By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - US, UK and France accuse Iran.

Kasz216 on 26 September 2009

Not that surprising.

US intelligence projects that in 6 years Iran will have nuclear weapons that could strike Europe.

That's the real reason I guess Obama pulled out of the missile defense plan.

Instead of it being America first, Europe second for protection they are going for a "Europe first, America second" plan.

 

Looks like this is going to be Europes problem more then ours now.  Should be funny to see how peoples positions change.  Since Iran is working on mid and lowrange missles.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 26 September 2009
Pyramid Head said:
i find this hilarious

random accusation time, threat time

thing is why cant they build whatever the fuck they want in their own country?

despite the turmoil etc politically, iran is a beautiful country with beautiful people

they deserve better than to be assaulted by a bunch of hipocrites

They've been offered a deal on uranium if they allow the UN to take the depleted uraninium after it's done.

The stuff that is of no use except for bombs.

Iran has declined.

Clearly it's not about a powerplant.



highwaystar101 on 26 September 2009
nordlead said:
Pyramid Head said:
i find this hilarious

random accusation time, threat time

thing is why cant they build whatever the fuck they want in their own country?

despite the turmoil etc politically, iran is a beautiful country with beautiful people

they deserve better than to be assaulted by a bunch of hipocrites

historically unstable government that hates a handful of countries and potentially harbors terrorists builds nuclear weapons and refuses to admit that they are doing so, what is to be concerned about?

Honestly, I love nuclear power, I think it is great. I think killing whole cities with nuclear bombs is horrible. But for what reason does Iran need to build a bomb? Rather then waste all this money building essentially a death request they could be investing in infrastructure and improving the lives of their citizens. If you want to claim they are building a nuclear plant for energy, then they should admit it rather than brining themselves under fire.

I was going to come and post something pretty much identical to this, but in the aid of saving time I'm just going to say...

This x2



Zlejedi on 26 September 2009

Israel should have attacked months ago already.

If they leave it talks the chance of success is grand 0%.



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

NJ5 on 26 September 2009

Apparently stronger sanctions would be imposed in Iran later this year... if that's not enough to make them change course (perhaps after Iranians rebel against the gov because of it), we may be in for some live war scenes on TV.



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 26 September 2009
kowenicki said:

@orca_azure

until it gets physical.....  then no doubt it will be left up to the US and the UK...  again!


The BAS haven't the resources to mount another deployment. At the end of the day, the USA could go in alone and win the war, that's something that they're very good at, it's nation building that is something that they struggle with (Somalia, post-Saddam Iraq, etc) - probably because of the electorate's disliking of long-term US engagement.



Kasz216 on 26 September 2009
SamuelRSmith said:
kowenicki said:

@orca_azure

until it gets physical.....  then no doubt it will be left up to the US and the UK...  again!


The BAS haven't the resources to mount another deployment. At the end of the day, the USA could go in alone and win the war, that's something that they're very good at, it's nation building that is something that they struggle with (Somalia, post-Saddam Iraq, etc) - probably because of the electorate's disliking of long-term US engagement.

Not to mention Iran is Afghanistan times a hundred.

Eastern Iran is full of mountains that would be nearly impossible to police or capture remenants.

Makes Afghanistan look like a cakewalk and we're losing Afghanistan.

A war with Iran would make Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan look easy combined.

 



Kasz216 on 26 September 2009
NJ5 said:
Apparently stronger sanctions would be imposed in Iran later this year... if that's not enough to make them change course (perhaps after Iranians rebel against the gov because of it), we may be in for some live war scenes on TV.

I dunno.  It's not like we did anything to stop North Korea.... and North Korea is worse then Iran in just about every way.

 

Except proximity to europe.



TheRealMafoo on 27 September 2009
Kasz216 said:
SamuelRSmith said:
kowenicki said:

@orca_azure

until it gets physical.....  then no doubt it will be left up to the US and the UK...  again!


The BAS haven't the resources to mount another deployment. At the end of the day, the USA could go in alone and win the war, that's something that they're very good at, it's nation building that is something that they struggle with (Somalia, post-Saddam Iraq, etc) - probably because of the electorate's disliking of long-term US engagement.

Not to mention Iran is Afghanistan times a hundred.

Eastern Iran is full of mountains that would be nearly impossible to police or capture remenants.

Makes Afghanistan look like a cakewalk and we're losing Afghanistan.

A war with Iran would make Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan look easy combined.

 

Iran would not be a full scale war. We would just destroy the locations that generate nuclear material, and then cut them off from the rest of the world financially.

Not only would that be effective, we can do it right now. Why we wait years to do these kinds of things when we know the outcome already, I will never understand.



outlawauron on 27 September 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
Kasz216 said:
SamuelRSmith said:
kowenicki said:

@orca_azure

until it gets physical.....  then no doubt it will be left up to the US and the UK...  again!


The BAS haven't the resources to mount another deployment. At the end of the day, the USA could go in alone and win the war, that's something that they're very good at, it's nation building that is something that they struggle with (Somalia, post-Saddam Iraq, etc) - probably because of the electorate's disliking of long-term US engagement.

Not to mention Iran is Afghanistan times a hundred.

Eastern Iran is full of mountains that would be nearly impossible to police or capture remenants.

Makes Afghanistan look like a cakewalk and we're losing Afghanistan.

A war with Iran would make Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan look easy combined.

 

Iran would not be a full scale war. We would just destroy the locations that generate nuclear material, and then cut them off from the rest of the world financially.

Not only would that be effective, we can do it right now. Why we wait years to do these kinds of things when we know the outcome already, I will never understand.

Well, after the way the US and Media has responded to previous preemptive strikes, I don't think Obama wants to lose more popularity.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.