Why does anyone care if Iran has nuclear bombs?

dsm said:
Yeah, but who will be the first to pull the trigger? The irrational ones because, well, they're irrational or the rational ones out of fear that the irrational ones will go first?

:eek:
Click to expand...

Let's just say the Soviets didn't believe in the "42 virgins in paradise" theory. Little things like that can make all the difference. :D
 
Jocko said:


Take a look at the UN's own intelligence, if that's what you really believe. Look at Blix's testimony. And then tell me again how good the UN is at keeping its shoes on the correct feet, let alone managing Hussein.
Click to expand...

Blix was saying he didn't have all the answers and needed more time. Guess what, he was right, the Bush Administration was wrong.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/60II/main577975.shtml

Let me guess, you are in pre-school.
 
a_unique_person said:
Blix was saying he didn't have all the answers and needed more time. Guess what, he was right, the Bush Administration was wrong.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/60II/main577975.shtml

Let me guess, you are in pre-school.
Click to expand...

I know that's what he said, dimwit. Hardly the ringing endorsement in ALL CAPS that the UN HAD COMPLETE CONTROL OVER THE IRAQ SITUATION! And after 12 years of blatant deception, why not give him MORE TIME?!

Wow, the liberating power of caps. Barely had to think at all.

Did you even absorb the gist of my post? Obviously not, so let me spell it out for you: the UN cannot adminster something like Iraq. They're better off distributing aid to nations not in open conflict. Without getting into the US action that followed, would you seriously suggest that Blix's statement is evidence of how well the disarmament was going?

Try to stow the hindsight first. BTW, I only brought the college student question because his unwavering faith in a shaky institution like the UN reminds me of another well-known college snot who hails from your grand nation.
 
SezMe said:
72, Jocko, 72. Let's try to avoid cheapening the holy Islamic religion.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'll expect a fatwa by morning.

Think about it though... 72 sounds like a lot till you remember you're talking about eternity. I went through nearly that many in four years of college. Then what do you have left? 72 nagging ex-girlfriends. Some paradise.
 
Jocko said:
I know that's what he said, dimwit. Hardly the ringing endorsement in ALL CAPS that the UN HAD COMPLETE CONTROL OVER THE IRAQ SITUATION! And after 12 years of blatant deception, why not give him MORE TIME?!

Wow, the liberating power of caps. Barely had to think at all.

Did you even absorb the gist of my post? Obviously not, so let me spell it out for you: the UN cannot adminster something like Iraq. They're better off distributing aid to nations not in open conflict. Without getting into the US action that followed, would you seriously suggest that Blix's statement is evidence of how well the disarmament was going?

Try to stow the hindsight first. BTW, I only brought the college student question because his unwavering faith in a shaky institution like the UN reminds me of another well-known college snot who hails from your grand nation.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't have unwavering faith in the UN, nor the US. Empirically, however, the UN appears to have been more right than the US.

If you read the link, there are reasons for the US being so wrong, and it was not because the intelligence failed, even if they had to cop the blame. (Funny about that. How could they get it so wrong). The hindsight is not needed, these analysts were right before the war, not that the Bush admin let anyone into that little secret.

If the UN was doing such a bad job, how come there were no WMD?
 
a_unique_person said:
I certainly don't have unwavering faith in the UN, nor the US. Empirically, however, the UN appears to have been more right than the US.

If you read the link, there are reasons for the US being so wrong, and it was not because the intelligence failed, even if they had to cop the blame. (Funny about that. How could they get it so wrong). The hindsight is not needed, these analysts were right before the war, not that the Bush admin let anyone into that little secret.

If the UN was doing such a bad job, how come there were no WMD?
Click to expand...

We can settle this right quick, AUP. Can you cite any respected intelligence agency that stated at the time there were no weapons? Not that they didn't know, but that they knew otherwise?

In other words, can you leave your smug and grossly oversimplified hindsight out of the equation for ten lousy minutes?
 
Jocko said:
We can settle this right quick, AUP. Can you cite any respected intelligence agency that stated at the time there were no weapons? Not that they didn't know, but that they knew otherwise?

In other words, can you leave your smug and grossly oversimplified hindsight out of the equation for ten lousy minutes?
Click to expand...

Bush apologist... :p

http://www.rense.com/general48/wew.htm

At the very least, the fact that there were questions shoud've made the Bush administration check more thoroughly. Saddam was contained and had inspectors breathing down his neck. The Bush administration could've done their "due diligence" and waited for the smoking gun to materialize. Given the troops off his shore, its highly unlikely that the "smoking gun" would've been anything more than a pea shooter.
 
Because if I don't do it, somebody else will.......

Who's Next by Tom Lehrer

First we got the bomb and that was good,
'Cause we love peace and motherhood.
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's O.K.,
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way!
Who's next?

France got the bomb, but don't you grieve,
'Cause they're on our side (I believe).
China got the bomb, but have no fears;
They can't wipe us out for at least five years!
Who's next?

Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day.
South Africa wants two, that's right:
One for the black and one for the white!
Who's next?

Egypt's gonna get one, too,
Just to use on you know who.
So Israel's getting tense,
Wants one in self defense.
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm,
But just in case, we better get a bomb!
Who's next?

Luxembourg is next to go
And, who knows, maybe Monaco.
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb!
Who's next, who's next, who's next?
Who's next?
Click to expand...
 
dsm, nobody with any sense of skepticism would EVER cite Rense as a source for anything other than pure woo. NOTHING on his site is worth the electrons it is displayed with. Got another link?
 
SezMe said:
dsm, nobody with any sense of skepticism would EVER cite Rense as a source for anything other than pure woo. NOTHING on his site is worth the electrons it is displayed with. Got another link?
Click to expand...

Just a quick search of Yahoo:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1140459,00.html
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/blair_new_100503.htm

Basically, there were questions that should've been more thoroughly checked before a "preemptive" war was launched.
 
Jocko said:
We can settle this right quick, AUP. Can you cite any respected intelligence agency that stated at the time there were no weapons? Not that they didn't know, but that they knew otherwise?

In other words, can you leave your smug and grossly oversimplified hindsight out of the equation for ten lousy minutes?
Click to expand...

Did you read the link I provided? The CIA had experts who were choking on their coffee at the claims being made.
 
a_unique_person said:
Did you read the link I provided? The CIA had experts who were choking on their coffee at the claims being made.
Click to expand...

On the specifics, yes. So what? Everyone disagreed on the nature of the threat, but I can't think of anyone who pooh-poohed the whole thing and dismissed any real chance of Saddam having such weapons.

And as usual, you've failed to back up your claim.

You know, AUP, you use hindsight the way a psychic claims to use ESP. That makes you a woo in my book.
 
a_unique_person said:
Well, as it turns out, they didn't have any WMD, and the US is up to it's neck in it.
Click to expand...

Well, if nothing had happened we'd STILL be wondering what kind of nasty surprises were waiting there. Hell, we waited 12 years. Why not 20? 30? Seriously, AUP, surely your retroclairvoyance can tell you how we "should" have handled things?

Or is it just good for schoolyard "nanny nanny boo boo" crap like this?
 
dsm said:
Just a quick search of Yahoo:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1140459,00.html
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/blair_new_100503.htm

Basically, there were questions that should've been more thoroughly checked before a "preemptive" war was launched.
Click to expand...

Er, I was kinda hoping for something a little less... er, agenda driven? Like an actual news story? If the Guardian is a news source, so is Newsmax.

AUP apologist! :D
 
a_unique_person said:
Did you read the link I provided? The CIA had experts who were choking on their coffee at the claims being made.
Click to expand...

And do you think, really now, that any decision of any government will not have legions of people who say "I told you so" when there is a problem? Really, answer and be honest. It just so happens that in this case you choose to quote those that can advance your US hating agenda. Am I right?
 
Ed said:
And do you think, really now, that any decision of any government will not have legions of people who say "I told you so" when there is a problem? Really, answer and be honest. It just so happens that in this case you choose to quote those that can advance your US hating agenda. Am I right?
Click to expand...

This isn't about America hating. This is about AUP's retroclarivoyance. He thinks it'll get him laid. I mean, he sure is accurate when predicting the past, ain't he?
 
Ed said:
And do you think, really now, that any decision of any government will not have legions of people who say "I told you so" when there is a problem? Really, answer and be honest. It just so happens that in this case you choose to quote those that can advance your US hating agenda. Am I right?
Click to expand...

US fundy radical hating, please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom