That was nothing more than blablabla.. and I'm trying to get people on my side just like you are trying to get people on your side.. it's an argumentation game. Please proove me I'm wrong, you ask for proofs so I do the same.. why would Iran need uran other than for making a warhead to it's Shihab-3 missile?
I don't know if they count votes or not but I'm 99% sure that they cheat enough. I know an Iranian that said that this democracy stuff there is bullshit. Most iranians hate their government.
There is no way in hell the repubs are going even think of attacking anyone else, lots of them a already whining about getting out of Iraq. They are scared that they will lose seats in the midterm elections, next election whatever canidate says they are going to pull out of Iraq will win. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05280/584293.stm http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051006/NEWS01/510060340 this ones classic Yeah we just invade a country totally rearrage its entire power structure, and create a democracy, sounds like quick job,
Only candidates approved by the ruling Mullah's are allowed to run for office. They do not approve anyone who disagrees with them. It's a sham democracy.
I wanted to see latehorns take on it, wasn't arguing against it just to see if he had more to say than it was fake
Actually you're the one who started the thread to attack Iran, I'm the one who called you on it. Furthermore there is no need to disprove there is not any other reason for the nuclear plants, it is up to the invading country especially to be taken seriously to prove Iran is actively making nukes which you still have yet to make a single point that proves it.
Even if they are doing so, why don't they have the right to try to defend themselves? USA has the largest number of Atomic bombs in the world and still is spending much more than any other country in the world to develop new and even more destructive weapons than atomic bombs while denying other countries rights to arm themselves. Have you ever thought that if other countries didn't feel such a threat from USA to their security, maybe they wouldn't spend their resources on trying to develop atomic weapons? Isn't this like a bank robber demanding all the security guards in the bank should be unarmed while he should have an assault rifle?
I think by the end of this century there won't be any country in the world where US would not have fought. This is crazy, every now and then Bush finds some country to attack and some vague reasons. There seems to be more nuclear weapons in US then rest of the world together. Talk about Iraq and people there are still suffering, better Bush should concentrate on Iraq. Bring a law and remove all the nuclear weapons from the world,each and every.Bush will be the first one to oppose this.
I just realised, my signature suggests a solution, simple solution by a great person way ahead of time.
Again I find that is a lousy excuse or proof to invade or attack. I am not backing up Iran, however the facts or lack there of is not reason enough to invade another country. Your own stats you posted shows them close to topping off their electricity so how is it such a jump that a plant could not be used for electricity? Their oil reserves afterall wont last forever. If they make power through a different source than one of their top commodities 'oil' it also gives them more of their commodity to sell. The only fact which makes it easy to jump to it must be for nukes is because it's Iran, most other countries and there probally wouldn't even be an eye batted. The United States has the worlds largest reserves of coal, yet we use many other power sources including multiple Nuclear power plants.
Found the following read very informative. http://www.payvand.com/news/03/oct/1015.html I have placed some quotes as it is a long read I do however encourage you to read the entire article. I'm not saying this article is 100% non biased or even factual, but does appear to give a decent history, have a better one that disputes it please post it and I'll be glad to read it.
Well look at Pakistan.. they got nukes the same way.. However the mullahs will very likely use their toys.. In Dec. 2001, former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani called the establishment of the Jewish state 'the worst event in history,' and declared his intention to decimate Israel, clarifying that 'one [nuclear] bomb is enough to destroy all Israel,' and that 'in due time, the Islamic world will have a military nuclear device.'
Latehorn I think you missed the point, the article above totally disproves your reasonings, find me a more truthful article. So? Saber rattling, nothing more, no reason to attack another country.
I don't know where y'all growed up, but where I come from, if someone says they want to kill you -- and then they pick up a gun -- we call killing them "self defense". The Iranians have publicly stated their intentions. The Iranians are reaching for a nuclear weapon. Nah... let's just stick our head in the sand and pretend it's not happening. That makes sense, right?
I would have expected a better responce than that from you Will but very well. Where is the proof of the nuclear weapon? Alot of speculation, even if they are trying for one there is plenty of time to contain and get involved to make certain they do not achieve one. If we attacked every country that said they would attack, kill us etc because we are also trying to put sanctions on them, verbally attack them as well, etc how many countries would we have to invade might I ask, that would be one hell of a long list and I see it as an extremely piss poor excuse for an invasion. You want to bomb their facilities I'm game for that, invade to take over the country is a bit different story. Your gun statement also doesn't work in the slightest, maybe if you changed it to they picked up a handle of a gun without any ammunition, barrel, etc, just the handle you might be a bit closer.
Will Does this work both way or only give rights to American to kill others? USA has been the most aggressive post WWII country in the world, from wars and attacking other countries to coup and CIA operations to over throw different governments. In the same time USA has the strongest military force and spend the most amount of money in the world on military and weapons. If Cubans decide to try and kill Americans, will you call that self defense too or do you think only Americans have right to self defense? The biggest reason for so many countries trying to go nuclear is because of USA's aggressive foreign policy. They feel the only way to protect themselves is to be a nuclear country and the example of North Korea gives creditability to that theory.
I smell appeasers Who says they don't, or are not working towards, having a nuclear bomb? If Europe is worried about it, something's wrong, that's for sure. Enriched uranium? Nah, probably just planning a new flavor of Starbuck's coffee. I wonder if I should take both sides of this issue, so I can say "can't get me there, look at the second part" or "can't get me there, look at the first part." Nah, I'll take a side. Takes a lot more skill
Nope you obviously didn't read all my posts as much of this is already answered, sorry would also rather have my own opinion than be a drone on either side, takes much more skill than being a yes man but believe what you wish.
How is disagreeing with someone who you agree on the whole of an issue but not of a subissue taking both sides? You can't honestly believe this can you, are you realy that stone cold set in your ways that you can not dispute even someone who is on your side? I see that as being very weak myself, just as politicians wont debate or call others in their own party when they error simply because they 'usually are on their side' is pretty lame.