Nuclear strike against Iran due end of March

matt b

Indexing all opinion
i think we have every reason to be worried marc- remember bush and his cronies want nuclear war because it will hasten their ascent to heaven


from znet.org:

Newsweek: Where do you put George W. Bush in the pantheon of American presidents?

Chomsky: He's more or less a symbol, but I think the people around him are the most dangerous administration in American history. I think they're driving the world to destruction. There are two major threats that face the world, threats of the destruction of the species, and they're not a joke. One of them is nuclear war, and the other is environmental catastrophe, and they are driving toward destruction in both domains. They're compelling competitors to escalate their own offensive military capacity—Russia, China, now Iran. That means putting their offensive nuclear missiles on hair-trigger alert.

The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes genius, literally.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
It's difficult, on the one hand a nuclear Iran is surely a bad thing and ought to be avoided if possible (there is another whole debate there about why one country should be allowed nuclear weapons and not another but if there are some that shouldn’t then Iran is one of them at present (as is the US)) but a pre-emptive nuclear strike can surely never be justified.
One of the main arguments used by those in favour of a nuclear deterrent is that no one would ever attack a country with such a powerful defence and there would therefore be no war; if countries with nuclear weapons can strike pre-emptively then this completely breaks down. If Iran does in fact already have nuclear weapons then the knowledge that it was about to face a nuclear attack would be the perfect reason to use them, what I’m trying to say is that if you have an admitted policy of pre-emptive nuclear strike that actually reverses the idea of mutually-assured-destruction and means that countries facing countries with nuclear power would be more, not less likely to attack.
You would hope that even the even the present US administration would hesitate before changing the present balance but I’m not that confident to be honest.
 

bassnation

the abyss
HMGovt said:
It is worrying. I'm not sure the new 32-inch High Definition TV I've ordered will arrive in time to catch the show.

best not book that holiday i had planned in april i guess. by then we'll all be living underground and mutating from all that radiation.
 
I live within 25 miles of a big US airbase and I've noticed a definite increase in activity in the past month - dozens of F-15s heading to the base for a start - never saw any before December and I've lived here for a while - plus various large transport planes.

And my god, have you seen the latest Army recruitment ads? There was a one during a Big Brother commercial break last night. THE most militarised Armed forces ad i've ever seen. No more manning checkpoints, digging kids out of rubble or touchy feely stuff like that - no, the army is now looking for mechanised infantry, who'll leap out of troop carriers, teeth bared, guns drawn.

I visited the 'secret nuclear bunker' at Kelvedon Hatch last week, maybe it's skewed my judgement.
 
Last edited:

IdleRich

IdleRich
Those news stories both predate Sharon's aneurysm. I would have thought that the Israelis might find it difficult to get too involved in something like this until they know who is running the country, so with a bit of luck you might get the tv in time.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Yeah, why would it need to be a nuclear strike? Not that I'm totally comfortable with a unilateral "conventional" strike either. On the other hand, I'm not comfortable with Iran having the bomb and I don't see them just agreeing to halt work unlesss they believe that they are actually under threat, maybe that's what it's all about, brinkmanship.
 
D

droid

Guest
One lesson that all developing nations have learned since the invasion of Iraq (and not North Korea), is that the only sure-fire deterrent to US and British aggression is the development of nuclear strike capabilities.

Even if Iran wasnt being run by a bunch of psychopathic facists and had a responsible and democratic government - building a bomb would still be the smart thing to do tactically... how else are you to defend yourself from all those nuclear armed nations that have been after your oil for the last 60 years or so?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
"Even if Iran wasnt being run by a bunch of psychopathic facists and had a responsible and democratic government - building a bomb would still be the smart thing to do tactically"

No disagreement there, it's in Iran's interest to have the bomb. Equally it's in the rest of the world's interest for them not to have it.
I don't want Iran to have the bomb because they are being run by a bunch of psychopathic fascists who are likely to use it whereas the US and British governments' don't want them to have it because they prefer the status quo as it is but we want the same thing on this one I think.
 

dominic

Beast of Burden
not only is there a lot of oil in iran, the country also has a very large share of the world's natural gas resources

natural gas will be the "bridge" fuel b/w the oil economy and some kind of post-natural resource economy

an independent iran therefore poses a threat to the so-called american way of life -- and it's only by having a nuclear capacity that iran can be independent

so even if iran were not run by what someone upthread refers to as "psychopathic fascists," a nuclear iran would be very difficult for an energy-hungry america (and the rest of the west -- face it, we're all complicit b/c we all enjoy the benefits relative to others) to deal with

but i find it hard to believe that u.s. would resort to tactical nukes to eliminate iran's nuclear capacity -- that would be upping the ante several times over in terms of inviting a wmd attack against nyc or some other american city
 
D

droid

Guest
dominic said:
an independent iran therefore poses a threat to the so-called american way of life -- and it's only by having a nuclear capacity that iran can be independent

so even if iran were not run by what someone upthread refers to as "psychopathic fascists," a nuclear iran would be very difficult for an energy-hungry america (and the rest of the west -- face it, we're all complicit b/c we all enjoy the benefits relative to others) to deal with

Kind of explains why the West has done everything in its power to prevent independent development in resource rich regions since forever. The 'threat of a good example' is far more dangerous in the eyes of political and military planners than the threat of a limited Nuclear defense. (which is all N.Korea or Iran could feasibly manage in the near future). Hence the demonisation of Cuba, Vietnam, Iran etc...

Who was it that said that giving nuclear weapons to every nation is the best way to prevent war? In the current climate of global gangsterism, wild west style interventions, and disdain for international law - he might have been onto something....
 

polystyle

Well-known member
Next ...

Perhaps closer then we knew .
Saw just the headline about US - Iran nuclear on the browser news on the way in ...
 

bassnation

the abyss
Paul Hotflush said:
This thread is the best yet. Easily the funniest thing I've read on this board (and there have been a few!).

my favourites are the comedy foaming-at-the-mouth neo-con satires that get posted here - can't we have more of those paul? ;)

alternatively you could always argue the point.
 
Last edited:

polystyle

Well-known member
Con foam

Well, there's plenty of neo- con & Bush league actions to foam about (Jack Abramoff/Tom Delay , NSA wiretapscooping up every International call made , email & private mail taping )
, some we are finding out about now / some have been tripping along unseen since they got the bright ideas .

Sure, disinformation is only half the NSA's and their brothers budget
but when you see & hear the news that Iran unsealing their nuclear facilities yesterday what does it make you think ?
Removed enough from what's going on out there to be so 'over it' ?
Oh it's a real cheery laugh alright
 
Top