E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mustafa Ozer / AFP - Getty Images, file
Saudi special forces take part in a military parade in the holy city of Mecca on November 10, 2010.
Saudia Arabia would move quickly to acquire nuclear weapons if Iran successfully tests an atomic bomb, according to a report.
Citing an unidentified Saudi Arabian source, the Times newspaper in the U.K. (which operates behind a paywall) said that the kingdom would seek to buy ready-made warheads and also begin its own program to enrich weapons-grade uranium.
The paper suggested that Pakistan was the country most likely to supply Saudi Arabia with weapons, saying Western officials were convinced there was an understanding between the countries to do so if the security situation in the Persian Gulf gets worse. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have denied such an arrangement exists.
Iran, which follows the Shiite branch of Islam, and Sunni Saudi Arabia are major regional rivals.
The Times described its source for the story as a "senior Saudi," but gave no other details.
Israel uses MEK terror group to kill Iran's nuclear scientists, US officials say
Mohammad Javad Larijani, a senior aide to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, describes what Iranian leaders believe is a close relationship between Israel's secret service, the Mossad, and the People's Mujahedin of Iran, or MEK, which is considered a terrorist organization by the United States.
"There is no intention currently to pursue a unilateral military nuclear program, but the dynamics will change immediately if the Iranians develop their own nuclear capability," the source told the newspaper. "Politically, it would be completely unacceptable to have Iran with a nuclear capability and not the kingdom."
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta now believes there's a strong possibility that Israel will attack Iran in an attempt to thwart Tehran's nuclear ambitions, according to U.S. officials. NBC's Richard Engel reports.
Iran envoy: We could hit US forces anywhere in world if attacked
Asked whether Saudi Arabia would maintain its commitment against acquiring WMD, Turki said: "What I suggest for Saudi Arabia and for the other Gulf states ... is that we must study carefully all the options, including the option of acquiring weapons of mass destruction. We can't simply leave it for somebody else to decide for us."
Turki is also a former Saudi intelligence chief and remains an influential member of the Saudi royal family.
In October, the U.S. claimed that agents linked to Iran's Qud's Force, an elite wing of the Revolutionary Guard, were involved in a plot to kill Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the U.S., Adel Al-Jubeir. Iran said the claims were "baseless."
The Saudi government has also accused a terror cell linked to Iran of plotting to blow up its embassy in Bahrain, as well as the causeway linking the island kingdom to Saudi Arabia.
In a secret diplomatic cable made public by WikiLeaks, Saudi King Abdullah allegedly urged Washington to strike at Iran and "cut off the head of the snake."
He said military action would only stiffen Iran's resolve, rally support for the regime and at best delay, but not halt, the nuclear program. "Such an act I think would be foolish, and to undertake it I think would be tragic," he said.
Leave a Comment:
What good is it to have nuclear wmd? People get killed and the world gets poisoned so no one can live in it. Wonder why the U.S. wants to build another nuclear facility if it is telling Iran to get rid of theirs? Nothing makes sense.
i think the us can build a reactor as we already have the weapon, where iran doesn't have a weapon but could be building one instead of a reactor.
the world is a mess ever since 9/11, then you have a president that has to be king of the world instead of a @!$%#house.
Russia developed nuclear weapons because the US had them. Pakistan developed nuclear weapons because India had them. If Iran develops a nuclear weapon, it only makes sense that the Saudi's and the UAE would acquire them. That is what will keep the peace, MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), is the only thing that will keep millions from getting killed and the world from being poisoned. A nuclear weapon has not been used on a population center since 11:02 am on August 11, 1945, when a US B-29 bomber dropped a single Mk-II "Fat Man" atomic bomb over Nagasaki, estimated population 240,000. MAD has worked to ensure peace for over 66 years. I don't want to see nuclear arms spread, but if Iran gets a nuclear weapon then it has already been proven that the only thing that will ensure peace is if their enemies in the region get them too.
"Politically, it would be completely unacceptable to have Iran with a nuclear capability and not the kingdom."
So there you have it....for all of you Religious fanatics! It looks like the Middle East is bringing you closer to you Heavenly Kingdom every day. .....
Get your facts straight and things will make sense. Iran was offered light water nuclear plants where less plutonium and tritium is generated as a by product compared to a heavy water reactor.
Mutually Assured Destruction worked with the Us and Russia because we/they are not suicidal. Not so with the nut cases in the Middle East. They blow themselves up with dynamite, just imaging how "glorious" these idiots will feel being nuked.
Men won't be satisfied until they've destroyed the earth.
Get your facts straight and things will make sense. Iran was offered light water nuclear plants where less plutonium and tritium is generated as a by product compared to a heavy water reactor.
That only means that instead of glowing green -after nuke day- those that survive will glow orange.
By the way, for those that think that roaches survive a nuclear holocaust, that is not true. 99% of roaches will die. The only insects actually able to survive are ants. -Some good news to cheer you all up-
"Iran, which follows the Shiite branch of Islam, and Sunni Saudi Arabia are major regional rivals"
Another piece of evidence that religion (ALL) is a poison to our world.
Sorry to say Vince but you're incorrect. Iran has already VOWED to use nuclear weapons as soon as it has them in hand against both the US and Israel. Iran has made it clear that they WILL wipe both nations off the face of the earth. To make matters worse, Iran has also stated that as soon as it has nuclear weapons, it will share them with all muslim nations!
This is not about peace but rather about control. Islam's religion demands that muslims rule the earth and if it means using military power to do then that wil what they will do. By dropping the bomb on any nation, specifically the US and Israel, the muslims believe this will bring their messiah back to rule the earth. We are not dealing with a mentality that you can negotiate with. This is not an option for them but rather a neccessity. Is it unthinkable for them NOT to do this.
The world needs to wake up at last and fully understand the crisis at hand. If we don't deal with them first then they will deal with us asap!
THe only difference is that every other country that has complied with the "MAD" way has not been a theocracy. These Iranians are crazy and I believe willing to use these weapons knowing the consequences. Its an extremist way of life that leads them and I dont think they will hesitate in using nuclear weapons if they acquire them. The US need to shut their program down now before the world plunges into a nuclear war. We will win of course but at what cost?
What is your unwised and unthinking comment! US does not stop Iran from building a civilian nuclear facility unless it is under UN monitor to make sure it is not used for making nuclear weapons. If Iran complies with the UN Nuclear Watch Dog then there would be no more discussion here. Beside that, US or The West have no reason to stop Iran from building it. Yes US has been building nuclear power plants. These plants are under international monitor.
I agree with Barry. These dopes are dumb enough to beleive they will be granted 72 virgins in heaven if they blow themselves up. If Iran gets the bomb, Saudi Arabia will get the bomb. Iran will eventually launch, which will lead Saudi Arabia to counter.
Population Iran = 75,000,000
Population Saudi Arabia = 27,000,000
Number of young virgins needed for pedophiles (assuming half population is male) = 3,672,000,000
Sorry ladies, you are the real losers of this conflct
Weapons are changing as they always have to become more powerful. The reasons, self defense and to conquer other countries, haven't changed though. If Iran wants these weapons it is for the same reasons other countries want them. Just think if Iraq had nuclear weapons it is unlikely Bush II would have invaded and conquered it. Possession prevents attack was the mentality of Russia and the US during the cold war, and it seemed to work. Iran may just not want to be next and knows nuclear weapons is the best deterrent. You can say Iran having or building nuclear weapons invites attack and invasion but not having them didn't help or do anything for Iraq to defend itself from invasion.
Where are all the ridiculous comments saying "America needs to stop spending money on the military", "America needs to stay out of other countries' business", "Bush warmongers".
Keep your head in the sand while radical nations develop weapons of MASS destruction. This is one issue that you can't take a chance on misjudging their intention. If you're wrong and do nothing, then it's TOO LATE.
I wish the Saudis would start to take care of their backyard.
I find the photo of the "Saudi Special Forces on Parade" a bit humorous: Dudes, covered in axel grease, wearing old-school motorcycle helmets and hefty trash bags. Nice HKs, though.
Simon - Please provide a link to support your statement that Iran has publicly stated that once they have the bomb they will use it agianst us and Israel. I find this rather hard to believe considering they have continued to deny that they are even building or attempting to build a bomb. You claim they have said they will use the bomb to destroy us as soon as they have it, but the reality is they continue to deny even trying to attain it, so please provide some evidence to support your claim. The truth is that all of you can call me naive or stupid, but the Iranain regime is not has crazy or suicidal as most of you think. This is a way for the current leaders to solidify their hold on power and whether or not you like to admit it they are pretty pragmatic, and know that if they attacked Israel it is Iran that would be wiped off the map. The goal of the Iranians isn't their own destruction, but rather to disrupt Israel's nuclear hegemony in the region. This isn't about control but rather as a foil to the nuclear arsenal of Israel. Having nukes would allow greater impunity to its proxies such as Hamas, but would not be used in a pre-emptive attempt to destroy Israel. Simon all your doing is spreading lies and war mongering
Carlof,
Your post was hilarious! Thanks for bringing some humor to this morning....Iran's nuclear direction isn't funny, I know, but it's nice to have some humor thrown in anyway!!
The Saudi statement is designed to deter Iran from developing nuclear weaponry. That makes sense. I hope it works. It certainly adds considerable weight to the recent 'announcement' that Israel is behind assassination of those working on nuclear weaponry in Iran and that most of the international community doesn't mind that a bit.
As for MAD, it is an appropriate acronym; it wastes resources, costs a lot, and is more than a little crazy. In this day and age, we don't need nuclear weapons. We haven't reached the era when we can scrap them all (witness the puke that ran North Korea until recently, the puke that took over from him, and the puke that pretends to be 'supreme' in Iran).
Nuclear power plants are a different issue, however. In the long run, it is inevitable that Iran will develop nuclear power plants, since they have uranium ore resources.
Put a bunch of crazy people that hate each other in a room, give them all a gun, lock the door, and see how long it takes before someone gets shot.
The Middle East is already a powder keg waiting to go off. Give everyone nukes and SOMEONE will use them.
The questions:
How many lives are lost now for going in before they have a WMD?
How many lives will be lost once they get a WMD and use it?
Will Iran use it either directly or to bully other countries into obeying their radical religion and ideals?
Can we actually stop them without military intervention?
What military action would be sufficient to stop them? (i.e. genocide, driving them back to the stone age, replace current leadership with US puppet leaders...)
You had a pretty good comment until you got to that part. Nuclear hegemony? Meaningless phrase.
I hope Ali Khamenei doesn't read that.
Please tell us you're not trying to revive the Nazi fantasy of an international Jewish conspiracy. There are too many copies of Mein Kampf littering bookstores around the world already.
Not funny, just offensive. Comments like that are just mean-spirited bigotry. If that's not enough reason to stop, comments like that play into al Qaeda's hands.
That would be suicidal. Ali Khamenei may be a vicious dictator, but he is not suicidal.
Agreed. Excellent comment.
Hegemony - authority or control: control or dominating influence by one person or group, especially by one political group over society or one nation over others. One of the synonoms SUPREMECY. Israel has nuclear supremacy in the Middle East and has had so since the late 1960's. This allows for greater latitude in the military decision making in Israel. I could argue that at the time if Iran had a nuclear weapon we probably would have never seen Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. If you and I want the same thing, but Im the only one with a gun, who do you think is gonna get it?
It started when Israel acquired nuclear weapons.
The middle East is the origin of civilization. At the end of the last ice age, the nomadic tribes of the drying savannahs resettled in crowded communities around the levant, and the river valleys of the Tigress and Euphrates and the Nile. The Sahara was a Savannah and so was Saudi Arabia. The resuling influx was the impetus to invent agriculture, to build cities, to create social laws and monumental architecture, institutional gavernment, and even writing and documentation. It was also in the middle east that larger armies and weapons technology, (iron and bronze age), became a result of the newfounded civilizations.
If there is a nuclear arms race in the middle east, it could also commence the end of civilization.
The scientist Julius Oppenheimer said, after the successful Trinity nuclear explosion, "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds". Perhaps he and his team are to blame for the knowledge of how to destroy each other, or perhaps it is human nature, our incentive to create such a device, and our quest to win and dominate at any cost, or to destroy our perceived enemy when we fail.
It is a strange irony, that the fusion of hydrogen on the sun is due to immense mass and gravitational pressure. On earth the fusion of hydrogen is caused by immense social and survival pressure to hold or resist dominion. It is as though survival pressure is a physical, inherent property of life, even to its demise.
Iran cannot afford to join the nuclear club, it will be the beginning of the end, they have too many enemies. Israel must eventually abandon its own and rely on the domion of others outside of the middle east, lest Oppenheimer's prophecy come true.
Judsi-2161644 "What good is it to have nuclear wmd? People get killed and the world gets poisoned so no one can live in it."
It's about power and influence. Using the money they get from selling oil to the West to build weapons to destroy the Western way of life, and please Allah. Doing what they think Allah wants is more important than anything else - including their lives and those of their people.
Western versions of 'logic and reason' are meaningless to the religious leaders in Iran.
Is it Halloween???
Interesting, I see that after thousands of years we still embrace the concept...
My johnson is bigger than yours.
The 9/11 bombers were Saudi's not Iranians, why would anyone think that the Iranians would do something as evil as the Saudi's did? If history counts you must remember that it was the Saudi's who attacked us not Iranians.
I hate to burst everyones bubble, but the problems arose many, many centuries ago and will continue until mankind is ultimately destroyed. People profess superiority through religious philosophies and wage wars in the name of freedom, but God knows what is in every mans heart, and from what I can see, most men are heartless. The NWO is being established today, and those that rule it will do so in the name of peace yet will require everyone to adhere to strict policies, which will be presented with monetary enticement via an international currency. We may prolong or even deny our foretold demise, but we may all rest assured that true vengence will be left to God.
Will 10918..., Post 1.20, Both sides of the House of Representatives and Senate have indirect access to WMD, can we dare hope that these A..Ho.. will use your plan and we can elect a completely new House and Senate and get on with the business of the People of the US?
Give it a rest Mike! Saying it was the Saudi's who attacked us on 9/11 would be like calling Oklahoma City a civil war. I mean it was the Americans that attacked us, right? What you are doing is holding an entire country responsible for the actions of a handul of its most extreme citizens. Your comment is reckless in the fact that it alludes to the Saudi government having sponsored those terrorist, which is completly untrue. Imagine if the whole world judged America and all Americans by the most ignorant bigotted rants on this site. Would that be fair?
You're forgetting three things:
1. Saudi Arabia has what the world wants: OIL,
2. We didn't invade Saudi Arabia because those who flew those airplanes into our buildings were from the same group that tried unsuccessfully to OVERTHROW the Saudi government itself, and
3. Saudi Arabia is BY FAR the wealthiest nation over there, and they have NO interest ( I repeat- NIL) in rocking the boat. They have FAR more at stake than the practically failed state of Iran does.
Hypocrisy, to ask others to do what you yourself wouldn't. Even when espousing democracy we want to make it quite clear that some humans are more equal than others.
@Judsi:
The reason(s) the US is getting to build not one but two new nuclear reactors are:
1. We're not a theocratic nation of radical terrorist hell-bent on converting the rest of the world to our state-religion or kill them if they resist.
2. To thumb our noses at Iran because we have both things they want, nuclear power and nuclear bombs.
3. To move towards consuming less terrorist oil for energy production, thus cutting a major source of their funding.
And finally, we nuked Japan, not once, but twice, and the world is still here. Granted, those were much smaller yields, but we've learned so much since vaporizing those two cities we're positive we could a much better job next time.
JK from PA...
Thanks for the gut-laugh (post 1.16)...serious subject but nice to lighten the mood sometimes.
...heafty trash bags...axle grease...old school motorcycle helmets, now that was good! Still chuckling...
It's all about religion. Religion has killed more humans than any other cause of death. It seems that the less intelligent people are the strongest believers. To blow yourself up so you can go to heaven is pretty dumb. That is what the religious leaders teach the suicide bombers. Muslims are taught to destroy the infidels, anybody who isn't Muslim. Iran is a Muslim country. You figure it out.
Actually its nothing more than an excuse to acquire nukes with a plausible explanation,why weren't the saudi's demanding the same when the U.S. gave nukes to israel or why weren't they whinning about india having over 40 and pakistan with 23 nukes? At least Iran was willing to sign Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT which allows International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to inspect the facilities and control the purchase of fuel and monitor the spent fuel.
MICHAEL-595198 Just how did you come the the conclusion Obama wants to be "king of the world?" Or was that your sad attempt at blaming Obama for everything , every chance you get?
As usual the warmongers who want to bankrupt the USA with another war are out in force. So what else is new?
@Cassie: Is Chancelor Merkel a man?
Yes, I get your point in general. But let's be fair. Do you really think Hillary Clinton would have done something different if she were President? Or would you absolve her of blame because she's a woman?
I'm going to say no, and no. Because answering yes might make me a sexist, whether I was a man or a woman....
Ed-1118000
What makes you think he doesn't? Wouldn't any politician love to be the "king of the world"? Now who's being nieve?
Israel will attack Iran before they produce any kind of nuclear war head. Heck, they already are killing off their nuclear scientists.
Big deal. That is a deterrent to Israel's neighbors attempting to 'wipe them off the map'. Iran has no such realistic concerns. "Breaking the Israeli nuclear hegemony" is not a legitimate policy goal.
Nuclear weapons for Israel are essentially a defensive deterrent. They are NOT an option on offense, and have nothing to do with military decisions regarding Gaza.
The gun is irrelevant. You wouldn't use it, so I'm not afraid of it.
Are we talking about the last potato chip in the bowl (you can have it even without the gun) or you wanting to kidnap my family (in which case waving your gun around wouldn't prevent me from trying to stop you no matter what)?
By the way, I really like your first post, except for the "nuclear hegemony" part. Keep up the good work.
