So Iran getting nukes is a problem why then?

I am sure that IAPAC will attack Carter now, yes, IAPAC, although they call themselves AIPAC, everyone knows their number #1 priority is that piece of shit country Israel.

So Iran getting nukes is a problem why then?

Because that would be one more country with nukes. The saying, "the more the merrier" does not apply to countries with nuclear weapons.

"The US has more than 12,000 nuclear weapons; the Soviet Union [sic] has about the same; Great Britain and France have several hundred, and Israel has 150 or more," he said.



And how many do India, China and Pakistan have, nobody knows....

All this noise is only El-Chimpo singing in the bathroom.

Los Angeles Times December 9, 2005

...no U.S. administration has effectively pressured Israel to either halt its program or to submit to inspections under the International Atomic Energy Agency. Nor has Israel been required to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The apparent rationale: Weapons of mass destruction in the hands of an ally are simply not an urgent concern.

Yet this rationale neglects a fundamental law of arms proliferation. Nations seek WMD when their rivals already possess them. Israel's nuclear capability has clearly fueled WMD ambitions within the Middle East. Saddam Hussein, for example, in an April 1990 speech to his military, threatened to retaliate against any Israeli nuclear attack with chemical weapons -- the "poor man's atomic bomb."

Oh, someone is not going to be pleased he said that. Being a former Persident, he is actually in a position to know. He might as well have said "they had 150 when I was President, God knows how many they have now".

Not that I'm begrudging them nukes. It's just that Israel's been treating them as the biggest of state secrets since the got them, they can't be happy that the cat's well and truly out of the bag. Then again, the real value of a nuke is as a deterrent anyway, when you get to the point you have to use it you've already lost.

let me see if i have this right if a law abiding citizen has three guns then a three time felon should be able to have three guns.wonder what the reason for each one would be to own those guns.

Oh, someone is not going to be pleased he said that. Being a former Persident, he is actually in a position to know. He might as well have said "they had 150 when I was President, God knows how many they have now".


POSTED BY ARGH AT 2008-05-26 05:25 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

I think Ex-POTUS still have access to top secret intelligence documents. That may be an accurate up to date number.

Because that would be one more country with nukes. The saying, "the more the merrier" does not apply to countries with nuclear weapons.

Posted by goatman


but which country is nuttier...Iran or Israel?

It is very difficult to understand Carter's outright hatred for Israel. Whether it is his book title that includes the word apartheid, or his claim that Israel's treatment of Palestinians is one of the worst human rights violations, the man seems to overlook other outrages world wide.

When Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza there was an opportunity for the Palestinians to reach out to the international community in helping the Palestinians institute true political reforms which would benefit the population both economically, socially, and politically, thereby setting an example for other Arab states. Instead what resulted was a power struggle between Fatah and Hamas. Instead of taking the steps needed to govern the powers that be are focused on striking at Israel knowing that Israel will strike back. This is the way the Palestinians have avoided taking any responsibility for themselves.

Does Jimmy Carter believe that if Israel returned all of Gaza and the West Bank to Palestinian control the Palestinians would be ready to govern themselves? In close to 40 years of being recognized as a political entity the Palestinians have yet to institute a formal rule of law, so basic in the foundation of a state. While they have received billions of dollars in aid from many countries over the years they have little to show for it. When they have an opportunity to show their people, Israel, and the rest of the world that they can be a responsible partner instead they fire rockets to keep the status quo.

The Israel are not blameless vis a vis the Palestinians,but there does come a point where every group needs to take responsibility for themselves instead of pointing fingers. With the exception of the Korean War, I am unfamiliar with any other war that has ended in which important issues have yet to be resolved. How many years more will it take for Arab countries to recognize Israel and include them on their maps.

Carter (& I) don't hate anyone...must be the mirror you are looking at today ~ Justsayhate?:>)

At least it is nice to see Carter hasn't changed a bit since being President in the 70's. Somehow the damage he does when he opens his mouth doesn't show up until years later. Before he was president the Muslim extremists stayed within their boundaries. He enabled them to go world wide with his blessing. Welcome to the world today that he played a key role in creating.

