*yawn* Rattling sabres again..

[baggygreen]

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23821379-23109,00.html

Problem is, i think they're right - lets face it, if iran gets nukes, theres no prizes for guessing who their first target would be.. Wouldnt be the first time israel's taken such measures to set nuclear programs back..

[Iceman]

Your topic title is incorrect..."Sabre Rattling" is what some country's with no backbone do..you fill in the blanks here...as shown by Americas action in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Israels attack on a Syrian suspected nuclear site...to say it is sabre rattling is very ignorant on your part I'm sorry.

You live in a more fluid world.

To me this is a very polite warning to prepare to be attacked if changes are not made...and were not ****ing around.

[Skybird]

A war lost - was a sabre rattling one better shouldn't have tried. :smug:

[Letum]

Israel attacks Iran
Iran attacks Israel

Both scenarios are equally as bad. There should be 100% effort in preventing both, not
threatening one to prevent the other.

[Skybird]

There should be 100% effort in preventing both,

Regarding preventing Iranian nukes, one question: HOW?

Realistic, hard and solid, workable options please, considering the political and religious and cultural realities, not just idealistic wishful thinking and wellmeant intentions only please.

I too prefer a peaceful solution to the iranian attempt to gain nuclear weapons in the hidden (and i take it for granted that they do, it is the only option that makes sense for them, and they have the much better cards anyway as long as theWest does not put ALL options on the table, whcih is very unlikely it ever will). Problem is i do not see a realistic, workable solution that does not depend on blind trust or such nonenses only, but is CONTROLLABLE and VERIFYABLE.

The alternative only is to accept a nuclear armed Iran, and it proliferating nukes even more to other groups and nations even harder to control.

[Letum]

There should be 100% effort in preventing both,
Regarding preventing Iranian nukes, one question: HOW?



I don't see that preventing Iran from getting nukes is the problem.

The primary problem is ensureing that Iran would not use a nuclear weapon weather it
had on or not. Only at this point will there be any kind of lasting scurity. It is something
that can only come through amiable diplomacy. Israil does not have a great record of
such things. This news article is a case in point.

War, ititiated by either side is not some kind of plan B. If war where to break out then
both sides have lost for many generations to come.

[SUBMAN1]

Hate for Israel is only a binding of the Middle East people, and yes, the nukes would be pointed at Israel.

Problem is, what is an even deeper hate is Sunni's against Shiite's.

So I see them blowing themselves back to the stone age (Where they seem to want to return the world to anyway, so nukes can do it faster for them :D) so give em the bomb! Do it soon! Then we won't need worry about their little threats any longer!

-S

[Skybird]

I don't see that preventing Iran from getting nukes is the problem.

The primary problem is ensureing that Iran would not use a nuclear weapon weather it

Wrong.

The main problem is proliferation, and Iran proliferating nukes to associated factions, while telling the international public it doesn't.

you are too reasonable and too good-hearted for this grim world, Letum. No offense meant, I mean it serious. By fate's queer sense of irony I have just changed my signature short ago. I think, amongst others Oscar also meant you.

You also trust in negotation results with Iran, you say. I have no clue why that could be.

Trust Iran, if you want. Control is so many times better. Trustworthy are other people, but not any iranian government.

[Zayphod]

[quote=Skybird]
War, ititiated by either side is not some kind of plan B. If war where to break out then both sides have lost for many generations to come.

Also, Iran should consider this: If they decide to nuke Israel, and clear the way for the Palistineans (sp? sorry!) to "take it back", would they want to live in a chunk of land that glows at night???

"Gee, thanks, Iran, but, uh, we'd still like to be able to have children with just 2 eyes, 2 arms, 2 legs, and without the tail, thank you very much."

Iran shouldn't be doing anyone any favors like that.

[Skybird]

[quote=Skybird]
War, ititiated by either side is not some kind of plan B. If war where to break out then both sides have lost for many generations to come.

Also, Iran should consider this: If they decide to nuke Israel, and clear the way for the Palistineans (sp? sorry!) to "take it back", would they want to live in a chunk of land that glows at night???

"Gee, thanks, Iran, but, uh, we'd still like to be able to have children with just 2 eyes, 2 arms, 2 legs, and without the tail, thank you very much."

Iran shouldn't be doing anyone any favors like that.
Wrong quote. That was Letum, not me.

[Zayphod]

Wrong quote. That was Letum, not me.
Sorry, when there's too many quotes quoting other quotes, it's hard to clean them all up. :oops:

[FIREWALL]

Did you all just arrive here on planet Earth. :D

The Isralies have enough nukes and a way to deliver them to take out all of the Middle East.

It wouldn't break my heart either.

One way to solve U.S.A. dependence on OPEC oil.:p