Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days!

[Omega Weapon]

OK people are taking this into realm of false dichotomy and that is never good and makes Omega Weapon stratch head.


It is true that America is starting to use its powerful nation more and more to bully people with 'if you are not with than you are against.' But even if there were no nuclear missiles in Iraq that does not mean every country America finds to be making them is really not making them!


People shouldn't answer and make snide remarks to feed into the stereotype of ignorant American who is defiant because he is culturally lacking. That is exactly what some show here. It's juvenile and rash. And it's imature.

"If they stopped now, we'd really be screwed. Now unless any of you have a time machine, show some respect and stop bitching."

Americans need to understand that they are not the only country in the world. We saw they knew little about France but Fox News said 'France sux0rz!' and everyone hated French and renamed food in defiance.  

The super hero image is false. America does good but it is not superman!!! It is right in this case to attack Iran but we should not overblow things here.

Muslims are not secular enough to handle atomic bombs except for Turkey. Pakistan is not secular and because of this recieves massive amounts of money from USA and they call it 'Ally against terror' when really the monies are being used to prop up the military coup leaders there. While this is bad, Iran would destroy Israel if they had nukes so it is OK for pakistan to have nukes because it is smaller and can be purchased by USA.

[Rune_of_Punishment]

Originally posted by Omega Weapon
OK people are taking this into realm of false dichotomy and that is never good and makes Omega Weapon stratch head.


It is true that America is starting to use its powerful nation more and more to bully people with 'if you are not with than you are against.' But even if there were no nuclear missiles in Iraq that does not mean every country America finds to be making them is really not making them!


People shouldn't answer and make snide remarks to feed into the stereotype of ignorant American who is defiant because he is culturally lacking. That is exactly what some show here. It's juvenile and rash. And it's imature.

"If they stopped now, we'd really be screwed. Now unless any of you have a time machine, show some respect and stop bitching."

Americans need to understand that they are not the only country in the world. We saw they knew little about France but Fox News said 'France sux0rz!' and everyone hated French and renamed food in defiance.  

The super hero image is false. America does good but it is not superman!!! It is right in this case to attack Iran but we should not overblow things here.

Muslims are not secular enough to handle atomic bombs except for Turkey. Pakistan is not secular and because of this recieves massive amounts of money from USA and they call it 'Ally against terror' when really the monies are being used to prop up the military coup leaders there. While this is bad, Iran would destroy Israel if they had nukes so it is OK for pakistan to have nukes because it is smaller and can be purchased by USA.

So, people living in America should just shut up as everyone else slanders us? If I insulted or slandered someone else's country, everyone would pitch a fit and call me a racist bicth. We have our sense of pride, too. We are always criticizd for everything we do wrong, but are never recognized when we do something right. Why is that? Is it because we've become something that other countries want to be but can't? are they jealous. My answer would be yes, however, I'm sure there will be many that disagree with me and then come on to say that I'm an idiot, a bigot, or some other slanderous word.

The Middle Eastern countries are all bound together by the same religion pretty much. Almost the entire area is Muslim, if not all. In that light, they will of course see each other as "brothers" and willl stick up for each other. Of course there are the loons that want superiority and want to show off their guns to try and shut people up. They want to frighten the people, and if they need to, will use the nukes. A nice target would be Israel for them. If they do fire one, that would be the target. That would then create a chain reaction and blah blah blah.

Going back a bit, someone mentioned the US and Russia having the majority of the Nuclear programs or whatever. Well, here's a news flash: WE NEVER INTEND TO USE THEM! The United States will never use a nuclear weapon unless it is necessary, which isn't very often. Russia will not dare to make such an attempt because they are not the power they used to be and it wouldn't help them very much. Truman dropping the atomic bombs in WWII really didn't need to happen, but it wasn't like he was a great commander-in-chief in the first place. The countries that would more than likely fire a nuke would be China, NK, or one of the aggressive Middle Eastern countries. Why? They are more hostile, especially with the way things are.

[Grandy]

So, people living in America should just shut up as everyone else slanders us? If I insulted or slandered someone else's country, everyone would pitch a fit and call me a racist bicth

 I know how it feels, as Brazil isn't exactly an warrior of a country, so everyone says we didn't do anything, but then again, you all talk about WW2 and how you saived the world, but never mention Brazil fought with the allies. Okay, so in the end, but we did anyway.
 And as a note, you meant "people living in U.S. should just shut up as everyone else slander us?" didn't you?

 

We are always criticizd for everything we do wrong, but are never recognized when we do something right.

 I bet Germany knows how it feels.

 

Is it because we've become something that other countries want to be but can't? are they jealous.

 Of course we are, but, then, again, U.S. don't help that much yelling "We are better than you!" at us, disrespecting international pacts, don't caring about our opinion, etc.

 

The Middle Eastern countries are all bound together by the same religion pretty much. Almost the entire area is Muslim, if not all. In that light, they will of course see each other as "brothers" and willl stick up for each other.

 Almost all America is christain, would YOU help us if we were at war?

 

Of course there are the loons that want superiority and want to show off their guns to try and shut people up. They want to frighten the people, and if they need to, will use the nukes

 I won't comment over this because I do not know to which side are you reffering to.

