Obama confirms Iran's right to nuclear technology

[Little-Acorn]

This is a lot like confirming that a known arsonist has the "right" to play with matches in a powder magazine, while piously reciting that he doesn't have the right to blow anything up.

Even if Iran builds a reactor for the purpose of generating electricity, does anyone in his right mind believe they will never use that technology later to produce fissile material for a bomb?

How far will we continue this insanity?

Is it November yet?

--------------------------------------

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9010171941

Iran's N. Rights Acknowledged by Obama

14:13 | 2012-01-21

TEHRAN (FNA)- Senior Iranian parliamentary sources revealed on Saturday that the Swiss envoy to Tehran has quoted US President Barack Obama as acknowledging Iran's nuclear rights.

Swiss Ambassador to Tehran Livia Leu Agosti attended a meeting with senior Iranian foreign ministry officials a few days ago to submit a letter from the US president to Tehran leaders.

Vice-Chairman of the Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Hossein Ebrahimi told FNA that during the meeting, Agosti had told the Iranian officials that President Barack Obama recognizes Iran's right of access and use of the nuclear technology.

"There are a couple of points with regard to this (US) message (to Iran)," Ebrahimi said and added, "Firstly, during the session to submit the message, the Swiss ambassador to Tehran quoted the US president as saying that 'we (the US) recognize your nuclear rights'."

As regards the second issue, the lawmaker said that the Swiss diplomat had also quoted Obama as saying that "I didn't want to impose sanctions on your central bank but I had no options but to approve it since a Congress majority had approved the decision."

Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast said on Sunday that Iran has received a US message regarding the Strait of Hormoz via three different channels.

"The US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice had handed a letter to Iran's Ambassador to the UN Mohammad Khazayee; the Swiss Ambassador to Tehran (Livia Leu Agosti) also conveyed the same thing; and Iraqi President Jalal Talabani delivered the same message to Iranian officials," he said last Sunday.

The US letter follows threats by Iran last month to shut off the Strait of Hormoz - the world's most important oil shipping lane - if new US and EU sanctions over its nuclear program halted Iranian oil exports.

Then the United States said it would not allow Iran to block the Strait, calling it a "red line" for the US military.

In reply, Lieutenant Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Brigadier General Hossein Salami dismissed the US warning over the closure of the strategic strait, and stressed that powerful Iran acts on its own and never asks for anyone's permission to carry out what it desires.

"The US is not in a position" to affect Iran's decisions, Salami told FNA late in December. "Iran does not ask permission to implement its own defensive strategies."

Meantime, US Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman General Martin Dempsey acknowledged that Iran is able to close the Strait of Hormuz.

"They've invested in capabilities that could, in fact, for a period of time block the Strait of Hormoz," Dempsey said in an interview aired on the CBS "Face the Nation" program.

[aboutime]

Forgive me jimnyc. But.....OBAMA IS A LIAR, AND ASSHOLE!
Everyone should accept those TWO facts as Honest, and Truthful.

Obama's eyes are Brown for more reasons than we know.

[jafar00]

Actually Iran does have the legal right to nuclear power under the NPT which they have signed. Obama is correct.

[jimnyc]

Actually Iran does have the legal right to nuclear power under the NPT which they have signed. Obama is correct.

Does that include locking inspectors out of Parchin? And testing detonators? Are detonators part of the NPT?

[KarlMarx]

Actually Iran does have the legal right to nuclear power under the NPT which they have signed. Obama is correct.
What part do centrifuges play in the need for nuclear power? Furthermore, with Iran sitting on huge amounts of oil, why would they need nuclear power in the first place?

And what defensive role do ICBMs play?

No, we're looking at a country that wants to become a nuclear power and will use that power to annihilate Israel.

Of course, the problem with that is the Israel also has nuclear weapons and will use them if provoked.

So there you have it. You're defending increasing the likelihood of a nuclear war in the Middle East.

It's going to be hard to go to Mecca during the Haaj with all of that nuclear fallout... or haven't you thought of that?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

This is a lot like confirming that a known arsonist has the "right" to play with matches in a powder magazine, while piously reciting that he doesn't have the right to blow anything up.

Even if Iran builds a reactor for the purpose of generating electricity, does anyone in his right mind believe they will never use that technology later to produce fissile material for a bomb?

How far will we continue this insanity?

Is it November yet?

--------------------------------------

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9010171941

Iran's N. Rights Acknowledged by Obama

14:13 | 2012-01-21

TEHRAN (FNA)- Senior Iranian parliamentary sources revealed on Saturday that the Swiss envoy to Tehran has quoted US President Barack Obama as acknowledging Iran's nuclear rights.

Swiss Ambassador to Tehran Livia Leu Agosti attended a meeting with senior Iranian foreign ministry officials a few days ago to submit a letter from the US president to Tehran leaders.

Vice-Chairman of the Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Hossein Ebrahimi told FNA that during the meeting, Agosti had told the Iranian officials that President Barack Obama recognizes Iran's right of access and use of the nuclear technology.

"There are a couple of points with regard to this (US) message (to Iran)," Ebrahimi said and added, "Firstly, during the session to submit the message, the Swiss ambassador to Tehran quoted the US president as saying that 'we (the US) recognize your nuclear rights'."

As regards the second issue, the lawmaker said that the Swiss diplomat had also quoted Obama as saying that "I didn't want to impose sanctions on your central bank but I had no options but to approve it since a Congress majority had approved the decision."

Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast said on Sunday that Iran has received a US message regarding the Strait of Hormoz via three different channels.

"The US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice had handed a letter to Iran's Ambassador to the UN Mohammad Khazayee; the Swiss Ambassador to Tehran (Livia Leu Agosti) also conveyed the same thing; and Iraqi President Jalal Talabani delivered the same message to Iranian officials," he said last Sunday.

The US letter follows threats by Iran last month to shut off the Strait of Hormoz - the world's most important oil shipping lane - if new US and EU sanctions over its nuclear program halted Iranian oil exports.

Then the United States said it would not allow Iran to block the Strait, calling it a "red line" for the US military.

In reply, Lieutenant Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Brigadier General Hossein Salami dismissed the US warning over the closure of the strategic strait, and stressed that powerful Iran acts on its own and never asks for anyone's permission to carry out what it desires.

"The US is not in a position" to affect Iran's decisions, Salami told FNA late in December. "Iran does not ask permission to implement its own defensive strategies."

Meantime, US Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman General Martin Dempsey acknowledged that Iran is able to close the Strait of Hormuz.

"They've invested in capabilities that could, in fact, for a period of time block the Strait of Hormoz," Dempsey said in an interview aired on the CBS "Face the Nation" program.

I told all you guys that obama plays for the freaking other teams, especially the ones that are prayerrug masters!!--Tyr

[jafar00]

What part do centrifuges play in the need for nuclear power? Furthermore, with Iran sitting on huge amounts of oil, why would they need nuclear power in the first place?

I think for them, it has become a matter of national pride.


And what defensive role do ICBMs play?

Are they the only ones to build missiles?


No, we're looking at a country that wants to become a nuclear power and will use that power to annihilate Israel.

There is no evidence to confirm that statement.


Of course, the problem with that is the Israel also has nuclear weapons and will use them if provoked.

Yes. The Samson option. We are all targets of Israel. Israel has also never been inspected by UN inspectors.


So there you have it. You're defending increasing the likelihood of a nuclear war in the Middle East.

It's going to be hard to go to Mecca during the Haaj with all of that nuclear fallout... or haven't you thought of that?

The prevailing winds blow the other way over that part of Asia. It's more likely that Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan would get most of it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I think for them, it has become a matter of national pride.



Are they the only ones to build missiles?



There is no evidence to confirm that statement.



Yes. The Samson option. We are all targets of Israel. Israel has also never been inspected by UN inspectors.



The prevailing winds blow the other way over that part of Asia. It's more likely that Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan would get most of it.

When Mecca is evaporated who gets the fallout will not do them any good! Your Allah can not stop a nuke blast directly on Satan's city.
Islam wants its own nukes simply because they know Allah can not protect them or his holy cities. We can break Islam by simply evaporating Mecca and Medina. A neat and fast victory..Think about that.... -Tyr

[jafar00]

When Mecca is evaporated who gets the fallout will not do them any good! Your Allah can not stop a nuke blast directly on Satan's city.
Islam wants its own nukes simply because they know Allah can not protect them or his holy cities. We can break Islam by simply evaporating Mecca and Medina. A neat and fast victory..Think about that.... -Tyr

Could you then stop a billion and a half of us spread around the world from exacting a swift and decisive reply?

[aboutime]

Could you then stop a billion and a half of us spread around the world from exacting a swift and decisive reply?



jafar. There you go. Exposing all of your past lies here. Pretending, and insisting YOU DO NOT HATE. Then you announce your deepest, darkest, secretive, unspoken wishes on anyone who ISN'T LIKE YOU.

Hypocrisy just leaked from the vacuum between your ears.

[fj1200]

jafar. There you go. Exposing all of your past lies here. Pretending, and insisting YOU DO NOT HATE. Then you announce your deepest, darkest, secretive, unspoken wishes on anyone who ISN'T LIKE YOU.

Hypocrisy just leaked from the vacuum between your ears.

You do know that he was responding to a (implied) threat to annihilate their holy cities don't you?

[aboutime]

You do know that he was responding to a (implied) threat to annihilate their holy cities don't you?


Oh. Now I get it. jafar and others are permitted to say almost anything designed to expose their hatred. But anyone who disagree's with such tactics is forbidden, or denounced for FIGHTING FIRE with Fire????

That sounds very much like a double-standard here. Everyone is free to denounce, and make accusations about Christians. But Christians are forbidden from responding IN KIND, because that is Unfair, and Hateful...if you are not a Christian?????

[fj1200]

Oh. Now I get it. jafar and others are permitted to say almost anything designed to expose their hatred. But anyone who disagree's with such tactics is forbidden, or denounced for FIGHTING FIRE with Fire????

That sounds very much like a double-standard here. Everyone is free to denounce, and make accusations about Christians. But Christians are forbidden from responding IN KIND, because that is Unfair, and Hateful...if you are not a Christian?????

How would you feel if he suggested that someone "evaporate" the Vatican (or insert your favored holy site here)?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Could you then stop a billion and a half of us spread around the world from exacting a swift and decisive reply?

H-bombs damn sure could! Neutron bombs do it with less mess and no fallout. We as a nation could destroy all if need be. Thats why muslims want A-bombs because we have the might and the power and your ALLAH CAN NOT DO A DAMN THING ABOUT IT BECAUSE HE IS ONLY A DEMON THAT OBEYS SATAN.
Don't try to intimidate me pedro, it doesnt work. I have no fear of dying myself.. -TYR

[jafar00]

jafar. There you go. Exposing all of your past lies here. Pretending, and insisting YOU DO NOT HATE. Then you announce your deepest, darkest, secretive, unspoken wishes on anyone who ISN'T LIKE YOU.

Hypocrisy just leaked from the vacuum between your ears.

Don't presume to know me, nor call me a liar. You talked about a threat to "evaporate Mecca and Medina". I merely pointed out the folly of the suggestion.


Oh. Now I get it. jafar and others are permitted to say almost anything designed to expose their hatred. But anyone who disagree's with such tactics is forbidden, or denounced for FIGHTING FIRE with Fire????

That sounds very much like a double-standard here. Everyone is free to denounce, and make accusations about Christians. But Christians are forbidden from responding IN KIND, because that is Unfair, and Hateful...if you are not a Christian?????

Are you free to insult us, and threaten us, and kill us, and not expect a response?


H-bombs damn sure could! Neutron bombs do it with less mess and no fallout. We as a nation could destroy all if need be. Thats why muslims want A-bombs because we have the might and the power and your ALLAH CAN NOT DO A DAMN THING ABOUT IT BECAUSE HE IS ONLY A DEMON THAT OBEYS SATAN.
Don't try to intimidate me pedro, it doesnt work. I have no fear of dying myself.. -TYR

Muslims do have the "A-bomb" Tyr. And it's a country being torn by a pack of rabid Taliban. Are you worried yet?

[jimnyc]

Don't presume to know me, nor call me a liar. You talked about a threat to "evaporate Mecca and Medina". I merely pointed out the folly of the suggestion.

Are you free to insult us, and threaten us, and kill us, and not expect a response?

You didn't seem to mind it in the slightest bit when an animal leader from the Brotherhood sits in while an animal acting as an imam calls for the death of Jews.

[mundame]

Thread topic:

<tbody>

Obama confirms Iran's right to nuclear technology (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?37438-Obama-confirms-Iran-s-right-to-nuclear-technology)
(http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=252)


</tbody>



Does Iran have a "right" to nuclear technology?

It does if it can get away with it, same as all the countries who already have nukes --- they could, so they did.

So if Obama is letting Iran develop nukes, they have a "right" because no one is stopping them.

If Obama and the Israelis bomb out their nuke factories, they will no longer have the right to nukes.

Which, since they are threatening to annihilate pretty much everyone around, seems to me to be a needed action. As long as it was action from the air and we didn't get bogged down in ANOTHER ten-year losing war, it would be best to deprive Iran of its "rights" PDQ, IMO.

I'm no fan of this idea of "rights." People can do what they can do, that's all. And it's time to stop Iran arming with nuclear weapons and killing millions of people.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Muslims do have the "A-bomb" Tyr. And it's a country being torn by a pack of rabid Taliban. Are you worried yet?



Pakistan has India to deal with and so far they have not been using their nukes to attempt to blackmail anybody.
India being a great counter to them and India is not as stupidly PC about things as USA is. They know that and act accordingly. Nice try but fail.. -Tyr

[mundame]

Pakistan has India to deal with and so far they have not been using their nukes to attempt to blackmail anybody.
India being a great counter to them and India is not as stupidly PC about things as USA is. They know that and act accordingly. Nice try but fail.. -Tyr

We tried very hard to prevent Pakistan from getting nukes, but they did it secretly and now I read that our whole military worries about it a lot -- that their nukes will get controlled by terrorists, as they don't have much of a government there.

That's what's the problem with Iran getting nukes. Just another rabidly crazy Muslim country with nuclear bombs, I fail to see how THAT does anything but bring us closer to WWIII.

[Thunderknuckles]

History tells us nobody has a "right" to anything. There is only a struggle to acquire paid for in blood.
The question we need to ask is will Iran win that struggle? Based on historical trend, my bet is on Iran unfortunately.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

We tried very hard to prevent Pakistan from getting nukes, but they did it secretly and now I read that our whole military worries about it a lot -- that their nukes will get controlled by terrorists, as they don't have much of a government there.

That's what's the problem with Iran getting nukes. Just another rabidly crazy Muslim country with nuclear bombs, I fail to see how THAT does anything but bring us closer to WWIII.

Quite true, and with Iran we hve an annpoun3ed and planned attack upon Israel soon after they nuke up! obama does nothing but buy Iran more time.Showing his true colors.. -Tyr

[mundame]

Quite true, and with Iran we hve an annpoun3ed and planned attack upon Israel soon after they nuke up! obama does nothing but buy Iran more time.Showing his true colors.. -Tyr


You know, Tyr, the biggest issue for me is how can we forget what happened in the 1930s.

Hitler rearmed and built a large army, despite the Versailles treaty saying he couldn't, and the whole entire time he made violent threats against pretty much everyone!!!

But no one believed him. Or they claimed they didn't -- I think Chamberlain really didn't believe him.

They said, oh, he's just talking, it's just talk, he doesn't mean it, he couldn't, wouldn't do that ----

But Hitler did EVERYTHING he said he'd do, or gave it a good six-year try. (I'm counting from his conquests starting about 1938.)

Bin Laden the same. He said he wanted to take out the West; he did try.

So I believe what people say! I figure, anyone says they want to kill me, or drive Jews into the sea, or kill all Americans, they mean it. History does show that. It's not just Hitler or Bin Laden --- I can think of many, many examples. Tamberlaine, Genghis Khan --- they said, surrender your city at once or we will kill everyone in it. No one believed they would do that. Then they did it.


Of course Iran means to kill out all of Israel and then start on us. Duh. They say so constantly. Why would they say it if they didn't mean it?

[Abbey Marie]

History tells us nobody has a "right" to anything. There is only a struggle to acquire paid for in blood.
The question we need to ask is will Iran win that struggle? Based on historical trend, my bet is on Iran unfortunately.

Good point. Might=right, as it ever did.

[Dilloduck]

You know, Tyr, the biggest issue for me is how can we forget what happened in the 1930s.

Hitler rearmed and built a large army, despite the Versailles treaty saying he couldn't, and the whole entire time he made violent threats against pretty much everyone!!!

But no one believed him. Or they claimed they didn't -- I think Chamberlain really didn't believe him.

They said, oh, he's just talking, it's just talk, he doesn't mean it, he couldn't, wouldn't do that ----

But Hitler did EVERYTHING he said he'd do, or gave it a good six-year try. (I'm counting from his conquests starting about 1938.)

Bin Laden the same. He said he wanted to take out the West; he did try.

So I believe what people say! I figure, anyone says they want to kill me, or drive Jews into the sea, or kill all Americans, they mean it. History does show that. It's not just Hitler or Bin Laden --- I can think of many, many examples. Tamberlaine, Genghis Khan --- they said, surrender your city at once or we will kill everyone in it. No one believed they would do that. Then they did it.


Of course Iran means to kill out all of Israel and then start on us. Duh. They say so constantly. Why would they say it if they didn't mean it?

Hitler also claimed the third Reich would last 1000 years. While it's true that some people have made good on their claims there is also a list a mile long of things people said were going to happen or things they would do that never happened.
One reason that the Islamic countries love to threaten Israel is that the different sects of Islam all need supporters. If you don't do the song and dance about blowing up Israel, you will lose your political clout.

[mundame]

Hitler also claimed the third Reich would last 1000 years. While it's true that some people have made good on their claims there is also a list a mile long of things people said were going to happen or things they would do that never happened.
One reason that the Islamic countries love to threaten Israel is that the different sects of Islam all need supporters. If you don't do the song and dance about blowing up Israel, you will lose your political clout.

Yeah, and if you actually DO get nukes and blow up Israel, wow! you really get a lot of clout. Then you can rule the whole Mideast!

No, I do not believe that it's all just talkie-talkie they don't mean.

The point is, if people clearly say they plan to do violent things, you have to take them seriously and take steps to prevent them. Hitler most certainly intended the Third Reich to last 1000 years, right? He wasn't going to rule for five years and turn it over to a European vote, right? Hitler failed to perpetuate the Third Reich more than a few years because of America, and it's our job to make sure Iran's continual threats to exterminate all Jews in Israel and all Americans also fails.

[Thunderknuckles]

The point is, if people clearly say they plan to do violent things, you have to take them seriously and take steps to prevent them. Hitler most certainly intended the Third Reich to last 1000 years, right? He wasn't going to rule for five years and turn it over to a European vote, right? Hitler failed to perpetuate the Third Reich more than a few years because of America, and it's our job to make sure Iran's continual threats to exterminate all Jews in Israel and all Americans also fails.
Well said!

