Netanyahu Raises Political Will for Iran Invasion. Zionist Press:"Iran Rattles Saber"

[Chanur]

I suppose it has nothing to do Iran supporting our enemies in Iraq, funding the Taliban and supplying them with weapons or paying them for every American they kill. It couldn't have anything to do with them building nuclear weapons against international sanctions or their constant rhetoric. No it must be the secret Zionist powers.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Chanur [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I suppose it has nothing to do Iran supporting our enemies in Iraq, funding the Taliban and supplying them with weapons or paying them for every American they kill. It couldn't have anything to do with them building nuclear weapons against international sanctions or their constant rhetoric. No it must be the secret Zionist powers.

Let stupid people be stupid please. The world needs ditch diggers, too. Bush; towers.

[Tommy_Wiseau]

Originally Posted by Chanur [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I suppose it has nothing to do Iran supporting our enemies in Iraq, funding the Taliban and supplying them with weapons or paying them for every American they kill. It couldn't have anything to do with them building nuclear weapons against international sanctions or their constant rhetoric. No it must be the secret Zionist powers.

Our enemies in Iraq? I don't have enemies in Iraq.

Building nuclear weapons? The evidence that they are building nukes is as weak as was Saddam's.

This is the exact same rhetoric that has been used to pull us into another disaster in the last decade - you're still buying it?

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Tommy_Wiseau [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Our enemies in Iraq? I don't have enemies in Iraq.

Building nuclear weapons? The evidence that they are building nukes is as weak as was Saddam's.

This is the exact same rhetoric that has been used to pull us into another disaster in the last decade - you're still buying it?

Um, no it's not. There was no evidence that Saddam was building a nuke. There were claims that he was seeking out yellowcake uranium, based on British intelligence, but the CIA's investigation of it -- mainly conducted by Joseph Wilson -- concluded that those claims were false. The other justification, surrounding aluminum tubes, was immediately and unambiguously refuted by the US DoE. US intelligence didn't fail -- it was ignored and misrepresented intentionally. Joseph Wilson wrote a damn op-ed piece saying that the yellowcake claims were bullshit.

The case against Saddam was "Hey, he used to have chemical and biological WMDs and he never got rid of them (even though they've long since expired). He's a totally bad guy. So if he wants to prove he's not a totally bad guy, he would show us where those old (and now worthless) WMDs are. Like, right now. And he's also maybe buying yellowcake and working on a nuke!!!!"

The case against Iran, on the other hand, is rock solid. They have an advanced nuclear program. They've enriched uranium. They've admitted to it, we can see it, there's no denying it. The only ambiguity -- and the ambiguity is in theory, only -- is over the aims of the program. The CIA and Western intelligence have found mountains of evidence of a weapons program, but assuming you don't trust those sources, the IAEA has found evidence that Iran has been researching triggers for nuclear weapons. There is also a new IAEA report coming out that is expected to eliminate any possible doubt over Iran's intentions, in the form of Iranian work on ballistic missiles designed for nuclear warheads.

This is not rhetoric. It's legitimate. I don't care enough to pile up facts for you, but look into it yourself if you actually care. The only shame is that the Iraqi and Afghani offensives have us gun-shy to actually confront a legitimate threat. Out of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran, Iran is the only one that actually poses even a mildly serious threat to the United States' interests.

TL;DR - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNq_9vwfSis

[deakolt]

I was just typing a big ol' response to this but then it got lost because I wasn't logged in...

so fuck it.

Believe what you want, but don't take everything you hear/read (even from the IAEA) at face value. The IAEA is by no means an impartial organization.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by deakolt [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I was just typing a big ol' response to this but then it got lost because I wasn't logged in...

so fuck it.

Believe what you want, but don't take everything you hear/read (even from the IAEA) at face value. The IAEA is by no means an impartial organization.

I love when people say things like "don't take the IAEA at face value". Oh, okay. I won't. I'll go ahead and corroborate their findings myself. Does Southwest fly to Iranian nuclear centrifuge bases?

What is your source of information on the subject? Have you inspected Iranian nuclear reactors? Who is it that you take at face value? There are relatively few parties that would be in a position to present any credible information on Iran's nuclear program. One would be Iran, which has obvious motives for deceit. Another would be the IAEA, which has inspected the program for years. Other credible sources would be the most advanced intelligence agencies in the world, and the governments they work for -- specifically, the US CIA, Israeli Mossad, and British SIS. Given that all these sources, minus Iran, have made parallel reports, it would be reasonable to assume that they are based in fact. That is, unless you believe they have all convened in a massive, multinational conspiracy.

If there's a comprehensive conspiracy which involves the US intelligence departments, the European intelligence departments, the Israeli intelligence departments, the US government, European governments, Israeli government, all major Western news outlets, the Israeli media, the UN, and the IAEA, well then fuck. They got me. For now, I'm just going to go ahead and take the IAEA's report at face value.

[Mardur]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[deakolt]

Back in 2003, Condoleezza Rice threatened director general of IAEA with no re-election if he didn't tighten his stance on Iran's nuclear program.

In 2007, this same director general criticized US hardline against Iran as war-mongering. Candoleza told him to "shut the fuck up"

This was also the man who was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize along with the IAEA (of course that doesn't really mean anything).

In 2009, that director general was not re-elected. Just sayin'.

Also, why does Israel get to completely ignore the IAEA as well as the NPT? Many believe they have hundreds of nuclear weapons. ? ? ?

OH YEAH WE ALREADY HAVE OUR PUPPETS IN PLACE IN ISRAEL

[deakolt]

and FUCK the bullshit that it is a matter of national security blah blah blah.

MAD means that the second Iran launches a nuke, tens or hundreds of nukes are coming to blow their country off the face of the planet.

You are ignorant if you believe that the Iranian government is so fanatic that they are willing to sacrifice everything (literally, everything) in an attack-

Furthermore, an invasion of Iran simply breeds more hate of the US in the Arab-speaking world, why not diplomacy? We are just going to proliferate these invasions until we have invaded pretty much anyone who isn't our lackey. fuck yeah Team America

[purest]

Originally Posted by daldolma

nuclear scaremongering, neo-con propaganda, gross exaggerations and straight up fabrications about the "threat" from Iran

[citation needed]