instantly bankrupt.

    I believe thats the very reason why Iraq was attacked, because they threatened to leave the petro-dollar, thus taking america to the stone age.
  • 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »