Whats the better Option? (1 Viewer)

How should the Iranian Nuke issue be solved?

  • Let them have nukes and tell them mutually assured destruction.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Let Israel preemptively take out the nuclear sites.

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • Let the US preemptively take out the nuclear sites.

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • It's Israel's problem let them deal with it.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    2

Jakboi

Death by Access
Local time
Today, 09:52
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
303
Well with time ticking and all wondering what the opinion is?
 

Keith Nichols

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 16:52
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
431
Having worked in a middle eastern country (Arabs) and knowing that (although the Iranians classify themselves as something something other than Arabs) the Iranians are broadly similar, I can tstify that their nuclear ambitions can only be a threat to themselves. Either by invitng attack or just plain effing up or starint a local nuclear war that pretty much destroys them.

To be considering nuclear energy (as opposed to weapons) they must be assuming that they will be net energy importers at some point in the future. Long term, the whole region is screwed anyway.

I thinkj your poll questions are wrong and that is why I am the first respondant.

Cheers. :)
 

Pauldohert

Something in here
Local time
Today, 06:52
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
2,101
None of the above

"Do as I say - not as I do" on behalf of the US, UK, Israel or anyone else isn't going to work with the Iranians.

Whilst Iran is clearly a scary prospect, if we have the right to have nuclear weapons then so do they.

A clear demonstration that we are winding down our nuclear weapons would be a good place to start. Then a UN controlled strike would be OK if iran continued to go the opposite way.
 

Jakboi

Death by Access
Local time
Today, 09:52
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
303
Well the fact is there are only 2 options. Either they get them or not. If they get them, then we are stuck with we few options. The US is not directly threatened by them, however its interest are such as allies and energy.

If I lived in Europe I would be afraid to let Iran have nukes...seeing that at least your threatened by them. The Iranians cant be depended on not using nukes or selling them to terrrorists who would plant them and kill.

The fact is they want Nuclear Energy than thats fine, but if they must abide my international rules. I believe one of those is international inspections and access to sites. All they have to do is abide by the rules of international organizations and things would prob be ok.

When Israel took out Iraqs nukes in the 80's with airstrikes, was that a good thing? Who knows those scud missiles launched at Israel in the Gulf War may have had Nuke war heads on them if they hadnt.
 
R

Rich

Guest
Jakboi said:
If I lived in Europe I would be afraid to let Iran have nukes...seeing that at least your threatened by them.

No different to growing up in an era that one was safe in the knowledge that they might have just four minutes to tuck their heads between their knees and kiss their ass goodbye.
America lecturing on world safety again:rolleyes:
 

ColinEssex

Old registered user
Local time
Today, 14:52
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
9,118
Jakboi said:
The fact is they want Nuclear Energy than thats fine, but if they must abide my international rules. I believe one of those is international inspections and access to sites. All they have to do is abide by the rules of international organizations and things would prob be ok.
I love it - a Yank saying that another country should abide by international rules.:rolleyes:

Col
 

GaryPanic

Smoke me a Kipper,Skipper
Local time
Today, 06:52
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
3,294
No one wins - if Iran was alittle more reasonable, it would a ideal place to try alternative enrgergy production (solar) etc, that way it would be involved in a cutting edge technology, it would also show the fundamenaists(?) tat the West is actual giving and not taking - and also try to help the Arab nations
 

Adeptus

What's this button do?
Local time
Today, 23:22
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
300
From what I've heard on the news recently, a lot of Iranians are not happy with their government's anti-West agenda.
So if "the people" get their way, we may see a more reasonable government in the not too distant future.
 

Jakboi

Death by Access
Local time
Today, 09:52
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
303
Adeptus said:
From what I've heard on the news recently, a lot of Iranians are not happy with their government's anti-West agenda.
So if "the people" get their way, we may see a more reasonable government in the not too distant future.

Yea heard as well. Comes down to democracy once again. If the people had their say in the govt instead of the country being ruled by the mullahs* or clerics than the people could just rise up and be pissed...

They have elections but the ultimate power or say lies with the clearics or Ayatollah*...Theocracy not a democracy...
 

MarkK

bit cruncher
Local time
Today, 06:52
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
8,186
The west is giving, not taking? Nuclear is not cutting edge? THEY should try solar? Arab nations want help? Iran is less reasonable that the US? Americans are unhappy with their government's Iraq agenda and this made a difference? So if the people get their way we'll see a more reasonable America? Rise up and get pissed, etc...?

Wow, I feel all warm inside. I didn't know any of this stuff.
 

Adeptus

What's this button do?
Local time
Today, 23:22
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
300
lagbolt said:
The west is giving, not taking? Nuclear is not cutting edge? THEY should try solar? Arab nations want help? Iran is less reasonable that the US? Americans are unhappy with their government's Iraq agenda and this made a difference? So if the people get their way we'll see a more reasonable America? Rise up and get pissed, etc...?

Wow, I feel all warm inside. I didn't know any of this stuff.
:D :D :D :D
 

Pauldohert

Something in here
Local time
Today, 06:52
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
2,101
Seems like there are more options than those above

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6274147.stm

Just the US would prefer to bomb the **** out of someone instead and can only see as far as

Let them have nukes and tell them mutually assured destruction.
Let Israel preemptively take out the nuclear sites.
Let the US preemptively take out the nuclear sites.
It's Israel's problem let them deal with it.
 
R

Rich

Guest
I'm reminded of a Bush speech about N. Korea

N.Korea has defied the will of the international community.
N.Korea has weapons of mass destruction.

Sound familiar Bush? so do you and it's gun ho Yanks who keep wanting to use 'em!:rolleyes:
 

dan-cat

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:52
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
3,433
I hate to spoil the party in painting Iran's balls gold but does anyone remember this?
 

Jakboi

Death by Access
Local time
Today, 09:52
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
303
dan-cat said:
I hate to spoil the party in painting Iran's balls gold but does anyone remember this?

Yea theres a big difference when it comes to Iran having Nukes and the Western World. Can you honestly trust these guys having nukes? No way. They cannot be allowed or the world cannot afford to wait.

Its too bad the world didnt act sooner when Adolf Hitler rose to power...instead of the appeasement the Europeans tried to do.

A lot can be learned from history and not repeating mistakes...
 

Brianwarnock

Retired
Local time
Today, 14:52
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
12,701
Jakboi said:
Its too bad the world didnt act sooner when Adolf Hitler rose to power...instead of the appeasement the Europeans tried to do.

.

Just remind me about what America did regarding Hitler, Ah I remember now it finally acted AFTER Germany declared war on America

Brian
 

Jakboi

Death by Access
Local time
Today, 09:52
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
303
Rich said:
I'm reminded of a Bush speech about N. Korea

N.Korea has defied the will of the international community.
N.Korea has weapons of mass destruction.

Sound familiar Bush? so do you and it's gun ho Yanks who keep wanting to use 'em!:rolleyes:

Well techically we are still at war with the North. There has never been a peace treaty...hence our troops on the 32nd parallel. If a country that is still at war with us had done what the North did...test and develope nukes...

We should be very concerned. We are protecting South Korea and protection agreements with Japan and a War with North Korea that never really ended. This may make Japan go Nuclear and they have the know how to do so.

China especially does not want Japan to go Nuclear after all the atrocities committed by the Japanese during the World Wars and the old militeristic Japan past.

There is more at stake here than just US interests. The region could like the Middle east explode into Nuclear Proliferation.

Steven Hawking continues to warn the the world about the Doomsday clock, which happened to be moved to 5 minutes to midnite the other day, that the worlds greatest threat is nuclear proliferation.
 

dan-cat

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:52
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
3,433
Jakboi said:
Its too bad the world didnt act sooner when Adolf Hitler rose to power...instead of the appeasement the Europeans tried to do.

I don't think you're going to get much approval on this statement unless you find a Czech or two :p Kraj might be your man :D
 

dan-cat

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:52
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
3,433
Jakboi said:
Steven Hawking continues to warn the the world about the Doomsday clock

I get warned of this everytime I get frog-marched to church. :p
 
Last edited:

dan-cat

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:52
Joined
Jun 2, 2002
Messages
3,433
dan-cat said:
I get reminded of this everytime I get frog-marched to church. :p

Replying to my own posts, must be so bored I'm talking to myself :rolleyes:

Anyway just thinking, who reset the clock after the Cuban Missile Crisis? :confused:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom