Or if you mean the US nuke thing...

The logical fallacy in that was... the US had Nuclear weapons first.

No one else was in the same position in as the US to use them... because after they got them... the US already had them.

All it takes to make that argument look stupid is context.  Would Iran of used Nukes in the same context?   Sure.  Hell they'd of probably nuked Russia too when they had the chance like Patton wanted.

It looks even stupider if you know much about WW2 and studied Japan's actual reaction. Which historical experts pretty much agree was either "Nuclear weapons caused them to surrender only after the second bomb" or "Nuclear weapons didn't make them surrender, it was actually the threat of Russian invasion."


So yeah... not very well thought out.

The US government is a million times scarier than Iran could ever be. I see the problem with Iran having nukes but I see the problem with everyone having nukes. If the US is gonna have nukes i'm glad that Russia does, because it keeps them in check to a certain extent. I cannot understand anybody who says Iran would actually use a nuke on the US, there's no reason to do that and assures complete destruction of Iran. As far as Israel goes, they need to defend themselves, and they have tons of nukes anyways.

We've actually never attacked a South American country. Debt dispute in Venezuela in early 20th century, our Delta Force was used to hunt Pablo Escobar in Colombia in the 90s, and we did some police action after the Brazilian Revolution of 1889

Good. Iran will have to defend itself soon.

I guess you've never heard of the bombing of panama which nobody seems to talk about that was as bad as 9/11.

I'll do you this favor just this once. The point of my statement was that while the US bomb dozens of other countries contradicts on how they allow Pakistan, and India to keep nukes while terrorist is known to live there, and at the sametime preach freedom and liberty for all. Here is another example, they thought saddam hussein have WMD, and the media kept preaching it on the air none stop, but we didn't find any. So far no one have any evidence of Iran weaponizing their nukes and yet the media is spreading fear, and we're already attacking Iran via cyber attacks.. I'm just not going to assume anything without evidence for it. where is the logic in that.

Panama is in North America. 

good point.

The border between Panama and Colombia is the border between North America and South America so Panama is in North America and Colombia is in South America. thanks for the correction guys.

Except you know... MI6 directly stated there is... to the point of where they've specifically stopped them before... and there has been plenty of other proof already given.

Do you know how unlikely it is for a government to say "Yes we've activly been foiling them for 4 years now."

If you got the idea that the Media was pushing the Iraq war, you must of been watching the wrong stations.  Everything I watched and listened to at the time was critical of Bush and the war.  It's partly why I was against Iraq when we invaded.

Also, Saddam Hussein did have WMDs.  Just not the ones we were looking for.  Afterall the US sold him WMDs in the first place in the form of chemcial weapons.   Hell there was even some proof on the "mobile chemical labs".  It's just the WMDs they were working on were pretty uneventful.

Also, in general, you must not have been keeping up with the Iraq War infomration and why we went to war there.   The WMD claims didn't come from thin air,  they came from a trusted informant that intentionally lied.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_%28informant%29