[aboutime]

History tells us nobody has a "right" to anything. There is only a struggle to acquire paid for in blood.
The question we need to ask is will Iran win that struggle? Based on historical trend, my bet is on Iran unfortunately.

I'd like to agree with you in many ways. And, as I do so. I am also a pragmatic kind of thinker. So. What I see as the reality of an Iran who tries to eliminate Israel....as they have been screaming for years. Will be a nation, unable to survive on it's own.
Mainly because. Attempting to follow through with their threats to Destroy Israel....they will also be causing the destruction of many neighbors as well.

The Middle East is far bigger than the Western Coast of the Mediterranean sea...with Israel, Leb. and Egypt. Fallout from any super WMD both Nuke, or Chemical cannot be limited to borders like some Computer Game.

We should also remember. Or think about Israel having somewhat of the same M.A.D. systems of protection to defend themselves. So. Should Iran, and Ahmadinnerjacket...the little idiot follow through with his threats. Well. Let's just say. WALMART will become TARGET, and the Middle East will have Massive Parking lots...into the next century.

[Thunderknuckles]

My bet on Iran was with them acquiring a Nuke, not necessarily following through with an attack on Israel.
In that sense, I completely agree with you.

[mundame]

My bet on Iran was with them acquiring a Nuke, not necessarily following through with an attack on Israel.
In that sense, I completely agree with you.

Sooner or later, ALL weapons are normalized. All, bar none.

I thought the WWI flamethrowers and poison gas were exceptions till I saw our troops outfitted with flamethrowers in Iraq, and Saddam poisoning out an entire village of Kurds with poison gas.

Which countries are likeliest to use nukes? So-called "rational actors" or total crazies like Pakistan and Iran with a government regularly overthrown violently and terrorists trying constantly to get at the nukes and likely to succeed?

Total hysterical crazies -- think of Hitler and his shrieking, kill-'em-all speeches -- are more dangerous than any other kind of government, IMO. Drones and Air Force, though, no more boots on the ground humping around for 10-12 years till everyone admits we've lost again!

[gabosaurus]

I have a question to ask all of you: What if Iran (or Saudi Arabia , China or whomever) protested our right to own nuclear weapons? Because they are afraid we might use nukes on them?

Another question: What right do we have to tell a sovereign nation what they can do inside their borders? We don't care if Pakistan has nukes? Or North Korea. Or China. Or Russia.

Don't answer me with rhetoric. Answer me using international law.

[mundame]

I have a question to ask all of you: What if Iran (or Saudi Arabia , China or whomever) protested our right to own nuclear weapons? Because they are afraid we might use nukes on them?

Another question: What right do we have to tell a sovereign nation what they can do inside their borders? We don't care if Pakistan has nukes? Or North Korea. Or China. Or Russia.

Don't answer me with rhetoric. Answer me using international law.


Can't answer you with international law: there is no such thing.

No enforcement, no law. And there is no enforcement --- not by law, anyway!

It's just one of those silly concepts like "natural rights" that people haven't thought out well, or are trying to confuse people and make them leftwingers. As Nietzsche says, the lambs are always trying to make laws against the behavior of eagles, but that works poorly..........................the eagles still dive out of the sky and swoop off with lambs to feed their eaglets.

"What if Iran (or Saudi Arabia , China or whomever) protested our right to own nuclear weapons? Because they are afraid we might use nukes on them?"

Well, they probably DO protest our nukes, every second Tuesday --- not that that helps them.

Are you thinking our carrying on about how Iran doesn't have a "right" to nukes is anything but propaganda for the homefolks? It's meaningless. If the powers that care decide they have to move against Iran, they will, that's all. If they don't think it's worth the risk and can push it all down the road for the next president, they'll do that.

"Law" and "rights" have nothing whatever to do with what is going on.

