Obama offers Iran 'serious dialogue': US President Barack Obama continued to offer Iran "serious, meaningful dialogue," despite revelations it was building a second secret nuclear facility
how'd that work out?
About as well as the rest of the hope and change...
Well then I think we should move to sanctions. If we sanction them from importing technology they are fucked. There is no way anyone will take their billions of oil money and sell them tech under the table.
Israel Launches UAV That Can Reach Iran: The Israeli Air Force Sunday launched a new unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), dubbed "Eitan," that can stay in the air 24 hours and can reach Iran. Military officials at the ceremony declined to say whether the new UAV was designed for use against Iran and did not specifically mention the Islamic Republic, but foreign news services noted that the Eitan can fly as far as Iran.
Russia Sets Date for Iran to Go Nuclear: Russia's nuclear agency says that it will load fuel into Iran's first nuclear power plant, the Bushehr Plant (left), next week, defying U.S. calls to hold off the start of the launch until Iran proves that it's not developing nuclear weapons.
This would be the best case scenario, if Iran were to remove Ahmadinijad and replace him with a more moderate and pro-Western government. If they would go the route of South Africa or Libya, and with a new regime give up their nuclear program to dismantling by U.N. weapons inspectors, in full disclosure.
But I don't see any evidence that in Ahmadinjad's departure, other Iranian leadership would be willing to completely dispose of their nuclear weapons program either.
Wow. That's about the stupidest thing I've heard about Iran in awhile. You really don't pay that much attention, do you? Replacing Ahmadinijad really isn't going to help as the elected officials are--more or less--puppets of the Ayatollahs. Read a fucking book other than Obamanomics.
But I don't see any evidence that in Ahmadinjad's departure, other Iranian leadership would be willing to completely dispose of their nuclear weapons program either.
I love how this dumbass pretends to to be IGNORING you, Iggy, yet STILL RESPONDS to you....but,to "no one". As if he's just talking out loud to....the thin....air. No, that doesn't make him seem even MORE crazy. No, no...
Wow. That's about the stupidest thing I've heard about Iran in awhile. You really don't pay that much attention, do you? Replacing Ahmadinijad really isn't going to help as the elected officials are--more or less--puppets of the Ayatollahs. Read a fucking book other than Obamanomics.
Replacing Ahmadinijad really isn't going to help as the elected officials are--more or less--puppets of the Ayatollahs...
Exactly why we should let Israel nuke 'em till they glow.
Why was Israel allowed to get nukes, but not Sweden?
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
I love how this dumbass pretends to to be IGNORING you, Iggy, yet STILL RESPONDS to you....but,to "no one". As if he's just talking out loud to....the thin....air. No, that doesn't make him seem even MORE crazy. No, no...
I'm pretty sure he slays giants in the fields of Spain on weekends, too.
My favorite part of this particular one is that he tries to re-post his final sentence as if it somehow matters. He had already made the contention that upcoming elections could conceivably alter the government of Iran and their nuclear power goals.
I can't believe there's dipshits out there who defend Iran and bash the U.S. and Israel as warmongers and so forth.
Iran has been pursuing nukes for 10 years. Many groups outside the U.S. --including the U.N., and including Iran's muslim neighbors-- have expressed certainty and fear that Iran is developing nukes, as well as missiles that could deliver nukes to Europe or the United States, as well as Israel.
The U.S. and U.N. and Israel have given Iran multiple warnings to abandon and fully disclose its nuclear program. The response has been defiance, threats to "wipe Israel off the map", threats against the United States, attempts to assasinate a diplomat inside the U.S., and other provocations. Hardly the actions of an innocent Iranian government. Plus, y'know, building deeper more bomb-fortified bunkers, to better protect their nuclear weapons program. That doesn't exist.
And yet... these dipshits believe we're the ones provoking war?
If and when an attack on Iran occurs, Iran alone is to blame, for ignoring warning after warning in their pursuit of nuclear weapons "to advance the cause of Islam".
I think it would be fully appropriate to use nukes on Iran, to thoroughly eliminate the nukes they are developing to use on us. Turn Tehran and the ayatollahs pushing this program into molten glass. Remove the head, and the beast advancing nukes will die, and the Iranians left will gladly surrender all nukes, and all future ambitions in that direction.
Allow Iran to have nukes, and Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and others will develop nukes as well, to establish a counter-balancing defense against a nuclear Iran.
I think it would be fully appropriate to use nukes on Iran, to thoroughly eliminate the nukes they are developing to use on us. Turn Tehran and the ayatollahs pushing this program into molten glass. Remove the head, and the beast advancing nukes will die, and the Iranians left will gladly surrender all nukes, and all future ambitions in that direction.
Let me guess, this is Christ-loving, Christian Dave saying all of this.
The whole nuclear Iran thing has been pushed by Israel for, at least, twenty years. Netanyahu said is '92 that they would have one by '99. Didn't happen. This is fear/warmongering, par excellence.
We've squandered our wealth and power while Russia and China continue(d) to build theirs up. We've set ourselves up for failure. This isn't about making the world safe for democracy or anything like that. This is all part of Western Civilization making one last dramatic play for power and relevance before it totally collapses. We had our chance to look inward towards renewal in the '90s and we blew it. Now, we've trapped ourselves into the role of Maj. Kong waving his cowboy hat as he rides the bomb.
I guess this is the part where we should, at least, enjoy the ride...
This article from the Council for Foreign Relations gives an optimistic view of Iran's program, which hopefully means that Iran's development of nukes is at least a year away, and that the U.S. and Israel's harsher rhetoric is more dire than their actual intentions.
Reading the professional punditry in Washington or the rhetorical nuclear and military pronouncements from Tehran, one would assume that Iran is very close to acquiring a nuclear weapon—and that the United States and Iran are on the brink of war.
In the United States, serious thinkers have offered articles that make “The Case for Military Action in Iran,” advocate for “Why Obama Should Take Out Iran’s Nuclear Program,” and assert it is “Time to Attack Iran.”
Earlier this week, a more extreme version of the Iran-war-determinism meme was penned by Thomas P.M. Barnett, chief analyst at Wikistrat, an organization that refers to itself as “the world’s first Massively Multiplayer Online Consultancy.”
In an op-ed entitled, “The New Rules: The Coming War with Iran,” Barnett wrote: “Israel and America will soon go to war with Iran—for as many times as it takes. In each instance, our proximate goal will be to kick the nuclear ‘can’ as far down the road as possible, but our ultimate goal will be regime change…Nothing is going to stop this war dynamic from unfolding…nothing. So get ready for war with Iran. Because once Assad is gone, that is what comes next.”
In Tehran, meanwhile, claims are made weekly about the supposed indigenous development of nuclear fuel rods, killer drones, next-generation centrifuges, and long-range missiles. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dons a white lab coat, points at some new technological innovation, or walks amidst a uranium-enrichment centrifuge cascade (which itself is under IAEA comprehensive safeguards).
Elsewhere, ballistic missiles are rolled through Tehran like a homecoming parade for threat projections. Or, the possible mock-up of the downed U.S. RQ-170 Sentinel drone is prominently displayed next to uniformed men who run their hands over its radar-reflective skin.
These supposedly groundbreaking “threats” from Tehran are then elevated by the Western media, rewarding the Iranian regime with the strategic communications coup that it so desperately seeks.
Outside of the threat industries in Washington and Tehran, however, are the professional analysts of the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC), who provide assessments of foreign policy and national security issues for policymakers. Yesterday, two senior members of the IC testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee: Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Lieutenant General Ronald Burgess, chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Over the course of two-plus hours, the officials made four statements that provided a much-needed clarifying perspective amidst all the hyperventilating by the media.
Clapper: “We believe the decision [to pursue a nuclear weapon] would be made by the supreme leader himself, and he would base that on a cost-benefit analysis.” Iran does not want “a nuclear weapon at any price.” Sen. Carl Levin: “Is it your implication that it will take more than a year for Iran to build a bomb?” Clapper: “Yes, sir.”
Burgess: “The [DIA] assesses Iran is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict.”
Burgess: “To the best of our knowledge, Israel has not decided to attack Iran.”
In other words, according to the heads of the IC and DIA: 1) against all odds, the supposedly “mad Mullahs” of Tehran are endowed with the capacity for rational human thought, and thus there might be diplomatic or economic inducements that could compel an agreement on outstanding questions regarding the nuclear program; 2) the United States has at least a year; 3) Iran is not looking to start a war with the United States; and 4) Israel has not yet decided to undertake a preemptive war with Iran.
The part about how Iran is exaggerating its capability, and that the media is unwittingly promoting Iran's propaganda for them, was particularly interesting.
As was testimony of military/intelligence experts before congress that see the threat as less immediate.
But we likewise didn't see North Korea's nuclear development as that urgent. Until they had them already. Or see Libya's nuclear development at all, prior to them revealing it in 2003, before giving it to U.N. inspectors for dismantlement. Or Syria's program more recently with North Korean components, prior to its being bombed to the ground by the Israelis.
Three examples why concern about Iran is not just "paranoia" or "warmongering".
I think it would be fully appropriate to use nukes on Iran, to thoroughly eliminate the nukes they are developing to use on us. Turn Tehran and the ayatollahs pushing this program into molten glass. Remove the head, and the beast advancing nukes will die, and the Iranians left will gladly surrender all nukes, and all future ambitions in that direction.
Let me guess, this is Christ-loving, Christian Dave saying all of this.
