User Tag List

View Poll Results: Iran: Bomb or not?

Voters
37. You may not vote on this poll
  • Bombs away!

    3 8.11%
  • Pursue other options to ensure Iran abandons nuclear weapons

    16 43.24%
  • Let Iran have nuclear wepons

    14 37.84%
  • I am unsure

    4 10.81%
First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 137

  1. #61
    Post Human Post Qlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,472

    Default

    I notice that a lot of people's solution to the world's problems is for everybody to be simultaneously nice. While I can't disagree that the world would be a better place if everybody was nice, I can't really see any narrative that would lead us there. The history of the world involves somebody with a big stick lording it over other people because that's just how humans work. I think the best we can do is try to insure that the person with the stick isn't a total ass.

  2. #62
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Really?

    Do you feel that bad for those waving the Great Satan signs around?
    Having grown up in a politically asinine country (USSR), I can tell you with great certainty that most of the people at those anti-American demonstrations are there because they are told to be there. They get a day off from work just for the demonstration and somebody (usually their employer/boss/local stooge) makes sure they attend.

    I'm sure some of those people at those demonstrations really do wish death upon America, but the majority feel rather neutral about the whole thing and just want to go about their lives peacefully. And don't forget that there is also a significant minority who want the whole regime replaced as bad as you and I do (as you can tell by the recent anti government riots).


    So yes, I'd feel bad for Iranian civilians dying needlessly, and honestly hope it never comes down to that. Having said that, I don't think we should stand down just because their government hid nuclear weapons in a population center. After all, as selfish as it may sound, better them than me.
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

  3. #63
    figsfiggyfigs
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Outsider View Post
    Whatever this means, I agree, because it sounds awesome.
    I'm glad we agree.

  4. #64
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Riva View Post
    No country gives or should be given the right to decide on this matter since it is rather hypocritical.
    In fact, no one could give it. Thus, since countries are sovereign, they decide what they do on their own.

  5. #65
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Mr. Obama said the U.S. and Russia would work to shape a "common response" to press Iran to abide by its international obligations.
    White House officials were asked precisely what that meant. Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes insisted that the U.S., China and Russia remain united on the need to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, while Press Secretary Jay Carney also addressed the question.
    Rhodes said, "They do not want to see the spread of nuclear weapons to Iran or frankly to any new state and therefore they remain committed to diplomatic efforts to compel Iran to live up to its obligations."
    http://www.voanews.com/english/news/...133760848.html

    Defending his efforts to halt the Iranian nuclear threat, President Barack Obama said Sunday that the economic sanctions against the country have had "enormous bite," and that he is united with Russian and Chinese leaders in ensuring Iran does not develop an atomic weapon and unleash an arms race across the Middle East.
    http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D9R0AU3O1.htm

  6. #66
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    (Reuters) - China and Russia share the United States' objective of ensuring Iran does not make weapons via its nuclear program and Washington will consult with them on how to achieve that, President Barack Obama said on Sunday.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7AD07N20111114

    And one more.

  7. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    2,841

    Default

    Premtively bombing the shit out of Iran would be one of the most reatarded and follish actions that the U.S. could possibly commit. Aside from the moral problem of slaughtering millions of innocent people, it would severe da,age the reputation of the U.S. as a destructive, parinoid, and ruthless nation ruled over by fear. Our enemy countires would demonize us as a completely evil nation while our allies break off any alleinces or aid to us, leaving the U.S. at a far greater mercy of terrible powers that would then seek to destroy us.

    Regarding Iran, I would be more in favor of either limiting their nuclear supply (although how we go about this is a matter of debate), or alternatively, we beef up our own nuclear supply and who it off. Let Iran try to start a nuclear war, they'll get their asses handed to them in to time if they try to attack us first. As long as the U.S. holds more power over them there isn't a thing that they can do about it.

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    2,841

    Default

    Premtively bombing the shit out of Iran would be one of the most reatarded and follish actions that the U.S. could possibly commit. Aside from the moral problem of slaughtering millions of innocent people, it would severe da,age the reputation of the U.S. as a destructive, parinoid, and ruthless nation ruled over by fear. Our enemy countires would demonize us as a completely evil nation while our allies break off any alleinces or aid to us, leaving the U.S. at a far greater mercy of terrible powers that would then seek to destroy us.

    Regarding Iran, I would be more in favor of either limiting their nuclear supply (although how we go about this is a matter of debate), or alternatively, we beef up our own nuclear supply and who it off. Let Iran try to start a nuclear war, they'll get their asses handed to them in to time if they try to attack us first. As long as the U.S. holds more power over them there isn't a thing that they can do about it.

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    Attacking Iran is a very bad idea for multiple reasons, one reason politicians seem to ignore is economical ones.

    The bombing of Libya is prime example what happens if a country gives up on their nuclear arms.

  10. #70
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Green_Pine View Post
    Every state can have an atomic bomb if it chooses too.
    Flabby relativism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Green_Pine View Post
    The sole reason for the US wanting to invade Iran is because of the massive oil deposits that are untapped in the region. Iran is the sole significant country opposing our Empire in the Middle East.
    Doesn't know the facts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Green_Pine View Post
    Never mind that, in addition, there is no evidence that Iran is actually making nuclear bombs.
    So counter to the facts it's ridiculous.

    Doesn't know a single thing about what's really going on.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...?tid=sm_btn_fb

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip View Post
    I just finished reading 'A Canticle for Leibowitz', it was written in the 1960's and is about the aftermath of a full on nuclear war. The science is dated, but still.. nuclear weapons are amazingly destructive. The though of myriads of little states with their own agendas chills me. I dunno, I really think somebody needs to play daddy in the world. The best case is if we could go multilateral.
    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by Green_Pine View Post
    There is no license required to own a gun? Don't know what country your from.

    This right is enumerated in the 2nd, and most important of all amendments in the US Bill of Rights.
    One more piece of evidence to support my hypothesis that Green_Pine is a militia member.

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    I don't want any country to have nukes. It does seem rather hypocritical to bomb other countries for having nukes when we have so many. Poking countries with a stick without moral authority also seems like a costly and counterproductive tactic (instigation of reaction as trumped up basis for claiming act of war).
    Flabby relativism.

    This post is dying for a healthy reality check.

    You expect the countries without nuclear weapons to go around stopping those who do from having them?

    Moral authority does not come from having or not having nuclear weapons: it comes from likelihood for responsible use of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by YWIR View Post
    IF this rumour turns out to be true:

    They should not be allowed to have nuclear warheads. They're an unstable country whose leaders and their political beliefs are the cause of constant distress and displeasure among the Iranian people. I doubt that they won't eventually use* them. A country like that should not be gaining more power...
    However, the USA doesn't have the funds to do anything about it right now... I think other countries need to be involved in this...

    I think other means of removing the possibility of weapons should be applied. If that doesn't work, well then, Option A.
    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip View Post
    I notice that a lot of people's solution to the world's problems is for everybody to be simultaneously nice. While I can't disagree that the world would be a better place if everybody was nice, I can't really see any narrative that would lead us there. The history of the world involves somebody with a big stick lording it over other people because that's just how humans work. I think the best we can do is try to insure that the person with the stick isn't a total ass.
    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cV_q-mVAAA&feature=related"]Foreign Policy Truth[/YOUTUBE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Having grown up in a politically asinine country (USSR), I can tell you with great certainty that most of the people at those anti-American demonstrations are there because they are told to be there. They get a day off from work just for the demonstration and somebody (usually their employer/boss/local stooge) makes sure they attend.

    I'm sure some of those people at those demonstrations really do wish death upon America, but the majority feel rather neutral about the whole thing and just want to go about their lives peacefully. And don't forget that there is also a significant minority who want the whole regime replaced as bad as you and I do (as you can tell by the recent anti government riots).

    So yes, I'd feel bad for Iranian civilians dying needlessly, and honestly hope it never comes down to that. Having said that, I don't think we should stand down just because their government hid nuclear weapons in a population center. After all, as selfish as it may sound, better them than me.
    A valuable perspective to hear.

    Thank you for that.

    Yes, yes, yes.

    That's why I mentioned actions vs words.

    Ever since Obama took office, the Administration has been trumpeting the "great cooperation" of Russia and China on this effort. And then Russia and China have dragged their feet the entire way on every effort aimed at actually preventing Iran from getting the bomb. The fact of the matter is, America's enemies (Russia, China, Venezuela, North Korea) all know that Iran getting a bomb is a major blow to American power. The day Russia and China stop dragging their feet and show a concerted and continued effort to halt the Iranian program, is the day I *might* starting believing them on this matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Savage Idealist View Post
    Premtively bombing the shit out of Iran would be one of the most reatarded and follish actions that the U.S. could possibly commit. Aside from the moral problem of slaughtering millions of innocent people, it would severe da,age the reputation of the U.S. as a destructive, parinoid, and ruthless nation ruled over by fear. Our enemy countires would demonize us as a completely evil nation while our allies break off any alleinces or aid to us, leaving the U.S. at a far greater mercy of terrible powers that would then seek to destroy us.

    Regarding Iran, I would be more in favor of either limiting their nuclear supply (although how we go about this is a matter of debate), or alternatively, we beef up our own nuclear supply and who it off. Let Iran try to start a nuclear war, they'll get their asses handed to them in to time if they try to attack us first. As long as the U.S. holds more power over them there isn't a thing that they can do about it.
    Doesn't get it.

Similar Threads

  1. To MBA or Not to MBA?
    By pure_mercury in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-15-2008, 01:25 PM
  2. OK to Reveal Team's Type Or Not?
    By ENFJ in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-19-2007, 06:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO