Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iran Raises The Nuclear Stakes After Being Reported To UN
The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 2-5-2006 | Philip Sherwell

Posted on 02/04/2006 5:48:25 PM PST by blam

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

1 posted on 02/04/2006 5:48:27 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Why don't *we* act now and put an end to this charade? Image hosting by Photobucket
2 posted on 02/04/2006 5:58:02 PM PST by JHBowden (Go White Sox -- World Champs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Iran's best option would be to "open source" its nuclear program and put all details of its nuclear technology and operations up on the Intenet.


3 posted on 02/04/2006 5:59:08 PM PST by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
which Western intelligence believes will be used for atomic weapons.

Probably everyone on earth thinks so at this point.

4 posted on 02/04/2006 6:00:48 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
Why don't *we* act now and put an end to this charade?

it's kinda like chess-still in mid-game, unfortunately; betting money indicates no blood for many weeks, at least.

5 posted on 02/04/2006 6:06:02 PM PST by 1234 (Border control or IMPEACHMENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Thanks to AQ Khan...when is he going to be executed?


6 posted on 02/04/2006 6:09:01 PM PST by spyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blam

Iran is begging to be attacked so the WMD in Syria may be unleashed. My bet is any preemption will take place in Syria.


7 posted on 02/04/2006 6:10:47 PM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Do it before it's too late.

Talk won't save us.

Bunker-busting bombs will.


8 posted on 02/04/2006 6:13:07 PM PST by tomahawk (Proud to be an enemy of Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden

because this isn't going to be some 72 hour war. alot of the nuclear infrastructure is going to be impenetrable to conventional attack. and if we attack iran, its going to spill over into iraq in a big way - just at the point when iraq is turning the corner significantly. and when silkworm missiles start hitting supertankers in the gulf, and oil goes to $150/bbl, you'll have public support for this effort in the 20s.


9 posted on 02/04/2006 6:17:27 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: spyone
Thanks to AQ Khan...when is he going to be executed?

Khan will be executed on the 12th of Never. He's still held in high regard by the majority of his countrymen. Musharraf would find himself overthrown in short order.

10 posted on 02/04/2006 6:18:21 PM PST by edpc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: edpc

Khan was just a bagman for China. the nuclear programs of north korea and pakistan, came from china.


11 posted on 02/04/2006 6:19:36 PM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

No shortage of enemies. They are helping each other against us and they are everywhere.


12 posted on 02/04/2006 6:21:31 PM PST by Supernatural (All the truth in the world adds up to one big lie! bob dylan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

The Iranian mullahs are banking on an attack on Iran. They need it to get WW III started. An attack against Iran will be billed as an attack against Islam. They believe that all the world's Islamic nations will join them against the infidels. We are dealing with an 11th century mentality. If it occurs, many on both sides will die fighting for God (the true one or the false one depends on which side you are on.) Its the Iranian mullahs and their followers that must be removed from power. Not an easy thing to do. Its like trying to take out Hitler or Stalin in 1939. The rulers control the army and the weapons.


13 posted on 02/04/2006 6:24:52 PM PST by Bringbackthedraft
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: blam

Iran has been coming up a lot lately. Like I said to my employer two days ago: Iran will have to be dealt with very soon. Since Iran is in the news so much, lately, tells me that we are being prepared for something. I wonder who will take the leadership.

There is no doubt in my mind who will take the leadership. However, as usual, they will be chastised for it. Thank God, we still have leaders in this world, because these rag heads are getting out of hand.


14 posted on 02/04/2006 6:28:55 PM PST by mirado (Next to Reagan, President Bush is the LEADER I'll follow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

The W.S.Journal has a excellent editorial (opinionjournal.com 2/3) on what the world would be like with a nuclear Iran. I don't think most people realize that the president of Iran is the cultural and mental equivalent of UBL. As Benjamen Natanyahou pointed out, during the Cold War the Soviets (despite their irrational ideology) generally behaved rationally when confronted by MAD. But in Iran's case the leadership is irrational and apocalyptic. Just consider what scenario he presented in a hypothetical (and insane) attack on Israel: yes, Iran might lose a few hundred thousand but Israel would be totally obliterated. One must understand that we are dealing with fanatical mullahs who - far from fearing - would welcome death in a jihad that brings martyrdom and immortality. Can we imagine binLaden with his finger on the button? This is NOT hyperbole. It's the most serious danger facing the civilized world.


15 posted on 02/04/2006 6:35:32 PM PST by T.L.Sink (stopew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

The W.S.Journal has a excellent editorial (opinionjournal.com 2/3) on what the world would be like with a nuclear Iran. I don't think most people realize that the president of Iran is the cultural and mental equivalent of UBL. As Benjamen Natanyahou pointed out, during the Cold War the Soviets (despite their irrational ideology) generally behaved rationally when confronted by MAD. But in Iran's case the leadership is irrational and apocalyptic. Just consider what scenario he presented in a hypothetical (and insane) attack on Israel: yes, Iran might lose a few hundred thousand but Israel would be totally obliterated. One must understand that we are dealing with fanatical mullahs who - far from fearing - would welcome death in a jihad that brings martyrdom and immortality. Can we imagine binLaden with his finger on the button? This is NOT hyperbole. It's the most serious danger facing the civilized world.


16 posted on 02/04/2006 6:37:21 PM PST by T.L.Sink (stopew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T.L.Sink

"... we are dealing with fanatical mullahs who - far from fearing - would welcome death in a jihad that brings martyrdom and immortality."

Yup, and perhaps them folks need to be assisted so that both sides can be happy right away.


17 posted on 02/04/2006 6:40:12 PM PST by elpinta (Three out of four voices in my head said I should stay home and clean the guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mirado

I like this burn every bridge brinksmanship from Tehran, it makes it SOOO much easier to get Russia and China to go along with us in the Security Council.


18 posted on 02/04/2006 6:40:28 PM PST by Nova442 ("Cry Havoc and let slip the Dogs of War.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft

As McCain put it, the only thing worse than war with Iran is a nuclear Iran. The Iranians are hoping they can hold out until March, at which point we'll discuss the possibility of having meetings to work toward a decision on whether or not to issue a strongly worded denunciation, as lgf put it.

Militarily our airforce can do whatever it wants to Iran; things getting mucked up among Shi'ites in Iraq is the cost. (This could be an advantage -- we may have the opportunity to put down Al-Sadr for good.)


19 posted on 02/04/2006 6:42:31 PM PST by JHBowden (Go White Sox -- World Champs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JHBowden
You think it will be that easy? Just a nice clean short airwar, and all will be fine? I don't think so. We may have to do it, but it will be far from easy. For starters, what will happen to trillion dollar global hedge funds and derivatives markets when oil explodes past $300 a barrel after the Hormuz is shut by cruise missile warfare? The economic shock may destroy the global economic sytem....which is Ahmadinejad's explicit goal. Whether he gets there by launching nukes, or plugging the Hormuz, may not matter.

And don't expect the world to stand and cheer when "Cowboy" Bush launches another "unecessary" preemptive war. Half of America and most of the world will condemn any "preemptive" strike, if the result is a global oil crisis leading to a systemic financial meltdown.

We may have to do it, but please, DON'T think it will be a quick, glorious, high tech victory.


20 posted on 02/04/2006 6:43:46 PM PST by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson