Iran is not guilty but Muslims are.

4th you beleive in fairy tales do you, what Iran nuke are you talking about and Iran is a country not a regime. You need to stop being spooked by all the lies.

Originally posted by magicmushroom
4th you beleive in fairy tales do you, what Iran nuke are you talking about and Iran is a country not a regime. You need to stop being spooked by all the lies.

First of all, I'm not 'spooked' by anyone.
Fairy tales?? Are you serious? If you are going to be truthful, you must know Iran is attempting to build nukes.
I prefer my term 'regime', thank you very much, when referring to Iran.

4th there is a big difference in wishing to acquire a weapons sytem and using said system.

You make the assumption that just because a few radicals speak out against America and its actions then the Goverment of Iran would whole heartedly support a nuke attack on US soil, what and knowing they would be turned to glass yes that makes real sense does it not.

The reason why Iran may or may not want nukes is because it has the Isralis sitting there with hundreds of them. What your saying is it would be alright for the former Soviet Union to have nukes and not the US would you support that no you would not.

For the last time Iran is not a threat to the US and never will be, you are I'm afraid your a victim of your corporate controlled media, and if anyone did use a nuke in the US I would start looking towards them as the culprits.

Wars are financed and prosecuted by the bankers for profit and greed, the combatents and victims of said wars are merely window dressings to them.

Originally posted by magicmushroom
4th there is a big difference in wishing to acquire a weapons sytem and using said system.

You make the assumption that just because a few radicals speak out against America and its actions then the Goverment of Iran would whole heartedly support a nuke attack on US soil, what and knowing they would be turned to glass yes that makes real sense does it not.

Remember, Iran also sponsers numerous terror groups, so all they have to do is let one of these groups detonate a nuke. Because of this and because the Iranian government is run by lunatics, they will think they could get away with it because in their twisted minds, they believe it could not be traced back to them directly. Indirectly, we would know they are guilty however.

4th of course they do but the US sponsers more and can afford to and cover its tracks, thats the difference Iran is up front to whom it supports America is not but is still supports and ferments terrorist action if its in its own interest.

Originally posted by magicmushroom
4th of course they do but the US sponsers more and can afford to and cover its tracks, thats the difference

Umm....the U.S. does NOT sponser terrorist groups.

Iran is up front to whom it supports America is not

Iran is NOT upfront about anything. Also, the U.S. would NOT give a nuke to another group unlike Iran.

4th the US does support terrorism and actually forms terrorists groups the evidence is well documented, look up Iran/Contra and supporting and aiding the Taliban in Afganistan during the Soviet occupation.

Or have you forgot that th US openly supported and armed Saddam Insane knowing full well he was a despot and was responsible for crimes against humanity. I'm afraid your country is not as lily white as you think it is.

Iran like any other country has its radical element, but its not the backward hell hole that you and others may think it is. Try to look at the bigger picture and it will all become clearer to you.

There are people inside the US whom are more of a threat to you and your fellow Americans than from any foreign national. And if you are facing all these alleged terrorist groups where are they, what have they been doing, have there been terrorist actions in the US on a weekly basis since 9/11 no they have not.

The fact that there have been no such events is an indication that there is no threat from without but there certainly is from within.

We can't run foreign policy on "ooh what if", only "what is", as otherwise every single Tom Clancy scenario would cause endless legislation, sanctions and aggression against people who might not even be as dangerous as the suggested scenario says. By that logic, Iran could say "well, the US could nuke us, so let's nuke them!" - where does it end?

If you want to be worried about unchecked nuclear ownership in the hands of belligerent powers, Israel is your chief worry. They have HUNDREDS of nukes already, no inspection, and no oversight from the international community. Israel has invaded/attacked more countries than Iran has.

I can see where you're coming from - it's not nice to think that a potential aggressor could twat you with a nuke, but that's a sword of Damocles the US has held over every non-nuke-owning country since WWII.

And I wouldn't be worried about a uranium bomb - those things are soooo large they're hardly worth having. Plutonium, however, is a different story, and they're nowhere near that yet. It would be far more sensible to use diplomacy than force in a situation like this, which is kind of the point of nukes - they make going to war retarded for everyone involved.

Remember that after 9/11 Iran was on the US's side - offering aid, assistance, everything it could. The US lumped them in with North Korea and Iraq to make their axis of evil look less like picking on two countries. It backfired greatly.

Originally posted by dave420
Remember that after 9/11 Iran was on the US's side - offering aid, assistance, everything it could. The US lumped them in with North Korea and Iraq to make their axis of evil look less like picking on two countries. It backfired greatly.

Sorry, but I don't remember this. Link please??