My thoughts on seeing the photo was:
Saudi Special Forces or Spaceball Darth Helmet Stunt Doubles? You decide.
The US is not like Iran, in that we need to be watched because we want to build another nuclear facility. We can build as many as we want. We are NOT hell bent on using them to take out the rest of the world. Yes, we did use them in WWII. but that was NOT to destroy Japan. That was to stop the war, or Millions more people would have been killed. Dropping the bombs in WWII saved Millions of lives. People need to stop trying to use the dropping of the bombs in WWII against us, and stop trying to compare Iran to the US.
Most of the terriorist involved in the bombings of September 11, 2001, were originally of Saudi Arabia nationality. They were not part of Saudi Arabia nation though. Your parallel is about as equivalent as saying that your are a terrorist because Jihad Jane was an American and you are an American.
That being said with regards to Iran, it has been showed several times over the last 2-3 decades that Iran has given covert support to Hezbollah and Hommas. Most nations have classified these organizations as terrorist organizations. It has been stated that the elite guard of Iran attempted to have the Saudi ambassador to the United States assassinated, of which even Turkey has stated they believe. It may be in doubt that Iran would use or see that a nuclear weapon they created to be used. When making the decision as to what they could do, all we have to judge such actions is their past actions. And to be prepared to accept the outcome if we are wrong on our decisions. Are you prepared to accept the outcome if you are wrong?
Much of the discussion on this thread is bankrupt --- either the short-sighted "bomb 'em all" rants of the hawks and right wing or the "maybe if we just ignore 'em they'll go away" thinking of the doves and far left wing. Teddy Roosevelt had it right --- "Speak softly and carry a big stick." It was TR who negotiated an end to the Russo-Japanese War. And it was TR who dealt with the Kaiser when he was preparing to invade the United States. (Hadn't heard that one, had you?) TR used the most basic of naval maneuvers and diplomacy to completely humiliate the Kaiser. The trouncing was so thorough that it was kep[t sub rosa for decades, but ended up being one of the major causes of WWI.
Saudi Arabia does not leak this sort of stories. They have repeatedly stated in the past that if Iran goes nuclear, then they must re-examine their positions. Nothing new here. But if the Saudi government is letting this sort of thing get into the press, it is a certain sign that they are sending Iran a clear message.
And one small correction: While many Saudi Arabians are Sunni, as is most of the Arab world, (only Iran and Iraq are predominantly Shiite) the ruling elite in The Kingdom are Wahhabi (Salafis.) The Wahhabis are so far to the right of Sunnis that they actually advocate the destruction of huge popular mosques and all sites of religious veneration, including Mecca's religious buildings.
The only viable solution to a nuclear-armed Middle East similar to the nuclear-armed Sub Asia, is exactly what is described in the article. The nuclear superpowers of the US, China, Russia, France and Britain should create a "force guarantor" that would guarantee a nuclear-free Middle East by simply assuring that any country developing a nuclear weapon would be subject to immediate retaliation, without prior UN consultation, together or singly, against any country known to develop nuclear weapons. The major presumption would be caused by a nuclear bomb test of any type. But this will never work because it would require Israel to both give up their nuclear weapons and to allow international inspection --- both of which they refuse to do. Israel is so far out of the loop that they are still denying that they have nuclear weapons (while threatening to use them) and do not allow inspectors based on the premise that they have no nuclear weapons to inspect (while castigating Iran for making the same argument.) Israel's current policies and government are a guarantee that there will be a nuclear-armed Middle East. First Iran, then Saudi Arabia in some sort of peninsular coalition, then Egypt, then Syria.
And for people who claim that Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) is workable, you are mad (as in insane.) MAD was at best a very tenuous understanding between two technologically advanced and secular countries. MAD led us to the brink of war in the Cuban Missile Crisis and it took both huge concessions to the Russians in conjunction with extreme sabre-rattling and intense diplomacy to prevent it from actually happening. But MAD requires that a) it be no more than two countries, b) that both countries have some sort of rational government, c) that the military and government are entirely secular, and d) that there is never a single miscalculation by anyone on either side.
If you tried MAD with Middle Eastern countries:
a) there are too many countries involved with too many squabbles pending to keep track of. If two nuclear countries are a baseline, then three nuclear countries would be six times as complex a situation. Four countries would be 24 times as complex and so on.
b) it is difficult to see some of these governments as stable enough to be called "rational." Israel has had a series of religious pandering right-wing coalition governments they depend on tension with the Arabs to stay in power. Iran has a religious government and is a Persian country that wished to lead an Arab community. Saudi Arabia is a fricking 16th century religious dynastic kingdom, Egypt is in the midst of a huge transformation, most likely to a right-of-center religious government. And Syria is falling apart at the seams and has passed the breakeven point of becoming a failed state. None of these countries are capable of rational government at this time.
c) the nature of religious politics is that they are not rational. Any time you interject the supernatural into politics, you get a failed governmental solution. It doesn't matter what religion or culture, it always fails. And this applies to Jews just as much as to Muslims.
d) But the best reason that prohibits MAD is that the governments in the Middle East are fragile on their good days and self-destructive the rest of the time. This is an environment that just begs for miscalculations. All it takes is one low-level military officer who flips out to start a nuclear war. All it takes is one bluff that gets called. All it takes is one stament that gets made into a sound bite. And a nuclear war can start. A good example of the kind of thing that gets out of hand is Iran's supposed vows to destroy Israel. The full quote says that "Islam will wipe Israel from the map of history." That is not exactly Iran threatening to bomb Israel. But it's the kind of jingoism that fuels hawks.
So the Saudis are also complete nuts like us. I have no doubt that the Iranians want the bomb, but according to our own intelligence, they are not even to the point of having refined Uranium to have a nuclear reactor, let alone weapons grade.
And you make a big post which advocates nothing. LOL!
Roger - Iran isn't hell bent on using nuclear weapons either. In fact, Iran dooesn't have any nuclear weapons to test or to use on other nations, as does Israel and America. Iran has not attacked another nation since the early 1800s. That is quite a record to be proud of, wouldn't you say? If Saudi Arabia hasn't the ability to purchase a nuclear weapon, so does Iran. All the bombing in the world could not stop Iran from purchasing a bomb, if they so desired.
The claims that Iran has threatened the world is a total fabrication, conceived and spread by the Zionist controlled media. If anyone would care to notice, the fact that the challenged interpretation of Ahmadinejad's alleged threat to Israel is never covered in the Zionist media, is proof enough.
We have a country with a long record of non aggression, being accused of having designs to take overthe ME and the world. Iran has no real naval threat, no long range missiles and an antiquated air force. They are a threat to no country, except in the minds of weak and fearful cowards, the same people who were clamoring for the war in Iraq. No more wars for Israel.
It is interesting to see (based on this article) the Saudis are more concerned about a fellow Muslim nation, that has not started any wars in more than a hundred years, than nuclear armed Israel, who has started (preemptive) wars against other Muslim nations.
The Muslim world is so divided, no wonder the West and Israel walks on them.
Making fun of these guys because of what they look like...yeah....well, how much do we spend on our military?
If axel grease makes your face look black, you can count on the US to either buy $400 an ounce axel grease, or 'invent' black make-up that costs even more.
Who's laughing now?
This is all tongue and cheek. I think our armed forces are the best in the world, and really to compare Saudi Arabia's to ours is unfair. I'm not going to mock someone elses soldiers because of the way they are dressed.
The problem with nukes is that they depend on the least sane one with them not doing something stupid. If you thought North Korea was as low as the bar went on that, it'll get much worse once Iran joins the nuke club.
WWI started from one guy getting killed, which led to one country attacking another one, then everyone else joined in. Tell me that same scenario isn't easy to see with all the fighting going on already over there, except with nukes this time...
MAD was effective with the US and USSR because they had an understanding of what was at stake. These people do not. They are children and don't think past today. They have no idea what tomorrow will bring and act accordingly. Saudi can get weapons now, so the US has been given the green light to bomb Iran. Iran is run by crazy people. NOT religious, but crazy and they must go. The world needs a little peace right now, people all over the world are on the brink and peace can fix most of it. Iran has signed it's own death warrant with this announcement Don't be surprised to wake up and read headlines about a terrible nuclear accident in Tehran with hundreds of thousands killed and dyin.....the beat goes on and on.
Great Atomic Power
Do you fear this man's invention
That they call atomic power
Are we all in great confusion
Do we know the time or hour
When a terrible explosion
May rain down upon our land
Leaving horrible destruction
Blotting out the works of man
Are you ready
For that great atomic power?
Will you rise and meet your Savior in the air?
Will you shout or will you cry
When the fire rains from on high?
Are you ready for that great atomic power?
There is one way to escape it
Be prepared to meet the lord
Give your heart and soul to Jesus
He will be your shielding sword
He will surely stand beside you
And you'll never taste of death
For your soul will fly to safety
And eternal peace and rest
Are you ready
For that great atomic power?
Will you rise and meet your Savior in the air?
Will you shout or will you cry
When the fire rains from on high?
Are you ready for that great atomic power
There's an army who can conquer
All the enemy's great band
It's a regiment of Christians
Guided by the Savior's hand
When the mushroom of destruction
falls in all it's fury great
God will surely save His children
From that awful awful fate
Are you ready
For that great atomic power?
Will you rise and meet your Savior in the air?
Will you shout or will you cry
When the fire rains from on high?
Are you ready for that great atomic power
The Louvin Brothers [1952]
Chris has a point that if you ONLY read MSNBC - points will be bankrupt of actual information.
For instance, an ex- Israeli Mossad Chief, has said that bombing or starting a war with Iran would be "the stupidest thing" to do. In the Mossad circle he is not alone. It is looking like Netanyahu is more unstable than the leaders in Iran.
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/former-cia-official-israe_b_900117.html
Interestingly, it appears that many countries who are not in the know - have said Iran would use nuclear weapons IF they had them - Iran has never stated this - they have only stated that they will close the strait of Hormuz if attacked. Guess what the Israeli government is now concerned about - if they will get nuclear fallout when they bomb Iran.....
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Israelis-Debate-Possible-Fallout-From-Any-Attack-on-Iran-139009379.html
It appears that most agree that Israel will attack THIS YEAR... statement below from first link
Everyone is in accord that Iran does NOT have nuclear weapons now - if they are in development, they are a few years away - so why is Israel bent on war THIS year? Iran has elections coming up, it is likely that the young people in the country who have grown up with satellite television from the US and abroad would elect a President who was for reform and not for making enemies. It seems Israel is not in the mood to get along with Iran even if the Dali Lama was Iran's President. Something just doesn't make sense, oh wait, I forgot - all the US troops are supposed to be home by the end of the year, Israel needs to attack while we are still there and force us into this war.
Israel has no problem bombing innocent civilians, or assassinating one of their own leaders who was for peace (Rabin). This is not looking good for anyone.
Saudi Arabia is finally finding itself in the cross hairs of radicals. Up until now they've played a friend to the West, while playing games in the League of Arab Nations, OPEC, funded various anti-west groups, etc. They've played all the cards they could to make as much as possible, supress their people, quietly support terrorism, and keep their neighbors happy.
Now they are being put in the position where radical Islamists (Muslim Brotherhood) said that this year they are going to start taking on "the kings"(last year was the year of "the regimes"). When Iran gets their nuclear weapons up and ready this year they will have the big stick to threaten everyone in the region. I continue to believe that Iran will attack Israel as soon as possible, but once they've gone there it's not much of a push to attempt to control the oil of the region. They've got Russia and China's support, so it will be hard to control them.
Funny thing that Saudi Arabia will likely go to Packistan for their nukes. They should be able to buy scientists, materials, and weapons pretty cheaply with their deep pockets. I wonder how the UN, the US, and others will deal with their interests. I'd guess it'll end up sounding like this, "Well, they have to protect themselves now that Iran has them."
Judsi-2161644
You are the one that is not making sense. Apparently you are confused. The US is not against the nuclear power plant the Russians built in Iran. That is for civilian power. Just like the power plants here in the US. But, we are against Iran developing nuclear weapons, which is what they are trying to do as a separate thing from their civilian power program. The weapons program includes a host of things ranging from centrifuges making uranium enriched at higher levels than needed for civilian use (a short and easy step away from weapons grade enrichment), to nuclear weapons missile technology, to bomb trigger mechanism, to work on advanced implosion technologies (which when perfected makes it easier to place nukes on smaller missiles that would be capable of hitting places like Tel Aviv). I suggest that you Google the IAEA and read the last two reports they issued on Iran's program. And please, also be informed that in the most recent visit to Iran, the IAEA team was denied access to certain facilities and to individuals knowledgeable about Iran's weapons program.
If their program was truly for peaceful purposes, they would have nothing to hide and would make all of their personnel available for interviews. Please educate yourself a little bit about what is going on before making comments that make little sense.
New Flash: The US is thirty years behind in replacing old nuclear facilities and building new nuclear facilities. Despite what die-hard environmentalists may think, green energy is not a viable base-line energy source, unlike nuclear and fossil fuel fired power plants. But does Iran need nuclear energy for peaceful purposes? Given its oil reserves, Iran's claim lacks credibility. If they had nukes, they'd use them on Israel, but Israel would strike first.
Oh so now nuclear reactors are the same as nuclear bombs. Okay if that's the case, then I argue that the oil and natural gas that you use for energy in your house is the same as napalm.
Since you think nuclear bad, and nuclear reactors = nuclear bombs, so therefore nuclear reactors = bad, I shall argue
napalm = bad, and oil and natural gas = napalm, so therefore oil and natural gas = bad.
See the flawed logic?
John - as another poster reported said on NV - yes, Iran has oil but it does NOT have refineries...it can refine only 2% of it's oil, that is not enough to support a large nation's electrical, etc. needs. It does need nuclear energy to support the country.
Additionally - Iran has the same problem as Saudi Arabia, it is difficult to refine "desert" oil - it is cheaper to sell it "as-is," then to try and refine it.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704436004576299421455133398.html
Egad, with all these countries getting nukes pretty soon we will only be able to invade Canada and Mexico :(
Life won't be worth living without the constant carnage of war.
@ Charles the Hammerhead
I do believe nuclear weapons are powered by nuclear fission, not fusion and unless you're referring to cold fusion, having a regular fusion reactor would be pretty bad since it would just melt everything around it.
=]
op2388
Nuclear leads to Thermonuclear. It's simply the next inevitable step. Both processes (fission and fusion) involve the atomic nucleus. And for your information, cold fusion thus far is a failed hypothesis.
In escalation there will always be the move to bigger and more powerful. Remember that dominion is obtained by whomever creates the loudest bang.
By all appearances Iran's secretive program is taking the first step, not yet the second. Saudi Arabia is threatening to take the fist step if Iran tests a device. Israel has taken 1st and 2nd steps. It has only been since 1945 that we have been in the nuclear age. This is a blip of time.
My original point was about the developement of nuclear or implicitly, thermonuclear devices. If Iran is willing to allow full UN monitoring of a civilian nuclear power program then there would be no discussion of an escallating arms race, and this article would never have been written.
TO: MICHAEL-595198 who wrote:
I wanna puke!
It was Republicans who put 2 oil men in the White House, Bush & Cheney, who then used the full forced of the United States Military to overthrow a foreign government so that Bush & Cheney could drill for oil in Iraq.
So don't even think about trying to blame President Obama for all the B.S. Republicans created.
Obama / Biden 2012
"
JK-4363698
Where are all the ridiculous comments saying "America needs to stop spending money on the military", "America needs to stay out of other countries' business", "Bush warmongers".
Keep your head in the sand while radical nations develop weapons of MASS destruction. This is one issue that you can't take a chance on misjudging their intention. If you're wrong and do nothing, then it's TOO LATE."
BECAUSE THIS IS AN ACTUAL CRISIS!!! IRAQ WASNT!!! duh!!! PEOPLE ARE STUPID! eSP THIS COMMENT!
The Saudis will act quickly to get a nuke!! That shouldn't take long, a couple of days in Brussels meeting with some of Obamas team along with a promise of increases oil exports and stock options.
Blackkettle-saying that the country of Israel is responsible for Rabin being killed by a fanatic is akin to saying that the US is resposible for both Kennedys, King, Lincoln being killed. Try saying something intelligent on the subject.
canon,
That would be a DIRECT violation of the NPT.
Darn good thing we have those genious leaders of ours Obama and Biden who were elected because of their excellent foreign policy backgrounds! It could be so much worse....bwah ha ha ha ha!!!!!
Except I believe that US is not drilling for oil in Iraq or at least did not get new contracts since the invasion. BTW, who did a regime change in Libya and who is getting that oil? Heck, part of the sanctions with Iran is that the EU now believes that it can replace the oil it was getting from Iran because it will get it from the newly open contracts in Libya. So it would not hurt as much to shut off the Iranian oil spicket.
But that being said, it is interested that people complain so much about national statergic issues that arise around the supply of a limited resource like oil or the creation of a nuclear power facility. And they are doing that on a device that requires a power source that is being generated from the burning of that limited resource or through the fisson process of that power facility. Without that disputed resource, they would not even be able to make their voice be heard here.
richard,
well the EU did actually put in most of the money for that 'regime change' in Libya.
Ok, I admit. I lol'd at this post.
Dont believe everything you read, or hear! The US Government wants and needs war....who is at the head of the US Government....Christians and Jews....notice who we are always at war with! Look at Santorum.....he claims that we need a 1000 year war to eradicate islam......this whole thing is Propaganda.
I used to think that the US govt was the best thing in the world.....till i realized they start soooo much @!$%#, and we end up in stupid wars, and that is why we are hated.
Lets get out of their countries....let them fight eachother......lets focus on ourselves! Israel can defend themselves.....i say fcuk em all......Lets fix our selves.....if we dont fix ourselves....we wont be able to help anyone in the future anyway....