Carter should be arrested, tried for sedition and then shot for revealing National military secrets.

Carter should be arrested, tried for sedition and then shot for revealing National military secrets.

Posted by fwthom

...are you saying a president should be shot?

Yet again I'll ask the question that nobody has an answer for. Why would Iran attack Israel? What possible benefit would they get?
Their idiotic conservative president made a few moronic comments which, depending on the translation, could be perceived as a threat to Israel and now they've public enemy number one. Wouldn't that suck if WE were held accountable for every moronic comment made by OUR idiotic conservative president?

All this noise is only El-Chimpo singing in the bathroom.

Posted by Tosser

What is the 'ears' doing?

Why would Iran attack Israel? What possible benefit would they get?

None. But rationality trumps rawed, unbridled hatred.

None. But rationality trumps rawed, unbridled hatred.

Posted by goatman

Stupid answers don't count.
George Bush's closeted lovers in Saudi Arabia have made far more insane comments about Israel than anyone in Iran.

Sorry Bani, but I call bullshit on your martial law link. The main reason being that I don't believe the population of Montana would put up any resistance to a military takeover of this country. I think they'd join in.

Stupid answers don't count.

To rasta, a stupid answer is one he cannot rebut.

"Stupid answers don't count."

To rasta, a stupid answer is one he cannot rebut.

Posted by goatman

I agree with Rasta...he write usually much better & funnier posts than you in my opinion ~ though you cerrtainly do have your moments ~ of course:>)

None. But rationality trumps rawed, unbridled hatred.

I got that backwards of course, but I think everyone understands what I meant to say:

Raw, unbridled hatred trumps rationality.

Sorry for the error

None. But rationality trumps rawed, unbridled hatred.

Posted by goatseman

Okay Goatseman. I'll rebut your answer. Iran does not have raw, unbridled hatred for Israel. You are incorrect.

And by the way, you were correct when you said rationality trumps raw unbridled hatred.

George Bush's closeted lovers in Saudi Arabia have made far more insane comments about Israel than anyone in Iran.

Posted by RastaCyborg at 2008-


ah but the difference of course is that the saudis have how many nukes, themselves..............I believe the answer is zero...........am I correct on that?

and I havent read a single post about the other part of this issue.
iran AT THIS MOMENT is helping the bastards to kill american soldiers........how will or will that change when they have nukes?.
and who will they sell these things to?
two questions that are every bit as important as the security of israel, if not more.

150? Does that include the ones they sold to South Africa?

Is a past President allowed to release classified information? Where did Jimmy get his information? Offically?

He's a superannuated man, so you've got to excuse his being diddly. Senile dementia, Alzheimer's, or just plain inherited insnanity, who knows what his particular ailments are. But the authorities would be well-advised to shut him up for the sake of everyone.

Maybe a shot of viagra would cause him to try to lust with his body instead of with his heart, and divert him from his random comments. Aside from his celebrity, Jimmy is a garden variety nut.

Jimmy with his brother, mother, daughter, and himself, represents poster material or the dysfunctional family.

What a disaster he was for this country. And he still can't shut up. The man doesn't have enough sense to be ashamed of himself. He probably will try to sell the contents of his Depends and think that he's doing everyone a favor.

"am I correct"

Considering your track record, I'd have to say....


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOO

"am I correct"

Considering your track record, I'd have to say....


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOO

Okay Goatseman. I'll rebut your answer. Iran does not have raw, unbridled hatred for Israel.

LOL. "I don't keep up with current events" flag

Hey bani you moron, you forgot these two of many.

Pam Schuffert is a loon and so are you.

You are so irrelevant.

Buy some new tin foil.

LOL

RWD

Minnesota is home of the loons & tinfoils usually reflects potential "shills" lack of imagination. A cheap taunt basicly...try using "cult" ~ that gets more press time these days in England ~ I hear:>)

br />

thanks for the links, though ~ RWD ~ Dan Brown will use them probably in his upcoming book on Washington D.C.:>)

iran AT THIS MOMENT is helping the bastards to kill american soldiers

Bushloverosama

says who?

Carter should be arrested, tried for sedition and then shot for revealing National military secrets.

Posted by fwthom

.......it's not OUR national military secret.......

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT or NNPT) is a treaty to limit the spread of nuclear weapons, opened for signature on July 1, 1968. There are currently 189 countries party to the treaty, five of which have nuclear weapons: the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and the People's Republic of China (the permanent members of the UN Security Council) .

Only four nations are not signatories: India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea. India and Pakistan both possess and have openly tested nuclear bombs. Israel has had a policy of opacity regarding its own nuclear weapons program. North Korea ratified the treaty, violated it, and later withdrew.

******************************
*********************

.......we are signatores to the treaty......as such, we had a responsibility to follow its terms honestly and even-handedly.......

.......but we broke the treaty by assisting Israel and by covering up its actions........

.......we have no moral high ground to beat up on Iran or anybody else......we broke the treaty also......

Carter should be arrested, tried for sedition and then shot for revealing National military secrets.

Posted by fwthom

.......it's not OUR national military secret.......


Posted by skizziks


FF

Thanking God for the US Taxpayers?

Israel has $Billions more in weaponry other than 150 nuclear bombs and guess what - Israel got this all for "Free" - courtesy of the hardworking but unwitting U.S.Taxpayers!!! Go Yankees!!!

****** Thanking God for the US Taxpayers?

Israel has $Billions more in weaponry other than 150 nuclear bombs and guess what - Israel got this all for "Free" - courtesy of the hardworking but unwitting U.S.Taxpayers!!! Go Yankees!!!

Posted by AntiCadillac ******

.......whats more.......Israel has deeply socialist policies that we support with billions of annual "foreign aid".......

.......and they wont even let us have an American military base in Israel.....some friends.......

With their bills being paid by the US, they can afford to divert their funds to weapon development.

Right-Wing-Dope
Thinks-with-his-(tiny)-Johnson
FatWhiteTHOM
SnipItInTheBud

All cut from the same rotten piece of felt.

.......and they wont even let us have an American military base in Israel.....

They are already a target to all sorts of crazies in that part of the world. Do you really think they want to paint that bull's eye red with the presence of "the great satan"?

What's Qatar's excuse?

~ RWD ~ Dan Brown will use them probably in his upcoming book on Washington D.C.:>)

Posted by Bani

You know Dan Brown Bani?

Probably?

Brown is working on a new novel, called The Solomon Key, which will reportedly take place in Washington D.C., and feature the "secret" society of the Freemasons.


Fact: Dan Brown is a fictional writer.

The Da Vinci Code is not a real story.

OMG! are you saying you believe everything you see in the movies and on tv.

sigh


rwd

Ps,your posts are becomming more and more incoherent

***** .......and they wont even let us have an American military base in Israel.....

They are already a target to all sorts of crazies in that part of the world. Do you really think they want to paint that bull's eye red with the presence of "the great satan"?
Posted by goatman ******

........seems like a goofy reason considering that Israelis are the number enemy of all Jihadists.....

......Saudistan kicked our base out and Bush still goes there to give blow jobs on a monthly basis, but at least the Saudis let us in for a few decades.......Israel never did.......

The real question is what is the male to female birth ratio in Gaza?

If the information now coming out is correct, they are reducing the male ratio, something they have known for some time.

"I agree with Rasta...he write usually much better & funnier posts than you in my opinion ~ though you cerrtainly do have your moments ~ of course:>)

Posted by Bani at 2008-05-26 07:52 PM"


Wrong! Goatman is easily one of the most rational posters here on DR even when I don't agree with him.

Though his repetitious "Where's the link?" can sometimes be mind-numbing. ;)

It is my belief, that Israel as with hopefully a other nuclear country's, would do anything possible to not be in a position where the use of nukes is needed. I feel vastly more comfortable with nukes in the hands of Israel by far, that those same weapons in any more Arab hands.

Certain of our regular posters like to put out propaganda to the affect that the people of Israel like to eat the newborn children of the Arabs. I would without question, like to see them treat the Arabs in general more like they are people not rabid nut cases. However certain groups and individuals wouldn't be treated better anywhere on this planet. Pure prejudice has and does have a substantial impact on the action of all sides (not both-all). In truth, can someone state reliably just howmany "sides" are there in the Palestinian/Israeli craziness?

With out the "ultimate" protection, or at least the threat of that resource, just how long would the Hebrew State continue to exist?

Israel has the bomb; its neighbors don't. Imagine one day with the tables turned.

I do not perceive Israel's nuclear arsenal as being a threat to the U.S. They have had one for over thirty years. We have never in any way ever been either implicitly nor explicitly threatened with it.
But I do perceive Iran obtaining such an arsenal as being a threat to the U.S. The "Death To America" anthem that rings out at every official Iranian event is enough to convince even the most naive among us that Iran does not wish us well.

Wrong! Goatman is easily one of the most rational posters here on DR even when I don't agree with him.

Though his repetitious "Where's the link?" can sometimes be mind-numbing. ;)

Posted by Gimme_a_Scotch

wright?:>)



Bill Cosby on Rev. Wright

Rev. Wright epitomizes the thoughts and actions that have prevented and continue to prevent
black America from moving ahead and achieving their potential as a people.
He suggests that this United States of America made up of sons and daughters of immigrants
(I'm talking of the millions of 1st, 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants in this country)
of every race, creed, color and religion each and everyone of them who had nothing to do with slavery,
somehow owe something to a group of people who have never been slaves?
Its amazing. It seems everyone is to blame for the shambles black society is in
with its violence, drugs, high school drop out rates, misogyny, and a host of other real and virulent problems,
except for the very people who engage in such behavior.
Enough. As a society, culture or people, they should look within themselves and fix their problems.
When did this man become the spokesman for the 'black church'?
And of course his church is different, but that doesn't mean his message and philosophy is acceptable,
or productive or non-offensive or not-racist or indicative or our greater cultural behaviors, values and norms Americans. And yes, the link between this man and Obama really does matter.
At a very minimum, it provides insight into the political and philosophical strain that Obama adheres to.

Comment by Bill Cosby - April 28, 2008 at 1:57 pm - Link - The Wall Street Journal

But Israel's policies of ethic cleansing in the Gaza do not speak well of our "best friend" even though we did the same with our Indians.

Guess what Bani...there was a mandate for both a Jewish state and a Palestinian state. The Jews formed Israel and the Palestinians not only declined to form a state but with their Muslim Brothers attacked Israel. That's how they got pushed out of their homes.

You start a fight and get your ass beaten, tough luck.

You start a fight and get your ass beaten, tough luck.

Posted by OzarkAggie


Andrew Jackson said the same ~ by golly:>)

Iran mosque blast plotters admit Israeli, US links

Iran's chief prosecutor said bombers who caused a deadly blast at a mosque in Shiraz had confessed of links to Israel and the United States, the ISNA student news agency reported on Friday.

DAYAM!

i was hoping they had at least twice that many!

US Marine BOASTS of MARTIAL LAW TAKEOVER In USA by MARINES

disc.yourwebapps.com

Posted by Bani at 2008-05-26 07:37 PM

google took the link for now for some reason:>)

So Iran getting nukes is a problem why then?

Israel isn't saying they're going to destroy other nations... Iran is. Maybe Iran isn't smart enough to realize they will be completely destroyed if they used their one or two nukes. Not that we should start bombing Iran, but we should certainly keep up diplomatic pressure to try to prevent them.

Israel isn't saying they're going to destroy other nations... Iran is.



