RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


so is george "yeehaw!" bush going to attack iran next?(42 posts)

so is george "yeehaw!" bush going to attack iran next?ColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 7:34 AM
i read in the paper today that iran is nearing nuclear capability. we are already in iraq...might as well take out iran next. why do i always get the mental picture of slim pickens riding that missle in dr. strangelove when this stuff happens?
hypotheticalDougSloan
Aug 4, 2003 7:46 AM
I have no position on this.

However, let's assume for discussion purposes that Iran is truly about to obtain nuclear weapons. What should be done about it?

Doug
How would we know, since we can't trustOldEdScott
Aug 4, 2003 7:56 AM
our intelligence or how our intelligence is characterized to us?

We'll just have to trust Wolfowitz/Cheney to Do The Right Thing.
who would you trust? nmDougSloan
Aug 4, 2003 8:09 AM
President Dean. nmOldEdScott
Aug 4, 2003 8:13 AM
in other words, "no one"? nmDougSloan
Aug 4, 2003 8:17 AM
We'll see. Meanwhile, it will be hard forOldEdScott
Aug 4, 2003 8:26 AM
the current administration to crank up yet another war to 'eliminate weapons of mass destruction,' and be believed by the public. Be like Clinton going on national TV to preach abstinence to the Youth.
oh, but they'll sure try.rufus
Aug 4, 2003 8:33 AM
just the unmitigated gall of the administration scares me.
It's breathtaking, all right. nmOldEdScott
Aug 4, 2003 8:36 AM
Won't believe it til I see it. Given the fallout form this one.94Nole
Aug 4, 2003 8:38 AM
I just pray that no country, especially the US, doesn't pay the price for inaction with regard to these weapons.
Totally agree. Scary, huh? The only way we'll attack Iran...94Nole
Aug 4, 2003 8:35 AM
is if they point one at someone and the entire world is allied with us.
hypotheticalDuane Gran
Aug 4, 2003 10:54 AM
let's assume for discussion purposes that Iran is truly about to obtain nuclear weapons. What should be done about it

Good question. Had the Iraq and Afghanistan operations worked out properly (where the enemy was caught, not heckling us through Al-Jazeera) it might serve as an example to discourage Iran. If I were the leader of Iran, at this point I would consider that being invaded might give me political collateral, which reflects on how we are winning the ground war but losing the PR war.

I think the best long term solution is more non-proliferation treaties and unilateral disarmament of nuclear weaponry with countries who have them (including the US). In the short term, economic sanctions from the UN may be helpful, but I think it is in our interest to dilute the blame by working through the UN.
non-proliferation?DougSloan
Aug 4, 2003 2:35 PM
The US likely has a vast advantage in conventional warefare at this point, even over other industrialized nations. So, assuming it's verifiable, why not eliminate nuclear arms totally?

Doug
We react to those just as we do with regard to Israel's nukesStarliner
Aug 5, 2003 8:10 AM
Bush has diminished America's credibility account with to his misadventure in Iraq - rattling the sabres on Iran would not only garner little international support, but would further solidify international opposition to America by providing further proof to the perception of American hyprocrisy on the subject of WMD's -- that we are being selective by not including Israel's nukes in our pounding drumbeat over the Iran nuclear issue. That kind of politics is poison to any attempts at gaining respect for America in the Arab world.

i Gee, Martha, do you suppose there's any connection between how much they hate us, and whether or not they're going to threaten our safety?
where would he find the troops?mohair_chair
Aug 4, 2003 8:41 AM
Seems to me American forces are strung out everywhere. I can't imagine we could get enough together to attack Monaco, much less Iran. There would be no one left to defend the homeland, unless the Canadians want to help out.

So don't worry about it. Nuclear capability is practically meaningless these days. Any advanced nation (yes, Iran qualifies) could be nuclear capable if they wanted to be. By now, everyone knows the physics and it's not that hard to make a basic atomic bomb. If you can get some uranium ore and enrich it, you can make a low-yield bomb. The enrichment process is fairly large scale, consumes large quantities of energy, and therefore, is pretty hard to hide. If Iran is doing it, it will be obvious, and it's simple enough to stop it, just like the Israelis did when they bombed the Iraqi reactor years ago.

