Utopia Talk / Politics / Iran

mexicantornado Member	Mon Oct 26 15:32:21 Does anyone here genuinely think Iran is building a peaceful nuclear energy program?
Paramount Member	Mon Oct 26 15:44:29 I haven't seen the evidence proving that they aren't. So yes. The only ones accusing them is the same liars who accused Iraq to have WMD and that Iraq could launch them within 45 minutes.
Formerly Fred Member	Mon Oct 26 17:09:50 They can build whatever they fucking want.
Liberal Member	Mon Oct 26 17:13:45 Somebody has got to start the war that sends us back to the caves. It might as well be them.
pillz Member	Mon Oct 26 17:14:47 actually, itll probably be the jews.
Formerly Fred Member	Mon Oct 26 17:15:44 Probably?
MrPresident07 Member	Mon Oct 26 21:54:38 Israel will take care of it.
yankeessuck123 Member	Mon Oct 26 22:54:49 Fred and MrPrez are right.
Sam Adams Member	Mon Oct 26 23:33:43 "They can build whatever they fucking want. " then we can bomb whatever the fuck we want
jergul Member	Tue Oct 27 03:49:30 Everyone is sure they have a peaceful program MT.
Nimatzo Member	Tue Oct 27 03:52:57 >>Does anyone here genuinely think Iran is building a peaceful nuclear energy program?<< You are wording this wrong, not even Israel denies that Iran is building a peaceful nuclear energy program.
mexicantornado Member	Tue Oct 27 14:30:48 You guys are pretty much retarded.
Paramount Member	Tue Oct 27 15:01:02 ^Mexicanretardo
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Oct 27 15:13:58 The line is a little blurry between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. The technological ability to build a modern nuclear reactor is not much different from the technological ability to build a nuclear weapon. So sure, right now they are building a "peaceful energy program". Its just that once built, they will have all the pieces in place to build a nuclear warhead in a matter of months.
Nimatzo Member	Tue Oct 27 15:21:13 So does every other nation that has nuclear power. You can not deny a nation the right to nuclear energy because of might or might not happen at some future date. The fear of a terrorist nuclear attack is completely irrational and out of proportion to the magnitude of the damage and the likelihood of it happening. The underlying fear comes from western power structure and is a political fear that the power balance in the middle east will shift.
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Oct 27 15:30:10 I dont care if Iran makes nuclear weapons. Well, let me rephrase. I dont think the consequences of the actions neccessary to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon would be worth it. So we should just pretend like we dont care if Iran has nuclear weapons. After all, if there was a nuclear attack via terrorism on the US, the response from the US public would be 100 times worse than 9/11. Iran would be lucky to survive a week if that ever happened.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Oct 27 15:32:31 "After all, if there was a nuclear attack via terrorism on the US, the response from the US public would be 100 times worse than 9/11. Iran would be lucky to survive a week if that ever happened." that's assuming the spin doctors fabricate enough evidence against iran.
Formerly Fred Member	Tue Oct 27 16:26:28 "then we can bomb whatever the fuck we want " We already do that and it hasn't really worked out very well has it.
The Multi Detector Member	Tue Oct 27 16:27:41 multis detected: Sad Adams aka Satan Milton Bradley aka Dakyron
Sam Adams Member	Tue Oct 27 17:14:43 Milton Bradley is too intelligent to be dakyron. "We already do that and it hasn't really worked out very well has it. " its worked out fucking awesome considering we are the most prosperous and powerful nation.
Clitoral Hood The Bloody Scourge	Tue Oct 27 17:19:23 does Iran have a viable delivery system for said possible nuclear warheads?
Milton Bradley Member	Tue Oct 27 17:21:24 Probably up to 250 miles they do.
The Multi Detector Member	Tue Oct 27 17:22:12 "Milton Bradley is too intelligent to be dakyron. " You are out of touch.
Clitoral Hood The Bloody Scourge	Tue Oct 27 17:24:44 that's from chicago to detroit. not especially far.
Sam Adams Member	Tue Oct 27 17:32:03 they couldnt even get 250 miles against western air power. their only realistic delivery option is a freight container. nuclear terrorism, its every muslims dream.
MrPresident07 Member	Tue Oct 27 18:04:36 Dudes, Israel will take care of it. Let's just hope they can wait until at least 2012 when we have a president and foreign policy that will back them up.
MrPresident07 Member	Tue Oct 27 19:12:39 I'd take Bush back in a heartbeat, compared to what we have now.
roland Member	Tue Oct 27 19:19:42 "I'd take Bush back in a heartbeat, compared to what we have now. " So, you prefer them manipulated and fabricated evidence to go on their ideological crusades and start wars. Ok.
MrPresident07 Member	Tue Oct 27 19:37:27 Lol. If that's the way you want to term it, so be it.
roland Member	Tue Oct 27 19:45:59 That's exactly what it is, do you term it the way how Sarah Palin explained for the Bush's doctrine.
MrPresident07 Member	Tue Oct 27 19:52:15 Yeah...uhhh...sure.
yankeessuck123 Member	Tue Oct 27 20:38:05 "I'd take Bush back in a heartbeat, compared to what we have now." I sure as hell wouldn't.
mexicantornado Member	Tue Oct 27 20:54:03 Bush was a liberal republican. Republican in the sense that he was hawkish on foreign policy but had a pretty liberal social agenda. I would also take Bush back over Barry O purely because Bush wouldn't be getting dicked around so much like Barry O is and it is quite a scary thought that Iran may get nuclear weapons. A few nuclear missiles fired off an oil tankers would cripple america for decades. Iran has already practiced shooting scuds off tankers and I have little doubt that they wouldn't be willing to strike the first blow if they felt invasion or rebellion was imminent.
roland Member	Tue Oct 27 21:03:41 "Bush wouldn't be getting dicked around so much like Barry O is and it is quite a scary thought that Iran may get nuclear weapons. " "I have little doubt that they wouldn't be willing to strike the first blow if they felt invasion or rebellion was imminent. " And of course, they did felt invasion is imminent because Bush named them as the axis of evil, and their fabricating of evidence to justify invading Iraq.
MrPresident07 Member	Tue Oct 27 21:31:15 "I sure as hell wouldn't." Over Obama? Really?
yankeessuck123 Member	Tue Oct 27 21:34:05 I believe Obama is significantly better than Bush.
MrPresident07 Member	Tue Oct 27 21:35:37 We'll see what you say to that by 2012.
Nimatzo Member	Wed Oct 28 02:56:37 It is pretty much a fact that Obama is better than Bush by an order of magnitude, there is a broad global consensus regarding this.
Sarcasm Member	Wed Oct 28 02:59:14 Obama may not be a founding father but hes no warmongering, torturing, economical tragedy to the planet like Bush.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Oct 28 09:31:59 Hmmm, which stupid statement to adress first...? "It is pretty much a fact that Obama is better than Bush by an order of magnitude, there is a broad global consensus regarding this." Nobody cares about the rest of the world. I thought you'd understand that most Americans don't care what you think of us by now. "Obama may not be a founding father but hes no warmongering, torturing, economical tragedy to the planet like Bush." Do you seriously think that Obama stopped ANY policy Bush had in place?
roland Member	Wed Oct 28 09:42:19 "Hmmm, which stupid statement to adress first...? " Let's start with yours. "Do you seriously think that Obama stopped ANY policy Bush had in place? " I dont think he has continued the Bush doctrine at least, that would be one of the most significant difference.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Oct 28 10:08:55 "I dont think he has continued the Bush doctrine at least, that would be one of the most significant difference." 1. You didn't address my question. 2. He HAS continued the Bush doctrine. We're still in Iraq and Afghanistan are we not? Did he not say he was going to end the war in Iraq and fix Afghanistan? He has not. He has continued the Bush doctrine, but said different things in speeches and has a D beside his name. 3. You clearly lack knowledge roland, go get some before posting next time.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Oct 28 10:10:13 Just an addition to #2: -He hasn't closed Gitmo -He maintains the right to military detention and tribunal -If you think for a second he has closed those secret prisons, you're gravely mistaken -If you think he has stopped using 'enhanced interrogation' to get info out of terrorists, you're gravely mistaken The list goes on.
Milton Bradley Member	Wed Oct 28 10:21:56 Bush presided over the worst economic crisis in the US since 1981. Therefore he is worse by default. Basically, Obama has done nothing. Bush did stuff, but he did the wrong things and did them badly. Obama vs Bush can be summed up with this: Doing nothing > being mind bogglingly incompetent.
Nimatzo Member	Wed Oct 28 10:55:10 >>Nobody cares about the rest of the world. I thought you'd understand that most Americans don't care what you think of us by now.<< Who the fuck cares what Americans think? We were talking about the facts and to reach conclusions regarding political opinions we need broad polls and a broad consensus.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Oct 28 12:00:42 "reach conclusions regarding political opinions we need broad polls and a broad consensus." When the rest of the world votes for a POTUS, then this statement will be true. Until then, it's garbage. GG. "Bush presided over the worst economic crisis in the US since 1981. Therefore he is worse by default." To say this was all Bush's fault is absurd. In fact, he tried to fix some of the problems that have led us here today.
roland Member	Wed Oct 28 12:01:21 "He HAS continued the Bush doctrine." Really? Which preemptive war did he started against people who is believed to harbour terrorist? Which regime did he unilaterally deposed? Judging by your answer, you don't even know what is the Bush doctrine, do you? There's another Sarah Palin here.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Oct 28 12:06:18 I know the Bush doctrine as well as you don't know English. The Bush doctrine isn't confined to starting preemptive wars dude. Geeze.
roland Member	Wed Oct 28 12:24:46 The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of former United States president George W. Bush. The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to secure itself from countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups, which was used to justify the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.[1] Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a potential or perceived threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate; a policy of spreading democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating terrorism; and a willingness to pursue U.S. military interests in a unilateral way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine
roland Member	Wed Oct 28 12:26:30 "The Bush doctrine isn't confined to starting preemptive wars dude. Geeze. " It isnt, it included: Preemptive strike Regime change (Spreading democracy through force) Unilateralism
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Oct 28 12:45:54 On foreign policy, Obama is no different than Bush at all. He talks a good game though.
roland Member	Wed Oct 28 13:15:33 And yet none of the above applied to him. Ah well.
MrPresident07 Member	Wed Oct 28 13:20:07 Alright roland, whatever you say. When the Obama delusion is over, I'll be right there to forgive you for your idiotic support of this guy. BTW-where are you from?
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: