• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The News Thread

you know though that the US will never force Israel to disarm. Problem with your position is that it always leaves the US open to being attacked for hypocrisy. Whether or not Israel should have the capability is not relevant when arguing with someone and saying they shouldn't. Israel has it and no one says boo, then we try to stop others. It looks and is favouritism and will never fly with the others.
 
TheCountofMonteCristo said:
you know though that the US will never force Israel to disarm. Problem with your position is that it always leaves the US open to being attacked for hypocrisy. Whether or not Israel should have the capability is not relevant when arguing with someone and saying they shouldn't. Israel has it and no one says boo, then we try to stop others. It looks and is favouritism and will never fly with the others.
Click to expand...

do you honestly think that states like iran and pakistan only pursue nuclear arms because israel has? honestly?
 
Pakistan has it because India does.

Iran just wants to say it has it. I don't believe for a second they intend to use it, the Mullahs don't want to die themselves. I believe there is a greater chance of Israel using one than Iran simply because Israel would attack first, whether justified or not and knows it would have the US' blank cheque (and that no one would attack it with a nuclear weapon). Iran does not have that luxury because if it used one and took out say Tel Aviv, then the US/Israel, Britain would use one or two etc on Tehran etc
 
JaysCyYoung said:
What state in the modern world would come out ahead of time and unequivocally state that they will attack another state? You'll never hear a threat that direct.

Plus Iran knows for a fact it would get its ass handed to them.



I agree with you that the threat concerning Iran as a worldwide menace is overblown, but that still doesn't mean that they don't pose a threat to regional stability and could disrupt the global economy with their OPEC posturing.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But part of that instability is due to stupidity from their neighbors, especially Saudi Arabia. I don't see a legitimate case for military action.

Besides, I think the real discussion should be why certain elements within these countries feel it necessary to ramp up such pointless rhetoric. It's really the Republican Guard v Likud, not Iran and Israel. Internal politics (election cycles, civil unrest) is driving this confrontation, as usual.
 
Last edited:
TheCountofMonteCristo said:
Pakistan has it because India does.

Iran just wants to say it has it. I don't believe for a second they intend to use it, the Mullahs don't want to die themselves. I believe there is a greater chance of Israel using one than Iran simply because Israel would attack first, whether justified or not and knows it would have the US' blank cheque (and that no one would attack it with a nuclear weapon). Iran does not have that luxury because if it used one and took out say Tel Aviv, then the US/Israel, Britain would use one or two etc on Tehran etc
Click to expand...

Do you actually read the garbage that you post? You and your fellow gurglers really believe that Britain or US would use a WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION against another country on behalf of Israel. Or ANYONE? London or Washington would stand that and say, we need to kill a few million Iranian civilian because we really, really care about the now non-existing state of Israel? And spread fallout over Pakistan, Russia and India? All nuclear powers?

Are you THAT naive or self delusional?

The most laughable term ever coined was and is "nuclear umbrella". It's what major power who have nuclear weapons want to tell the kiddies and stupid ones. Including Canada. At the very best, at theor very strained maximum, they may covertly "lend" a nuke so that a friendly country may exact revenge, but directly attack another with nukes on their behalf? And kill millions? And/or risk nuclear response against themselves?

Get a common sense brain.......
 
Last edited:
lecoqsportif said:
It has nothing to do with Israel. They are far more afraid of the US and some neighbors, such as Russia, China, and India.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah....the US, China, Russia and India present an immediate and existential threat to Iran. That and armed unicorns.

Seriously? China, Russia and India are threat to Iran? At the very worst, at the end of ones imagination, US may be a pain in the ass for Iran's hegemonic ambitions. But a threat?

I edited my post to TRY to play nice....but....
 
Last edited:
msun30 said:
as if that makes a difference.

please.



this is ridiculous schoolyard reasoning.

israel having nuclear capabilities doesn't make it ok for iran to have it.

the world shouldn't 'turn a blind eye' to israel, they should be encouraging disarmament. but that doesnt' mean they shouldn't proactively try to stop other countries... especially ones that are known to covertly fund terrorist organizations and rebel groups.... from arming.
Click to expand...

Israel needs to have them based on simple, undeniable fact that it's neighbours can be and have repeatedly screamed their desire to be an existential threat to Israel's. No one other then lefty useful idiots know that Israel nukes are a defensive weapon of last resort. And I agree with them.

The reasons why Iran should never have nuclear weapons....

..... the stated desire, very public and very well stated desire that they want to have regional hegemony over their neighbours AND by definition, the heart of Western economic power.....oil.

....regional nuclear proliferation.....in the most unstable part of the world.

....the direct threat to Israel. Both verbal and de facto. See Hezbollah.

....the low regard for human lives the mullahs have. All the useful idiots have to do is pick up a book or Gurggle what the imams did in the war with Iraq.

This argument is simple. If Iran has no nuclear ambitions and the imams are sane, then they should submit to nuclear proliferation inspections. If they are as insane as they appear to be, then they should NEVER have any nukes. There is really no argument for NOT dealing with Iran with a heavy hand, including a military one, other then one of appeasement and capitulation to the inevitable.
 
lecoqsportif said:
It remains a "scandal" only within oil-funded, right wing echo chambers. They are way past the point of admitting they are wrong.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, well funded.....like the quarter billion dollars that GreenPeace alone gets for screaming the sky is falling? Or the tens of billions of dollars the sky fallers are getting for "researching" the umm........sky falling?

