Which country is the biggest threat to "World peace"?

Nodin

Biggins wrote: »

Just a point to consider - and I'm NOT debating for either side.
Just throwing this out there!

IF something like a nuke went off anywhere, depending on how big and what way the wind was blowing, radiation (and fallout dust, etc) travels!
Be that nuke dust coming from England or a nuke going off in an Arab state!

Short version - even more innocent lives will be lost either way (along with economies effected)!

That's not what Fred is getting at, however.

Biggins

Nodin wrote: »

That's not what Fred is getting at, however.

Fair enough.
It was just a though that crossed my mind in either case.

Short version - there are no winners in the current mess if things go south!

Toby Take a Bow

Biggins wrote: »

Fair enough.
It was just a though that crossed my mind in either case.

Short version - there are no winners in the current mess if things go south!

Twas often the way with nuclear war.

Biggins

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

Twas often the way with nuclear war.

All true.

sxt

Question for anyone

If you were governing Iran.. and you witnessed America allowing Israel to become the only Nuclear power in that region , and pumping them with billions of dollars of weapons every single year for decades...This is from a country that used an atomic weapon on Japan , as an experiment , and as a political tool to show its overwhelming strength. This is from a country that sponsored terrorism against your country for decades, supporting and bank rolling Saddam Hussein ( including all the necessary ingredients to make chemical weapons!) .This is a country that attacked your border country , Iraq in 2003, bombing it to kingdom come, killing hundreds of thousands of it's Civilians , causing 4-5 million of it's citizens to flee as refugees , putting into chaos and ruin for generations to come

How would you be feeling? What steps would you take defend your nation against this clear and present threat?

In my opinion, there is only one way to neutralise this menacing threat, and that is to build a nuclear weapon yourself !

What gives the right for a country like America , to dictate to Iran, what they can and can not do to in order to give security to their people..

Freddie59

Biggins wrote: »

Just a point to consider - and I'm NOT debating for either side.
Just throwing this out there!

IF something like a nuke went off anywhere, depending on how big and what way the wind was blowing, radiation (and fallout dust, etc) travels!
Be that nuke dust coming from England or a nuke going off in an Arab state!

Short version - even more innocent lives will be lost either way (along with economies effected)!

Got it in one Biggins. The 'Global Village' scenario, as it were. But Nod and Co. tend to lighten the threat posed at every opportunity. Again, very WW2-esque.

Freddie59

Nodin wrote: »

That's not what Fred is getting at, however.

Thanks for speaking for someone else as usual Nod.:rolleyes: No surprises there.:D

Toby Take a Bow

Freddie59 wrote: »

Thanks for speaking for someone else as usual Nod.:rolleyes: No surprises there.:D

Freddie59 wrote: »

Got it in one Biggins. The 'Global Village' scenario, as it were. But Nod and Co. tend to lighten the threat posed at every opportunity. Again, very WW2-esque.

Hello pot, have you met kettle?

talkinyite

Chinas not listed?

wes

Freddie59 wrote: »

People like you Wes. People like you. In fairness, after that diatribe you're in no position to lecture ANYONE!

Coming from someone who seem to think that anyone disagreeing with you, is an attempt to silence you, clearly doesn't understand whats going on. Look, I know the truth hurts some times, but it needs to be said.

Freddie59 wrote: »

As I've pointed out before those links in your sig say it all about you.:)

You mean where I am against blood thirsty **** killing innocent people. In one case a Western backed bunch of idiots and in the other case, a vile dictataors that the West hates. What those links show is that I am consistent, and not a blood thirsty war monger, who is living in 1939.

So, on the basis of the critcism of my signature, apparently you have an issue with me being agianst the Sudanes regimes genocide against the people of Darfur. Quick question, why does me being against such a genocide bother you? Also, the fact that you have an issue with someone being against genocide, is what is rather telling. I take as long as you can "win" a internet arguement, you are willing to even condemn someone for being agianst genocide. I have to say that is rather repugnant thing to do, and more proof of a clearly disturbed world view.

Nodin

Freddie59 wrote: »

Thanks for speaking for someone else as usual Nod.:rolleyes: No surprises there.:D

Yeah, your fixation on the enviromental aspect was notable. Like here -

Both are inseparable. Iran are seeking, ultimately, to usurp the West and dominate, using their brand of "religion" as a vehicle to drive it.

So we are confronted, as a civilisation, with two ideologies (one under which we we enjoy democracy and freedom) and another, which seeks to drag the world to the brink, throw us back several hundred years, and subjugate its subjects. And incredibly, people try to rationalise and defend this.

...and in these.....

If it were left to some then we'd all take it up the ass from the Irans of this world.

Sigh. The same was said of Hitler. Will we ever learn............

Hitler/Iran/no threat to world peace/peace in our time (look it up). The people who held the peace conference were incredibly naive....as are the defenders of modern-day Iran.

Those damn superpowers. which would you take tomorrow, given a choice. a) The lifestyle of people in Iran. Or b) the lifestyle that we enjoy in the West? Just a or b will do than you.

Which protects us from the loons and their supporters which are a direct threat to the freedoms we currently enjoy.

And of course, no mention whatsoever, despite numerous requests, of how Iran are going to "subjugate" us. Is there some weapons program they have of which only you are aware? Bionic ayatollahs, perhaps....

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

WakeUp

sxt wrote: »

Question for anyone

If you were governing Iran.. and you witnessed America allowing Israel to become the only Nuclear power in that region , and pumping them with billions of dollars of weapons every single year for decades...This is from a country that used an atomic weapon on Japan , as an experiment , and as a political tool to show its overwhelming strength. This is from a country that sponsored terrorism against your country for decades, supporting and bank rolling Saddam Hussein ( including all the necessary ingredients to make chemical weapons!) .This is a country that attacked your border country , Iraq in 2003, bombing it to kingdom come, killing hundreds of thousands of it's Civilians , causing 4-5 million of it's citizens to flee as refugees , putting into chaos and ruin for generations to come

How would you be feeling? What steps would you take defend your nation against this clear and present threat?

In my opinion, there is only one way to neutralise this menacing threat, and that is to build a nuclear weapon yourself !

Whilst your reasoning here is pretty sound about how you might go about protecting yourself if threatened by nuclear nations -i.e build a bomb - the consensus from the vast majority of sensible people in the know with regard to Iran's attempt at making a nuclear bomb - and I exclude the IAEA from the "sensible" part which I will get to in a second - conclude Iran is NOT currently attempting to build a bomb and wont be in a position to get there for at least 10 to 15 years even if they wanted too, but you wont be told this in the press nor by the IAEA under their new leadership who clearly have an agenda - the warmongers want war hence the media and political lies spin and BS. We are currently in the "soft-war sanction mode" after which the bombs start falling.

The IAEA have five Dept's - Nuclear Energy - Nuclear Safety & Security - Science and Applications ( non-weaponry ) Safeguards and Technical Cooperation.

Now people claiming - predominantly from what they are being told on TV or what they read in the press - that Iran is building a bomb ( this isnt directed at you OP) please show me the IAEA's Dept that knows about, is knowledgeable about and have people working there that know even the first thing about building a nuclear fcking bomb?? You wont find it because it doesnt exist. The IAEA scientists havent the first notion of how to construct a nuclear bomb - yet there report is being held up as proof that "Iran is building a bomb". IAEA scientists are trained in the detection of nuclear materials thats what they do. Not one of them would be able to tell you how to construct a nuclear bomb yet according to them from some - Iran is building a bomb.

The public is being intentionally mislead , again for anyone paying attention , and some vital vital information has not been made public or isnt being talked about. Like how you cant build a bomb from "gas" alone - we hear all this talk Iran is spinning centrifuges , enriching uranium etc, etc, but you cant build a bomb just from that not even close. The gas must be converted to metal a dangerous and timely process something Iran has no experience in and no facilities to undertake the process in. Would take them years to perfect it hell they cant even get their centrifuges working properly - yet they are on the eve of having the bomb.

Its BS people to justify the coming war against them and people are lapping it up cant believe after what happened in Iraq some people are still being hoodwinked, its incredible.

irishmover

Aquila wrote: »

Ireland
Cos that lovable drunken rogue image is only an act,ye place yourselves in every world major city,waiting to attack with guinness cans filled with weaponised bio-chemical agents!!!

... I was just about to post something slightly similar:mad:

Freddie59

wes wrote: »

You mean where I am against blood thirsty **** killing innocent people.

And yet you defend one of the most brutal regimes on the planet in Iran. Nice reasoning.

wes wrote: »

In one case a Western backed bunch of idiots and in the other case, a vile dictataors that the West hates. What those links show is that I am consistent, and not a blood thirsty war monger, who is living in 1939.

For blood thirsty war monger write a realist who appreciates what's going on and you're a bit closer. The same applied to 1939. But hey - you're carrying on that wonderful pacifist tradition of walking blindly into walls. Keep it up my friend.:)

RichieC

Iran is not anywhere close to the worlds most brutal regimes.

Freddie59

Nodin wrote: »

And of course, no mention whatsoever, despite numerous requests, of how Iran are going to "subjugate" us. Is there some weapons program they have of which only you are aware? Bionic ayatollahs, perhaps....

Ah nod.:D Keep digging. As usual. The world is a very, very small place, and even a slight shift in the balance of power could alter those cosy notions of yours. And you don't even realise it.

Nodin

Freddie59 wrote: »

And yet you defend one of the most brutal regimes on the planet in Iran. Nice reasoning.
....

Don't suppose you'd be able to show where he's defended Iran with some actual quotes etc? Or is this just more empty provocative crap from you?

Freddie59 wrote: »

The world is a very, very small place, and even a slight shift in the balance of power could alter those cosy notions of yours. And you don't even realise it. ....

More bluster. You stated the Iranians were out to "subjugate" us. I want to know how they're going to do it. Try answering.

Da Shins Kelly

USA. And no, it's not because I "hate" the US. It's because it is.