NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7515589.stm

US offers Iran nuclear deadline

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Javier Solana on his hopes for an answer from Iran

Iran must decide between confrontation and co-operation in the dispute over its nuclear plans, the US has warned.

At talks in Geneva, envoys from the US, EU and UN asked Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment in return for a pledge not to introduce new sanctions.

Iran gave no guarantees it would halt its activities, so the diplomats gave Tehran two weeks to provide an answer.

The meeting was the first time US and Iranian officials have held face-to-face talks on the nuclear

issue.

Senior US official William Burns was present at the Geneva talks - although he made no public comment.

Instead, state department spokesman Sean McCormack issued a strongly-worded statement in Washington.

"We hope the Iranian people understand that their leaders need to make a choice between co-operation, which would bring benefits to all, and confrontation, which can only lead to further isolation," he said.

'New opportunity'

Mr McCormack added that Mr Burns had delivered a "clear simple message" that Washington was "serious" about the incentives package but that it would only negotiate with Iran if it upheld its side of the deal.

Diplomats had hoped that Iran would respond to a so-called "freeze-for-freeze" offer, under which a freeze of Iran's uranium enrichment programme at its current levels would be matched by a Western pledge not to strengthen sanctions on Tehran.

"It was a constructive meeting, but still we didn't get the answer to our questions," EU envoy Javier Solana told reporters.


'FREEZE-FOR-FREEZE' OFFER
Iran suspends its nuclear activities including the installation of any new centrifuges
At same time the six world powers refrain from any new Security Council resolution on sanctions
Talks can then start on long-term deal on recognising Iran's right to develop nuclear energy for civilian purposes, and lifting of sanctions

"We hope very much we get the answer and we hope it will be done in a couple of weeks," he said.

Mr Solana said he had agreed with Iran's chief negotiator, Saeed Jalili, to speak again either by telephone or personally in two weeks.

The BBC's Jon Leyne in Tehran says Iran is interested in the offer but it is unclear whether there are divisions in the leadership or the Iranians are playing for time.

Mr Jalili said he had put forward many positive ideas and he urged Western powers not turn away from negotiations.

"This package we have proposed contains a number of possibilities. In a nutshell, it is a new opportunity which should not be lost."

But doubt was cast over the value of the talks, after a member of the Iranian delegation said there was "no chance" of a freeze on the uranium-enrichment programme.

Iran says its nuclear facilities are designed to meet its energy needs, denying that it has a weapons programme.

But Tehran's continued activity is defying UN Security Council demands to halt enrichment.

Rising tensions

In addition to the EU, Iranian and US envoys, the talks in Geneva's city hall were attended by representatives from Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia.

The US and Iran have had no diplomatic relations since the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the taking of hostages at the US embassy in Tehran.

Formal contact between the two countries has been extremely limited, though last year they met at ambassadorial level to discuss security in Iraq.

The meeting came after weeks of rising tensions in the Middle East.

The Iranians test-fired missiles last week, and a series of threats and counter-threats between Iran and Israel has been watched nervously in the West.

My first impression: Oh shit.

My second impression: Oh double shit.

My third impression: Let's hope there's not a real threat of force backing this up. The last thing we need is Bush getting us into another war before he gets unceremoniously tossed out of office.

EDIT(After first fifty posts or so): My real impression: While I'm on the fence about whether Iran should possess nuclear weaponry or not, and whether or not they're actually gaming for it, I am glad that talks are actually going to be concluded. Diplomatic action sometimes requires strong sentiments, and now is the time for such sentiments, since they're clearly not going to listen otherwise.

Ah, fuck. My chances of not being deployed before college just dropped rather drastically. sigh*

Let us hope that Bush doesn't fuck us over any more before he leaves. God damn it...

EDIT-Hey, they didn't say military confrontation. Maybe they mean more sanctions. Though with Bush...ah, shit.

Heres my impressions :/

1st impression: :o

2nd impression: :O

3rd impression: bush-----> :confused: :mp5: <-------- Me -YOU FUCKED US ALL D:<

The whole world will know EXACTLY when Iran develops a viable nuclear weapon...

...30 min. later, or less; there will be a smoking hole where Israel USED to be.


...you know damn good and well there's no way in HELL The U.S.A. will allow that to occur.

Lets pray the people advising Pres. Bush are not dumb enough to do anything.

Bush ------------->:eek: - oh shit I did it again my bad

Ummm...there's that history thing, again.