Don't know why you get the Strangelove image, but that was a bomb, not a missle.
imageColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 8:50 AM
nuther oneColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 8:51 AM
and yet anuther oneColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 8:53 AM
looks a little like bush, huh?
what the hell is that man doing to that corn cob? nmrufus
Aug 4, 2003 9:06 AM
The Emperors new clothescritmass
Aug 4, 2003 9:41 AM
Typical classless act from the leftLive Steam
Aug 4, 2003 10:51 AM
It just goes to show you how low some on the left are willing to stoop. Would you hire that jerk?
yeah nothing tastless or crass ever comes from the right nmEpicX
Aug 4, 2003 10:59 AM
I am a show me person, so show me!Live Steam
Aug 4, 2003 11:11 AM
The same prick, uh I mean jerk could have use the same stupid prop during Clinton's impeachment, but I didn't see anything like it. Did you?
Same old rhetoric from the left=can't beat 'em, make fun of 'em94Nole
Aug 4, 2003 11:25 AM
It is so tiring.
how about this jack@ssColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 1:04 PM
or these good 'ole boysColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 1:13 PM
and this little gemColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 1:17 PM
LOL Definitely full bore whacked out extremeists...No_sprint
Aug 4, 2003 1:22 PM
Not a political statement and/or representative of anyone but themselves.

Crazies voicing their opinion in a really idiotic way.
I agree. A few idiots expressing ...Live Steam
Aug 4, 2003 2:55 PM
hateful views. The first one is probably spot on though :O)
Bull RunSteveS
Aug 4, 2003 1:48 PM
I can't read their posters.Maybe they are commemorating the first battle of Bull Run.

Oh, the horror, the inhumanity of their what? Vigil,protest, commoration?
bannning the confederate flag i think (nm)ColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 2:36 PM
try thisEpicX
Aug 5, 2003 4:30 PM
i'd say Rush Limbaugh has shown numerous times that poor taste strays to the right frequently.

i'd also point to conservative anti-abortion protesters that think it's cute to picket with pictures of aborted fetuses on their signs. I could provide pics, but i'll spare you. whatever your stance this just isn't right.

you want your kids to see that?
How about this?Live Steam
Aug 5, 2003 4:39 PM
I have a problem with those on the left being troubled by a sign with dead fetus on it. I also have a problem with those on the left being troubled by these people freely expressing their positions. Sounds rather hypocritical to me. I guess it all depends upon what side you consider yourself to be aligned with. Protesting is fine for your cause, but not another's? The dead fetus pic is reality not fiction or someone's interpretation, thereof. It represents the act in a genuine way. Sorry if the vision of reality upsets you.

As for Rush, that is a truly subjective issue. I have never heard him be vulgar in any way. I think your "partisan paradigms" have gotten the best of you here :O)
You called that one rightSteveS
Aug 4, 2003 11:25 AM
Must be an extremely glib and intelligent Californian in this picture, tolerant of each and every lifestyle and form of speech, supporter of Howard Dean, never seen military service and disdainful of it, defender of drugs and their casual use, etc. etc. I think he should be a poster boy for the current state of the Democrat party..Feel free to have this guy just as he is parade around the next national Democrat convention. I would love to see that happen, if the Left has the courage of their convictions. (they won't and don't)

Exactly the kind of thing I would expect from the Left crowd and the guy appears to be a Clinton era liberal, with a much bigger missile from what Gennifer Flowers described.

Note that the Left wants everyone to be 'tolerant' of this form of 'speech.'
how about mr. monica-nudo here?ColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 1:27 PM
WhySteveS
Aug 4, 2003 1:44 PM
Why I don't see anything offensive there only a rather happy person standing on the left and someone dressed up as what, an Oscar Meyer weiner on the right?

What could you possibly be referring to when you mention "mr. monica-nudo here?"

This inocuous picture doesn't at all seem like what was posted previously. (the nude man, phallic missile and mask of George Bush) This one is wholesome and the other was Democrat sponsored pornography. Still, I think the latter should show up just as he is on the podium with all the Dem's running for President. It really does sell the message of the Left.
you joking? clinton, cigar, lewinsky? put em together...:) (nm)ColnagoFE
Aug 4, 2003 2:38 PM
I believe his point was that a mother ...Live Steam
Aug 4, 2003 3:02 PM
could actually walk by with her child and not feel embarrassed. It leaves more to the imagination. Heck, we don't even know if this was a political statement. Maybe it was a costume party.
so now pornography equalsrufus
Aug 4, 2003 3:00 PM
a man in beige colored briefs wearing a plastic missile? man, you gotta get out more.
I think you are being a little flipant about itLive Steam
Aug 4, 2003 3:03 PM
My 5 year old nephew would know what the first idiot was up to. The cigar would be way over his head.
still, it's a far cry from being pornographic nmrufus
Aug 4, 2003 3:24 PM
Was this a rally or a ....Live Steam
Aug 4, 2003 2:58 PM
convention of John Deere owners? You have to admit that it was actually done in better taste than the original.