 

Going back a bit, someone mentioned the US and Russia having the majority of the Nuclear programs or whatever. Well, here's a news flash: WE NEVER INTEND TO USE THEM!

 Surprise to you: Cold war, both U.S. and Russia were waving the missiles at each other and screaming "I'm gonna throw, I'm gonna throw!"
 Besides, if you do not intent to use, why just not dispose of them? I would prove your good intentions AND would put you inside that pact both US and Russia made, but none respect, about the max number of nuklear warheads.

 

which isn't very often.

 That means often it is?

 

Truman dropping the atomic bombs in WWII really didn't need to happen, but it wasn't like he was a great commander-in-chief in the first place.

 You and I agree in this point.

 

The countries that would more than likely fire a nuke would be China, NK, or one of the aggressive Middle Eastern countries. Why? They are more hostile , especially with the way things are.

 

 THAT is what I'm saying, you're acusing these countries the very same way you don't like we to acuse U.S.

[Rune_of_Punishment]

 

Almost all America is christain, would YOU help us if we were at war?

Well, I am not a Christian. As for who I would help, it depends.

 

Surprise to you: Cold war, both U.S. and Russia were waving the missiles at each other and screaming "I'm gonna throw, I'm gonna throw!"
Besides, if you do not intent to use, why just not dispose of them? I would prove your good intentions AND would put you inside that pact both US and Russia made, but none respect, about the max number of nuklear warheads.

I said that we don't intend to use them unless it is necessary. Nuclear weapons are powerful things, and are hazardous to keep. In any case, we only intend to use these weapons if the need arises, which doesn't look like will be anytime soon. When an "enemy" is threatening to use a weapon of such high magnitude, you better have the same thing or something better to defend yourself with.

 

THAT is what I'm saying, you're acusing these countries the very same way you don't like we to acuse U.S.

We don't go around threatening to fires nukes at people, nor do we have warlords or corrupt communist leaders that would use these weapons if they found it opportune. The countries I listed would use these as a first strike or offensive purpose. The U.S. would use them for defensive purposes. There is a huge difference.

[Grandy]

 

Well, I am not a Christian. As for who I would help, it depends.

 But then... you mean muslins wouldn't SURELY help each other as they are from the same religion?

 

When an "enemy" is threatening to use a weapon of such high magnitude, you better have the same thing or something better to defend yourself with.

 Having some of those is one thing, but having more than 1000 is just too much, and following your logic, Iran is right of amking an atomic bomb, as U.S. has some, and they are in war, even if U.S. doesn't shows interest in launching it, it's better they have one IN CASE U.S. does.

 

corrupt communist leaders that would use these weapons if they found it opportune

 Again, that's an acusation against communists that you wouldn't like if it was directed against you.

 

The countries I listed would use these as a first strike or offensive purpose.

 Do you have any proof?

 

The U.S. would use them for defensive purposes.

 You can't use a BOMB as defense! bombs explode! They hurt! They kill! Anything bomb related is offensive, doesn't matter who started the fight, if you throw a punch, you're attacking!

 

There is a huge difference.

 No, there isn't.

[Sephiroth rocks]

Well I think we should be grateful that the U.S. polices the world. Somebody has to do it and U.S. has taken that hard task and are paying with their own lives. Besides many countries has got nuclear weapons (e.g. France) But then again shouldn't they get rid of their nuclear weapons when they're getting so bitchy whenever another country gets their hands on weapons of mass destruction?
But anyway in the future we might need to find someone else to police the world now that U.S. seems to be overtaken by cristian fanatics (like that they teach what they call "Intelligent Design" on the same level that they teach science which I find disgusting).

So IMO the americans are doing a good job but it would be better if it was the UN that policed the world instead. (yeah at the moment U.S. seems to have more power than UN which is kinda scary to think of)

[MrMister]

All Christians don't believe in a lot of that crap. Teaching intelligent design in school is ridiculous. You can mention it, that's it.
The point is a lot of Christian idiots out there ruin it for the rest of us by calling themselves a Christian organization and stuff. Heh, I hate Christian music, I'm prochoice, and I don't force my religeon on anyone else. Stop assuming I do.

[Rune_of_Punishment]

Originally posted by MrMister
All Christians don't believe in a lot of that crap. Teaching intelligent design in school is ridiculous. You can mention it, that's it.
The point is a lot of Christian idiots out there ruin it for the rest of us by calling themselves a Christian organization and stuff. Heh, I hate Christian music, I'm prochoice, and I don't force my religeon on anyone else. Stop assuming I do.

True that.

[Grandy]

 I don't think anyone should police the world. It was for that reasong that the UN was made, if the UN doesn't take off Saddan from his throne, that's because it's not they'r problem, nor it is U.S's problem, if you think about it, no one even cared about that until not too long ago, more specically, until the 11/9, which was Osama's doing, not Saddan. So, why did we suddenly start to care about a tirane that was like that for years? Of course, I remember Bush saying that Saddan was hiding chemical weapons, AND Osama, but now no one could find both, and Bush also doesn't mention both anymore, why's that? Besides, now that has been proven Saddan wasn't culprit of any accusations, why doesn't set him free? Even police have no rights to mantain people under arrest without an accusation.

 On a side note.... how did this discution started again?