The Mayor of Tehran has a gorgeous smile

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by casioculture, Jun 27, 2005.

  1. The operative phrase here is, "Iran, a non US friendly nation....."

    I don't give or sell my guns to my enemies, and I frown at people like
    France who do give or sell their guns to my enemies....If you think that
    makes me crazy or immoral, well, you are entitled to your opinion.
     
    William Graham, Jul 4, 2005
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. casioculture

    Joseph Kewfi Guest

    I don't give or sell my guns to my enemies, and I frown at people like
    You should read this article and hear what you're beloved Jews of Israel are
    doing with your guns, that your government gives them for free paid for by
    your tax dollars,
    http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/23A0A815-7FD2-4482-A20A-09DDF72D8A5E.htm
    speaking of enemies I've heard many in the zoo you call a government
    consider China an enemy state or potentially an enemy state, it appears that
    your black and white "with us or against us" mentality isn't so easy to
    apply for international politics or strategic interests.
     
    Joseph Kewfi, Jul 4, 2005
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. casioculture

    Mikey Guest


    Spin it all you want... but the day a nuke goes off in a city, be it
    America or Europe.. be sure the left wing wackos like yourself will
    have enabled it to happen with your stupidity and hate of freedom.

    If your so damn sure life is better in the Arab world, go live there
    and see how free you are to express your opinions!

    The difference between ignorance and stupidity is that ignorance can
    be cured. It's obvious your ailment is incurable!
     
    Mikey, Jul 4, 2005
    #43
  4. If it wasn't for Israel's military capabilities they would have been wiped
    off the face of the earth a long time ago. And none of their neighbors have
    been wiped off the face of the earth by them. - The proof of the pudding is
    in the eating. You can do a lot of hand waving, but a couple of facts are
    certain. Israel has only used its military might to insure it's own
    existence. They haven't taken over any other countries yet. - And neither
    have we. Everything else is just, "hand waving".......
     
    William Graham, Jul 4, 2005
    #44
  5. casioculture

    casioculture Guest

    Actually, stupidity is quite evident in your post. Look at what you've
    written above and be ashamed that your post is the regurgitated
    blathering of a radio midget. Here above, in cliche sentence after
    cliche, is the skin and skeleton of a profound cretinism. Aren't you
    capable of an original thought?! Aren't you able to speak for yourself
    and speak your mind, or had you none to start with?!
     
    casioculture, Jul 4, 2005
    #45
  6. casioculture

    Sander Vesik Guest

    You mean like US company subsidiaries in Caiman Islands and Israel and
    similar who sell all kinds of technology to China and Iran and others?
    And again - Iran is not somehow magicly more of an US enemy (in any
    menaingful sense) than Pakistan. The only realy difference is that
    Pakistan is being painted nice so they will would open their airports
    and airspace and would co-operate with hunt for Taleban remants.
    Taleban remants
     
    Sander Vesik, Jul 4, 2005
    #46
  7. casioculture

    Sander Vesik Guest

    If a nuke does go off in a city in America or US, by far the most likely
    reasons are:
    * some fraction of US/European forces went renegade and did it
    * its the beginning of a nuclear war with Russia/China

    There is no point for Iran or any other islamist country to acquire
    nukes for first strike - absolutely *NO* point at all. They are
    excessively behind in delivery, reconaissance and teh cahnges of it
    working - nuclear first strike only makes sense if you can make it work.
    A nuke or two or five or then won't cut it, especially if you have dodgy
    untested rockets using the equivalent of 60s technology. However, they
    would work if instead of thousands of kilometers you were talking about say
    2-3 hundred and were planning to use them against an invading force,
    whetever for actual kill or area denial.
    Wouldn't make a difference to you, as you don't seem to have any that
    actually are your own.
    Check your own ailment first.
     
    Sander Vesik, Jul 4, 2005
    #47
  8. casioculture

    Bill Funk Guest

    First, you are discounting the very *reason* for terrorist acts.
    Islamic idiots aren't interested in gaining territory, but in killing
    infidels. One nuke will do that.
    Second, delivery isn't anywhere as difficult as you seem to think.
    Even an *old* technology nuke will fit in a shipping container.
    Getting one to go ff after you acquire it is easy; they have ways of
    making people talk, if they are not supportive of their cause. If they
    aren't, why supply a nuke in the first place? IOW, if they can get a
    nuke, they will have the knowledge to make it go boom. Delivery is
    easy; put it in a shipping container, get it to New York Harbor, and
    detonate it. It's easy.

    And, you're forgetting the problems Bush is having for invading
    Afghanistan and Iraq; they didn't attack us. Neither did Saudi Arabia,
    or any other country. That's one of the beauties of terrorist groups;
    you can't attack them directly, and doing so indirectly raises cries
    as we see now.

    What's the downside to a terrortist Muslim group using a nuke?
     
    Bill Funk, Jul 4, 2005
    #48
  9. casioculture

    casioculture Guest

    What's the downside to scorching their land time and again with
    depleted uranium for centuries to come and blowing up their kids in
    their homes? What's the downside to their casualties being in the
    hundreds of thousands of people time and again in a single country and
    yet more?

    Because I'll tell you, *that* is real and counting, unlike the
    *expedient* use of a chance-in-freakness worst-case yet-no-evidence
    **what-if** scenario like you made above to justify injustice (WMDs,
    huh?).

    Sorry Sir, it is *you* who is "discounting the very *reason* for
    terrorist acts".
     
    casioculture, Jul 4, 2005
    #49
  10. casioculture

    Joseph Kewfi Guest

    If it wasn't for Israel's military capabilities they would have been wiped
    Israel is an artificial construct designed to serve western
    (American/European) interests, it's whole purpose of being is two fold, to
    divide the Muslim world using political recognition, some recognise-some
    don't, to cause instability and conflict in the Middle East using the
    ideology of divide, conquer, exploit. The second reason is, Europe doesn't
    want millions of Jews within it's nation states borders, so they have to be
    put somewhere as liquidating them didn't quite work, for this reason they
    got stuck on Arab land, the Arabs are weak and can't resist such a plot and
    the Jews did exist in that area at one point in history, so we stick them
    back there and keep them there with all manner of support, we make a new
    race of refugees called Palestinians, which are a lot less troublesome as
    the untrustworthy Jew.
    Israel is founded on racism and I would rather it ceased to exist
    altogether, the future for the Jewish minority of historical Palestine
    should be to live in a single secular Palestinian democracy as free and
    equal citizens, and before you say Jews and Arabs can share that land in
    peace, I have some news for you my unlearned American friend, Jews and Arabs
    lived side by side in peace for hundreds of years under Ottoman rule, on the
    very same soil they are now murdering each other over. A two state solution
    simply will not work, mark my words.
    Everything else is just, "hand waving".......

    Your assertions are beyond the pale of reality.
     
    Joseph Kewfi, Jul 4, 2005
    #50
  11. casioculture

    Bill Funk Guest

    How so?
    I think I have a better understanding of terror than you, if you think
    terror is like any other warfare, which is what's described above.
    "There is no point for Iran or any other islamist country to acquire
    nukes for first strike - absolutely *NO* point at all."
    No point? How can that be? There's certainly more pount to using a
    nuke in NY harbor than using an IED to blow up a Hummer in Iraq. Can
    you not see the effect of using such a nuke? The demonstration that
    they can detonate in a busy harbor, just becasue we don't worship the
    same god? Or becasue they thing we are holding them back? Or any other
    of a thousand reasons?
    The reason doesn't matter. What matters is that they did it
    (hypothetically). If they did it once, and promise to do it again,
    *THAT* is terror.
    Who do you strike back at then? Whose land do you want to lay waste
    to? WHich country (that didn't attack us) do you want to retaliate on?


    You want to minimize a problem, and insist that those who don't are
    somehow related to Chicken Little.
    You really believe that the possibility of there being a nuke
    delivered to *any* terrorist group is not possible? Are you aware that
    there are still nukes unaccounted for in former Soviet Union
    countries? And even the accounted-for nukes are not all that secure?
    That Japan just had some weapons-grade plutonium go missing, to add to
    all the other missing weapons-grade plutonium so far? Where is that
    stuff, eh? Are you *sure* it's not being fashioned into a bomb?
    Remember, in the mid-40s, we managed to make two of them, and
    technology is *much* better now.
    I admire your ability to hide your head in the sand, but I do not
    admire the fact that you do it. Simply denying a distinct possibility
    may be how you get through your day, but I am glad there are others
    who refuse to do that.
     
    Bill Funk, Jul 5, 2005
    #51
  12. casioculture

    Ross Garrett Guest

    I think your response gives no import to the fact of fissile identity.
     
    Ross Garrett, Jul 5, 2005
    #52
  13. casioculture

    Bill Funk Guest

    And that helps how?
    After the fact, if we find that the bomb innards came from, say,
    Bulgaria, does that mean Bulgaria gave the terrorists the nuke?

    After-the-fact findings may tell where the nuke was first made, and
    possibly even a trail to where it was last officially deployed, but
    how does that identify who set the nuke off? Or tie that to an actual
    country?
    The US has lost enough weapons grade stuff that any tracing could
    indicate that the US made it. Then what? Do we bomb Washington?
     
    Bill Funk, Jul 5, 2005
    #53
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.