Lets pray the people advising Pres. Bush are not dumb enough to do anything.


Lets hope time flys and not have mcain as pres.

The whole world will know EXACTLY when Iran develops a viable nuclear weapon...

...30 min. later, or less; there will be a smoking hole where Israel USED to be.


...you know damn good and well there's no way in HELL The U.S.A. will allow that to occur.

Meh, and twelve minutes after that, there will be a parking lot where Iran used to be. Israel has its own nukes, and they would not look kindly upon a nuclear strike by Iran. Then the fallout would poison half the middle east, and the debris thrown into the air would cause a nuclear winter and we are all screwed. Maybe. The nuclear winter thing has never been proved.

otherwise were all fucked. mccain was singing "bomb bomb bomb iran" the other fuckin day

Having actually been in the middle east, I didn't see common sense take much of a leading role in toomuch of ANYTHING over there, sorry.

Nukes ruin the whole fun of war :/ ........... meh , im goin to USMC basic this october. doesnt look very good :o

Nukes ruin the whole fun of war :/ ........... meh , im goin to USMC basic this october. doesnt look very good :o

I understand completely...I'm going to Army basic sometime in the indeterminate future. Probably may.

I head that marines goin after army green berets. army goes in after that. We just just send in the navy SEALs so do the job :D

Bush- "Crap I did it again. Obama's problem now."

Already did my time the 1st go-'round in the gulf, (gator fleet).

Obama is going to fix all ths and get a nobel peace prize :D

Already did my time the 1st go-'round in the gulf, (gator fleet).

Army or the U.S. Marine corps?

I head that marines goin after army green berets. army goes in after that. We just just send in the navy SEALs so do the job :D


Nah, not really. Imagine this metaphor-

The Marines are the ambulance, the Army is the hospital. The Ambulance can save somebody, yes, but usually it is meant to keep that person alive until they get to the Hospital.

You can't replace the hospital with the ambulance.

And SEALs? those are recon troops. Bad ass? Absolutely. Meant for stand up, knock down fights? No.

Obama is going to fix all ths and get a nobel peace prize :D

*Groans* Not all this "Obama iz our saviorz!!1111!!1!!11111" shit again...

Army or the U.S. Marine corps?

Navy. Persian Gulf Yacht Club.

Nah, not really. Imagine this metaphor-

The Marines are the ambulance, the Army is the hospital. The Ambulance can save somebody, yes, but usually it is meant to keep that person alive until they get to the Hospital.

You can't replace the hospital with the ambulance.

And SEALs? those are recon troops. Bad ass? Absolutely. Meant for stand up, knock down fights? No.


Im goin to fly close air support I heard the USMC are geting some A-10s so yea. BTW think of it as a banana. the marine corp peels the banana then the army eats it. so the marine corp does most of the hard work. lol

*Groans* Not all this "Obama iz our saviorz!!1111!!1!!11111" shit again...

LOL no think of bush as a retard and think of obama as his janitor lol

Obama is going to fix all ths and get a nobel peace prize :D

I think the next 4 or 5 presidents are going to be Bush's janitors. (sigh).

true? or are they? maybe theyre are his retarded play mates from school :o cant be too sure

Obama is going to fix all ths and get a nobel peace prize :D

Anyone expecting a radical foreign policy shift next January regardless of who gets elected had better brace themselves for some disappointment.

true? or are they? maybe theyre are his retarded play mates from school :o cant be too sure

...unfortunately, you could be right.


-some men are born to greatness, some have greatness thrust upon them, others get it as a graduation gift.
-R. Williams

thumbs up?

thumbs up?

decidedly not.

thought so

Im goin to fly close air support I heard the USMC are geting some A-10s so yea. BTW think of it as a banana. the marine corp peels the banana then the army eats it. so the marine corp does most of the hard work. lol

sigh*
tell yourself that.

As for the A-10s, I would be surprised. They haven't made those since the 60's...props to you if you get to a Marine aviator, though. Those are some BAMFs.

*sigh*

Yea yea, blow us all to kingdom come....yea yea....wake me up when something really happens.

*goes back to sleep*

sigh*
tell yourself that.

As for the A-10s, I would be surprised. They haven't made those since the 60's...props to you if you get to a Marine aviator, though. Those are some BAMFs.

Hey the A-10s are one bad ass muther fucking aircrafts! They are built to take alot of punishment, deal out alot of punishment and last forever! HOO RAH! :D

Google "Highway of Death" sometimes to see how much the A-10s can deal out. That's why they'd never be replaced. Not from a lack of trying mind you.

Im goin to fly close air support I heard the USMC are geting some A-10s so yea. BTW think of it as a banana. the marine corp peels the banana then the army eats it. so the marine corp does most of the hard work. lol

The Marines are a good light, mobile force able to quickly respond to crises around the world fairly rapidly. The Army is a much larger, slower organization but once the Army is deployed and ready to go there's nothing on this Earth that can stop it.

The Marines are that skinny guy in the bar who'll break his beer bottle and cut you with it. The Army is a professional heavyweight boxer. The skinny guy can and will fight anywhere, anytime while the boxer needs lots of time to prepare. They're both good at what they do, they just do different things.

Hey the A-10s are one bad ass muther fucking aircrafts! They are built to take alot of punishment, deal out alot of punishment and last forever! HOO RAH! :D

Google "Highway of Death" sometimes to see how much the A-10s can deal out. That's why they'd never be replaced. Not from a lack of trying mind you.


Oh, I'm not trashing the A-10. I love that bird, I'm right next to the willowgrove naval air station, I see them all the time. And they were due for replacement in 2000, but did so well during the Gulf War they postponed retirement indefinetly.

However, they no longer make them.

The fact that Obama could inherit this...I'm not really sure about him on Iran. I can't say I know how McCain would handle it either. And Bob Barr? Shit.

you're blowing this completely out of proportion. More fear mongering plz?

All they said is that the deal was only good for the next few days. No mention of violence, or even more sanctions.

how comes any mention of the word nuclear, and the white house is immediately there to impose sanctions on whatever country it doesnt like?

im goin to USMC basic this october. doesnt look very good :o

oh God please don't

All they said is that the deal was only good for the next few days. No mention of violence, or even more sanctions.

but WWIII could still erupt over Lebanon! *somehow involves the Chinese and Russians*

how comes any mention of the word nuclear, and the white house is immediately there to impose sanctions on whatever country it doesnt like?

because nuclear bombs can kill a lot of people? And if we don't like them, they probably don't like us? therefore...

LOL no think of bush as a retard and think of obama as his janitor lol

1. We all already knew Bush is a retard.

2. Obama is a janitor prospect, he has never been Janitor before, and he has no experience with blood spills.

3. McCain is a janitor prospect, who has never been janitor before, and has experience with blood spills despite rapidly forgetting how to deal with them.

Wait, wait, wait... Diplomats from the US, the UN, and the EU all approach Iran over their nuclear program, the White House makes a statement about the issue, threatening neither war nor sanctions, and we all of a sudden are like "OMG!!!1!11!! Teh retrd Bush iz gettin' us in2 WW3?!?!11?! TWFW?Q?Q?1!?!PROFIT?!"

I mean, really?!

Wait, wait, wait... Diplomats from the US, the UN, and the EU all approach Iran over their nuclear program, the White House makes a statement about the issue, threatening neither war nor sanctions, and we all of a sudden are like "OMG!!!1!11!! Teh retrd Bush iz gettin' us in2 WW3?!?!11?! TWFW?Q?Q?1!?!PROFIT?!"

I mean, really?!

Yeah. I mean, if UN, EU, and US diplomats had approached Iraq, we might not have invaded.

Oh wait...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7515589.stm



My first impression: Oh shit.

My second impression: Oh double shit.

My third impression: Let's hope there's not a real threat of force backing this up. The last thing we need is Bush getting us into another war before he gets unceremoniously tossed out of office.

Maybe you need to read the background on this.

The EU and US have been debating on when actual, biting political and economic sanctions will take effect. The EU has been stalling, asking for just one more talk, and just one more talk.

There's been agreement between the EU and US that the talking isn't getting anywhere, and using some leverage (however ineffective) is necessary.

They're talking about a hard deadline - a countdown - to severe political and economic sanctions.

Wait, wait, wait... Diplomats from the US, the UN, and the EU all approach Iran over their nuclear program, the White House makes a statement about the issue, threatening neither war nor sanctions, and we all of a sudden are like "OMG!!!1!11!! Teh retrd Bush iz gettin' us in2 WW3?!?!11?! TWFW?Q?Q?1!?!PROFIT?!"

I mean, really?!
Finally, someone who got it.

Maybe you need to read the background on this.

The EU and US have been debating on when actual, biting political and economic sanctions will take effect. The EU has been stalling, asking for just one more talk, and just one more talk.

There's been agreement between the EU and US that the talking isn't getting anywhere, and using some leverage (however ineffective) is necessary.

They're talking about a hard deadline - a countdown - to severe political and economic sanctions.

Yes, I'm well aware of this.

Finally, someone who got it.



Yes, I'm well aware of this.

So why did you imply in your OP that this was a countdown to an attack?

When it isn't.

Yeah. I mean, if UN, EU, and US diplomats had approached Iraq, we might not have invaded.

Oh wait...

If things start to heat up, then I'll be a bit worried.

But the pattern, so far, has been that diplomats will start to talk of a hard line stance towards Iran to give them reason to believe they are serious, Iran responds in their own fashion, then the two sides seem to cool off a bit.

Short of Iran backing off its stance towards being a nuclear power, I don't see this ending well. However, it doesn't seem like the signs pointing to the "Shit hitting the fan" period yet.

So why did you imply in your OP that this was a countdown to an attack?

When it isn't.

My intention was essentially to see how many people had the sense to see past the OP and actually critically think about what the article said.

Sadly it seems people aren't doing that all that much. I have since edited the original post with my actual impressions.

(Mods, if this is seen as trolling then please accept my humble apologies. My intention was, as I said, to assess critical thinking skills, not to piss people off or anything like that.)

If things start to heat up, then I'll be a bit worried.

But the pattern, so far, has been that diplomats will start to talk of a hard line stance towards Iran to give them reason to believe they are serious, Iran responds in their own fashion, then the two sides seem to cool off a bit.

Short of Iran backing off its stance towards being a nuclear power, I don't see this ending well. However, it doesn't seem like the signs pointing to the "Shit hitting the fan" period yet.

Normally I would agree with you, but when the U.S. government decides to take a hard liner stance at the same time Israel is prepping for a strike against Iran, I start to get worried.

If things start to heat up, then I'll be a bit worried.

But the pattern, so far, has been that diplomats will start to talk of a hard line stance towards Iran to give them reason to believe they are serious, Iran responds in their own fashion, then the two sides seem to cool off a bit.

Short of Iran backing off its stance towards being a nuclear power, I don't see this ending well. However, it doesn't seem like the signs pointing to the "Shit hitting the fan" period yet.

I'm sure that the EU and US will "give the sanctions time to work". Which means years of corruption (Iran has oil, and it will find the money), and a lot of suffering Iranians - of course, none of the ruling imams, or their friends will suffer at all, so they won't give a shit how long the sanctions go on.

no one included the rest of the world

no one included the rest of the world

Oh, the rest of the world will do what it usually does - bitch.

Did you see "the rest of the world" come to the aid of Iraq?

Mmmm? Or did they just sit back and bitch?

no one included the rest of the world

meh. They don't matter.:)

The whole world will know EXACTLY when Iran develops a viable nuclear weapon...

...30 min. later, or less; there will be a smoking hole where Israel USED to be.


...you know damn good and well there's no way in HELL The U.S.A. will allow that to occur.

The real power in Iran is not that stupid. They know what will happen if they should attack anyone with nuclear weapons.

The real power in Iran is not that stupid. They know what will happen if they should attack anyone with nuclear weapons.

Unless Israel counterattacks with nukes, essentially nothing.

The problem inherent here is that Bush likes to "preemptively strike." This is obvious, just look at Iraq. I don't like any meetings in which the US gives another nation a time limit. Not to mention, are we absolutely sure that the intelligence reports are true this time? I mean, what happens if the intelligence is faulty again?

And yes, it would be the next Presidents problem because Bush doesn't have that much time left in office.

:$ American

:gas: Troops are being pulled out of Iraq and into Iran. Is your sense of participation in your government's decisions dissolved yet?

Lol people not taking the hint.

:rolleyes:

Normally I would agree with you, but when the U.S. government decides to take a hard liner stance at the same time Israel is prepping for a strike against Iran, I start to get worried.


Yup. Israel was running war tests. Iran is making nukes. Government is now taking a hard stance. Looks like another set-up.

I just want to say don't think this actually represents what Americans want to do. It is more like a very conservative minority wants to get in another war.

Bush- "Crap I did it again. Obama's problem now."

