Richards 0
QuoteIs there any "Blackmail" potential with Nukes. They are AN INTRINSICALLY DEFENSIVE WEAPON!
Some tinpot can use it as an insurance policy against western intervention if he engages in local aggression. Some middle eastern tinpot can blatantly increase his support for Hamas or even initiate some direct intervention against Isreal knowing that he has at least hedged against being over-run if he loses. Eliminating the fear of a full fledged counter-invasion will give any local tinpot the balls to try excursions he might not have otherwise
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
LOIL. Hey . I don't give a FLYING FUCK. We need to keep or noses outta everyones else beeswax. I'm' ready to go anytime. You?QuoteQuoteI hope everbody gets NUKES. Might give the US a reality check
Would you like to see someone explode nuclear bombs upon America in order to teach America a lesson?
I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.
QuoteQuoteIs there any "Blackmail" potential with Nukes. They are AN INTRINSICALLY DEFENSIVE WEAPON!
Some tinpot can use it as an insurance policy against western intervention if... support Hamas... {attack} Israel.... Eliminating the fear of a full fledged counter-invasion.
The "Tinpot" has invariably ceased to be idiotic when he acquires nukes.
Much of the "fear" talk about Iran acquiring a nuclear capability (or indeed any nuclear proliferation) centres on a country gaining a regional nuclear monopoly, when the actual case is that we're dealing with a LOSS of such a monopoly.
In the case of Iran it is the US & Israel which loses it's nuclear monopoly, not Iran which gains a monopoly.
The net result would be the "Tinpot-Aggressor" (whoever that may be) losing the balls to invade & conquer - and instead find a means of peaceful co-existence with "The Enemy". Kilotonnage & Megadeath have a way of focussing even the most extreme political leaders on a peaceful solution.
Mike.
Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.
Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.
Amazon 7
QuoteIn the case of Iran it is the US & Israel which loses it's nuclear monopoly, not Iran which gains a monopoly.
The net result would be the "Tinpot-Aggressor" (whoever that may be) losing the balls to invade & conquer - and instead find a means of peaceful co-existence with "The Enemy". Kilotonnage & Megadeath have a way of focussing even the most extreme political leaders on a peaceful solution.
We have used restrraint after we understood the ramifications of using nuclear weapons. Israel has had them for 40 years or so and has not used them.
I see not a single chance in hell of Iran NOT using them in one way or another. They see it as a way of dealing Holy War on the west.. the great Satan.... to believe otherwise is naiviete of the highest order.
QuoteQuoteIn the case of Iran it is the US & Israel which loses it's nuclear monopoly, not Iran which gains a monopoly.
... not a single chance in hell of Iran NOT using them.... to believe otherwise is naiviete of the highest order.
To believe that Iran WILL use nuclear weapons when they acquire them is to completely ignore history and the actual actions of those people who HAVE gained control of such weapons.
Is Ahmeninejad somehow more evil that Stalin? Beria? Malenkov? Mao? Botha & De-Klerk? Or were some of the most extremist political leaders & "Greatest Mass Murderers in History" really Liberal Humanitarian Softy's at heart?
Isn't a belief that Ahmeninejad will react differently to the same issues faced by the above-mentioned, really Bigotry of the highest order?
Mike.
Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.
Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.
Richards 0
QuoteIn the case of Iran it is the US & Israel which loses it's nuclear monopoly, not Iran which gains a monopoly.
The net result would be the "Tinpot-Aggressor" (whoever that may be) losing the balls to invade & conquer - and instead find a means of peaceful co-existence with "The Enemy". Kilotonnage & Megadeath have a way of focussing even the most extreme political leaders on a peaceful solution.
I hope you are right but I doubt it. Isreal has always been able to use it's nuclear advantage to prevent a mass invasion and that will not change.
That said, Israel was always able to launch massive conventional retaliatory strikes, against foe's and that risk did help keep some in check. If Iran has nukes it can step up it's support of Hamas and other Isreal hating groups while now Isreal has to be more carefull about how it responds. Causing Isreal to hesitate does force them to yeild some strategic advantage to their enemies, and may encourage greater misconduct on the part of it's neighbors.
I was not suggesting that Iran was willing to go into armagedon. Just pointing out that they can use that leverage to make Isreal be more measured in it's response, which could likely encourage more attacks.
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
Amazon 7
QuoteIsn't a belief that Ahmeninejad will react differently to the same issues faced by the above-mentioned, really Bigotry of the highest order?
Not at all... its a reaction to their DECLARED ....JIHAD against the west... the others you listed were not religious fanatics who believed in personal martyrdom. THAT is our reality in the world today....its not bigotry to point out that they fucking want to kill all the "non-believers"....Convert or die....personally I prefer that they are the ones who die. Espically since they seem to be incapable of living in this world in peace.
Quote....JIHAD against the west...religious fanatics... personal martyrdom... prefer that they are the ones who die... incapable of living in peace.
What makes religious fanatics so special!!? Any fanaticism is equally dangerous. Nazi fanatics, Stalin's NKVD, Mao's Revolutionary Guards, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge, Serbians involved in ethnic cleansing, Hutus & Tutsis in Rwanda... None of them were religious, some quite the opposite.
What they all shared was the belief that the dangers they faced were such that it was permissible to view opponents as sub-humans, Vermin only worthy of extermination. It wasn't murder, it was making the world a cleaner, safer place.
And here you are proposing that America & Britain make the world a safer, cleaner place. The Persians don't like us... They say nasty things... They look at us funny... They may hurt us one day... Eradicate them! Annihilate them! That way they'll never hurt us. We'll have destroyed ourselves. America, the country founded on Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness committing the greatest act of mass-murder the human race has ever seen.
Mike.
Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.
Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.
"To believe that Iran WILL use nuclear weapons when they acquire them" > Where you been? You don't think the've had them for many yrs? Question is WHEN
I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.
Amazon 7
QuoteAnd here you are proposing that America & Britain make the world a safer, cleaner place. The Persians don't like us... They say nasty things... They look at us funny... They may hurt us one day... Eradicate them! Annihilate them! That way they'll never hurt us. We'll have destroyed ourselves. America, the country founded on Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness committing the greatest act of mass-murder the human race has ever seen.
Personally I have been a proponent of peace for most of my life. I have sacrificed enough to war in my life thank you.. but when I see these ASSBITES who will not negotiate.. and apparently do not want peace in any form other than the eradication of a group of people that have also suffered enough.. that is brain damaged shit.
Peace at any price has never worked just ask Mr Chamberlain. I also will never convert so such a peace loving religion... so I guess they can just go right ahead and TRY to kill me.
QuoteIran .. nuclear weapons .. had them for many yrs?
No. Pakistan has them. There's also the suggestion that the Saudis have them (bought from Pakistan).
I do believe that Iran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons. I just swim against the tide by believing that Iran managing to build such weapons doesn't constitute a threat of destabilisation.
Mike.
Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.
Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.
That would be one concern. the other of course is the blackmail potential of tinpots who now have an ace up their sleeve.
One of the things about Nukes is that as nations get them, they make DAMN SURE that "fanatics" don't get near them. Those which DO get the responsibility of control of them tend to quickly lose their fanaticism in the face of the characteristics of the weapons.
As I said earlier, we've had some pretty "Fanatical" folk in charge of Nukes since their development, and in each case it has caused a change in the degree of actual fanaticism (as opposed to rhetoric).
Is there any "Blackmail" potential with Nukes. They are AN INTRINSICALLY DEFENSIVE WEAPON!
Mike.
Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.
Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.