General Discussion

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)

147. there's some unbiased sources for you....

Reply to Missycim (Reply #123)

Tue Sep 18, 2012, 04:59 AM

Sep 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

174 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

OK. I'll say it. Yes, I'd rather risk Iran having nukes than [View all] cali Sep 2012 OP

If Israel can live with the Pakistani/Saudi bomb, they can learn to live with the Persian bomb, too leveymg Sep 2012 #1

Aren't the rest of them living with Israeli bombs? n/t malaise Sep 2012 #2

israel doesn't boast of annihilating her neighbors. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #6

you mean like the Palestinians? magical thyme Sep 2012 #19

There is no such state called Palestine. Missycim Sep 2012 #23

and there was no state called "Native America" magical thyme Sep 2012 #67

Well then they are Missycim Sep 2012 #69

And that area is expected to be unliveable by 2020. randome Sep 2012 #77

Even if the Israeli's went back to the 1967 boarders Missycim Sep 2012 #82

Stop allowing Jewish settlers to take over Palestinian land would at least help. randome Sep 2012 #87

I agree Missycim Sep 2012 #89

Wow. Good point. randome Sep 2012 #71

I could be wrong and correct me if I am but Missycim Sep 2012 #84

"The world�s largest Open Air Prison:" Gaza�s Shrinking Borders polly7 Sep 2012 #85

You're correct. It is not genocide. randome Sep 2012 #86

Educate yourself tavalon Sep 2012 #149

You are correct; Genocide is the incorrect term w/r to Palestine Scootaloo Sep 2012 #155

you clearly have no clue as to what constitutes genocide. cali Sep 2012 #106

Wish I'd said that. truedelphi Sep 2012 #169

Actually... janlyn Sep 2012 #97

Well then they should go to the Syrians and get their land back Missycim Sep 2012 #98

snark janlyn Sep 2012 #121

I think you might have to do some more research. Missycim Sep 2012 #123

The people were called Philistines LiberalEsto Sep 2012 #125

there's some unbiased sources for you.... HiPointDem Sep 2012 #147

Custer said there weren't any Cheyennes, too n/t Scootaloo Sep 2012 #157

And yet, you, yourself, tavalon Sep 2012 #150

I think you should find a bit more credible sources. polly7 Sep 2012 #167

Sorry your educational opportunities never truedelphi Sep 2012 #168

You mean like at the Olympics in '72? Lod Airport? Hebrew University? Pan Am 103? School WinkyDink Sep 2012 #46

I see it this way, too duhneece Sep 2012 #64

This message was self-deleted by its author sherylkaye Sep 2012 #88

Added to the fact Missycim Sep 2012 #24

Tell that to the Palestinians n/t malaise Sep 2012 #38

Yes they do Recursion Sep 2012 #40

Is he the President or Prime Minister? WinkyDink Sep 2012 #49

He's the head of the lynchpin coalition party Recursion Sep 2012 #99

Well they do although it really isnt necessary if you have nuclear capability. nm rhett o rick Sep 2012 #41

The US does it for them. OnyxCollie Sep 2012 #43

Israel is the only country over there I have heard threatening to nuke Iran's sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #91

Well, aren't they special? Skidmore Sep 2012 #94

That talk is for domestic consumption. It appeals to the conservative base in Iran and alfredo Sep 2012 #95

But they still have nukes Scootaloo Sep 2012 #152

Many war mongering nations have refrained from "Boasting" truedelphi Sep 2012 #153

Aren't we? Israel has used the threat against its neighbors as blackmail against us more than once leveymg Sep 2012 #30

That was one interesting post. And I had never heard that truedelphi Sep 2012 #159

Yes, they are. polly7 Sep 2012 #78

+100 HiPointDem Sep 2012 #148

First of all, Iran hasn't been "Persia" for centuries. Secondly, who are you to say what another WinkyDink Sep 2012 #5

so you're saying invading Iraq, in particula, was a good thing? cali Sep 2012 #7

No. I'm saying Americans have no right to tell another nation what to do. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #10

I have every fucking right in the world to say what I wish about this matter, dear. cali Sep 2012 #11

Yes, of course; you are not the Leader of the Free World, are you? I'm not talking about Free Speech WinkyDink Sep 2012 #48

So America has no right to tell Iran not to build a nuclear weapon? MattBaggins Sep 2012 #15

Actually, I have always wondered why some countries can have them and some can't. Always Laura PourMeADrink Sep 2012 #44

stewardship Mosby Sep 2012 #102

Why haven't they been given chemical weapons ? former-republican Sep 2012 #145

Actually, America is the last nation which can be considered to have moral authority to speak to the Skidmore Sep 2012 #122

which would include telling another nation what technology they may develop magical thyme Sep 2012 #20

Sorry we and others do if that country has repeatedly Missycim Sep 2012 #27

That's a hoax pushed by the war mongers cpwm17 Sep 2012 #90

it said almost weekly Mosby Sep 2012 #103

Nice propaganda tavalon Sep 2012 #151

Well, you've just sunk your own argument, the warmonger argument DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2012 #32

I was speaking, specifically, of an American telling israel what to do or not to do. And yes, that WinkyDink Sep 2012 #47

But Israel should tell the US when to use force? abelenkpe Sep 2012 #39

I don't believe I said that. But "not for anything"? You need a bigger imagination. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #53

Nah abelenkpe Sep 2012 #124

but israel does? spanone Sep 2012 #57

No need to be snarky. "Persian" is a commonly used synonym for "Iranian" Bucky Sep 2012 #144

I agree get the red out Sep 2012 #3

I guess I am wondering why Iran is considered so much more likely to use them n2doc Sep 2012 #4

You are fundamentally incorrect. No USSR leader said any such thing. The MOST that was said WinkyDink Sep 2012 #8

No, and that's survival logic at its basest. Zalatix Sep 2012 #13

We were "surrounded" by China and the USSR n2doc Sep 2012 #16

Did the shape of the world change? Missycim Sep 2012 #31

How do you define "failure," when "success" to some would mean no Israel? WinkyDink Sep 2012 #56

Isn't The Converse True As Well?.... global1 Sep 2012 #60

the Soviet Union had an essentially materialistic mindset el_bryanto Sep 2012 #9

This. fifthoffive Sep 2012 #12

Nothing short of a full fledged invasion and occupation of Iran will stop them from getting nukes. redgreenandblue Sep 2012 #14

Well it would cost a fortune but money Missycim Sep 2012 #33

Oh, yes, the US could win a confrontation with the Iranian military. redgreenandblue Sep 2012 #37

Dick Cheney is that you? bahrbearian Sep 2012 #51

No I know how to handle a Missycim Sep 2012 #54

Your thinking not your shot gun skills. I quess you weren't on the Fight Deck Mission Accomplished bahrbearian Sep 2012 #58

again I am saying in a war of conquest Missycim Sep 2012 #112

Uh, you have heard of two nations who wouldn't be pleased with truedelphi Sep 2012 #156

Yes but they rely on us for money Missycim Sep 2012 #161

your statement "Yes but they rely on us for money" truedelphi Sep 2012 #174

It depends on whether by "win" you just mean the initial fighting or include the occupation. JHB Sep 2012 #109

The Initial fighting would be a Win, not sure on the Missycim Sep 2012 #113

The only way to win a war in the ME is through complete annhilation BarackTheVote Sep 2012 #136

I see you're pretty new here tavalon Sep 2012 #158

Yes but it bugs me Missycim Sep 2012 #162

it could last six days, six weeks. i doubt six months. frylock Sep 2012 #119

Agreed, 100%. nt magical thyme Sep 2012 #17

Agree with you - TBF Sep 2012 #18

If I was Iran I'd want nukes as fast as I could get them madokie Sep 2012 #21

I would rather everyone in all countries watch "Threads". moriah Sep 2012 #22

Probably most here would agree with you oberliner Sep 2012 #25

It would be utter suicide if Iran ever uses them anyway jsr Sep 2012 #26

i dont know if theyare try to get the bomb or not, but if they are, i bet money it's for something dionysus Sep 2012 #28

Well I would agree Missycim Sep 2012 #36

"the Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" ronnie624 Sep 2012 #61

Links please? Missycim Sep 2012 #63

You're sitting at your computer. ronnie624 Sep 2012 #65

That's not how the Iranian state-run news agency translated it oberliner Sep 2012 #68

Ahmadinejad and other Iranian government officials ronnie624 Sep 2012 #92

Funny how Juan Cole think he knows more than the Iranian translators oberliner Sep 2012 #105

"Being concerned" is one thing. ronnie624 Sep 2012 #111

I didn't make your point so why should I have to prove it? Missycim Sep 2012 #75

Thank you! polly7 Sep 2012 #72

I would think Iran would get the support of Russia and possibly China Rosa Luxemburg Sep 2012 #29

They could have attacked and killed most of the Israeli people already if they wanted. former-republican Sep 2012 #34

Yes. Let's just sell the Ayatollahs a bunch of nukes for a reasonable price. Nye Bevan Sep 2012 #35

I agree abelenkpe Sep 2012 #42

I certainly respect your opinion.. zellie Sep 2012 #45

Ever hear of the cold war? All of us have nukes pointed at us today. ret5hd Sep 2012 #96

Uh, we've had nukes pointed at us FOR DECADES -- Hell Hath No Fury Sep 2012 #100

Israel has done their fair share of provoking. nt Comrade_McKenzie Sep 2012 #50

How so? WinkyDink Sep 2012 #52

Well, when Ahmadinejad denied the Holocaust, and Netanyahu waved the Auchwitz plans at him, Nye Bevan Sep 2012 #80

I wouldn't... liberallibral Sep 2012 #55

Using a nuclear bomb on Israel would make the country uninhabitable for decades. randome Sep 2012 #59

What about something on a smaller scale? oberliner Sep 2012 #70

I would think the capability of building those kind of delivery systems would take years. randome Sep 2012 #73

Iran would be another expensive, decade long stalemate. Initech Sep 2012 #62

Oh, Israel could definitely halt Iran's nuke program MercutioATC Sep 2012 #66

Jews living in a huge sea of Christians didn't work out very well either oberliner Sep 2012 #74

Win what? A sea of destruction and uninhabitable land for decades??? nanabugg Sep 2012 #76

+1. polly7 Sep 2012 #79

Iran's leadership's rationality is questionable. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #166

I agree, but Israel isn't going to allow that, so other opinions are irrelevant. n/t Waiting For Everyman Sep 2012 #81

In short, right or wrong, an attack on Iran will be a F'en mess for years. Another win for religion. RKP5637 Sep 2012 #83

Iran is never going to stop trying to get nukes. Iggo Sep 2012 #93

Mutual assured destruction, Iran is no more of a risk, ... CRH Sep 2012 #101

Iran Trades with Pakistan... triplepoint Sep 2012 #104

great OP for Rosh Hashanah Mosby Sep 2012 #107

Oh, are we supposed to suspend posting about politics during Rosh Hashanah? progressoid Sep 2012 #110

Unlike YOU. Classy is certainly not a problem for you. cali Sep 2012 #115

I'm not implying or insinuating or whatever that your post was antisemitic Mosby Sep 2012 #116

You should probably do a search for posts where this same sentiment has polly7 Sep 2012 #118

Yeah, because this is only an issue for Jews. progressoid Sep 2012 #120

This message was self-deleted by its author Mosby Sep 2012 #127

Yes. But what does that have to do with it? progressoid Sep 2012 #128

This message was self-deleted by its author Mosby Sep 2012 #130

Isn't it our right to mock religions, regardless of holidays? Alduin Sep 2012 #140

No flames here. AngryOldDem Sep 2012 #108

Agreed i don't see Iran using nuke as terror device. chknltl Sep 2012 #114

Only religious fanatics and lunatics would ever use them....people like Harry Truman. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2012 #117

+1000! Walk away Sep 2012 #129

Surely you're not so naive as to think if Truman hadn't used them then no one else would have in the cherokeeprogressive Sep 2012 #132

No one else has. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2012 #133

Because until it was used the first time, no one really knew what it was capable of. cherokeeprogressive Sep 2012 #134

So, it was all for show. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2012 #135

That doesn't explain the second time jberryhill Sep 2012 #160

I'm guessing it's possible the Bomb Damage Assessments were inconclusive. cherokeeprogressive Sep 2012 #170

There were two designs jberryhill Sep 2012 #171

actually so would i. barbtries Sep 2012 #126

An old favorite of mine RandiFan1290 Sep 2012 #131

I'll go you one better. If Iran were to get nukes, that would make them much harder to attack eridani Sep 2012 #137

Okay, here's a question: BarackTheVote Sep 2012 #138

Jerusalem is not the holiest place in Islam. Behind the Aegis Sep 2012 #141

Meant to say one of the holiest places BarackTheVote Sep 2012 #142

The Al-Aqsa Mosque is the 3rd most holy site, but not Jerusalem. Behind the Aegis Sep 2012 #146

And where is that mosque located? Hugabear Sep 2012 #172

Hint...he said city, not mosque. Behind the Aegis Sep 2012 #173

I'd rather have no one with nukes over there. Alduin Sep 2012 #139

It's called Containment, the policy that prevented nuclear war for 45 years. Bucky Sep 2012 #143

This message was self-deleted by its author darkangel218 Sep 2012 #154

Is it because you feel relatively safe from an Iranian nuke? customerserviceguy Sep 2012 #163

I tend to agree with you... Volaris Sep 2012 #164

I agree, but our government shouldn't tell Iran that Tom Rinaldo Sep 2012 #165