Typical Dubya Pattern.

Step One: Place Dubya in charge of something.

Step Two: Dubya runs something into the ground.

Step Three: Dubya steps out, someone else has to clean up the shit.

Step Four: Repeat from Step One.

Bush- "Crap I did it again. Obama's problem now."

Obama is going to fix all ths and get a nobel peace prize :D

I just want to remind you both that this is July, and the election happens in November. Since it hasn't occurred yet, saying that Obama's going to be cleaning up any messes is premature. Not that I'm pulling for McCain either. I might abstain from voting for president, since I really don't care for either of them.

As to the subject brought up in the OP. I hope that Iran takes the Freeze for Freeze offer, so that both sides have time to work this out diplomatically, for the benefit of both sides.

Man just leave the damn muthafuckas alone. They ain't gonna don nothing to no one. If we actually sat down and apologized for all the Cold War shit, we'd be on our way to peace. At that point, we would soon see Iran drop support for Hezbollah and peace comes to the Middle East.* Al Qaeda and such are marginalized and the Islamic Revolution is peacefully voted out.

Man all this crap caused by one overthrow of Mossadegh.

*Peace also requires Israel to make peace with Syria, Lebanon, and Iran which would lead to Hezbollah's collapse, Hamas's collapse etc...

The Bush administration has no credibility on this issue, and any kind of deadline set by them is pointless.

The whole world will know EXACTLY when Iran develops a viable nuclear weapon...

...30 min. later, or less; there will be a smoking hole where Israel USED to be.


...you know damn good and well there's no way in HELL The U.S.A. will allow that to occur.

Melodramatic fear-mongering. In the end, Iranians know they will die if they attack Israel or America. Maybe you think they're all fanatics, so it wont matter. Well, if you think all Iranians, or evan most are fanatics, then I think you're both prejudiced and ignorant.

Remember that Amidinejad is not the real power in Iran. His blowhard antics are not a justification for war.

In the end, the Iranian Government are politicians too. Rarely are the leaders fanatical enough to die for their cause. They prefer to send young desperate men out to do that for them. They're not going to bring a nuclear strike down on themselves. This is a barganing chip, plus some rantings from a blowhard anti-semite. But by all means, lets jump blindly into another preemptive strike against the will of the American people and the international community, one that will lead to a global oil crisis, widespread terrorism, the final and utter collapse of Iraq and Afghanistan, a draft, resulting civil unrest, and quite possibly a fucking nuclear world war, given Putin's statement to the effect that an attack on Iran would be considered an attack on Russia.

It comes down to weighing the risk of a surprise attack on Israel, against the risk of collapse of the United States as a nation and/or a nuclear world war for which we will bear ultimate responsibility. To those who are blinded by "patriotism" or bigotry, or who see Middle East politics mearly as a means to fulfill the Book Of Revelations, the choice is obvious. To those who believe in analysing an adversary's motives to gain the most for the least risk and cost, the answer is equally obvious, if rather different.

I just want to remind you both that this is July, and the election happens in November. Since it hasn't occurred yet, saying that Obama's going to be cleaning up any messes is premature. Not that I'm pulling for McCain either. I might abstain from voting for president, since I really don't care for either of them.

As to the subject brought up in the OP. I hope that Iran takes the Freeze for Freeze offer, so that both sides have time to work this out diplomatically, for the benefit of both sides.

As this issue so clearly illustrates, the stakes are far to high to just sit this election out.

Kinda makes me happy that I was offered a job by a company in Canada, relocation expenses, and sponsorship.

I'm still young enough to be drafted, but old enough to know that I want no part of this middle east thing.

Personal position on this is,

1) let us just get the hell out of the middle east. Nothing we are going to do is going to change thousands of years of hatred and tribal warfare.

2) Israel can stand on it's own two feet in the Middle East. They have proven that again and again. They don't need the US as a big brother protecting them from the mean Arab bullies.

3) if we just leave the rest of the world to tend to it's own business, and only step in when genocide or ethnic cleansing is taking place, I think we and the world would be better off. Let the world figure out it's own problems. You know that ever since we became a superpower that no country has completely take over another country by force (vietnam didn't count as it was one country but different political parties fighting it out, and hong kong was peacefully given back to the Chinese in 1999)?

4) we no longer speak softly and we use our 'big stick' too often.

5) politicians today have no qualm about sending their citizen-soldiers off to die if some diplomat offends said politicians. "That bastard in Iraq looked at me funny then told me to go to hell! I'll fix him! Send in our troops and keep them there for the next 20-50 years (you will recall that after we destroyed Germany and Japan that the US stuck around long after the war was over. In fact we have bases in both countries yet today..same with South Korea....anyone seeing how Iraq could look like that in the future?)

Not interested in the topic, nobody's stupid enough to use nukes when they have something to lose. However statement number 3 above my post grasped my attention, it's not exactly a correct statement if you look around the globe for a bit.

everybody seems to forget something crucial about iran nuking israel. Would they nuke jerusalem? well it wouldn't be much use otherwise so probably...what is in jerusalem? the dome of the rock...Islam's third most holy site if memory serves. Don't you think someone muslims somewhere would be a bit pissed if there third most holy site was reduced to constituent atoms?

and yes MAD also plays a part, everyone "knows" that israel has nukes. they also have several god ways to deliver those nukes. so if iran launched, who knows they might just shoot em at the enemies just because if your gonna die you do desperate things...(I am actually very pro-israel just to state my position on that) so I don't think Iran will launch nuclear weapons...of course I will admit that my perspective is a rather young one...but thats my 2 cents
and don't let anyone tell you otherwise ;)

This is silly...

Iran's GDP is less than that of Denmark's and has smaller military budget than Sweden yet it is depicted as a global threat

/me does not compute

It has to be Oil, there's no other rational explanation.

(source fo' numbers: Wikipedia)

Melodramatic fear-mongering. In the end, Iranians know they will die if they attack Israel or America. Maybe you think they're all fanatics, so it wont matter. Well, if you think all Iranians, or evan most are fanatics, then I think you're both prejudiced and ignorant.


-I think Iran's LEADERS don't give a tin shit what their people think.


Remember that Amidinejad is not the real power in Iran. His blowhard antics are not a justification for war.


-I think Amidinejad is Iran's equivalent of Bush, (on nearly every level).


In the end, the Iranian Government are politicians too. Rarely are the leaders fanatical enough to die for their cause. They prefer to send young desperate men out to do that for them. They're not going to bring a nuclear strike down on themselves. This is a barganing chip, plus some rantings from a blowhard anti-semite. But by all means, lets jump blindly into another preemptive strike against the will of the American people and the international community, one that will lead to a global oil crisis, widespread terrorism, the final and utter collapse of Iraq and Afghanistan, a draft, resulting civil unrest, and quite possibly a fucking nuclear world war, given Putin's statement to the effect that an attack on Iran would be considered an attack on Russia.


-Please consider...
1. politicians occasionally misstep.
2. this is a theocracy, some of the "logic" here differs from the drive for self-preservation, zealotry and common-sense don't seem to mix well.
3. by all means, let's NOT jump blindly into another bottomless quagmire, but good luck arguing That point with Bush.
4. Yes, Putin's statements give this an even MORE ominous facet.


It comes down to weighing the risk of a surprise attack on Israel, against the risk of collapse of the United States as a nation and/or a nuclear world war for which we will bear ultimate responsibility. To those who are blinded by "patriotism" or bigotry, or who see Middle East politics mearly as a means to fulfill the Book Of Revelations, the choice is obvious. To those who believe in analysing an adversary's motives to gain the most for the least risk and cost, the answer is equally obvious, if rather different.

It has been repeated ad-nauseum that Iran wants Israel "wiped from the earth". When you bluster in this manner over a period of not just years, but decades, you shouldn't really be surprised when the west panicks at the thought of even the possibility of a nuke in Iran, no matter what you claim your intentions are.
...and as far as the "patriotism, bigotry, prophesying, and analysis" goes, well, see my previous statement about zealotry.

Once events such as these reach a certain critical mass, they seem to take on a life all their own, sceptical?, take a good long look at Iraq.

Oh, the rest of the world will do what it usually does - bitch.

Did you see "the rest of the world" come to the aid of Iraq?

Mmmm? Or did they just sit back and bitch?

That's because Iraq is a problem YOUR GOVERNMENT created! The world has every right to complain about that senseless, unjust, wrong war!

Im Amazed to see the ignorance of the USA people about the world, the war, even about the WEAPONS that they has developed and deploy.