The whole nuclear Iran thing has been pushed by Israel for, at least, twenty years. Netanyahu said is '92 that they would have one by '99. Didn't happen. This is fear/warmongering, par excellence.
We've squandered our wealth and power while Russia and China continue(d) to build theirs up. We've set ourselves up for failure. This isn't about making the world safe for democracy or anything like that. This is all part of Western Civilization making one last dramatic play for power and relevance before it totally collapses. We had our chance to look inward towards renewal in the '90s and we blew it. Now, we've trapped ourselves into the role of Maj. Kong waving his cowboy hat as he rides the bomb.
I guess this is the part where we should, at least, enjoy the ride...
I think it would be fully appropriate to use nukes on Iran, to thoroughly eliminate the nukes they are developing to use on us. Turn Tehran and the ayatollahs pushing this program into molten glass. Remove the head, and the beast advancing nukes will die, and the Iranians left will gladly surrender all nukes, and all future ambitions in that direction.
Let me guess, this is Christ-loving, Christian Dave saying all of this.
The whole nuclear Iran thing has been pushed by Israel for, at least, twenty years. Netanyahu said is '92 that they would have one by '99. Didn't happen. This is fear/warmongering, par excellence.
We've squandered our wealth and power while Russia and China continue(d) to build theirs up. We've set ourselves up for failure. This isn't about making the world safe for democracy or anything like that. This is all part of Western Civilization making one last dramatic play for power and relevance before it totally collapses. We had our chance to look inward towards renewal in the '90s and we blew it. Now, we've trapped ourselves into the role of Maj. Kong waving his cowboy hat as he rides the bomb.
I guess this is the part where we should, at least, enjoy the ride...
Christ didn't tell the United States or any other nation that they don't have the right to defend themselves from murderous fanatics that threaten to kill us.
And I again point to Libya's nuclear program, that no one had a clue they were developing it until they surrendered it to U.N. inspectors. surrendered precisely because the U.S. invaded Iraq, and Ghaddafi/Libya didn't want to be next.
Likewise (as I already pointed out) head-in-the-sand ostriches like you said North Korea didn't have imminent nuclear weapons capability. Right up until they had it.
I think it would be fully appropriate to use nukes on Iran, to thoroughly eliminate the nukes they are developing to use on us. Turn Tehran and the ayatollahs pushing this program into molten glass. Remove the head, and the beast advancing nukes will die, and the Iranians left will gladly surrender all nukes, and all future ambitions in that direction.
Let me guess, this is Christ-loving, Christian Dave saying all of this.
The whole nuclear Iran thing has been pushed by Israel for, at least, twenty years. Netanyahu said is '92 that they would have one by '99. Didn't happen. This is fear/warmongering, par excellence.
We've squandered our wealth and power while Russia and China continue(d) to build theirs up. We've set ourselves up for failure. This isn't about making the world safe for democracy or anything like that. This is all part of Western Civilization making one last dramatic play for power and relevance before it totally collapses. We had our chance to look inward towards renewal in the '90s and we blew it. Now, we've trapped ourselves into the role of Maj. Kong waving his cowboy hat as he rides the bomb.
I guess this is the part where we should, at least, enjoy the ride...
Originally Posted By: Traitor David, the Wonder Racist
Christ didn't tell the United States or any other nation that they don't have the right to defend themselves from murderous fanatics that threaten to kill us.
Wrong again, moron...
Originally Posted By: THE BIBLE, Matthew 5:39
"But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
Originally Posted By: The Wonder Racist
UNLESS THEY'RE NOT WHITE!!! THEN YOU CAN KILL THEM! SO SAYETH MY GAWD!!
Originally Posted By: Traitor David, the Wonder Racist
Christ didn't tell the United States or any other nation that they don't have the right to defend themselves from murderous fanatics that threaten to kill us.
Wrong again, moron...
Originally Posted By: THE BIBLE, Matthew 5:39
"But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
I'll wager that your head would spin 360 degrees and you'd start making animal sounds and projectile vomiting if you ever actually entered a church.
i'll further wager that you know nothing about the Bible or its context, other than whipping something out at random to use for the sole purpose of slandering me.
Jesus did NOT say to the Roman Centurion "You have to leave military service before I heal your paralyzed servant". Instead he DID say "I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith" and "go home and it will be done as you believed it would."
Paul said similar things about Roman soldiers later in the New Testament, even of the Roman soldiers who imprisoned him. That they have a purpose in providing order that serves God on earth.
To say nothing of the many wars and conquests in the Old Testament, sanctioned by God in the formation and preservation of Israel. Kings David, Saul and Solomon were soldiers. As were many others praised in the Bible. The Bible says individuals should "turn the other cheek" and not be quick to anger. But nowhere does it blanket condemn military service. And I've seen enough of your posts here to know that you're not a Christian anyway. You have contempt for the Bible, and is just one more set of words you viciously hack into chunks to fling at me, like the rest of your cake-like poo that passes for discussion.
just another weapon for slander. On Easter, of all occasions.
Originally Posted By: Pro
Originally Posted By: The Wonder Racist (as completely fabricated by Pro the Treasonous Slanderer
UNLESS THEY'RE NOT WHITE!!! THEN YOU CAN KILL THEM! SO SAYETH MY GAWD!!
Once again proving I haven't actually said racist things. so you have to say vile racist things and "script" me to say them, slanderously putting the words in my mouth.
Again proving what a miserable human being you are.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Originally Posted By: Traitor David, the Wonder Racist
Christ didn't tell the United States or any other nation that they don't have the right to defend themselves from murderous fanatics that threaten to kill us.
Wrong again, moron...
Originally Posted By: THE BIBLE, Matthew 5:39
"But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."
Originally Posted By: The Wonder Racist
UNLESS THEY'RE NOT WHITE!!! THEN YOU CAN KILL THEM! SO SAYETH MY GAWD!!
Originally Posted By: Traitor David, the Wonder Racist
Uh...Uh...oh shit!!! Uh! G-SPIN!! THE COLOREDS DID IT!! SPICS!! SOOOORRROOOSSSSS!!!!! JESUS WAS WHITE!!!!!!!!!
WITNESS as David attempts to RE-WRITE the Word of God on Easter.
Such a profound grasp on reality, he has. Such a respect for culture and wisdom. Such an honest, thoughtful commentary on the meaning behind the peaceful parables of Jesus Christ.
Oh. No, wait. Sorry. It's just the same old tired, racist hate-filled extremist rhetoric he's been indoctrinated with by the looney-toon-Rightwing propaganda terrorists. Nevermind. He's a fucking whackjob....
Dude, really, just because YOU think it's funny to call The President of the United States a racial slur doesn't mean anyone else does. Why do you feel the need to be such a racist pig, David? Why do you think Caucasians have any superiority whatsoever? Is it a southern thing? Did your parents or friends teach you to fear those with different skin color?
I'll really be glad when your generation has finally passed so that we can move closer to being free from racist scum like yourself. You sad little man.
But, really, STOP calling your President that word. That's an order, you hateful bitch.
An interview with a respected U.S. Col. Douglas A. MacGregor, that gives an interesting counter-perspective on the downside of invading Iran.
He says that neither President Obama(we already knew that) nor the officers in the Pentagon want an invasion of Iran. That even most of the Senate and Congress do not, but play for the cameras and the contributing lobbyists to their campaigns, who would turn on them if they did not have a pro-Israel aggressive stance toward Iran. MacGregor predicts domestic attacks on the U.S. if Iran is invaded (and I guess Europe too) such as the mall attack we saw a week ago in Kenya, because they are incapable of doing more than minimal damage to U.S. air and naval forces if we invade Iran. So they would retaliate against "soft targets" that could not resist attack.
And even says that if Iran is attacked, they wouldn't need to bild nukes, in that situation "their allies" (presumably the Russians) would give them nukes.
In the concluding minutes, he also touches on similar issues of invading Syria. That they have one of the strongest and most disciplined militaries in the Middle East, and air defense that would be costly to bring down.
And he envisions, if left alone, Iran will naturally become more peaceful, more pro-Western and less extremist, in accordance with the will of its people, and the islamists will gradually lose power, just as he says the Chinese have become more capitalist and open to the West.
Although... that really doesn't address the thousands of centrifuges spinning all over Iran, generating weapons-grade plutonium. Or Iranian missiles capable of delivering them. Or Iran's rhetoric to "wipe Israel off the map" and vow to use nuclear weapons "in the cause of Islam". Or Iran's test of a nuclear EMP that could black out North America.
As interesting as I found this interview, I'm aware that it is from RT (Russia Today, a 100% state-owned Russian media) that certainly wouldn't air views that undermine Russian interests, or those of their regional allies, Iran and Syria.
A very fiery and entertaining, if not insightful, exchange between congressmen and Michael Scheuer, whose credentials are clearly cited in the video.
I always liked this guy, despite that I have a far more pro-Israel stance than he does. He is normally much more reserved. Here he is unnecessarily combative. You could make the argument that he feels that strongly about the issues, or that he is being overly confrontational. Either way, I value his insights, as a highly qualified expert on Al Qaida and the Muslim world.
![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/blogban3.jpg)
[/center]![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/jlamiska.jpg)
[/center]
Uh...Uh...oh shit!!! Uh! G-SPIN!! THE COLOREDS DID IT!! SPICS!! SOOOORRROOOSSSSS!!!!! JESUS WAS WHITE!!!!!!!!! 
