Nuclear Option against Iran? Have the Bushies totally lost their minds?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Sayhey, Apr 8, 2006.

  1. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #1
    Yahoo News

    If this happens, we have final proof we have a madman with his finger on the nuclear button. Time to start impeachment proceedings NOW!!!
     
  2. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #2
    Yea an imminent attack on Iran has been predicted before, both by Scott Ritter, and by Hersh as well IIRC. Somehow I'm not yet convinced Bush is quite that out of touch with reality.

    Although it would fit the 'Bush will use a nuke on someone' prediction that has been floating around this forum for a number of years...
     
  3. Sayhey thread starter macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #3
    I hope you're right, mac. Here is a link to Hersh's article in the New Yorker. From the article,

     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    I'd be very surprised if there WASN'T planning going on... but I just don't think the public support will be there for another military action that looks like a war of choice right now. And a surprise strike would be a very risky political move -- it could easily backfire and put the GOP in a minority status for another generation.
     
  5. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #5
    Trouble is, Bush - and Blair, for that matter - seems to believe that he stands at a Crossroads of History™: they really think that it's their destiny to take the "bold but unpopular" decision which nobody else has the cojones to take, which the world will thank them for, eventually. They probably reason that the achievements and vision of Alexander, Julius Caesar and Napoleon were not properly appreciated by their contemporaries either. These guys are in it for the history books.

    Goddess help us all.
     
  6. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #6
    Yeah, the last and final editions.
     
  7. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #7
    The special "End Times" presentation bookshelf. While stocks last.
     
  8. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #8
    I'll take the hidebound edition, edged in guilt.
     
  9. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
  10. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    I must confess to being slightly foxed.
     
  11. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #11
    He doesnt have to, technology with conventional explosives is still progressing. Iran is screwing up just as Saddam screwed up. If they would take the carrot they both would be better off but the arrogance makes sure they get the stick. If Bush bombed all those nuclear facilities in Iran his poll #s would go up. Thats how i see it. Plus i wouldnt feel bad about a Russian Nuclear weapons program that got destroyed in Iran. They are giving the missile tech and bomb tech to the Iranians so its only natural we destroy it.:D

    Bush doesnt need nukes, conventional weapons can do the job.
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    Is "the job" setting the world on fire?
     
  13. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #13
    no, it's solving global warming with a nuclear winter.
     
  14. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #14
    Nope but if Russia is spreading nuclear tech and missiles someone has to step in and stop it.

    U.S................... World Police because someone has to do it.

    After we destroy the nuclear program we should give Russia a few pointers on their bad behavior. The world should be raising hell at the russians for spreading this stuff. But lets see we are tied now to russia for space trips and oil so nothing is done:rolleyes:
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    Of course not... Bush has never even heard of the end-of-days part of Christianity!
     
  16. iPhil macrumors 68040

    iPhil

    #16

    zimv20 seems like all the predictions that you made will come fruitful and i'm scaried of bush with his greasy thumb hoovering over that button now .. :eek: :eek: :mad:


    The GOP thinks there a teflon-don never does nothing wrong with the USA:eek:
     
  17. Airforce macrumors 6502a

    Airforce

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    #17
    Yup, in fact, they are testing them out in Nevada.:cool:
     
  18. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #18
    President Ford's team endorsed Iranian plans to build a massive nuclear energy industry, but also worked hard to complete a multibillion-dollar deal that would have given Tehran control of large quantities of plutonium and enriched uranium -- the two pathways to a nuclear bomb. Either can be shaped into the core of a nuclear warhead, and obtaining one or the other is generally considered the most significant obstacle to would-be weapons builders. Iran, a U.S. ally then, had deep pockets and close ties to Washington. U.S. companies, including Westinghouse and General Electric, scrambled to do business there.

    Could it be that the US trained the scientists running the Iranian nuke progam?
    Yes it could.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran's_nuclear_program
     
  19. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #19
    Russia is building the reactors today so lets not bring up the 80s, the Shaw and Ford.
     
  20. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #20
    Inconvenient history,I see.Russia,China,Germany,UK,France and especially the US have been up to their necks in this for donkeys years.Could you tell me Israels position on inspections by the IAEA.:rolleyes:
     
  21. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #21
    Israel isnt threating its neighbors like Iran has threatened Israel, lets not forget which countrys president just called for the destruction of Israel on public tv while saying millions of jews werent murdered by the Germans.

    If Iran really wanted nuclear power it would have gone about it a different way. Iran doesnt want nuclear power sitting on all that oil but it does want those nuclear weapons. Time for a spanking.
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    A spanking won't fix the problem, it will only delay it and put any hope of international control beyond possibility.

    Iran will just move their bomb production to a more secure location. If they have to, they'll put in in a city, or they'll bury it far underground. Remember, you can go far enough underground such that you are protected from even the most powerful nuclear weapons. Think NORAD.

    So a spanking will, at best, postpone Iranian bomb development for 3-5 years. Meanwhile Shiite Iraq goes up in flames. And remember, the Shia aren't the ones we're already fighting in Iraq. That's largely a Sunni insurrection. The Shia are working with us (nominally at least) at the moment, and you can see how well things are going. What happens if they turn on us?

    So we'd have 3-5 years extra, but we'd give ourselves easily as much work dealing with the majority in Iraq rising up in anger against us.

    And don't for a second think that if we nuke a few Iranian locations, that the locals will be greeting us with candy and flowers...
     
  23. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #23
    You are too generous, 3-5 years? a good spanking should set it back 10 or 20:D
     
  24. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #24
    Well! Bush has certainly solved the problem of how you attack Iran with a depleted military, hasn't he? :rolleyes:

    Riiiiiight....

    Hey, Bush will be making history all right -- first he comes out with his "pre-emptive" wars, making a mockery of the US' "no-first-strike" policy, and now he's prepared to do something we never want to do again...use nukes.

    I don't like this development either, not only because of the nuclear chain reaction argument, and because Bush has shown that he can't be trusted to do anything right, much less instigate a nuclear war!

    I will ask those others here who are against it, though...what would you do about Iran's nukes? "Nothing" does not appear to be (to me) to be a viable option, since these people are fanatics and are led by a guy who clearly doesn't have all his marbles. Does anyone know what the US (or the world) could do short of the Dr. Strangelove approach?
     
  25. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #25
    And set the rest of us back three or four centuries....
     

Share This Page