1. Wasn't it Israel that recently attacked and laid waste to Lebanon?

2. Wasn't it Israel which said "we will only use 10 neutron bombs to shut down Iraq"? (this was just before the current Iraq war)

3. Iran said they would wipe out someone??? When? How?

Quit making things up.



but we should certainly keep up diplomatic pressure to try to prevent them.


Your diplomatic "pressure" isn't doing much. LOL

One is that, "as military powers go, Iran is a pipsqueak".



Exactly. Which is why I wonder what are they supposed to attack other nations with? Rocks? Slingshots? LOL

Iran can only fight a defensive guerrilla war on it's own land.

no U.S. administration has effectively pressured Israel to either halt its program or to submit to inspections under the International Atomic Energy Agency. Nor has Israel been required to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The apparent rationale: Weapons of mass destruction in the hands of an ally are simply not an urgent concern.


And how well did that failed logic work out in Iraq?

Iran can only fight a defensive guerrilla war on it's own land.

Which is where we need to keep them, over there...

Carter continues to embarrass the United States.

Your diplomatic "pressure" isn't doing much. LOL

Posted by Tosser


Then it will eventually lead to military attacks... which will suck for Iran and its people.

Then it will eventually lead to military attacks...



I doubt if you are in any condition to do that.



After Lebanon attacked and killed some Israeli soldiers and took a couple prisoner. An act of war by even the most liberal definitions...


No, that was not an act of war. The soldiers taken prisoner or killed, were on Lebanese territory to start with.


I'd like to see a quote on that...



Why, Asshole? Don't you trust me.... Asshole? Go do your own Googling. I am not your secretary.



Iranian leader: Wipe out Israel


I believe he was quoting someone. And he more or less said, "it is time for Israel to go to hell".

He never said, "IRAN will make Israel go to hell".

Even a two-bit defense lawyer can rip holes in THAT one.... Asshole.



pakistani queer.


American homo.

I doubt if you are in any condition to do that.

I didn't say invasion, I said attacks... and we are most certainly capable of destroying Iran from the air and sea...

No, that was not an act of war. The soldiers taken prisoner or killed, were on Lebanese territory to start with.

They were in Israel, and it was an act of war. I'm not gonna cry for people who started a fight then got their asses kicked.

Why, Asshole? Don't you trust me.... Asshole? Go do your own Googling. I am not your secretary.


TRANSLATION: Tosser is lying

I believe he was quoting someone.

Yeah, Ayatollah Khomeini in a speech about how Israel and the US should no longer exist... You're right, it was totally innocent... douchebag.

and we are most certainly capable of destroying Iran from the air and sea...


And then you will go to the bazaar on a donkey when oil goes to $300 a barrel.



They were in Israel


No they weren't.



Yeah, Ayatollah Khomeini in a speech about how Israel and the US should no longer exist... You're right, it was totally innocent... douchebag.


But we come to the same point.. Asshole.

NOBODY said "IRAN will kill the US and Israel", now did they... Asshole?

Yeah, Ayatollah Khomeini in a speech about how Israel and the US should no longer exist... You're right, it was totally innocent... douchebag.


But we come to the same point.. Asshole.

NOBODY said "IRAN will kill the US and Israel", now did they... Asshole?

Rob the Asshole:

TRANSLATION: Tosser is lying


Oh?

I only asked you to do your own Googling. You thought I was evading you??? LOL

You are so stupid and lazy... I said wasn't you secretary but I give you a hint:

"ISRAEL has reached agreement with the United States to explode a neutron nuclear bomb in an Iraqi city in the event of a serious attack by Saddam Hussein, it was claimed yesterday.

As the United States moved closer to military action in the Gulf, the authoritative British military publishers, 'Jane's Information, said Israel planned to launch a nuclear attack to counter an chemical or bacterial assault by Iraq.

A neutron bomb can kill large numbers of people while doing minimal damage to buildings...

Jane's said that sources had told it that Israel would be given a free hand by the US for its commandos to locate and, if necessary, 'destroy Iraqi missiles to prevent any attacks on it.

But if a missile did penetrate Israel's defences and if it carried a chemical or biological cargo, the sources said Israel would retaliate by using a neutron bomb, which suppresses the nuclear blast but increases radiation levels to cause far greater loss of life.


Now go google THAT... Asshole. There is plenty more out there.

hahahahahahaha

A bit more for The Asshole:

"THE neutron bomb, or enhanced radiation warhead, is the ultimate weapon for the misanthrope. It kills people in large numbers while doing minimal damage to real estate.

The technology is now around to make them no bigger than a baseball, leading some analysts to warn that they could become the new weapon of terrorism.

This is the weapon that reports from Britain claim Israel is preparing to use against an Iraqi city, should Baghdad deploy chemical or biological weapons against the Jewish state.

A spin-off of the thermonuclear weapon, or hydrogen bomb, neutron bombs were first developed by the US in 1963 and then the Soviet Union in the late '70s. They were primarily intended as a small-scale battlefield weapon.

The US suspended development in 1978 under the Carter administration but resumed it under Reagan in 1981.

In a normal thermonuclear weapon, half of the energy released is produced by the fusion of hydrogen isotopes, tritrium and deuterium. But this weapon is encased in a blanket of the uranium isotope 238 which after detonation produces the rest of the bomb's energy by fission.

A neutron bomb does not have the blanket to produce the blast and the fast neutrons are released into the environment to kill living tissue.

Because a neutron bomb has a ground zero blast area of only a few square metres, the idea was for them to be used as a deterrent against armored or infantry assault.

They could be carried by a lance type missile, fired by a 200 millimetre gun or delivered by an aircraft. The bomb would disable enemy infantry or tank crews in minutes and those exposed would die within a few days.

Strategically, their ideal use would be to destroy targets that are close to a site that a force wants to protect. For example, a bridge heavily guarded by enemy troops.

A neutron bomb detonated near the bridge would kill the enemy troops guarding it without doing any significant damage to the bridge structure.

One of the weapon's most valuable features is its effectiveness against tank attacks.

Because neutrons are penetrative radiation, such a weapon could take out large numbers of tank crews simultaneously without destroying the tanks. Residual radiation is minimised, theoretically allowing the tanks to be salvaged by the attacking force."


Google this too.

It took me 30 seconds... Asshole. You couldn't Google for 30 seconds and find this? Asshole?

I can find more by Googling.. Asshole.

Want me to try? Asshole?

When I asked you to Google it yourself, I guess I was asking too much of you... Asshole?

Why did you use "Asshole" as your name Asshole?

Tosser, how about the link big guy...

But just reading what you posted:

said Israel planned to launch a nuclear attack TO COUNTER an chemical or bacterial assault by Iraq.

Notice where I added the emphasis. Your first post was misleading at best. If what you posted is true, then Israel was saying what they would do in response to a WMD attack. This is what you posted:

2. Wasn't it Israel which said "we will only use 10 neutron bombs to shut down Iraq"? (this was just before the current Iraq war)

A dishonest muslim? whoda' thunk it?

Want me to try? Asshole?

I would love for you to produce what you FIRST claimed Israel said. that they would preemptively drop 10 nukes on Iraq... not what their retaliation would be for a WMD attack.

I would also prefer links as to you ruining the thread by copying and pasting entire stories in... plus it would help with the credibility of your stories.

"The Jews formed Israel and the Palestinians not only declined to form a state but with their Muslim Brothers attacked Israel."

Interesting to note though that the Palestinians and their Muslim brothers had occupied the land for generations whereas the vast majority of Jews who "settled" the newly formed country came from other lands, such as the USSR and Europe. Their only claim to those lands was of a religious nature: very few had any ancestral claims, such as for example, the Amerinds had before the whites showed up and stole the
Americas. And therein lies the rub. Israeli "settlers" are still "appropriating" Palestinian land and homes today.

And Israel still has yet to formally acknowledge the possession of nuclear weapons. That they have had them has been known for decades. Carter's announcement is not news, but rather continuing validation that Israel is double dealing the world.

When I asked you to Google it yourself, I guess I was asking too much of you... Asshole?

You made claims... claims you've yet to back up... its not my job to support your bullshit arguments.

"Which is where we need to keep them" - Boaz

Not an issue. They have no desire to attack us here.

"Which is why I wonder what are they supposed to attack other nations with? Rocks? Slingshots? LOL

Iran can only fight a defensive guerrilla war on it's own land."

Posted by Tosser

Wrong, partly. Your assertion that Iran can only fight on its own land is mostly true: Iran does not possess much offensive capability. An invasion of Iran though would be most difficult, not the pushover Iraq was. Iran is much larger and has an entirely different geography.

Defensively, or offensively, Iran has been supplied with the Moskit SS-N-22, NATO designation SunBurn, a Mach 2 plus cruise missile that can easily disable or outright destroy any surface asset the US can deploy. There is nothing in any nation's arsenal that can defeat the SunBurn. Note that the SunBurn can be fitted with a 120 kiloton nuclear warhead.

Imagine a US carrier with 5,000 plus crew being sent to the bottom of the Strait of Hormuz.

The Sunburn is a defensive weapon if you don't have the navel platforms to project power with.... which Iran doesn't.

They can only fore it from land. Otherwise you would need a Sovremney (spelling) class destroyer... which Iran doesn't have.

If you saw the video, Iran seems to focus on defensive tactics only. They do not have the sea-power or the air-power for power-projection.

Imagine a US carrier with 5,000 plus crew being sent to the bottom of the Strait of Hormuz.

Posted by ZOT


You'd have to hit it with a lot more then just a couple cruise missiles... Not to get all titanic-y but they are virutually unsinkable...

Also, one way you can tell we aren't attacking Iran anytime soon is we still have carriers in the gulf... We won't leave them within shooting distance if we plan on attacking.

Tosser, how about the link big guy...


The link... Asshole.. is yours for the taking if you do 30 seconds worth of Google searching.

I want to see how bright you are.

Take a sentence of what I posted, put it into google and there you are!

As this news came from Janes, it should be credible enough.

Idiot.

The link... Asshole.. is yours for the taking if you do 30 seconds worth of Google searching.

You made assertions that your own postings proved false. It is not my responsibility to research your bullshit.

A dishonest muslim? whoda' thunk it?


The statement is not dishonest at all. It stands on it's own merit.

Isreal DID make a threat through a third party. It doesn't matter if Isreal made it by adding a qualifier like "if we are attacked.."

Asshole.. that is exactly what the Iranians say. "if we are attacked..."

An American who lies. Who woulda thougt it...? LOL

It is not my responsibility to research your bullshit.



Bullshit? Even after I posted it here?

You can't read can ya? LOL



You made assertions that your own postings proved false.


How was I proven false?

Fact:

Isreal made a nuclear threat. They threatened a non-nuclear country with nuclear weapons.

I don't think you are aware of it.. Asshole.. but that is against The Rules.

Isreal DID make a threat through a third party. It doesn't matter if Isreal made it by adding a qualifier like "if we are attacked.."

No they did not make a threat. They might have expressed what their strategy would be in the wake of a WMD attack, but they made not threat.

Its not a threat to say how you will defend yourself.

Further, your postings don't back up your original statement about Israel attacking Iraq. You said:

. Wasn't it Israel which said "we will only use 10 neutron bombs to shut down Iraq"? (this was just before the current Iraq war)

that's light years away from: We'll use nukes if we're attacked with Chem and Bio weapons.

Bullshit? Even after I posted it here?

Just because you post it doesn't mean it isn't bullshit... in fact your follow up post on the subject proved your original statement to be bullshit.

It is not my responsibility to research your bullshit.



If you don't want to research it, than why ask for the link?

What an idiot... LOL

I told you, 30 seconds of Google will bring it up.

I wanted to see how bright you were, BUT YOU FAILED!

Here you go cry-baby... the link for you: