Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SIR ASHMAN

The current state of affairs in Korea

Recommended Posts

geothermal would also work VERY well in aus.

IIRC, we're one of the leaders in this technology, right here in SA?

 

Yes. However, they are having problems. Its not easy.

 

 

Chernobyl is a completely useless example when arguing against nuclear power. New power reactors are designed with "passive safety" - such that they slow the nuclear reaction when things go wrong, not accelerate it. The plant at Chernobyl was badly designed, horribly understaffed and the staff they did have was underqualified. It was an disaster waiting to happen, and was simply a matter of time.

 

And they were conducting tests at the time - tests disabling most of the safety systems - and directly causing the 'accident'. Anywhere else, this wouldnt have been called an accident - it would have been criminal negligence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and IMO nuclear bombs are old now, there are many better alternatives.

Better, you say?

Yes. Other highly explosive weapons that don't leave nasty radiation everywhere.

 

Russia used a Thermobaric bomb weighing ~6000 kilograms to level a city block - this is known as the Father of All Bombs. Apparently this had more force than a small nuclear bomb.

 

_44111852_russian_bomb_inf416.gif

 

America is currently developing a monster Thermobaric bomb as well - except this one is twice the size of the Father of All Bombs.

 

Known as a type of BunkerBuster, but good enough to level a small city, regardless.

 

Oh.. that's MUCH better. <_>

 

I don't get why people think that a bomb that doesn't kill people by radiation is any worse than one that does.

 

It kills a shit load of people a different way..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, I knew you'd mention that... you bleeding heart father of 1.

 

Humans are always going to go to war. People will die at the hands of other people. Theres no 2 ways about it.

 

We are talking about 'better' in a strategic sense.

 

Drop a nuclear bomb... walk in the next day... die. Fail.

 

Drop a thermobaric bomb... not much left either but, okay. Win!

 

Drop a neutron bomb... walk in the next day... dont stand in any concrete buildings incase they fall over, and you'll be okay. Win!

 

Thermobaric bomb is a bigger boom than Neutron bomb. We have a winnar!

 

Genocide really is *that* simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

someone needs to make a bomb with a radius of 40,000 kilometres..

 

That should settle any further arguments..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ USA don't dictate the terms of nuclear proliferation. You might be thinking of the UN.

 

No, the UN is a joke, international law is based on mere conjecture and is largely unenforceable. The UN also opposes Israeli expansions (the US does not.)

Notice how Israel are free to act?

 

The US acts to protect its interests, clearly, a Nuclear Iran/NK presents a threat.

A nuclear Israel on the other hand is seen as a positive.

 

Blatant double standards. So again, it is good to see Iran and North Korea off-setting the current balance of power in a new direction.

 

So a theocracy guided by a book with passages such as "Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day" and a third world nation ruled by a family with an inferiority complex are trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

No problem there at all.

 

lol, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quoting religious scriptures out of context merely elucidates your lack of knowledge regarding the Iranian regime. Further, your logic is flawed, Pakistan is also an Islamic country (and already in possession of nuclear weapons.) We aren't dead are we?

 

You fear, because you are taught to fear, you do not know why. A little research will reveal to you that Iran at least, is no real threat (despite what the pro-Israeli media will have you believe.)

 

Caustic pointed out in his initial post that Iran was a theocracy, Pakistan is not. And Pakistan developed Nuclear Weapons because India had them.

 

If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will start an arms race in the region. A region that, historically is the most unstable place on the planet. With several governments rising and falling every century. So you have a mix of nuclear weapons, regional instability and a grudge against the west. Not a good thing.

 

I'm sorry an arms race with whom exactly?

 

Israel? (They already have nukes)

Saudi Arabia? (US controlled)

Turkey? (US controlled)

Syria? (Iranian ally)

Pakistan? (Already have nukes, Iranian ally)

 

Please elaborate on this imaginary arms race that will ensue. In my opinion a nuclear Iran will result in a balance of power between Israel and Iran in the middle east.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
someone needs to make a bomb with a radius of 40,000 kilometres..

 

That should settle any further arguments..

Until the guys on the International Space Station make 2 coffees and only have 1 stick of sugar left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ USA don't dictate the terms of nuclear proliferation. You might be thinking of the UN.

 

No, the UN is a joke, international law is based on mere conjecture and is largely unenforceable. The UN also opposes Israeli expansions (the US does not.)

Notice how Israel are free to act?

 

The US acts to protect its interests, clearly, a Nuclear Iran/NK presents a threat.

A nuclear Israel on the other hand is seen as a positive.

 

Blatant double standards. So again, it is good to see Iran and North Korea off-setting the current balance of power in a new direction.

 

So a theocracy guided by a book with passages such as "Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day" and a third world nation ruled by a family with an inferiority complex are trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

No problem there at all.

 

lol, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quoting religious scriptures out of context merely elucidates your lack of knowledge regarding the Iranian regime. Further, your logic is flawed, Pakistan is also an Islamic country (and already in possession of nuclear weapons.) We aren't dead are we?

 

You fear, because you are taught to fear, you do not know why. A little research will reveal to you that Iran at least, is no real threat (despite what the pro-Israeli media will have you believe.)

 

Caustic pointed out in his initial post that Iran was a theocracy, Pakistan is not. And Pakistan developed Nuclear Weapons because India had them.

 

If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will start an arms race in the region. A region that, historically is the most unstable place on the planet. With several governments rising and falling every century. So you have a mix of nuclear weapons, regional instability and a grudge against the west. Not a good thing.

 

I'm sorry and arms race with whom exactly?

 

Israel? (They already have nukes)

Saudi Arabia? (US controlled)

Turkey? (US controlled)

Syria? (Iranian ally)

Pakistan? (Already have nuke, Iranian ally)

 

Please elaborate on this imaginary arms race that will ensue. In my opinion a nuclear Iran will result in a balance of power between Israel and Iran in the middle east.

 

Hey wait we should all have nukes. A world where everybody holds the power to destroy whole cities with the press of a button is a happy world.

 

A stand off where everybody's threatening to launch missiles is not a successful outcome.

 

Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty remember, producing nukes would be in violation of that.

 

Sure, Israel probably shouldn't have them, but just because the do doesn't mean everybody else should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
someone needs to make a bomb with a radius of 40,000 kilometres..

 

That should settle any further arguments..

Until the guys on the International Space Station make 2 coffees and only have 1 stick of sugar left.

 

Space... the final frontier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ USA don't dictate the terms of nuclear proliferation. You might be thinking of the UN.

 

No, the UN is a joke, international law is based on mere conjecture and is largely unenforceable. The UN also opposes Israeli expansions (the US does not.)

Notice how Israel are free to act?

 

The US acts to protect its interests, clearly, a Nuclear Iran/NK presents a threat.

A nuclear Israel on the other hand is seen as a positive.

 

Blatant double standards. So again, it is good to see Iran and North Korea off-setting the current balance of power in a new direction.

 

So a theocracy guided by a book with passages such as "Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day" and a third world nation ruled by a family with an inferiority complex are trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

No problem there at all.

 

lol, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quoting religious scriptures out of context merely elucidates your lack of knowledge regarding the Iranian regime. Further, your logic is flawed, Pakistan is also an Islamic country (and already in possession of nuclear weapons.) We aren't dead are we?

 

You fear, because you are taught to fear, you do not know why. A little research will reveal to you that Iran at least, is no real threat (despite what the pro-Israeli media will have you believe.)

 

Caustic pointed out in his initial post that Iran was a theocracy, Pakistan is not. And Pakistan developed Nuclear Weapons because India had them.

 

If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will start an arms race in the region. A region that, historically is the most unstable place on the planet. With several governments rising and falling every century. So you have a mix of nuclear weapons, regional instability and a grudge against the west. Not a good thing.

 

I'm sorry and arms race with whom exactly?

 

Israel? (They already have nukes)

Saudi Arabia? (US controlled)

Turkey? (US controlled)

Syria? (Iranian ally)

Pakistan? (Already have nuke, Iranian ally)

 

Please elaborate on this imaginary arms race that will ensue. In my opinion a nuclear Iran will result in a balance of power between Israel and Iran in the middle east.

 

Hey wait we should all have nukes. A world where everybody holds the power to destroy whole cities with the press of a button is a happy world.

 

A stand off where everybody's threatening to launch missiles is not a successful outcome.

 

Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty remember, producing nukes would be in violation of that.

 

Sure, Israel probably shouldn't have them, but just because the do doesn't mean everybody else should.

 

Well, given that Israel is Iran's biggest enemy, it doesn't hurt to have a balance. Operations are well under way, it is only a matter of time.

 

Further, Nuclear Non-Proliferation is a joke, the entire concept is laden with double standards. Either everybody should be entitled to nukes, or nobody should be entitled to them. For the US to dictate terms based on its allies is hypocritical, accordingly, I see it fit for other countries to compete, this way we will continue to see the US lose its grip of the world, seeing it collapse further both internally and internationally as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ USA don't dictate the terms of nuclear proliferation. You might be thinking of the UN.

 

No, the UN is a joke, international law is based on mere conjecture and is largely unenforceable. The UN also opposes Israeli expansions (the US does not.)

Notice how Israel are free to act?

 

The US acts to protect its interests, clearly, a Nuclear Iran/NK presents a threat.

A nuclear Israel on the other hand is seen as a positive.

 

Blatant double standards. So again, it is good to see Iran and North Korea off-setting the current balance of power in a new direction.

 

So a theocracy guided by a book with passages such as "Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day" and a third world nation ruled by a family with an inferiority complex are trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

No problem there at all.

 

lol, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quoting religious scriptures out of context merely elucidates your lack of knowledge regarding the Iranian regime. Further, your logic is flawed, Pakistan is also an Islamic country (and already in possession of nuclear weapons.) We aren't dead are we?

 

You fear, because you are taught to fear, you do not know why. A little research will reveal to you that Iran at least, is no real threat (despite what the pro-Israeli media will have you believe.)

 

Caustic pointed out in his initial post that Iran was a theocracy, Pakistan is not. And Pakistan developed Nuclear Weapons because India had them.

 

If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will start an arms race in the region. A region that, historically is the most unstable place on the planet. With several governments rising and falling every century. So you have a mix of nuclear weapons, regional instability and a grudge against the west. Not a good thing.

 

I'm sorry and arms race with whom exactly?

 

Israel? (They already have nukes)

Saudi Arabia? (US controlled)

Turkey? (US controlled)

Syria? (Iranian ally)

Pakistan? (Already have nuke, Iranian ally)

 

Please elaborate on this imaginary arms race that will ensue. In my opinion a nuclear Iran will result in a balance of power between Israel and Iran in the middle east.

 

Hey wait we should all have nukes. A world where everybody holds the power to destroy whole cities with the press of a button is a happy world.

 

A stand off where everybody's threatening to launch missiles is not a successful outcome.

 

Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty remember, producing nukes would be in violation of that.

 

Sure, Israel probably shouldn't have them, but just because the do doesn't mean everybody else should.

 

Well, given that Israel is Iran's biggest enemy, it doesn't hurt to have a balance. Operations are well under way, it is only a matter of time.

 

Further, Nuclear Non-Proliferation is a joke, the entire concept is laden with double standards. Either everybody should be entitled to nukes, or nobody should be entitled to them. For the US to dictate terms based on its allies is hypocritical, accordingly, I see it fit for other countries to compete, this way we will continue to see the US lose its grip of the world, seeing it collapse further both internally and internationally as well.

 

That's just the thing. Israel is Iran's biggest enemy. Not the other way around. Anti-Semitism is much more rife in Arab countries than Anti-Arabism is in Israel, probably partly due to the fact that there's a whole stack of Muslims in Israel, but 99.9% of most Arab countries are Islamic. (That might have to do with the whole getting beheaded for apostasy thing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's just the thing. Israel is Iran's biggest enemy. Not the other way around. Anti-Semitism is much more rife in Arab countries than Anti-Arabism is in Israel, probably partly due to the fact that there's a whole stack of Muslims in Israel, but 99.9% of most Arab countries are Islamic. (That might have to do with the whole getting beheaded for apostasy thing)

 

I'm sorry, I don't see Iran trying to mobilise military action against Israel, the opposite is true. Israel sees Iran as a threat, therefore, Israel is enemies with Iran and vice versa.

 

Further, Iran is not an Arab country, Iranians are Persians, they have a distinct language and culture from the Arabs. Further again, Iran is not an Anti-Semitic country, simply, Anti-Zionist, note the key difference. There are 75,000 Jews in Iran who are prospering and are treated with equal rights. You really need to look into the situation deeply and not simply regurgitate arguments that are propagated by the biased media.

 

_42345177_ahmadinejad_afp416.jpg

 

22575.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ USA don't dictate the terms of nuclear proliferation. You might be thinking of the UN.

 

No, the UN is a joke, international law is based on mere conjecture and is largely unenforceable. The UN also opposes Israeli expansions (the US does not.)

Notice how Israel are free to act?

 

The US acts to protect its interests, clearly, a Nuclear Iran/NK presents a threat.

A nuclear Israel on the other hand is seen as a positive.

 

Blatant double standards. So again, it is good to see Iran and North Korea off-setting the current balance of power in a new direction.

 

So a theocracy guided by a book with passages such as "Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day" and a third world nation ruled by a family with an inferiority complex are trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

No problem there at all.

 

lol, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quoting religious scriptures out of context merely elucidates your lack of knowledge regarding the Iranian regime. Further, your logic is flawed, Pakistan is also an Islamic country (and already in possession of nuclear weapons.) We aren't dead are we?

 

You fear, because you are taught to fear, you do not know why. A little research will reveal to you that Iran at least, is no real threat (despite what the pro-Israeli media will have you believe.)

 

Caustic pointed out in his initial post that Iran was a theocracy, Pakistan is not. And Pakistan developed Nuclear Weapons because India had them.

 

If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will start an arms race in the region. A region that, historically is the most unstable place on the planet. With several governments rising and falling every century. So you have a mix of nuclear weapons, regional instability and a grudge against the west. Not a good thing.

 

I'm sorry an arms race with whom exactly?

 

Israel? (They already have nukes)

Saudi Arabia? (US controlled)

Turkey? (US controlled)

Syria? (Iranian ally)

Pakistan? (Already have nukes, Iranian ally)

 

Please elaborate on this imaginary arms race that will ensue. In my opinion a nuclear Iran will result in a balance of power between Israel and Iran in the middle east.

 

Jordan and Egypt have nuclear reactors going up by 2012. Libya, Turkey, Tunisia will have thiers up close to 2020 and Algeria has had a few since the mid 90's. This has nothing to do with a balance of power in the middle east, this is not an anti-muslim thing or arab (especially as iran ain't an arab nation) thing either. This is about extending the influence of Iran, the country voted most unpopular in the middle east.

 

A country with 1-2 thousand years of conquest & war tucked under its belt, that has lived the last few hundred years under the thumb of other powers and nolonger want to be the regions doormat.

 

Iran wants the bomb to extend its influence in the region, something a Sunni dominant middle east will not allow to happen.

 

Its the reason why NOBODY in the middle east, and the rest of the world wants Iran to be a nuclear power. They will not bring a balance of power, they will destabalise the region. The fact that you said that they will bring a balance of power is just further evidence that they will bring ruin.

 

How exactly did you think they will bring a power balance? You think Iran will say "hey stop picking on palestine or we will nuke ya?". Do you think Israel will be cowed by that? f**k no. Israel will need to take aggressive action to show they are not intimidated, which could be anything from attacking Lebanon/Palestine to a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran.

 

The percieved need for the Jewish state to show aggression is most evident in the activities of the Mossad.

 

Even if you think that somehow Iran gets the drop on Israel and glasses them first, you have to remember Israel, just as with every other nuclear powered country in the world, believes in mutually assured destruction. And unlike Iran they have the capability (airforce, submarines etc etc) to actually see it through.

 

Then you have muslim politics that come into play, Sunni VS Shiites. Iran builds the bomb. Jordan and Egypt and just about everyone else in the region who will have nuclear power by that time almost certainly will too. ARMS RACE. This is not a hypothetical, its cause and effect.

 

And to address some of you misconceptions:

 

Turkey is not US controlled, thier actions are guided by thier desire to join the EU.

 

Pakistan is a US ally, not Iran. There has been Shia-Sunni tension that has pushed the relations between the two countries apart for the last 20 years, made all the worse during the Afghan civil war. Thier is existing trade relations though, is that what you where referring too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ USA don't dictate the terms of nuclear proliferation. You might be thinking of the UN.

 

No, the UN is a joke, international law is based on mere conjecture and is largely unenforceable. The UN also opposes Israeli expansions (the US does not.)

Notice how Israel are free to act?

 

The US acts to protect its interests, clearly, a Nuclear Iran/NK presents a threat.

A nuclear Israel on the other hand is seen as a positive.

 

Blatant double standards. So again, it is good to see Iran and North Korea off-setting the current balance of power in a new direction.

 

So a theocracy guided by a book with passages such as "Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day" and a third world nation ruled by a family with an inferiority complex are trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

No problem there at all.

 

lol, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quoting religious scriptures out of context merely elucidates your lack of knowledge regarding the Iranian regime. Further, your logic is flawed, Pakistan is also an Islamic country (and already in possession of nuclear weapons.) We aren't dead are we?

 

You fear, because you are taught to fear, you do not know why. A little research will reveal to you that Iran at least, is no real threat (despite what the pro-Israeli media will have you believe.)

 

Caustic pointed out in his initial post that Iran was a theocracy, Pakistan is not. And Pakistan developed Nuclear Weapons because India had them.

 

If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will start an arms race in the region. A region that, historically is the most unstable place on the planet. With several governments rising and falling every century. So you have a mix of nuclear weapons, regional instability and a grudge against the west. Not a good thing.

 

I'm sorry an arms race with whom exactly?

 

Israel? (They already have nukes)

Saudi Arabia? (US controlled)

Turkey? (US controlled)

Syria? (Iranian ally)

Pakistan? (Already have nukes, Iranian ally)

 

Please elaborate on this imaginary arms race that will ensue. In my opinion a nuclear Iran will result in a balance of power between Israel and Iran in the middle east.

 

Jordan and Egypt have nuclear reactors going up by 2012. Libya, Turkey, Tunisia will have thiers up close to 2020 and Algeria has had a few since the mid 90's. This has nothing to do with a balance of power in the middle east, this is not an anti-muslim thing or arab (especially as iran ain't an arab nation) thing either. This is about extending the influence of Iran, the country voted most unpopular in the middle east.

 

A country with 1-2 thousand years of conquest & war tucked under its belt, that has lived the last few hundred years under the thumb of other powers and nolonger want to be the regions doormat.

 

Iran wants the bomb to extend its influence in the region, something a Sunni dominant middle east will not allow to happen.

 

Its the reason why NOBODY in the middle east, and the rest of the world wants Iran to be a nuclear power. They will not bring a balance of power, they will destabalise the region. The fact that you said that they will bring a balance of power is just further evidence that they will bring ruin.

 

How exactly did you think they will bring a power balance? You think Iran will say "hey stop picking on palestine or we will nuke ya?". Do you think Israel will be cowed by that? f**k no. Israel will need to take aggressive action to show they are not intimidated, which could be anything from attacking Lebanon/Palestine to a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran.

 

The percieved need for the Jewish state to show aggression is most evident in the activities of the Mossad.

 

Even if you think that somehow Iran gets the drop on Israel and glasses them first, you have to remember Israel, just as with every other nuclear powered country in the world, believes in mutually assured destruction. And unlike Iran they have the capability (airforce, submarines etc etc) to actually see it through.

 

Then you have muslim politics that come into play, Sunni VS Shiites. Iran builds the bomb. Jordan and Egypt and just about everyone else in the region who will have nuclear power by that time almost certainly will too. ARMS RACE. This is not a hypothetical, its cause and effect.

 

And to address some of you misconceptions:

 

Turkey is not US controlled, thier actions are guided by thier desire to join the EU.

 

Pakistan is a US ally, not Iran. There has been Shia-Sunni tension that has pushed the relations between the two countries apart for the last 20 years, made all the worse during the Afghan civil war. Thier is existing trade relations though, is that what you where referring too?

 

Jordan and Egypt etc are Pro-Israeli/US puppets, they are no threat and will not develop nuclear weapons, I'm surprised you raise this argument, because it is truly fallacious even as a hypothetical. Even if Iran goes nuclear, they will not respond given US pressure.

 

You say Iran was voted the most unpopular in the middle east? This does not seem right, having traveled throughout the Middle East myself (I have relatives everywhere!) Ahmadinejad is actually the most revered leader in the Middle East, according to recent polls in Lebanon and Egypt. He is very popular in Pakistan as well (although that technically isn't the middle east.) True, Iran is extending its influence, but this is for the balance of power, Saudi/US alliance vs Iran/Syria and its subordinates (i.e HizbAllah, Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, to an extent Iraq etc.)

 

In terms of the Sunni-Shia Middle East issue, you will find that Iran has managed to transcend this divide. Hamas and MB are Iranian backed Sunni movements. They recognise that the Saudis/Egyptians are nothing but corrupt US puppets, accordingly, they vent their rage against the US/Israel/West via Iran. The voice of the people is strongly pro Iran (although the Governments are obviously pro US.) Iran is the only country that backs the movements against Israel in Lebanon/Palestine etc, while at the same time, the Egyptians for example, shoot Palestinians who try and cross at Rafah. Thus, i reiterate, a nuclear armed Iran will not bring ruin, it will help maintain stability and prevent Israeli expansions (which the entire Middle East fears.) Iran enjoys good support where it counts and have out played the Saudi/US/Israeli alliance.

 

Regarding an attack on Iran, Israel cannot manage on its own. Logistically it is too difficult, it needs US backing. Iran is well on its way to becoming a nuclear power, Israel has tried its best to prevent this, but failed without the US backing it needs (and the backing the US cannot afford to give, given the multitude of war fronts currently in operation.)

 

Apparent misconceptions:

 

Turkey is US controlled, they share military contracts with Israel and the US and are not independent from decisions, particularly the development of Nuclear weapons. EU inclusion does not contravene US interests, you will find that the EU/US work hand in hand.

 

Trade between the countries is strong but I was not referring to this point. Pakistan, is pro-Iran as we speak, but it depends on the political climate. There is no secterian tension between the countries (such as that which exists with Iran/Saudi.) Pakistan has always had a soft spot for Iran, it has a large Shia population, was founded by a Shia and has largely been governed by Shias. The current President (Zardari) is Shia, his deceased wife Bhutto, was half Iranian and Shia. True, they are technically a US ally as well, but it was Pakistan that gave its nuclear secrets to Iran, if that doesn't make Pakistan an ally then I don't know what does! You will find Pakistan as it stands, is Pro-Nuclear Iran, else they wouldn't have helped the process in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of interest have any of you ever heard of Retired Russian Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov?

 

Back in the 80's during the Cold War, Russia's standard procedure when their early warning systems detected a nuclear missile launch was to immediately launch a retaliatory nuclear strike, in this case, at the USA.

 

On September 26th 1983, Petrov deviated from that procedure and did not report the detection believing the one he was seeing was a false alarm. Later, when the warning system was investigated, it was confirmed to be malfunctioning. Scary.

 

Look him up if you want to read more. Now parts of this story are disputed but it is essentially true people, we did come this close to mutually assured destruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wait, isn't this meant to be about Korea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's just the thing. Israel is Iran's biggest enemy. Not the other way around. Anti-Semitism is much more rife in Arab countries than Anti-Arabism is in Israel, probably partly due to the fact that there's a whole stack of Muslims in Israel, but 99.9% of most Arab countries are Islamic. (That might have to do with the whole getting beheaded for apostasy thing)

 

I'm sorry, I don't see Iran trying to mobilise military action against Israel, the opposite is true. Israel sees Iran as a threat, therefore, Israel is enemies with Iran and vice versa.

 

Further, Iran is not an Arab country, Iranians are Persians, they have a distinct language and culture from the Arabs. Further again, Iran is not an Anti-Semitic country, simply, Anti-Zionist, note the key difference. There are 75,000 Jews in Iran who are prospering and are treated with equal rights. You really need to look into the situation deeply and not simply regurgitate arguments that are propagated by the biased media.

 

So you're arguing semitics now? Anti-Zionist then. They're anti-Israel and not anti-Jews in general. Although I'm sure you'd find that in Iran, like most Islamic nations the general population is anti-semitic.

 

The Government severely restricts freedom of religion. The constitution declares the "official religion of Iran is Islam and the doctrine followed is that of Ja'fari (Twelver) Shi'ism." All laws and regulations must be consistent with the official interpretation of the Shari'a (Islamic law). The constitution states that "within the limits of the law," Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians are the only recognized religious minorities who are guaranteed freedom to practice their religion; however, members of these recognized minority religious groups have reported imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on their religious beliefs

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71421.htm

 

And the highest estimates I've been able to find for the number of Jews in Iran are 30,000-10,000 or about 0.04%. Although it was considerably higher before most of them emigrated to the US or Israel following the Iranian Revolution.

 

The more you keep talking about biased media the more it makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist. Don't go down that path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Protip: Using phrases such as "corrupt US puppets" make you sound like a North Korean press release and not a credible source of information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's just the thing. Israel is Iran's biggest enemy. Not the other way around. Anti-Semitism is much more rife in Arab countries than Anti-Arabism is in Israel, probably partly due to the fact that there's a whole stack of Muslims in Israel, but 99.9% of most Arab countries are Islamic. (That might have to do with the whole getting beheaded for apostasy thing)

 

I'm sorry, I don't see Iran trying to mobilise military action against Israel, the opposite is true. Israel sees Iran as a threat, therefore, Israel is enemies with Iran and vice versa.

 

Further, Iran is not an Arab country, Iranians are Persians, they have a distinct language and culture from the Arabs. Further again, Iran is not an Anti-Semitic country, simply, Anti-Zionist, note the key difference. There are 75,000 Jews in Iran who are prospering and are treated with equal rights. You really need to look into the situation deeply and not simply regurgitate arguments that are propagated by the biased media.

 

So you're arguing semitics now? Anti-Zionist then. They're anti-Israel and not anti-Jews in general. Although I'm sure you'd find that in Iran, like most Islamic nations the general population is anti-semitic.

 

The Government severely restricts freedom of religion. The constitution declares the "official religion of Iran is Islam and the doctrine followed is that of Ja'fari (Twelver) Shi'ism." All laws and regulations must be consistent with the official interpretation of the Shari'a (Islamic law). The constitution states that "within the limits of the law," Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians are the only recognized religious minorities who are guaranteed freedom to practice their religion; however, members of these recognized minority religious groups have reported imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on their religious beliefs

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71421.htm

 

And the highest estimates I've been able to find for the number of Jews in Iran are 30,000-10,000 or about 0.04%. Although it was considerably higher before most of them emigrated to the US or Israel following the Iranian Revolution.

 

The more you keep talking about biased media the more it makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist. Don't go down that path.

 

Yes they are Anti-Israel, you cannot say Anti-Semitic because being an Anti-Zionist does not make you an Anti-Semitic. Muslims are against Zionism, not Judaism, note the fundamental difference.

 

Are these chaps Anti-Semitic also?

 

444191293_img.jpg

 

Index-Jews-YeshivaStudentNamesIsrael.jpg

 

Further, there will always be some intolerance towards a population in any country, this doesn't mean it is mainstream.

"however, members of these recognized minority religious groups have reported imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on their religious beliefs"

 

This line could be applied to pretty much any country. Muslims in the US could say the same.....more recently, Indians in Melbourne could make this argument. My point is, of course there are always social issues, doesn't mean it is the social norm.

 

Generally speaking, the Jews in Iran are happy. The figures vary, Iranian sources indicate it to be at 75,000.....the highest Western source i have seen is around 40,000.

 

 

 

The media is biased, you are blind if you cannot see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Protip: Using phrases such as "corrupt US puppets" make you sound like a North Korean press release and not a credible source of information.

 

I am Anti-US. B) Corrupt pro US governments exist, I don't see the issue. :)

 

This is the interwebz, I am no more or less credible than yourself good sir (nor do i feel a need to try and undermine you. :rolleyes: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US is developing a larger thermobaric bomb??

Oh gooodie... ugh.

It is really unusual how the USA gives themselves special rights and exceptions when it comes to mass destruction weapon development...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Protip: Using phrases such as "corrupt US puppets" make you sound like a North Korean press release and not a credible source of information.

 

I am Anti-US. B) Corrupt pro US governments exist, I don't see the issue. :)

 

This is the interwebz, I am no more or less credible than yourself good sir (nor do i feel a need to try and undermine you. :rolleyes: )

 

Well I'm anti-Arab League. And I wasn't trying to undermine you, just pointing out that it didn't seem you were coming from a very neutral point of view.

 

f**k I hate discussions about politics in the Middle East.

 

Could you explain in what way its beneficial for Iran to have nuclear weapons?

 

Or maybe we should just get back to talking about North Korea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cos i'd make them feel like a big man?

 

I know i'd feel pretty smug having a nuke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^^ USA don't dictate the terms of nuclear proliferation. You might be thinking of the UN.

 

No, the UN is a joke, international law is based on mere conjecture and is largely unenforceable. The UN also opposes Israeli expansions (the US does not.)

Notice how Israel are free to act?

 

The US acts to protect its interests, clearly, a Nuclear Iran/NK presents a threat.

A nuclear Israel on the other hand is seen as a positive.

 

Blatant double standards. So again, it is good to see Iran and North Korea off-setting the current balance of power in a new direction.

 

So a theocracy guided by a book with passages such as "Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day" and a third world nation ruled by a family with an inferiority complex are trying to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

 

No problem there at all.

 

lol, ignorance is bliss.

 

Quoting religious scriptures out of context merely elucidates your lack of knowledge regarding the Iranian regime. Further, your logic is flawed, Pakistan is also an Islamic country (and already in possession of nuclear weapons.) We aren't dead are we?

 

You fear, because you are taught to fear, you do not know why. A little research will reveal to you that Iran at least, is no real threat (despite what the pro-Israeli media will have you believe.)

 

Caustic pointed out in his initial post that Iran was a theocracy, Pakistan is not. And Pakistan developed Nuclear Weapons because India had them.

 

If Iran gets nuclear weapons it will start an arms race in the region. A region that, historically is the most unstable place on the planet. With several governments rising and falling every century. So you have a mix of nuclear weapons, regional instability and a grudge against the west. Not a good thing.

 

I'm sorry an arms race with whom exactly?

 

Israel? (They already have nukes)

Saudi Arabia? (US controlled)

Turkey? (US controlled)

Syria? (Iranian ally)

Pakistan? (Already have nukes, Iranian ally)

 

Please elaborate on this imaginary arms race that will ensue. In my opinion a nuclear Iran will result in a balance of power between Israel and Iran in the middle east.

 

Jordan and Egypt have nuclear reactors going up by 2012. Libya, Turkey, Tunisia will have thiers up close to 2020 and Algeria has had a few since the mid 90's. This has nothing to do with a balance of power in the middle east, this is not an anti-muslim thing or arab (especially as iran ain't an arab nation) thing either. This is about extending the influence of Iran, the country voted most unpopular in the middle east.

 

A country with 1-2 thousand years of conquest & war tucked under its belt, that has lived the last few hundred years under the thumb of other powers and nolonger want to be the regions doormat.

 

Iran wants the bomb to extend its influence in the region, something a Sunni dominant middle east will not allow to happen.

 

Its the reason why NOBODY in the middle east, and the rest of the world wants Iran to be a nuclear power. They will not bring a balance of power, they will destabalise the region. The fact that you said that they will bring a balance of power is just further evidence that they will bring ruin.

 

How exactly did you think they will bring a power balance? You think Iran will say "hey stop picking on palestine or we will nuke ya?". Do you think Israel will be cowed by that? f**k no. Israel will need to take aggressive action to show they are not intimidated, which could be anything from attacking Lebanon/Palestine to a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran.

 

The percieved need for the Jewish state to show aggression is most evident in the activities of the Mossad.

 

Even if you think that somehow Iran gets the drop on Israel and glasses them first, you have to remember Israel, just as with every other nuclear powered country in the world, believes in mutually assured destruction. And unlike Iran they have the capability (airforce, submarines etc etc) to actually see it through.

 

Then you have muslim politics that come into play, Sunni VS Shiites. Iran builds the bomb. Jordan and Egypt and just about everyone else in the region who will have nuclear power by that time almost certainly will too. ARMS RACE. This is not a hypothetical, its cause and effect.

 

And to address some of you misconceptions:

 

Turkey is not US controlled, thier actions are guided by thier desire to join the EU.

 

Pakistan is a US ally, not Iran. There has been Shia-Sunni tension that has pushed the relations between the two countries apart for the last 20 years, made all the worse during the Afghan civil war. Thier is existing trade relations though, is that what you where referring too?

 

Jordan and Egypt etc are Pro-Israeli/US puppets, they are no threat and will not develop nuclear weapons, I'm surprised you raise this argument, because it is truly fallacious even as a hypothetical. Even if Iran goes nuclear, they will not respond given US pressure.

 

You say Iran was voted the most unpopular in the middle east? This does not seem right, having traveled throughout the Middle East myself (I have relatives everywhere!) Ahmadinejad is actually the most revered leader in the Middle East, according to recent polls in Lebanon and Egypt. He is very popular in Pakistan as well (although that technically isn't the middle east.) True, Iran is extending its influence, but this is for the balance of power, Saudi/US alliance vs Iran/Syria and its subordinates (i.e HizbAllah, Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, to an extent Iraq etc.)

 

In terms of the Sunni-Shia Middle East issue, you will find that Iran has managed to transcend this divide. Hamas and MB are Iranian backed Sunni movements. They recognise that the Saudis/Egyptians are nothing but corrupt US puppets, accordingly, they vent their rage against the US/Israel/West via Iran. The voice of the people is strongly pro Iran (although the Governments are obviously pro US.) Iran is the only country that backs the movements against Israel in Lebanon/Palestine etc, while at the same time, the Egyptians for example, shoot Palestinians who try and cross at Rafah. Thus, i reiterate, a nuclear armed Iran will not bring ruin, it will help maintain stability and prevent Israeli expansions (which the entire Middle East fears.) Iran enjoys good support where it counts and have out played the Saudi/US/Israeli alliance.

 

Regarding an attack on Iran, Israel cannot manage on its own. Logistically it is too difficult, it needs US backing. Iran is well on its way to becoming a nuclear power, Israel has tried its best to prevent this, but failed without the US backing it needs (and the backing the US cannot afford to give, given the multitude of war fronts currently in operation.)

 

Apparent misconceptions:

 

Turkey is US controlled, they share military contracts with Israel and the US and are not independent from decisions, particularly the development of Nuclear weapons. EU inclusion does not contravene US interests, you will find that the EU/US work hand in hand.

 

Trade between the countries is strong but I was not referring to this point. Pakistan, is pro-Iran as we speak, but it depends on the political climate. There is no secterian tension between the countries (such as that which exists with Iran/Saudi.) Pakistan has always had a soft spot for Iran, it has a large Shia population, was founded by a Shia and has largely been governed by Shias. The current President (Zardari) is Shia, his deceased wife Bhutto, was half Iranian and Shia. True, they are technically a US ally as well, but it was Pakistan that gave its nuclear secrets to Iran, if that doesn't make Pakistan an ally then I don't know what does! You will find Pakistan as it stands, is Pro-Nuclear Iran, else they wouldn't have helped the process in the first place.

 

 

You are clearly distorting things and your bias is becoming obvious. Are you are for the overthrow of democratic governments to instill Muslim Theocracies in the Middle East?

 

Your idea that Iranian support (an islamic theocracy) for the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas (groups that want to overthrow democratic countries and instill islamic theocracies) somehow bridges the sunni-shia sectarian violence acts as evidence of this. Iran promotes sectarian violence in various countries in thier support of shia muslims or other islamic sect, most notably in Lebanon, Iraq and Pakistan. There has been no bridging of the gap.

 

The most recent reason there is poor iran-arab relations is that Ayatollah Khomeini was open about his intention to export the revolution to other parts of the Muslim world. When in power this is what they will hope to achieve. ALL the groups you have listed goals are the installation of muslim theocracies.

 

And you are latching onto the one country in the middle east that the world is stating they do not want too develop nuclear technology (once a nuclear reactor is up, it will not take long to build a nuclear weapon. So you have to argue the possibility as it would be the height of folly to "wait and see"), as opposed to ALOT of other middle eastern democracies that are CURRENTLY building nuclear reactors without any international condemnation.

 

Iran has been singled out. And it has nothing to do with being US puppets.lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The US is developing a larger thermobaric bomb??

Oh gooodie... ugh.

It is really unusual how the USA gives themselves special rights and exceptions when it comes to mass destruction weapon development...