No one is perfect, not them and not us! But we dont need to tell them how to live their lives either. And while they might be doing something....i dont believe Iran is a threat to the US with their building of ONE (hypothetical) bomb....
This country loves how stupid we are.....they control most of the US with FEAR! Very easy to manipulate when you are scared!
American Girl-724855
HA HA the blame game goes on 4 years later....OWN IT GURL
On to the subject: Perhaps it IS finally time to leave that part of the world and let them all look at themselves holding nuclear weapons? That is as long as we keep OUR military ready and our defenses AT THE MAX! Holy sh##t if those people over there get nuclear. GO ISRAEL...take out those scientists and hold it back as long as possible.
But Obama is doing nothing about it either....he is a puppet!!!! Sorry to break it to you! Obama is controlled by the establishment...he doesnt have a back bone, and will do what ever he is told to do! and unfortunately that is more war!
But Obama is doing nothing about it either....he is a puppet!!!! Sorry to break it to you! Obama is controlled by the establishment...he doesnt have a back bone, and will do what ever he is told to do! and unfortunately that is more war!
Umm, my guess is you're either 65 yrs. old or about 20 yrs. old...lol
Great!
Battle plans of the Islamic religious Nazi beasts: Sunnis vs Shiites.
As world's 80 percent Islamic radicalism and terrorism are due to Sunnis, I am sure many like I would give only moral support Shiites, lesser evils for now!
In battles: we would count the dead!
Jonathan-1917156
I do not think that is true, but I will give you that until a study is done on the actual cost in numbers 10 years from now we will not know. I will point out that I believe that it was said that of the 150 some missiles fired in Libya on the first week, it was said that 115 came from the US 6th Fleet. I would also point out that most of the sorties for the duration was flown either from Italy or from the US 6th Fleet. I also believe that most of the mid-air refueling was done by the US Air Force. Than I think there is the fact that about 70% of the NATO military budget is funded by the United States. Do not get me wrong, Britain and France both provided a lot to the War on Libya, but because of the United States GDP and technologies levels for situations, the United States tend to be proportionally larger
Umm, my guess is you're either ignorant, or dumb...lol
Umm, my guess is you're either ignorant, or dumb...lol
you cannot BUY nukes you morons..
you got enough money you can buy anything.
Just keep telling yourself that while your head is in the sand... money can buy anything.
Did you read the article? They apparently have a deal with Pakistan (who already have nukes) to buy warheads directly from them should Iran successfully develop their own.
They can buy a Bush, works almost as good, but the fallout seems to come back to hit America.
hey thefreecountry - you can't buy nuclear weapons? I gotta say I just love it when stupid people call other people morons. The U.S., you imbecile, has provided nuclear weapons for Turkey, Germany, Italy, and Canada to name a few places. When the U.S.S.R. fell they sold nuclear weapons to the highest bidders. When Saudi Arabia is ready to buy, Pakistan or someone else will be ready to sell.
I wouldn't be surprised if the US sells them. Our energy plan for the past few decades has been the phrase "Saudi Arabia" written on a piece of paper and circled a few times.
What is your proof of such a statement? We have STATIONED nuclear missles on foreign soil, but that is different than providing or selling them because they remain under US control. Germany can't decide to fire off a short-range nuclear missle on its own.
why do you say that, we sold them to Israel, and the equipment to make more and now they will not sell but would use it against who ever attacks them. Russia and china both have them and don't think they haven't provided some strong help to them like china did north Korea.
like the article stated their is a agreement for them to buy from the packi's and they will because money talks and bullsh*t walks and they want money or otherwise they would have told us to get lost long time ago and all they are doing right now is raising the rate up with all of their bull.
They have over 400 years of readily available oil reserves.
They can pretty much buy whatever they want.
Tony, we did not sell nucler bombs to Israel they developed them on their own. US new/ suspected that the program was in the works, but did not provide equipment or know how (which was not needed in the first place). The country that did provide material to Israely nuclear program was France. The only nation that US activily helped in development of nuclear arms is Great Briton and that is only because British scientists worked on Manhatan project.
Isrial bought nukes from the U.S.
I wonder if the US can get 15 trillion dollars for our nukes from them. It would solve 2 problems - we can pay down our national debt and get rid of all of that radioactive waste that we need to dispose of as well.
Radioactive waste is not a nuke.
Dammit, need more wars, not enough...Need excuse to destroy another country. Must....have.....carnage......
Scotland! They *could* be developing nukes. Let's chastize them in the press and get an opposition group to claim atrocities. Then we send in the death squads!
Between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, fountainheads of Islamic radicalism and terrorism, anything is possible.
The stage has been cleared. Saudis will buy nukes from Sunnis of Pakistan. So Paki nukes are on auction blocks.
Shiites (forming 18 percent in Pakistan) should steal Paki nukes and hand them over to Iran.
Nice to know that Pakistan is one nation.
Yes that is what Saudi Arabia and other Sunni ruling bigoted barbarians, oil companies and their partners in the US, Britain and European nations want to imagine.
Let the writing on the wall be clear: a religion, society and nation degenerated to the worst levels vanish at the fastest rate despite all the best of Allahs, Mohammads and others.
The interesting thing in all this is that Pakistan supplied the design of the centrifuges to Iran. The same centrifuges and nuclear technology that it acquired using Saudi money. Now if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, Pakistan will take even more money from Saudi Arabia to supply them the bombs. After all they are one nation, wink wink. I think both Iran and Saudi Arabia need a new brother ;) Just saying.
What you can't buy with money, you can buy with a lot of money.
Romilio et al >>>>>>> Yeah! Israel started all the trouble when they hit Islam back !!!
"we shall not have a mine shaft gap!"... a famous quote from Dr. strangelove or how i learned to stop worrying and love the bomb...
My favorite part is the entire exchange between the Soviet Premier and the President. All we hear is the president.
Why is there a picture of Darth Vader accompanying the photo?
There's a lot of that going around.
The Pic reminded me of the 3 Stooges.... haha what a laugh "hey Mo, hey Larry" eeeeeehhhh
What a racist pic...that blackface crap went out in the 30's.
Yes, true I feel offended!
I thought it was the blue man group trying out a new look...
Have them get a bomb. Once everybody gets nukes, the world will be in peace. Iran will get nukes. It is a matter of time. Israel should figure out their problem by themselves.
Full nuclear proliferation. MAD on a global scale is the only thing that will keep the peace.
I agree with this:
I do not agree that this will lead to peace. That's based on the nation-state as the sole actor. The likelihood of nuclear terrorism increases hugely as more countries get bombs. It's already bad news that Pakistan has them, given the game they're playing and that some of the world's most wanted terrorists have been hiding inside that country. I'm actually more concerned about Pakistan's bombs than Iran's.
I think that, given it is only a matter of time before Iran has the bomb, we should really be looking at ways to work toward normal diplomatic and trade relationships with them, instead of ratcheting up the sanctions and rhetoric, which only encourages them and allows them to use anti-American sentiment as a political device. It would make our other allies in the region safer. It has the benefit of decreasing their motivation for a nuclear deterrent in the first place. As it is now, they have absolutely nothing to lose.
As an American, I could care less about "Rogue" agents or terrorists. Let's just be plain and upfront, "If someone in your country comes to our and uses a nuclear weapon, we will wipe your country and culture from the face of the planet." Police your own crazies and we'll police ours.
I agree with you. The more nations get them, the higher the chance that one of them will be used by a rogue to cause harm to Americans. And, I will not stand for that.
Israel has them because they're probably going to need them
trust2112 if you think these crazies don't have the support of Russia and China you better think again. If they launch nukes and we launch nukes...well....neither you or I will be around to see the end result. You can talk a big game until the nukes start flying but as soon as they do you will be crying like a little baby.
I agree...let them have their nukes...all it does is level the playing field and hopefully keeps peace.
We will always have wars. Nuclear weaponry does not (and will not) 'keep the peace'. Full proliferation would just increase the odds that someone would go nutty and pull the trigger. Eventually, we need to eliminate all nuclear weapons. We just can't do it yet.
That's as silly a statement as any. Crimes are committed in America every day. Obviously, we are not able to 'police our crazies'.
Your idea of deterrence is that we will murder tens of millions of innocent foreigners if someone murders hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans? Really?
Have you considered that a peron who murders hundreds of thousands of innocent people may not CARE if you emulate his crime on a larger scale? We're not fighting the Bork, you know.
Yeah, fighting a war to obtain peace is like screwing as a form of birth control. There is no way to peace, peace is the way. Are we as a species destined to exterminate ourselves?
You bet!
But let us, infidels of the US, Britain, European nations and other non-Muslim nations keep away from their desert wars.
US and many have the habit of dancing along with Saudis, Pakis and Israel and some more.
Saudis will get the nukes! But how will they use them?
Saudi rulers and 5000 princes and princesses since the beginning are used to do battles in harems, unarmed civilians and minority.
They outsource major defense and attacks on their nations to the US, British, European nations, Pakis and others!
In Mecca/Medina, 500 Shiites captured their holy place barred to infidels.
Brave Saudi soldiers battling girls (most preferred ones), women and others in 100s, could not quell the rebellion.
So they outsourced the attacks and removal of Shiites from their holy places to their Paki and Jordanian soldiers.
These are the people acquiring nukes! They can nuke their harems at most!
you cannot BUY nukes you morons, it's not like when it comes to cars or TVs... and you could not build them on your own in a 1000 years
They are not as hard to acuire as one might think. When the russian goverment collasped several of theirs disapeared they latter turned up on the black market.
freecountry - you should read a book sometime and educate yourself putz.
There seems to be only one moron here. Do you honestly think that the "suitcase nukes" that came from Russia and are on the black market right now are not for sale? Do you really think that it is impossible for a country to build them? If North Korea can do it, any country can. Kaci's right, you should read a book or two and educate yourself.
So we never have to worry about nukes or dirty bombs from al quahdi? I ll let TSA and the CIA know.
thefreecountry said:
you cannot BUY nues you morons, it's not like when it comes to cars or TVs... and you could not build them on your own in a 1000 years"
RIF - Reading Is Fundamental
Read article again. Look for key words "agreement" "Pakistan" "one country" for where to buy, and a reason why.
(though I'm assuming - just like the similar post farther up - that this is actually someone trolling)
Sure they can buy nukes. If you have enough money, somebody will sell whatever you want. And the Saudis know this. After all, they bought two US Presidents (father/son package deal, even) and look how well that worked out for them?
If all countries got nuclear weapons, no one would use them. It's the same logic gun proponents use: With everyone armed, the world is safer. No one will want to pull a gun on anyone else, as demonstrated every day in America's inner cities and ethnic urban neighborhoods.
If you look at the states that implemented a concieled carry law the crime rate has dropped dramatically but i am sure the truth makes left wingers go crazy
I want a nuclear bomb for valentine's day .Does anyone have a bomb for sale ? $327.42 all i have if its not enough i take a half bomb ,a quarter or just 2 grams plutonium .
MAD (Mutually Asssured Destruction) keeping the world's population safe from nuclear weapons for over 66 years!
Uh Jay I think the boys in black suits are going to crawl up your ass with a telescope now Watch yourself bro. But other than that you made me laugh so hard coffee spewed on the screen
"An armed society is a polite society."
This argument brings back memories of the "All in the Family" skit where Archie Bunker is being interviewed and he had the solution to stopping the "sky jackings." His solution was to arm all the passengers when they board and disarm them when they disembark. Now that's funny. I don't care who you are.
Optimist you're talking about Iran. A country full of people who aren't afraid to die by wiping us or Israel off the map. MAD might work on sane people but here you already have people blowing their self up with dynamite so dying by nukes would probably be a bigger pleasure for them.
you have to remember this is based on religion. religion that promotes a world cleansed threw sacred violence they will us nukes if they get them because they like us believe that there god will protect them. BTW i am a "left winger" on most stuff but im all for gun rights.
Hey Jay, I ll sell you a picture of one on EBay. The going bid is $327.41 now.
For some strange reason, people believe that you can stop violence, killing, and wars by eliminating weaponry, and yet everyone who doesn't have it advocates acquiring it in the name of self-preservation and progress, but everyone who has it advocates stopping it for the fear of proliferation and annihilation, which by definition is an oxymoron. Guns and nukes don't kill people. People kill people. If the world was filled with nukes and guns but there were no people, those and all weaponry would be rendered useless. If people don't kill people with nukes and guns, they will use rocks, knives, clubs, tree branches, ropes, bows and arrows, fire, or whatever else is available to them. If nothing is made readily available, they can always use their hands. Such has been the case since history was first recorded when Cain slew Abel, and I'm pretty sure they didn't have guns or nukes at that time. The question is not "how" you kill someone, but rather "why"? That rationalization is being proliferated by governments throughout the world today, and the people that they govern are accepting it, which is an even greater tradgedy.
MAD works for logical people....remember, Islamic extremists advocate blowing each other up to kill Israelis, Americans, Europeans, other Muslims, etc. The modern concept of terrorism is all about suicide. THey think that they will go to heaven if they kill themselves and take others with them.
So the idea of MAD blows up in your face (figuretively and unfortunately, literally) when you're dealing with Middle Eastern Islamic states.
yes, let's think about that. one gang has guns. a rival gang has guns. is there any proof from history that they would use them on each other? that would never happen, they would be afraid of reprisal. please note sarcasm, for those who couldn't see it.
And the elements therein will burn up.....
Saint Atilla
So what does this mean for the U.S. now? Iran is supposedly our biggest rival in the middle-east currently, but if Saudi Arabia tries to obtain weapons should we try to form an alliance with them? Of course that wouldn't work, because Saudis were the nationalities of the men who hijacked commercial aircrafts on September 11, 2001 and destroyed the World Trade Centers in New York City and are responsible for taking 3000 American lives. Americans wouldn't stand for that. However, we don't want to start a rift with the Saudis too, do we? Now we know Pakistan has Saudi Arabia's backing, so where do we stand with Pakistan now?
More and more proof that our involvement in this mess is more threatening to our national security than staying at home and protecting our homelands. If the states involved in these middle-eastern nuclear preventive-war talks don't like each other, for whatever reasons that they may be, so be it. Even if we try to police the world, we're clearly terrible at it and it's a fruitless effort on our behalf. Let's get the heck out of there before we find ourselves in the most destructive mess in world history.
Besides, even if nothing happens and this is all talk and speculation between countries, we still borrow billions of dollars, from the financial scam that is the federal reserve, every year that we don't have to spend. It's a debt that actually will only be paid back at this point if we did start a war, and maybe those are our real intentions. I don't have hope for our policies and I hope more people (Americans, in particular) start to wake up
The terrorists who caused 911 of Saudi descent? So was Osama Bin Laden. They spent their lives in Bin Ladens terrorist cell located in Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Once they were trained for their mission they traveled back through Iran, and Iraq to Saudi Arabia Both Iran and Iraq were aware of who, and what they were. The Saudis on the otherhand were stupid. So were the Americans. They got designated to learn how to fly jet aircraft at a US Air Force base in Florida guarded by US Marines. They learned takeoff procedures but never finished the training. They didn't bother to learn how to land a jet. Were they actually Saudis? Well I guess their credentials said so.
Stirring trouble again , Demetrius ,to get us into war with Iran,ha ? Glad you mentioned it. 9/11 was done by Bush and Cheney to keep us in endless wars till we are broke and implode. They and McCain , Lieberman, Wolfowitz and others should be tried for treason. In time they will be. The Towers were brought down by dynamite as well as bldg 7 which was not even hit. Only in a fairy tale buldings would fall that neatly. Ask Trump !!! He knows and anyone with half a brain.
Anyone thinking that we only have to worry about rising oil prices if these religious giants go at it, step back and remember an incident that happened only a few months ago. Exploding nuclear power plants in Japan. The experts said, don't worry we be safe. The truth be we all in the USA, Canada and some parts of Russia got a good dose of radiation fallout and it is now in the food chain. Quit buying fresh caught fish from Pacific rim when this happened. Just because our hair and lips didn't fall out doesn't mean you didn't get a dose. Because of the destructive, suicidal nature of Islam, " yes they will cut off their nose to spite their face." To Muslims it is not about oil but about religious domination. USA...get your solar and wind powered grid a going,FAST AND QUICK.
Joe you should really watch how and why the Twin Towers collapsed. Those buildings were never designed to handle those jets crashing into them with basically all the fuel still in them. The heat from that caused the steel to buckle and once it collapsed at the top had no choice but to continue down. You sound like an Obama sheep. Maybe you should grow half a brain and realize what Obama is doing to this country.
@Joe...at first I thought you were being sarcastic. Then read the rest of your post. How can I say this without insulting you??? Not possible....you are just a naive fool. Not to mention the 3 fools who "liked" your comment. Where is the "not like" comment button when you need it.
Just wanted to correct your typo. We are borrowing "TRILLIONS" from the Fed each year.
Sunni Shia rivalry is created by the west. There was no rivalry between the two in the past for centuries. Take the example of Pakistan where Shia and Sunni intermarry and have lived together for years. Same is true for India and B-Desh. The only rivalry is between Arab and Persians which is not based on religon. The west wants Sunni and Shia's to fight so they can weaken Islam as was the case behind Iran Iraq war where west supplied arms to both sides.
It might be a bit extreme to say that the Sunni - Shia rivalry was created by the West since it dates back over 13 centuries. But you are safe to say that the Iraq conflict did restart a Sunni - Shia rivalry that had been dormant for years.
Your point about Arab - Persian conflict is well taken. As proof, it is interesting that the Saudis were not interested in nukes with the Israelis having them since the 1960s. It is only when the Iranians (Persians) threaten to have them do the Saudis express interest.
If anyone starts shooting off nukes,then bend over and kiss it goodbye. The pinnacle of destruction and pollution,man made! The middle East could well end up being the "showcase" of stupidity for mankind.
if it gets so bad you have to kill for food that you can't grow anymore, @!$%# you are better off taking a gun and shooting yourself in the heart, no mess that way.