When Chernobyl happenned THOUSANDS of people die of CANCER, thousands of people birth with genetic problems and NOT just in Soviet Union, was in EUROPE, just for one nuclear reactor a cloud of toxic radioactive poison was fliying around THE WORLD, and now after the No Nuclear Propliferation Pact is USA treating to another country of spread POISON OVER million of people just because they WANT, just they want, couse USA and just 3 or 4 countries most to have the MONOPOLY of the NUCLEAR FUEL, couse this is the root, not is about BOMBS, its about BUSSINESS and FUEL.

If they are so afraid about bombs in the hands of FANATICS ¿why they dont BOMBARD ISRAEL? Israel produces NUKES against the whole U.N. And USA is developing TACTICS NUKES all this cheap chat shit about peace is just bullshit, all is about MONOPOLY of bussiness, and be sure that NOBODY can make bussines in their field, if they do, they are dead, A GANSTERS GAME, Al Capone is not dead, is in the White House and have NUKES in his hands, and i am not talking about the moron of President that they have, he barely can find the bathroom after his alcoholic and cocaine parties, im talking about those MEGA Industries of weapons that RULES that country, pigs in the slaughterhouse are the people with a uniform called soldiers for them.

Looking for a Third World War and a Nuclear Winter :(

:soap:Im Amazed to see the ignorance of the USA people about the world, the war, even about the WEAPONS that they has developed and deploy.

When Chernobyl happenned THOUSANDS of people die of CANCER, thousands of people birth with genetic problems and NOT just in Soviet Union, was in EUROPE, just for one nuclear reactor a cloud of toxic radioactive poison was fliying around THE WORLD, and now after the No Nuclear Propliferation Pact is USA treating to another country of spread POISON OVER million of people just because they WANT, just they want, couse USA and just 3 or 4 countries most to have the MONOPOLY of the NUCLEAR FUEL, couse this is the root, not is about BOMBS, its about BUSSINESS and FUEL.

If they are so afraid about bombs in the hands of FANATICS ¿why they dont BOMBARD ISRAEL? Israel produces NUKES against the whole U.N. And USA is developing TACTICS NUKES all this cheap chat shit about peace is just bullshit, all is about MONOPOLY of bussiness, and be sure that NOBODY can make bussines in their field, if they do, they are dead, A GANSTERS GAME, Al Capone is not dead, is in the White House and have NUKES in his hands, and i am not talking about the moron of President that they have, he barely can find the bathroom after his alcoholic and cocaine parties, im talking about those MEGA Industries of weapons that RULES that country, pigs in the slaughterhouse are the people with a uniform called soldiers for them.

Looking for a Third World War and a Nuclear Winter :(

...and propagandizing solves EVERYTHING, doesn't it?

Oh, the rest of the world will do what it usually does - bitch.

Did you see "the rest of the world" come to the aid of Iraq?

Mmmm? Or did they just sit back and bitch?

Like how the whole world sat idly by and let Iraq develop WMD - you know, the whole crazy stockpile that the US discovered after the administration was forced to invade?

Yeah...

everybody seems to forget something crucial about iran nuking israel. Would they nuke jerusalem? well it wouldn't be much use otherwise so probably...what is in jerusalem? the dome of the rock...Islam's third most holy site if memory serves. Don't you think someone muslims somewhere would be a bit pissed if there third most holy site was reduced to constituent atoms?

I don't know, but it's a good bet the Imams would try to placate the masses by saying it HAD to be destroyed, to rid the world of "Zionists & Infidels".

well I think we have to get to the hypothetical now...I think we are right in assuming if Iran nuked israel they would get at least some missiles fired back...say enough to reduce iran to a nuclear wasteland. soooo.
1. everyone would know who fired first
2. muslims would be kinda ticked that the dome of the rock was gone and apparently someone said in another thread the apocalypse is supposed to happen then (I don't know if this is true or not) assuming that is true, and assuming it didn't happen muslims would probably be somewhat oh whats the word...meh anyway


another question...does israel have a missile defense system and if so, is it half decent or anything? that would be another factor...if Iran launches, Israel destroys them and has the foresight not to shoot back, you can bet your britches Iran is going to be invaded by just about everyone...I think even the UN would take notice if someone fired nukes...

IDK I just realized this post was just a bunch of my random well...ramblings ;)
meh
anyway hope some of that was clear...

oh I remember what I was trying to say...Iran would be gone probably, so they wouldn't have to be placated but I would guess that some groups would rebel...maybe even an islamic civil war...