[Dilloduck]

Can't answer you with international law: there is no such thing.

No enforcement, no law. And there is no enforcement --- not by law, anyway!

It's just one of those silly concepts like "natural rights" that people haven't thought out well, or are trying to confuse people and make them leftwingers. As Nietzsche says, the lambs are always trying to make laws against the behavior of eagles, but that works poorly..........................the eagles still dive out of the sky and swoop off with lambs to feed their eaglets.

"What if Iran (or Saudi Arabia , China or whomever) protested our right to own nuclear weapons? Because they are afraid we might use nukes on them?"

Well, they probably DO protest our nukes, every second Tuesday --- not that that helps them.

Are you thinking our carrying on about how Iran doesn't have a "right" to nukes is anything but propaganda for the homefolks? It's meaningless. If the powers that care decide they have to move against Iran, they will, that's all. If they don't think it's worth the risk and can push it all down the road for the next president, they'll do that.

"Law" and "rights" have nothing whatever to do with what is going on.

No international law? You might wanna explain that to people like Milosevic.
and you might wanna check this out
http://icanw.org/internationallaw

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I have a question to ask all of you: What if Iran (or Saudi Arabia , China or whomever) protested our right to own nuclear weapons? Because they are afraid we might use nukes on them?

Another question: What right do we have to tell a sovereign nation what they can do inside their borders? We don't care if Pakistan has nukes? Or North Korea. Or China. Or Russia.

Don't answer me with rhetoric. Answer me using international law.

Sure Gabby, we admit that Iran has the right to get the technology to be able to make good on their threat to destroy Israel. Happy now, dipshat?
This, while you defend their right to murder millions of Jews..
Say, where did you say you teach????-Tyr

[Thunderknuckles]

I have a question to ask all of you: What if Iran (or Saudi Arabia , China or whomever) protested our right to own nuclear weapons? Because they are afraid we might use nukes on them?

Another question: What right do we have to tell a sovereign nation what they can do inside their borders? We don't care if Pakistan has nukes? Or North Korea. Or China. Or Russia.

Don't answer me with rhetoric. Answer me using international law.
Read my earlier post. Iran has neither the "right" to nuclear weapons just as we do not have a "right" to them or to tell Iran what to do with their own country.
What we all have are "interests" that we wish to pursue and that brings countries into conflict at some point. I stopped thinking of our foreign policy in terms of a "Moral high ground" a long time ago. Today the U.S. is like any other historical power. We do what we do because we believe it is in our interest to do so. Right/Wrong, Good/Bad really don't have much to do with it.

[mundame]

No international law? You might wanna explain that to people like Milosevic.
and you might wanna check this out
http://icanw.org/internationallaw

"International law" is total nonsense and will be until there is One World, One Government, heaven forbid.

Where powers can enforce whatever they want to enforce, they do, that's all.

Note that "international law" has done nothing about Mugabe, the Congo, North Korea, etc., etc.

That's because it's all a total sham.

They can't catch any of the two dozen American pols the International Court would like to try, either, because we don't allow it, and since they aren't actually "law" in any sense, only power that isn't very strong, they can't do anything about it. They finally caught some Serbs, big deal.

[mundame]

Sure Gabby, we admit that Iran has the right to get the technology to be able to make good on their threat to destroy Israel


I don't admit they have any rights whatsoever, except what they can compel.

If America or Israel is weak, that could be quite a lot.......look at Pakistan. Once they get nukes, what can we really do?

I guess we'll see what people can do about that. Because it sure looks like they are going to nuke up because Obama is going to kick the can down the road for the next guy.

[jafar00]

Pakistan has India to deal with and so far they have not been using their nukes to attempt to blackmail anybody.
India being a great counter to them and India is not as stupidly PC about things as USA is. They know that and act accordingly. Nice try but fail.. -Tyr

So you're saying that Iran having nukes, and the missiles to deliver them to Israel would be a good counter to Israeli belligerence?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So you're saying that Iran having nukes, and the missiles to deliver them to Israel would be a good counter to Israeli belligerence?

Iran plans no counter rather they plan on a destruction! The problem is one they dont know yet, it may be their own! -Tyr

[Dilloduck]

Iran plans no counter rather they plan on a destruction! The problem is one they dont know yet, it may be their own! -Tyr

Muslims are sneaky. You can't predict em unless you are one.

[jimnyc]

So you're saying that Iran having nukes, and the missiles to deliver them to Israel would be a good counter to Israeli belligerence?

No country that has leaders talking about the destruction of entire countries, races or religions should ever be allowed to have nukes. Nor should countries that have leaders that happily sit in and pray for the destruction of Jews and their supporters. So it seems Iran and Egypt are SOL.

[jimnyc]

Muslims are sneaky. You can't predict em unless you are one.

There must be a reason that about 95% of terrorists happen to be Muslims.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Muslims are sneaky. You can't predict em unless you are one.

Wrong, they are very predictable. Read the Koran, study their 1400+ year history and watch current world news..
All that leads to the truth about Islam which clearly refutes its propaganda! Their wholesale use of murder and terror says it all to any that are not blinded, mislead and/or stupid. -Tyr

[Dilloduck]

Wrong, they are very predictable. Read the Koran, study their 1400+ year history and watch current world news..
All that leads to the truth about Islam which clearly refutes its propaganda! Their wholesale use of murder and terror says it all to any that are not blinded, mislead and/or stupid. -Tyr

Which embassy will they hit next Mr. Predicto ?

[Voted4Reagan]

Don't presume to know me, nor call me a liar. You talked about a threat to "evaporate Mecca and Medina". I merely pointed out the folly of the suggestion.



You are a HYPOCRITE.... I'd be more worried about Iran owning a Bomb because if they DO USE it you can be assured that Israel will incinerate the country responsible and any others that supported it...

maybe you should be worried about reigning in the Radical Islamist Mullahs and their Lap-Dog I'MADUMMYJIHADIST then getting your panties in a knot over what someone says to you on a Bulletin Board...

You have never once spoken against Ahmidennijad's call for the destruction of Israel and her total eradication from the map.

I say you are a hypocrite and a Fraud...as well as a Liar...

[Drummond]

Muslims are sneaky. You can't predict em unless you are one.

Should I acknowledge your expertise in this area ?

[aboutime]

You are a HYPOCRITE.... I'd be more worried about Iran owning a Bomb because if they DO USE it you can be assured that Israel will incinerate the country responsible and any others that supported it...

maybe you should be worried about reigning in the Radical Islamist Mullahs and their Lap-Dog I'MADUMMYJIHADIST then getting your panties in a knot over what someone says to you on a Bulletin Board...

You have never once spoken against Ahmidennijad's call for the destruction of Israel and her total eradication from the map.

I say you are a hypocrite and a Fraud...as well as a Liar...

VR4. jafar is just trying to sound like Obama. He needs to create mountains out of mole hills because...that is the only way people like jafar feel any sort of power. Using threats like ONE and One Half Billion Muslims is something jafar, and the Taliban thinkers use as their BIG HAMMER.
Thankfully. jafar is so twisted, and filled with hatred. He fails to recognize that Those ONE and ONE HALF Billion Muslims he talks about. ARE NOT AS RADICAL as jafer would like to think they are. So the threats only include the RADICAL Muslims who are like OBL.

Americans need to recognize. Radicals like jafar seems to support, are a small number of...sad to say..Hitler Like, minded people who want to control Those One and one half Billion other Muslims...as much as they want to control all of us Terrible, Westerners.

[mundame]

There must be a reason that about 95% of terrorists happen to be Muslims.


I think the reason is they are savages.

We are turning civilization over to savages, in the name of Political Correctness. This has been a poor decision, IMO.