It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Hmmmm....
Everybody except the antisemites are worried about Iran having the bomb and using it to nuke Israel.
I've realized something.
He once threatened to shut the oil supply off from the world.
So what if he uses the nuclear bomb to destroy the oil supplies and reserves?
What would people think then?
Just one more possibility.
Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by spav5
No need to go to war just blow up their nuke facilities like israel did to Iraq and Syria lately (no war started). If Iran is stupid enough to go to war and attack civilians over its nuke program its their choice and they will be destroyed...
In 2005, 1,181 women were murdered by an intimate partner.1 That's an average of three women every day. Of all the women murdered in the U.S., about one-third were killed by an intimate partner.
As U.S. and Israeli officials talk publicly about the prospect of a military strike against Iran's nuclear program, one fact is often overlooked: U.S. intelligence agencies don't believe Iran is actively trying to build an atomic bomb.
Originally posted by TheTimeIsNow
Originally posted by dannotz
reply to post by CountDrac
yea...well i haven't gotten the chance to read through the thread. But there is a difference between "truth" and "opinion".
You're right about certain things(i like your 2nd opinion), but do you think you're 100% correct? How did you come to these conclusions?
I hope you don't think every thought you have is pure gold and correct all the time..please don't be one of those people
OH, and i don't think people "support" Iran having a nuke, like you say. I think they either don't think Iran can develop a nuclear weapon (like i think). Or they see it as the US being hypocritical, i don't agree with those people because Iran's leaders are obviously not the most stable.
We talk everyday about Iran making a nuke, wouldn't it be funny if they weren't even capable of it?
edit on 6-3-2012 by dannotz because: chyeaaa
Can you please explain to me your statement of "Iran's leaders are obviously not the most stable"?? What is your proof they are unstable...first what is your definition of stable leader(s)?
Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by VBarbarino
Yes I worry about a country with one of the lowest rates of civil liberties in the region. A country ruled by primitive religious freaks with no separation of religion and state.
A country that’s it’s legal to stone a woman to death on even the suspicion of adultery. Yes, I’m worried about a nation ruled by barbaric primitive Muslims like this...
edit on 5-3-2012 by CountDrac because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by CountDrac
reply to post by curious7
I’m dealing with Muslims on this thread who said a woman should get stoned to death because God said it’s a law. And people want us to agree to give Iran a country that enforces this animalistic law a nuke?
See how a country treats its own civilians morally and ethically and you will get a clear picture of how they would treat other countries and people.
This type of Islam and narrow-minded primitive thought is the reason Islam breeds fanatics, hate and barbaric behavior in our modern world.
This Islam and the primitive people who believe in it are the seed of evil in our world and should be dealt with like the sick Virus they are.
Enough with this barbaric religion…
edit on 6-3-2012 by CountDrac because: (no reason given)