 

the average anti-American crap.

 

Thermobaric bomb affects is around 200-400m, using conventional LEGAL explosives. there's no laws against any country producing them.

 

on the other hand, with the right technology, resources and knowledge a nuclear warhead. let's say 1mt(megaton) payload, would annihilate a vast area, explained below:

 

pressure from the explosion (1mt), radius from ground zero.

15 psi: 2.43 km

5 psi: 4.5 km

2 psi: 7.9 km

 

15 psi: Complete destruction of reinforced concrete structures, such as skyscrapers, will occur within this ring. Between 7 psi and 15 psi, there will be severe to total damage to these types of structures.

5 psi: Complete destruction of ordinary houses, and moderate to severe damage to reinforced concrete structures, will occur within this ring.

2 psi: Severe damage to ordinary houses, and light to moderate damage to reinforced concrete structures, will occur within this ring.

 

so the scale of damage between the thermobaric bomb and a large nuclear weapon is vastly different. not only that but the fallout of a nuclear weapon poisons and kills thousands decades afterwards. a nuclear weapons most common use would be to destroy a city, a thermobaric weapon while still large could be aimed towards shipyards, air ports or military bases, actually severing a purpose to destroy the enemies military power and not just killing civilians.

 

also, Russia as also create a similar bomb. don't see anything unusual about it, seems to me they are following international military weapon laws.

 

 

quick comment on the people defending Iran, the Iranian prime minister has stated on record he would like to see Israel "blasted off the face of the earth" (something along those lines). Statements like that don't seem peaceful to me.

 

Just for those who forget about the great, loving and peaceful nation of Iran:

-death penalty for porn

-death penalty for homosexuality

-death penalty for adultery

-death penalty for leaving Islam.

-reported stonings for "allowing" rape

 

Iran is currently the world's biggest executioner of juvenile offenders. Iran accounts for two-thirds of the global total of such executions, and currently has roughly 140 people on death row for crimes committed as juveniles

 

a bit off topic though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quick comment on the people defending Iran, the Iranian prime minister has stated on record he would like to see Israel "blasted off the face of the earth" (something along those lines). Statements like that don't seem peaceful to me.

 

Just for those who forget about the great, loving and peaceful nation of Iran:

-death penalty for porn

-death penalty for homosexuality

-death penalty for adultery

-death penalty for leaving Islam.

-reported stonings for "allowing" rape

 

Iran is currently the world's biggest executioner of juvenile offenders. Iran accounts for two-thirds of the global total of such executions, and currently has roughly 140 people on death row for crimes committed as juveniles

 

a bit off topic though.

 

I was about to bring that up.

 

Controversial but: "Sharia law is incompatible with modern standards of human rights."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The US is developing a larger thermobaric bomb??

Oh gooodie... ugh.

It is really unusual how the USA gives themselves special rights and exceptions when it comes to mass destruction weapon development...

 

the average anti-American crap.

 

Thermobaric bomb affects is around 200-400m, using conventional LEGAL explosives. there's no laws against any country producing them.

 

Actually, its a grey zone. Currently, not illegal, but lots of controversy. The following is about a shoulder mounted rpg style thermobaric weapon...

 

Thermobarics first disperse a flammable mist of underoxidised fuel which ignites to create a gigantic explosion of immense destructiveness. The explosion of the SMAW-NE is effective in three main ways. Firstly, it is accompanied by a massive fireball which incinerates all in its path. Secondly, it creates a massive pressure wave capable of rupturing the internal organs of all those nearby and so powerful that it can reduce load-bearing walls to rubble and bring down buildings. Finally, the explosion also sucks all the oxygen out of the air, asphyxiating anyone in the immediate vicinity . Basically, if you’re in the building when it hits, it’ll kill you.

 

...which leads you on to...

 

But in an era of precision bombs, where collateral damage is expected to be kept to a minimum, such massively brutal weapons have become highly controversial. These days, every civilian casualty means a few more “hearts and minds” are lost. Thermobaric weapons almost invariable lead to civilian deaths. The Soviet Union was heavily criticized for using thermobaric weapons in Afghanistan because they were held to constitute "disproportionate force," and similar criticisms were made when thermobarics were used in the Chechen conflict. According to Human Rights Watch, thermobaric weapons "kill and injure in a particularly brutal manner over a wide area. In urban settings it is very difficult to limit the effect of this weapon to combatants, and the nature of FAE explosions makes it virtually impossible for civilians to take shelter from their destructive effect."

 

Read the Human Rights Watch article here: http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:bSEXz...lient=firefox-a

 

In conclusion, thermobaric weapons kick ass, but aren't as humane as a bullet to the back of the skull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Iran is currently the world's biggest executioner of juvenile offenders. Iran accounts for two-thirds of the global total of such executions, and currently has roughly 140 people on death row for crimes committed as juveniles

 

a bit off topic though.

 

Do not bash Iran, the only people I have met from there are some of the nicest, most gentle people I have ever met. (cousins BF, and a co-worker)

I encourage harsh punnishments, look at the f**k wits running around over here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's china you have to be most careful off, everyone is watching iraq etc, but not china.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it's china you have to be most careful off, everyone is watching iraq etc, but not china.

Don't be silly.

 

China has a strict non-interference sovereign state policy.

 

I means they will never interfere with another country's internal disputes.

 

For them, its just another day, another dollar.... insert Sudan here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×