PDA

View Full Version : Washington Message: Iran a threat to U.S., Israel



BrianW
02-02-2007, 01:11 PM
Not again! More of the same strong language from Washington D.C. directed at Iran.

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons," ...told a crowd of Israel supporters. "In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table."

"We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force,"

Thought I'd bring this up, because I recall how that "no option can be taken off the table." quote really got some folks here pretty mad a few months ago. Can't believe they'd try it again.

TimH
02-02-2007, 01:14 PM
I would say that id Bush has his way, we will be in Iran within 6 months.

John of Phoenix
02-02-2007, 02:00 PM
dubya invaded Iraq and got away with it. Lies, bad intel, screwed up occupation and all, no one did anything to make him pay.

So now he's going to do it again. You're surprised?

TimH
02-02-2007, 02:42 PM
Prepare yourself for the unthinkable: war against Iran may be a necessity


If Iran gets safely and unmolested to nuclear status, it will be a threshold moment in the history of the world, up there with the Bolshevik Revolution and the coming of Hitler. What the country itself may do with those weapons, given its pledges, its recent history and its strategic objectives with regard to the US, Israel and their allies, is well known. We can reasonably assume that the refusal of the current Iranian leadership to accept the Holocaust as historical fact is simply a recognition of their own plans to redefine the notion as soon as they get a chance (“Now this is what we call a holocaust”). But this threat is only, incredibly, a relatively small part of the problem.
If Iran goes nuclear, it will demonstrate conclusively that even the world’s greatest superpower, unrivalled militarily, under a leadership of proven willingness to take bold military steps, could not stop a country as destabilising as Iran from achieving its nuclear ambitions. No country in a region that is so riven by religious and ethnic hatreds will feel safe from the new regional superpower. No country in the region will be confident that the US and its allies will be able or willing to protect them from a nuclear strike by Iran. Nor will any regional power fear that the US and its allies will act to prevent them from emulating Iran. Say hello to a nuclear Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,19269-2011570,00.html

High C
02-02-2007, 02:52 PM
Not again! More of the same strong language from Washington D.C. directed at Iran.

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons," ...told a crowd of Israel supporters. "In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table."

"We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force,"


Who is this fire breathing hawk?! Jeb Bush? Billy Bob Bush? Franken Bush? Rush Bush?

He has to be stopped! ;)

John of Phoenix
02-02-2007, 03:02 PM
Oh I get it. You're quoting her grossly out of context though. If you look closely (or not), she's advocating the "D" word.


I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations. I don't believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines. But let's be clear about the threat we face now: A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond. The regime's pro-terrorist, anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric only underscores the urgency of the threat it poses. U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and should not — must not — permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support vigorously and publicly expressed by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations. And we cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to the current leadership of Iran — that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons. Diplomacy.

Osborne Russell
02-02-2007, 03:41 PM
Let's just hope that any serious decison making occurs under a competent adminstration.

Phillip Allen
02-02-2007, 03:44 PM
why must we legislate against scaryness by scaring folks

TimH
02-02-2007, 03:47 PM
maybe we could take out their nuclear facilities with airstrikes and avoid a real war. Shouldnt be too hard since we are the ones who built the facilities in the first place.

Cuyahoga Chuck
02-02-2007, 04:21 PM
Blowing up nuclear reactors, which we can do easily, would release clouds of radiation which would make others in the neighborhood,who were not a target, rather testy. And the prevailing winds would carry the radioactive debris over the food supplies of some rather muscular counties like India and China.
Still want to sign on to this, Tom?

John of Phoenix
02-02-2007, 04:26 PM
This must be scary for the neocons.

Hillary is out right winging the uber right wingers.

LeeG
02-02-2007, 04:33 PM
maybe we could take out their nuclear facilities with airstrikes and avoid a real war. Shouldnt be too hard since we are the ones who built the facilities in the first place.

the phrase "take out" is applicable for food delivery, not a range of facilities spread over a large territory, some buried very well.

It might not be a bad time to actually refer to the IAEAs assessments. Assessments that turned out to be accurate in Iraq where the US was,,100% wrong.

There's a whole bunch of miles between Kuwaitt and the Bagdad bases that supply lines require. Attacking Iran would make those lines mighty insecure.

TimH
02-02-2007, 04:37 PM
Blowing up nuclear reactors, which we can do easily, would release clouds of radiation which would make others in the neighborhood,who were not a target, rather testy. And the prevailing winds would carry the radioactive debris over the food supplies of some rather muscular counties like India and China.
Still want to sign on to this, Tom?

Thats why they are experimenting with small nukes that can blast down and destroy the target, then a small conventional explosive will fill in the hole, safely burying the dangerous contaminants. The people in the test area (somewhere in the american desert are in an uproar about it.
It was on NPR.

LeeG
02-02-2007, 04:44 PM
TimH, that's a fantasy. Read up on the topic. The "bunker busing nuke" is a thinly disguised program to suck more money or spread disinformation.

The depth required to completely bury a nuke explosion is nearly 1000' or more down. If we're using nukes we won't care there's fallout. Most likely any underground facility is too close to the surface to be buried without releasing radioactive material anyway.

BrianW
02-02-2007, 04:59 PM
This must be scary for the neocons.

Hillary is out right winging the uber right wingers.

Not scared John, I'm laughing my arse off, to put it politely. :)

I like the fact it's now called 'diplomacy' but before it was 'war mongering'. :D

Say, let's let at your quote 'closely'...

First she complains about 'outsourcing' negotiations...


I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations. I don't believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines.

But then at the end says...


In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support vigorously and publicly expressed by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations.

Basically, her lips are moving, therefore... ;)