Poll shows Americans fear Iran's nuclear ambition
 

Here we go again with this propaganda crap it's just the stupid reason for war on Iran.
Dr Goebbels would be proud to hear that. Nuclear War is a no win situation no one will win so it will never happen. :hulk:

I suppose that depends on weather or not one side fervently believes that they will go to paradise and enjoy the company of many virgins in the event of their death. Is that an incentive? :-?
I for one wouldn't trust an arab with a nuke as far as I could spit, given their proclivity for reaching for the 'Sword of Justice'® at the drop af a hat.

EDIT:
on the other hand:

No STEED, it shows that we are rightfully concerned about a madman with capabilities of nuclear weapons.

There is little doubt among Americans about Iran's intentions. Eight of 10 predict Iran would provide a nuclear weapon to terrorists who would use it against the USA or Israel, and almost as many say the Iranian government itself would use nuclear weapons against Israel. Six of 10 say the Iranian government would deploy nuclear weapons against the USA.

More than two-thirds agree that economic and diplomatic efforts should be used now, but Americans divide 45%-45% over whether the United States should take military action if diplomacy fails.

I can gurantee that at some point in the future that there will at least be a limited Nuke exchange. Maybe between Pakistan and India. Maybe between Iran and Israel. How about North Korea and South Korea?

I expect the highest likelyhood of an exchange to be between Iran and Israel. Iran will use those weapons where other countries are more restrained. If the situation in Iraq stabilizes however, that may force Iran to stabilize as well, but Iran won't conform without kicking and screaming first, and I bet they are part of the terrorist actions (the term insurgent is inappropriately applied in Iraq).

-S

PS. I think a few airstrikes to take out their reactors should slow them down sufficiently - that is the first step.

Wake up people these loonies want to rule the world how the hell are they going to do that after a Nuclear War the whole planet will be a radioactive waste ground :rotfl:

There wouldn't be a full fledged nuclear war, I would forsee Iran trying to launch a nuclear capable missile against an American task force in the Gulf, or a long-ranged missile against Isreal. Due to the vast oil reserves in Iran and the fact that we don't blame the people of Iran, the US and Isreal wouldn't use nucs. Just a 'hole bunch of tactical munitions from the USS Ohio, B-2, B-52, and other naval entities in the area.

The threat of any kind of Nuclear War has been around since the 1950's and we are still here wake up and get a life.

Was an there an Islamic nuclear threat in the 50s? 60s? 70s? 80s?

In the 80s there almost was one. It was resolved very quickly, with no nuclear fallout.

Do you really compare the Cold War crisis to the religiously based threats of destruction and global domination coming from Iran?

Are you that naive?

North Korea + Islam = poo-poo.

Only God will destroy this planet not man!!!

I thought that was a Chinese dish. :hmm:

I thought god is supposed to let us destroy the planet before he finishes the job? Armeggedon is probably going to start as a nuke war.

-S

WHAT CRAP :rotfl:

Oh, I assume you already know how it all ends by your comment? :)

-S

Nuclear War what rubbish
Yes I know what's coming next the Tribulations, when I don't know but it is on it's way so you better make your mind up.

Armageddon refers generally to end times or giant catastrophes in various religions and cultures. It may also refer to any great loss of life in battle or use of weapons of mass destruction. The word armageddon is derived from Mount (Har in Hebrew) Megiddo, the site of the Battle of Megiddo and other battles.

The only mention of the word "Armageddon" in the Bible was in Revelation 16:16: "And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon" (KJV). The bible includes many passages that refer to the concept of Armageddon, however. But this specific bible prophecy reference is ambiguous as to whether any event actually takes place here or whether the gathering of armies is only to be seen as a sign. In fact, a gathering of the Roman army occurred at this place as a staging ground for one of their assaults on Jerusalem in AD 67. This is consistent with the preterist interpretation that the events of Revelation 16:17-21 refer to events culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. However, one indication that the book predicts a future event is the mention of an army from the east of two hundred million, a number that would not have been likely in any battle of that period.

You can go on wasting your time, I am Happy I have seen the light. :D

"..."

I don't quite understand where you are coming from, (and I assume many others here are trying to figure out the same thing)? Care to elaborate?

The Catholics actually believe a nuke exchange between the US and Russia (not sure that will happen personally) is the most likely source of the beginning of the end. Maybe sparked by a small regional war perhaps? Dunno. Maybe you can enlighten us with your wisdom?

-S