Iran is no threat

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MACDRIVE, Jan 27, 2007.

  1. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #1
    Guardian


    Boy, that's sure a relief. All this time I had been worried for no reason. Iran won't have the bomb for at least 10 years. It's time to break out the sun umbrellas and the lounge chairs and start drinking some tropical fruit punch. :cool:
     
  2. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #2
    macdrive, perhaps you could just say straight out what you think is the solution to Iran's nuclear development? Do you think military action is the way to resolve this? Why do you think Iran would wish to build a nuclear weapon? Could they feel threatened by US actions on their border? Could they not want to be without nuclear weapons while the US and Israel both have them? Does it matter to you what their motives are, or do you just don't want any muslim nation to have the capability? Would it make any sense to you to try to disarm the entire region of nuclear weapons so that no nation feels threatened? In short, macdrive, you keep starting threads with articles aimed at pointing out an Iranian threat, but I don't see much beyond alarmist posting in the way of thinking on the subject.
     
  3. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #3
    two borders, technically.

    and i'll second the emotion about two-threads-a-day-about-the-iran-threat. seriously macdrive, you could keep it all in one thread.
     
  4. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #4
    4 if you count pakistan and turkey since they are US allies

    so i guess calling them surrounded is allowed
     
  5. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #5
    There's no arguing. A country with WMDs, a history of sponsoring terrorist groups, and a desire to topple unfriendly governments by radical means is indeed a threat to world security.

    I say we invade and destroy their infrastructure now, take and secure the oil installations on the coast first then push inland towards the leader's country retreat. If we plan it carefully enough, we'll be in Dallas within weeks.
     
  6. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #6
    Don't forget we've gotta make a lightning strike before the invasion to take out the damned Wolverines - they totally surprised us last time.
     
  7. calculus Guest

    calculus

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    #7
    Who can you be talking about? Answers on a postcard...
     
  8. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #8
    I guess I'd believe Iran is no threat, if they'd just quit threatening. When the leader of a government utters threats, I tend to believe he means what he says.

    'Rat
     
  9. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #9
    Do you get it yet?
     
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    They'll probably welcome us with flowers, too.
     
  11. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #11
    of course technically the Iranian nuclear program started long before the USA had forces on Iran's borders so there really isnt a direct connection

    and I agree with you that one thead a day about the Iran thread is plenty
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    Technically, Iran's nuclear programme apparently wasn't a problem until they started talking about setting up a petro-bourse trading in Euros.
     
  13. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #13
    so you're saying that Iran's nuclear program is indeed a problem?
     
  14. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #14
    Skunk thinks everyone should have Nukes, not a good scenario.
     
  15. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #15
    It certainly wasn't a problem when US companies stood to make multi billion dollar deals with the Shah.


    The Ford administration -- in which Cheney succeeded Rumsfeld as chief of staff and Wolfowitz was responsible for nonproliferation issues at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency -- continued intense efforts to supply Iran with U.S. nuclear technology until President Jimmy Carter succeeded Ford in 1977.

    That history is absent from major Bush administration speeches, public statements and news conferences on Iran.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3983-2005Mar26.html
     
  16. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #16
    I'd go for a goal of no one having them.

    Seems we always leave out the thousands in the US arsenal when we talk about this subject. It's as if we expect the rest of the world to live forever under the "benevolent" nuclear umbrella of the US military. Why should anyone think this is acceptable? I would think we have a choice of moving to eliminate our own stockpiles along with others, or face a growing number of nations who decide the only way to stop the possibility of a US invasion is to have these weapons.
     
  17. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #17
    I agree about no one having them but we may need a few for the next asteroid,comet or chunck of rock heading our direction. If Iran wants nuclear energy for electricity thats fine, but not for weapons and we should do everything it takes for them not to have them.
     
  18. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #18
    Get it, dynamicv? Apparently, a lot better than you do. The Iranian leadership, ever since the fall of the Shah, has saber-rattled and threatened. They've financed such as Hezbollah, and have recently said that Israel will be nuked ASAP. The present leader has threatened an Armageddon-like scenario in some sort of "second coming" scenario.

    This all started long before Bush 1 or Bush 2. It started a helluva long time before April of 2003 and our entry into Iraq.

    To state that our official statements about the present situation in Iran are somehow unilateral and unwarranted threats is to ignore the past history of Iran's behavior.

    'Rat
     
  19. MACDRIVE thread starter macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #19
    That means at 11:19 PM tonight, I get to start another one. :D
     
  20. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #20
    a slow reduction, please. not the kind that takes only a couple hours :)
     
  21. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #21
    It's the "everything it takes" that worries me. What does that mean to you, DHM? Can you see another US invasion as acceptable in order to prevent this from happening? Where does that end? If any other nation tries to get such weapons will we go to war? Or is it only against nations that we view as unfriendly? See, to me, drawing the line in the sand that nuclear weapons in the hands of any nation we don't like means war, also means an awful lot of wars in our near future. I think we've already proved in Iraq this strategy doesn't work (and there we went to war under the false assumption of nuclear weapons.) If we continue down this road, not only do we become the world's worst aggressors (a title many think we already own,) we will surely lose.
     
  22. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #22
    But zim, that way we solve the problem of global warming in one fell swoop. Nuclear winter will stop those nasty rising temperatures. :eek:
     
  23. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #23
    I think we have more international support if we invade Iran. It won't be a go it alone type of thing.
     
  24. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #24
    If the world cant stand up against the proliferation of these weapons it cant stand up for anything.
     
  25. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool

Share This Page