The only echo chamber is in useful idiots head that the well funded sky fallers desperately need......
 
MindzEye said:
Especially considering that the "climategate" "papers" were nothing more than 4 scientists discussing technical data over the course of ~2000 emails, where only two comments taken incredibly out of context created what in hindsight is a hilarious footnote in the history of climate science. The scientists involved have been cleared of wrong doing by everyone of any note who has seriously looked into the matter.
Click to expand...

Four scientist who are in the center of the sky falling malarkey. Discussing how to manipulate, redirect, hide and lie to further their agenda......and funding....and food on their table.

By their own hands....black and white.....that would convict them in any court.

Phil Jones's approach to FOI, here is his email in Txt 1577 dated July 28 2009:

CRU is considered by the climate community as a data centre, but we don't have any resources to undertake this work. Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden.

I've discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.

And here he is again in May 2009 (txt 2440) advising on how best to evade Freedom Of Information:

I've been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process

As for cleared for wrong doing......by fellow sky fallers. Pure garbage. What amounts to paedophiles finding other paedophiles innocent of wrong doing.
 
Last edited:
Sorry HA you are just spouting old news that even die-hard deniers have backed away from due to the fact that it is so baseless.

There are lots of other angles to attack the science that don't involve out of context quotes. They might even give people pause...because spouting that stuff only makes your argument look weak.
 
Weird, being cleared of wrongdoing by ones peers isn't acceptable for our police, but it is for big-money climate researchers.
 
The environmental movement has alot of money invested in it now.

Solar farms, windfarms, ect. Big companies have their hands in this pot now. This is undeniable.
 
Went to a seminar this week and they were talking ethics in geosciences. One practice I heard was pretty crazy...a big petroleum company here in Canada used to do this on a regular basis.

When old tank storage facilities and gas stations would close the company would do an environmental assessment on the state of the soil, groundwater, etc. To save the dough that would routinely be needed to remediate these sites, the company would doctor the tests. They would inject monitoring wells that penetrated these known sources of contaminants, but be long enough that the well screen would also penetrate clean aquifer below the source. That way when they drew sample water up, the concentrations of the organic contaminants would fall well below tolerable limits due to mixing with non-contaminated groundwater.

That is one story of many. This is what is behind that anti-climate science movement.
 
HabsAddict said:
Oh yeah....the US, China, Russia and India present an immediate and existential threat to Iran. That and armed unicorns.

Seriously? China, Russia and India are threat to Iran? At the very worst, at the end of ones imagination, US may be a pain in the ass for Iran's hegemonic ambitions. But a threat?

I edited my post to TRY to play nice....but....
Click to expand...

(*sigh* I need to scale down some basic assumptions)

Of course, I know damn well who Iran's "friends" are. Jeepers. But...

"Nations have no permanent allies or enemies, they only have permanent interests."

- Lord Palmerston

Anyone who does not respect Russian, Indian and Chinese power is a fool.
 
Last edited:
corksens said:
The environmental movement has alot of money invested in it now.

Solar farms, windfarms, ect. Big companies have their hands in this pot now. This is undeniable.
Click to expand...

It is a mere pittance and a johnny-come-lately compared to oil/gas/coal. We go to war for that shit.
 
HabsAddict said:
Do you actually read the garbage that you post? You and your fellow gurglers really believe that Britain or US would use a WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION against another country on behalf of Israel. Or ANYONE? London or Washington would stand that and say, we need to kill a few million Iranian civilian because we really, really care about the now non-existing state of Israel? And spread fallout over Pakistan, Russia and India? All nuclear powers?

Are you THAT naive or self delusional?

The most laughable term ever coined was and is "nuclear umbrella". It's what major power who have nuclear weapons want to tell the kiddies and stupid ones. Including Canada. At the very best, at theor very strained maximum, they may covertly "lend" a nuke so that a friendly country may exact revenge, but directly attack another with nukes on their behalf? And kill millions? And/or risk nuclear response against themselves?

Get a common sense brain.......
Click to expand...


Enough said.
 
corksens said:
Weird, being cleared of wrongdoing by ones peers isn't acceptable for our police, but it is for big-money climate researchers.
Click to expand...

do you honestly believe that having the fuzz determine if a brother fuzz actred correctly is good and you get real justice that way?
 
Last edited:
HabsAddict said:
Israel needs to have them based on simple, undeniable fact that it's neighbours can be and have repeatedly screamed their desire to be an existential threat to Israel's. No one other then lefty useful idiots know that Israel nukes are a defensive weapon of last resort. And I agree with them.

The reasons why Iran should never have nuclear weapons....

..... the stated desire, very public and very well stated desire that they want to have regional hegemony over their neighbours AND by definition, the heart of Western economic power.....oil.

....regional nuclear proliferation.....in the most unstable part of the world.

....the direct threat to Israel. Both verbal and de facto. See Hezbollah.

....the low regard for human lives the mullahs have. All the useful idiots have to do is pick up a book or Gurggle what the imams did in the war with Iraq.

This argument is simple. If Iran has no nuclear ambitions and the imams are sane, then they should submit to nuclear proliferation inspections. If they are as insane as they appear to be, then they should NEVER have any nukes. There is really no argument for NOT dealing with Iran with a heavy hand, including a military one, other then one of appeasement and capitulation to the inevitable.
Click to expand...

double standard, thy name is HA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top