Art what do you mean "The middle East could well end up being"? They are NOW.
It already is.
Nukes will be here until the end of time. From what I understand there is no way to un-enrich uranium. And no way to truly dispose of them. Its just a matter of time before some 3rd world country lets one go. There is no doubt that iran would use them against Isreal, wich in my oppinion would be disasterous for the world in general.
Iran wants them because Israel has them. Saudi Arabia and the UAE will want them if Iran gets them. This is what keeps the world safe. MAD (Mutually Asssured Destruction) keeping the world's population safe from nuclear weapons for over 66 years!
we will not allow iran to get that far...
another war is inevitable...
No way, you're wrong, "another war" by this war mongering, dishonest, hypocritical, "religiously" bigoted "government" is not inevitable, any more than insanity is although we live in a paranoid, insanely motivated world of existence on this planet, there's always hope of something better.
Great! Now we might see the Shias and the Sunnis each with nukes. Maybe they will settle their differences at last. Might be the Israelis who are the safest of all, because I don't see any muslim country vaporizing that holy "rock" they worship so much. Insanity at its max here.
Citing an unidentified Saudi Arabian source... not to be confused with an operative for the Military Industrial Complex. As I said a few weeks ago we will continue to see stories like this fear mongering crap....unidentified sources, unconfirmed reports, loosely translated, out of context BS, once or twice weekly until somebody pulls the trigger and wham there you go another profit stream is created for the MIC.
Great for the US unemployment numbers every precious young man or woman killed is one more that won't be on the unemployed list.
Have a listen folks it's WMD's in Iraq all over again, I just hope the Pres. can stay the course and keep the USA (and ultimately Australia) out of any more foreign interventions on behalf of the profit stream of the MIC.
Fear mongering? The Saudi's getting nukes if Iran gets them should take away fear. Read a book.
Iran wants them because Israel has them. Saudi Arabia and the UAE will want them if Iran gets them. This is what keeps the world safe.
MAD (Mutually Asssured Destruction) keeping the world's population safe from nuclear weapons for over 66 years!
Right on the money, Yank. Henry Ford Sr. predicted what is happening in 1920 in his book.
Joe-3496279, you have no grip on reality. Conspiracy theory?.....Really Joe?
Susan.....obviously you are not paying attention ...... the conspiracy is scaring people like you enough to start shooting aT ghosts ...... so they can get deeper in to your pockets and you will think you are being helped.....it's called a PROTECTION RACKET and the M.I.C. are running it world wide and doing quite nicely thank you very much.
You think these people whose profits are derived from war are not going to do every thing they can to keep up the rumor of war and the actual shooting, you are kidding yourself. With Iraq finished, Afghanistan winding down and because Congress can't stop putting their nose in the trough long enough to work out how to cut the deficit without cutting the profit stream of the M.I.C. there is now the automatic Offense Department cuts that are really going to knife in to their profits.....they need another enemy and another WAR and soon......Iran seems like a good candidate they have been on the bench for a long time might as well get them into the game.
Read a history book for Christ's Sake!
Vince.... the only bad thing about MAD........ is the D......and I would not like to see Mutual Accidental Destruction because some nut like Newt decided he could escape to the moon so he might as well test out a couple of those buttons.....and beside it is Mutually Assured Fear that keeps the Military Industrial Complex in business and it's got to stop or it will just be a matter of time before there is nothing left but the cockroaches.
JUST KEEP YOUR EYES OPEN.....THE BS WILL COME OUT TWICE A WEEK UNTIL SOMEBODY STARTS SHOOTING.
I wonder where Iran would test a nuke?
We can only HOPE Washington DC in the Middle of the NIGHT!... Happy Blasting!...
I'm sure that they have the technology to dig a hole in the desert. The blueprints for building a shovel are even easier to acquire than the blueprints for building a bomb! Can you believe it?
When someone tests a nuke who goes in to view the results? Cameras are not an option as they would be vaporized if the damn thing works right.
The answer to your question dumbass american: right in the middle of Israel!
BCOHIO banned for death wishing.
We don't know where Iran would test a nuke, dumbass, because they don't have a nuke to test. The fact that their uranium enrichment process is constantly monitored by the IAEA, I would say it is something that is a long way off, if ever.
Any test would be revealed by siesmology monitoring, which goes on 24/7, 365 days a year. It would be impossible to test any nuclear devise without the whole world knowing.
Iran "doesn't seem to have the same North Korea-like obsession with developing nuclear weapons. That's nowhere to be found in the [IAEA] evidence," says Shannon Kile, head of the Nuclear Weapons Project at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
January 2011: When Meir Dagan steps down as director of Israel’s Mossad spy agency, he says that Iran would not be able to produce a nuclear weapon until 2015. "Israel should not hasten to attack Iran, doing so only when the sword is upon its neck," Mr. Dagan warned. Later he said that attacking Iran would be "a stupid idea.... The regional challenge that Israel would face would be impossible."
February 2011: National intelligence director James Clapper affirms in testimony before Congress that “Iran is keeping the option open to develop nuclear weapons in part by developing various nuclear capabilities and better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so," Mr. Clapper said. "We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons."
I would say, if you can interpolate anything from the comments of these men, you would have to conclude Iran is not working on nuclear weapons. Anyone saying anything different on these forums, is talking through their anal cavity or just regurgitating Israeli propaganda. Iraq did not have WMD and Iran deos not have a nuke program.
When are we going to learn-USGovernment and U.S. oil cartel invest in alternate clean energy - stop buying forign oil the let the middle east bomb themselves back to biblical times and start over again. I think I am correct in assuming the 99%'rs would be far more willing to spend tax money on this than colonies on the moon, mission to mars, and bridges to nowhere. Anyone else think like I do?
These Bleeding heart liberal socialist will be the Death of us ALL!... I remember THE COLD WAR!, and it was NOT Good!....... The BIG Diffrence here is Iran will USE WHAT THEY GET!... Obammy is a FOOL and HAS CAUSED NOTHING BUT CHAOS in the Middle East!........ Israel should Strike and POUND Irans Bases until they have Destroyed THEM!..... This is ANOTHER ONE OF Obammys FAILURES BIG TIME!...........
LMFAO!!! bcohio read what you wrote - first it was Bush League that stirred the pot by going after Iraq with no justification what so ever. Obama took over just as the effects of the "work" of the drunken, AWOL, mission accomplished, CINC - who managed to start illegal wars and totally destroy our economy. And what is LOLFDF is after all your screaming you want Isreal to do the dirty work. It is so great this constitutional right called freedom of speech it has made for more comedy on Newsvine than anything else in the world.
@bcohio- you are partialy correct about Isreal strikeing first. Although I am not an obbamma suporter I dont see this as his fault. It was foretold in the BIBLE sometime between 2-5 thousand years ago.
You Know NOTHING ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE SPOUTING OFF ABOUT!... Just liberal socialist talking points!, What a PUNK!.... Smoke another one you'll be OK!...
BCOHIO - I think you are the one who doesn't know what they are talking about. Course that's because your comment is solely aimed at Obama without any factual information what so ever. However, we have grown accustomed to conservatives not knowing anything worth value.
BCOHIO, you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
Fear not. Obama said we should be nice to our Islamic Brothers and they will return the favor. And the Muslim Brotherhood is a just a bunch of good ole blokes.
Yah!, If your a Liberal Socialist Muslim LIKE Obammy!....
Try reading up on the Muslim Brotherhood. You might be surprised at what they stand for.
If he would just show his birth certificate Iran would be nice and the economy would get better. Amirite?
We cannot allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.
I don't mind the idea of Saudi Arabia having them, but Iran; HELL TO THE NO !!!
It will be World War III because they will use it.
We need to stay out of it. We're broke- we've shed more than enough blood and money in those useless sand pits for people who hate us and look down on us. Let them nuke each other = best possible outcome.
Nonsense, no country wants to blow themselves up. World War III is more likely to start if either Israel or the US tries to strike Iran. If someone hits Iran, they could retaliate with strikes against Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, the US would step in to prevent a complete Iranian invasion of Saudi Arabia, Russia will step in on Iran's side to even the odds. This is how a World War starts.
Iran wants them because Israel has them. Saudi Arabia and the UAE will want them if Iran gets them. This is what keeps the world safe.
MAD (Mutually Asssured Destruction) keeping the world's population safe from nuclear weapons for over 66 years!
SonarGuy...is that because 15/19 of the 9/11 Highjackers came from Saudi Arabia??? or is it because Bin Laden was a Saudi???
I could imagine if Just one Iranian has been involved in 9//11 you warmonger trolls would be posting ad nauseam that Iran sent terrorists to Attack us 9/11
But almost all the 9/11 Highjackers were from Saudi Arabia....the guy who our Govt tells us was behind 9/11 is from Saudi Arabia....and yet its OK for the Saudis to have nukes....you BS meter is flashing red.
No terrorists attacks from the Iranians here on American soil....ever.....
do you know all the terror and extreme is coming from Saudi Arabia
Wake up folks, for all of those who bashed Pres. Bush and so on There is weapons of mass destruction out there and they are not in the hands of some stable countries. They could be pointing at us with some fanatic with their finger on the fire button!
Pointing at us? Iran has absolutely no way to deliver a nuclear payload to the US.
So lets not worry about it until they do?
Like having a hole in your roof but not doing anything about it because it is not raining today.
No, it's more like replacing a perfectly good roof that isn't leaking rather than spending that money and effort on replacing the plumbing that doesn't work. We have far more pressing problems facing us right now than the possibility that Iran might be able to attack us with nukes fifty or more years in the future.
Good thing that most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Not sure what that has to do with the topic at hand. I can, however, simulatneously pat my head and rub my stomach.
Mad worked only because it was between two civilized? countries. Arm the Middle East with nukes and it all over. One of those countries is dumb enough to use it against their own people, oops.
Well at least it is a mistake these regimes will only make once. And once the middle east is a radioactive wasteland maybe there will be some effort to come up with an energy plan for the US.
Prag: and meanwhile we'll all have unsafe levels of strontium in our dairy products for a generation. If you were alive when the US and France were testing H-Bombs in the South Pacific, you have unsafe levels of strontium in your bones right now. And people wonder why cancer levels are rising.
What if ONE missle made into the U.S. would you want to be living were it hits?
roc: since they don't have missiles capable of reaching us, I'm not really worried about it. I tend to worry more about things that can, ya know, actually happen.
Once again, the uber-wealthy spoiled brats in charge in the middle east can't get along. It's almost like cliques of rich kids on an elementary school playground comparing notes: "Well, if you have a Porsche collection, then I will acquire a Lamborghini collection- so there!" "If you get nukes, that's unacceptable. I need them too! Mommy!"
Except this is the best situation that could be. We Americans should be tired of wasting boatloads of money on these useless sandpits and spoiled brat wealthy "elites" running the middle eastern countries. Pull the plug, help America first.
Let them nuke each other. The best possible outcome. We have shed enough blood and more than enough money over there. They either get along with each other, or we should sit back and let them kill each other, period. They are all wildly rich, they are all wildly useless. And that goes for every middle eastern "nation".
Time to heal America- we have more than enough problems to deal with.
I agree, But Why let them SEND THAT Fall out around the WORLD!???????. Lets Bomb them Back to the stone age, and that would not take much!.... 20 B52s and 2 days of Carpet Bombing Should DO THE TRICK!... I'm talking 24/7 for two DAYS....... I say unleash The DOGS OF WAR!.. It's Time for SHOW AND TELL!..
Way to go, "BCO", I agree 110%.
Ohiodude,
Too much chest beating can crack ribs. Be careful there. Anyway, that show of bravado is just a genetic left-over from your gorilla days.
The US is not like Iran, in that we need to be watched because we want to build another nuclear facility. We can build as many as we want. We are hell bent on using them to take out the rest of the world. Yes, we did use them in WWII. but that was NOT to destroy Japan. That was to stop the war, or Millions more people would have been killed. Dropping the bombs in WWII saved Millions of lives. People need to stop trying to use the dropping of the bombs in WWII against us, and stop trying to compare Iran to the US.
That is supposed to be NOT hell bent.
BCOHIO- What are you, 12 years old?? The whole, "let's just nuke 'em" mentality would lead to far more horror and devastation than you are capable of realizing. And I don't mean just for Iran.
God, go read a book or two.
".....24/7 for 2 days..." Yeah, it'll be THAT simple....sure......
A friend of mine was taken in the aftermath of the Iranian Hostage Crisis. They "collected" many Americans but did not add them to the official list as they had enough public captives. Due to a serious illness he was let go through the Israeli Embassy after a few months. Orthodox Jews lived in Iran at the time with no fear whatsoever. That all changed after their revolution that we gave the green light to on in two ways: 1) we removed listening devices pointed at Russia, and 2) Carter waited many weeks to take a call from the Shah of Iran to congratulate him. It signaled that we would not mind a regime change.
So far, there has been a massive ignorance of the Middle East shown on this board when people speak of America's enemies in Iran. Go 50 miles outside of Tehran, which houses more people that NYC and has over 100,000 prostitutes that the leaders allow to work and interpret the Koran in a way such that they are just "making them men happy and fulfilling their obligations as Islamic women", and the leaders outside the cities is he who controls the water well.
The mullahs travel with 20-100 body guards as they know they are hated. It is a totalitarian regime, which is the road America is on right now so we have that in common. When you discuss Iran, whooch is widely secularized and loved the Shah because despite being a brutal dictator, he contained those of the ilk of the Muslim Brotherhood who have wanted to install Sharia Law worldwide since 1928 when they were formed by Hassan al-Banna, you might want to speak of the right enemy. They are not "Iran", they are the leaders of The Islamic Republic of Iran.
Obama just handed Egypt to the Muslim Brotherhood, which is not on the terrorist list as they helped the Bushes form the Mujaheddin with Islamic Nazis we imported into America from Belarus after WW II, despite acting like the SS there.
The Islamic Republic of Iran...destroy it, not Iran.
One Irish Catholic's opinion.
A thought, what if some of those missles are pointed at us?
Today's MSNBC article warns us of how bad it would be if Iran gets a Nuclear weapon...
And yesterday's MSNBC article was about how bad Israel is for using Iranian insurgents(called them terrorist) to kill Iran's Nuclear scientist...
So this tells me, that liberals realize deep down Iran should not get a Nuclear weapon, but on the other hand, Israel and the US should leave them alone and let them build one...
That sounds like military intelegince to me
So only liberals realize deep down Iran should not get a Nuclear weapon, but on the other hand, Israel and the US should leave them alone and let them build one?
We're broke - why should we keep protecting the extremely wealthy elites in the sand kingdoms? Heal America first. Let them all get nukes and kill each other. Who cares? America should only act if the US is in danger. Iran CANNOT send a missile to the US.
America first!
Yes, only liberals are confused on what we should do. Conservatives support Israel and the taking out of Iranian Nuclear plants...
Why do Conservatives support Israel?
Why NOT!... These people are the ONLY People in the middle that just want to trade and live in PEACE!..If they were MUSLIM ALL WOULD BE RIGHT WITH THE WORLD!... People Just DO NOT UNDERSTAND!???????.... The Muslims Belive That IF YOUR NOT MUSLIM YOU MUST DIE!... Thats What THIS IS ALL ABOUT!.........
Because conservatives don't turn their backs on a freinds...
Nor do conservatives apologize for it either...
IRAN IS DEVELOPING A NEW MISSILE THAT CAN REACH THE EASTERN US. I doubt that they are dumb enough to use it though.
Iran wants them because Israel has them. Saudi Arabia and the UAE will want them if Iran gets them. This is what keeps the world safe.
MAD (Mutually Asssured Destruction) keeping the world's population safe from nuclear weapons for over 66 years!
Why do liberals support Israel?
To get Jewish money and their votes!!!! One of Obama's top contributors is head of a US-Jewish group.
Hey guys....the bus is here! If you don't get going, you'll be late for school!
C'mon kids! Grab your bookbags, put your shoes on and stop making immature statements about topics you know nothing about!!!
QUICK!! THE BUS IS HERE!!!!
@Plotinus- good point I hadn't thought about that mosque on the temple site. They may not but then again if the dome was nuked they would use it as a rallying card to incite musslim violence world wide mostly directed at Isreal and us here in the USA. One could bet the farm on one fact, we would get the blame. They would find a way to make look like our fault.
Sorta reminds me of Country Joe and the Fish, I'm fixing to die rag.
Are they coming in from Los Angeles...
I seriosly do not know. Why doesn't Saudi Arabia already have nuclear weapons?
Why would they want them? It would be an offensive move to the peace and security of the Blue Earth, also their own people. However, Iran is a serious threat to humanity, and to Saudis.
It has nothing to do with any threat from iran, in fact the region being more and more controlled by the muslim brotherhood, they're more like allies. It has to do with OIL, the saudis did not need a nuke in the past because they could control the oil. Economies depend on the oil, and nations were either held at bay or, otherwise made to cave to saudi desires. Now that the muslim brotherhood is gaining power in the region, they wish to have military abilities now that their economics are not giving them the power to the same degree. Couple this with the brotherhoods desire to spread sharia law worldwide, and you have the problems we have now.
100% correct. They are just playing the "Iran card" to get Uncle Sucker to sacrifice his son and daughters, instead of their own. Reminds me of another country that is in that region.
Looking at the picture of the Saudi military, does anyone else out there want to start chanting: "Oh wee oh, wee ohhhh, oh"?
Exactly what I was thinking!
I was thinking they were maybe Mecca's version of the Blue Group.
the guy on the left in blackface looks Western, a mercenary no doubt. If the Saudis are worried about Iran they should dust them by theirselves.
Please, it was a tribute to Obama.
You'll notice there are no magazines in the weapons they are carrying (H&K MP5), that's because they look like they would shoot whomever made them wear the black-face. Their facial expressions scream "Oh, yeah...this was stupid".