Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 11 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#17681 - 04/11/06 04:17 AM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: chazman]
Daniel Online   content
veteran

Registered: 05/23/01
Posts: 1515
So: The doctrine of prevention means force when W says it means force, and means diplomacy when W says it means diplomacy. In short, it means whatever the administration says it means in any particular circumstance, and since the administration won't tell us what objective standards it applies in determining what it means, it means nothing.

I guess we shouldn't have expected anything more from those who described themselves as "compassionate conservates," which also appears to mean whatever they want it to mean from situation to situation.

And down the rabbit hole we continue to fall . . . .

Top
#17682 - 04/11/06 07:16 PM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: oenophore]
chazman Offline
old hand

Registered: 02/07/02
Posts: 944
Iran's answer to this wild speculation...
Quote:

April 11, 2006
Iran Claims Nuclear Breakthrough
By NAZILA FATHI and CHRISTINE HAUSER

TEHRAN, April 11 — President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said today that Iranian scientists had achieved the goal of enriching uranium for its nuclear power program and that the nation was determined to develop production on an industrial scale.

"The nuclear fuel cycle at the laboratory level has been completed, and uranium with the desired enrichment for nuclear power plants was achieved," Mr. Ahmedinejad said in a speech that was broadcast live from the city of Mashad.

"Iran has joined the nuclear countries of the world," he later added. "This is a starting point for more major points of success for the Iranian nation."

Mr. Ahmadinejad also said that Iran was treading a path for the production of industrial fuel.

He said that other countries must respect Iran's right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program.




Top
#17683 - 04/11/06 10:23 PM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: chazman]
Daniel Online   content
veteran

Registered: 05/23/01
Posts: 1515
1. My understanding is that international law allows nations to have nuclear power programs.

2. My understanding is that even if Iran is really aiming at building a bomb, it's not imminent. According to an expert on tonght's PBS Newshour, U.S. intelligence puts an Iranian nuke at 3 to 5 years away.

The issues surrounding Iran's possible acquisition of a nuclear bomb should be taken seriously, but I also think today's announcement should not be blown out of proportion. After all, there's really very little we can do about it on our own in the short term anyway.

Top
#17684 - 04/21/06 10:44 AM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: Daniel]
oenophore Online   confused
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/24/01
Posts: 5972
Loc: 212 land
_________________________

Top
#17685 - 04/21/06 01:18 PM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: oenophore]
pedestrian Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/05/02
Posts: 2244
Loc: a heavily fortified bunker!
War by October is highly unlikely. This process is going to take years before we get to that point.

Top
#17686 - 04/21/06 02:05 PM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: Daniel]
alicex4 Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/05/00
Posts: 3400
"The issues surrounding Iran's possible acquisition of a nuclear bomb should be taken seriously, but I also think today's announcement should not be blown out of proportion. After all, there's really very little we can do about it on our own in the short term anyway. "


No worries Daniel, Iran is elected to the Asia seat of the UN Disarmament Committee. Am I the only person who sees the irony?

Top
#17687 - 04/21/06 06:59 PM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: Daniel]
timh Offline
member

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 194
Loc: Delaware
"2. My understanding is that even if Iran is really aiming at building a bomb, it's not imminent. According to an expert on tonght's PBS Newshour, U.S. intelligence puts an Iranian nuke at 3 to 5 years away."

If this is the same "U.S. intellegence" that claimed that Iraq had WMD's, it probably means that Iran is alot closer to having the bomb than said experts would like to admitt.
_________________________
Tim

Top
#17688 - 04/21/06 07:09 PM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: timh]
zachres Offline
addict

Registered: 04/03/03
Posts: 495
Loc: In the midst of a "psychotic b...
Quote:

"2. My understanding is that even if Iran is really aiming at building a bomb, it's not imminent. According to an expert on tonght's PBS Newshour, U.S. intelligence puts an Iranian nuke at 3 to 5 years away."

If this is the same "U.S. intellegence" that claimed that Iraq had WMD's, it probably means that Iran is alot closer to having the bomb than said experts would like to admitt.





Actually, the logical conclusion would be the inverse.. that Iran is much farther away from having the bomb than the intelligence predicts... assuming it's the same source, analyst, etc.. obviously, we lean towards alarmism.

Zach
_________________________
Give me liberty, or give me death!

Top
#17689 - 04/21/06 11:46 PM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: alicex4]
Daniel Online   content
veteran

Registered: 05/23/01
Posts: 1515
We can complain all we want about Iran's potential to make a nuke. We can speculate all we want about when that might happen. The operative question is: what can we do about it? The answer seems to me to be: not much. A military strike would probably only delay the program, not stop it. It would spawn myriads of Al Qaeda-type organizations. It would radicalize the Iranian population, most of whom don't really hate us at the moment. There are no good options here, only bad ones and worse ones. And of the options I've heard, seems to me that the military one falls in the latter category.

Top
#17690 - 04/22/06 02:09 AM Re: Strange and Scary Thoughts [Re: Daniel]
mworking Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/26/04
Posts: 764
Quote:

"2. My understanding is that even if Iran is really aiming at building a bomb, it's not imminent. According to an expert on tonght's PBS Newshour, U.S. intelligence puts an Iranian nuke at 3 to 5 years away."

If this is the same "U.S. intellegence" that claimed that Iraq had WMD's, it probably means that Iran is alot closer to having the bomb than said experts would like to admitt.




No it means exaclty what Daniel, wrote before - which was that GWs admisitraion will tell us what ever they think will lead us to believe what is good for them is good for us.

Quote:

We can complain all we want about Iran's potential to make a nuke. We can speculate all we want about when that might happen. The operative question is: what can we do about it? The answer seems to me to be: not much. A military strike would probably only delay the program, not stop it. It would spawn myriads of Al Qaeda-type organizations. It would radicalize the Iranian population, most of whom don't really hate us at the moment. There are no good options here, only bad ones and worse ones. And of the options I've heard, seems to me that the military one falls in the latter category.




You may have just convinced me that we will be at war wih Iran shortly!

Top
Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored