GOP Rep.: Nuke Iran If War Is Necessary

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, Dec 5, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #1
    This is what passes for a member of the House Armed Services Committee. This from a guy who thinks Iran is run by extremists. Amazing how clueless many of our so-called leaders are.

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gop-rep-nuke-iran-if-war-is-necessary
     
  2. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #2
    The only time I have seen Americans actually demonstrating for war rather than against war was during the Iranian hostage crisis. There's a lot of history between the US and Iran that is negative.... Having said that, we should keep using diplomacy, for any unprovoked military adventure would be like pouring gasoline on a flame.
     
  3. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #3
    That's an understatement, given that the US/UK over threw a democratically elected leader in 1953, an put a bloody despot in his place.

    The US/UK supported Iraq under Saddam in a war against Iran in the in the 1980's.




    .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état
     
  4. Huntn, Dec 5, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2013

    Huntn Suspended

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #4
    Is this man (Rep. Duncan Hunter) frick'n insane? This is the type of talk that in an adversaries mind legitimizes smuggling a nuke into the U.S. for a preemptive strike. The epitaph on humanities's grave stone will be "We loved nukes!" and it will be thanks to dangerous idiots like this.
     
  5. Jesla macrumors 6502

    Jesla

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Location:
    Tennessee USA
    #5
    Dang!....Where is all the criticism for all the hate their leaders spew?

    One sane comment from one of our leaders and......BOOM!
     
  6. rdowns thread starter macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #6

    Sane comment?
     
  7. Huntn, Dec 5, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2013

    Huntn Suspended

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #7
    While it could eventually become a consideration, when someone like Duncan starts blabbing about the nuclear option prematurely, they are fools. It is not a sane comment in any shape or form unless an individual has a death wish, likes playing chicken, or is just plain STUPID.
     
  8. mrkramer, Dec 5, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2013

    mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #8
    I'm thinking if there were any leaders in Iran talking like this about us we would be doing a preemptive strike with nukes. So yeah I'd say he's insane and probably hoping to push Iran to do something that would justify attacking them.
     
  9. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    What are you thinking of?
     
  10. Huntn, Dec 5, 2013
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2013

    Huntn Suspended

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #10
    This is the deal. We are in conflict with Iran, from a historical perspective, a conflict we started, or at a minimum got the ball rolling. We preach to Pakistan not to be tempted to use their nukes against India, but when we face a conflict, we have at least one buffoon who publicly puts nukes on the table? Un-frack'n believable! The Administration should tell him to shut the **** up! When we as a nation legitimize the use of nuclear weapons as an option for conflict in any circumstance less than outright survival, we just opened Pandora's box.

     
  11. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #11
    Nuke Iran. Brilliant. :rolleyes: We nuke them, China nukes us, WW3 ensues, and boom... humans cease to exist because of their stupidity.


    This man should be locked up in a mental institution. Then when he gets out, send him to work at burger king. He clearly doesn't have the mental capacity to anything more complex than flipping burgers.
     
  12. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #12
    I am aware of that - it was a mistake on the US side that occurred before I was born.

    An even worse, possibly criminal, mistake. The irony is that the US supported Iraq in part because of the hostage crisis, but I remember a 60 Minutes news show just before the Shah fell that described the activities of his secret service on US soil. As a consequence support for the Shah in the US was dwindling to nothing when the hostages were taken, and indeed Saint Carter took a lot of flack for accepting the Shah into the US. Had the hostages not been taken I suspect the US would have accepted the new Iranian regime more readily.

    In any case, let us hope things go better now.
     
  13. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #13
    What Rep. Hunter doesn't understand is a primary reason the Iranian want a nuclear weapon is to deter the United States from invading or bombing the country in the first place.

    The Iranians want power, prestige, and the world's biggest stick, but arguing that if they try to hold the same stick that Pakistan, India, Russia, and Israel have (just to name the nuclear powers near Iran), we will bomb them is just another reason to accelerate the program.
     
  14. Huntn Suspended

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #14
    I don't know if the U.S. and U.K are unique (I suspect not), but we've had a habit of playing ball with the friendly countries/dictators and turning on those who don't cooperate. Oh they are good! ( Saudis, Saddam). Oh, now they are bad and e-v-i-l! (Saddam, and Mosaddegh*)

    *According to this Wiki link, Mosaddegh was not a dictator but the prime minister who took steps that threatened to make Iran a full democracy and nationalize the oil fields that belonged to BP.

    (Wikipedia source)

    ----------


    You mean they want the ability to protect themselves? Preposterous! Note, this does not signal my desire for them to have nukes... I'm selfish. :p
     
  15. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #15
    Any congressman that even suggests the use of nuclear weapons should immediately be thrown out of office, IMO.
     
  16. Jesla macrumors 6502

    Jesla

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Location:
    Tennessee USA
    #16
    What?.....We should pretend we don't have nukes?

    Oh come on......your kidding right....
     
  17. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #17
    Those weapons should be destroyed. The use of a nuclear weapon should considered a war crime, will all involved tried and executed!
     
  18. Scepticalscribe Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    The Far Horizon
    #18
    Excellent post.

    The overthrow of Mr Mossadeq in 1953 in the form of a disgraceful a coup backed by the secret services of both the UK and US was a turning point for Muslim societies, one which sent them the message that democracy was an indulgence permitted to the advanced west, but deemed to be too expensive a luxury to be on offer to those benighted souls dwelling in the developing world.

    Worth noting is the fact that Mr Mossadeq was a democratically elected leader in elections deemed free and fair who proceeded to govern for the good of the people of his country to the dismay of western owned oil companies such as the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, which later became BP.

    Of course, amnesiacs in our world tend to forget that the Shah's administration was rather close to the west (and indeed US) in the decades that followed. The enmity that followed was a consequence of the overthrow of those who overthrew the Shah.



    The Shah had been overthrown by the time the hostage crisis occurred; it was the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini which seized the hostages, not that of the Shah.

    However, the statement of the US (Republican) public representative quoted above is so inane, obtuse, uninformed and is so utterly witless about what is happening that it is unnerving and rather unsettling.

    Aside from nursing ancient grievances, and nurturing deeply rooted prejudices, the Republican representative in question may not be aware of the fact that earlier this year, an election (regarded as relatively free and fair, and resulting in a peaceful transition of power) took place in Iran. It resulted in the election of President Rouhani, who is viewed as somewhat more moderate than his predecessor, and who certainly seems to be genuinely interested in defusing conflicted situations, and in building bridges with alienated neighbours.

    Thus, a recent agreement - of genuinely historic importance - between the US and Iran, which should serve to defuse tensions and improve ties was reached a few, short weeks ago. Moreover, this is not the only such initiative undertaken in recent weeks by Iran.
     
  19. sovereign macrumors 6502

    sovereign

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    #19
    China's state run media disclosed plans, projections, and maps of a massive nuke strike on the US and nothing is done: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/inside-china-nuclear-submarines-capable-of-widespr/

    Chinese military generals have been threatening to nuke LA for over a decade as well.
     
  20. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #20
  21. Huntn Suspended

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #21
    You don't believe that the U.S. does not have contingency plans in place?
    Do you suggest a per-emptive strike? ;)

    Chinese officials don't give interviews and say if the U.S./any country displeases us, they'll nuke them, do they?

    Sounds like you are missing some pieces of the puzzle. What do you suggest needs to be done? Or are you saying by virtue of these plans it's ok if some U.S. Congressman talks about nuking Iran?
     
  22. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #22
    Well, the reason nothing was "done" is because US officials aren't going to react to such an obvious bit of propaganda. Pentagon officials know what the Chinese have in terms of ballistic missiles and have certainly already calculated the worst-case scenarios should the US and China end up at war.

    Remember, from the Chinese perspective, the US has been sailing a large, potentially hostile navy in the South China Sea and had bases throughout the Pacific. The US has even considered negotiating for an air base in Thailand and a deep-water port in Cam Ranh Bay, Vietnam.

    It also worth noting that the US continues to work on missile defense systems, making it more apparent to the Chinese that a large, overwhelming strike would be necessary.


    Of course. We have a layered response starting with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles that could be launched from B-2s out of Diego Garcia, up to 450 LGM-30 Minuteman IIIs each carrying a warhead with a yield of 300 to 500 kilotons, which could be launched from silos in North Dakota.
     
  23. Jesla macrumors 6502

    Jesla

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Location:
    Tennessee USA
    #23
    So what then? We sit by and wait until Iran tries to nuke Israel off the map?
     
  24. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #24
    First of all Iran isn't that stupid to launch nukes, they want them for defence and to prevent things like a US preemptive strike. Second unless by we you are referring to Israel there isn't anyone else who should be getting involved militarily there. Israel can defend themselves if their policies lead to an attack on themselves. The US is responsible to the US not for Israel.
     
  25. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #25
    Where have you been the past year?

    If you haven't noticed, Ahmadinejad left office earlier this year, and has been replaced by someone not only more moderate, but more diplomatic than Ahmadinejad ever has been. That is the biggest reason why we have been in talks with Iran and have been getting more cooperation from them than we have since Ahmadinejad took office!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Rouhani#Foreign_policy

    And yet, we have idiots like this Red who wants to keep a very twitchy, trigger-happy finger on the nuke button, thinking that 'might makes right' on the world stage. It was that type of thinking that got us the casualties we did in Iraq.

    We should be damn lucky we have people like Rouhani who is willing and able to sit down and talk things out and settle differences without any bloodshed. But something tells me that you are not up to date on current events in Iran.

    BL.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page