or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › We're going to have to attack Iran
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

We're going to have to attack Iran - Page 3

post #81 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

If the article is false, then we'll find out soon enough. The article I linked to seemed pretty clear to me. Obviously I don't believe everything I hear and read, but until I see something that contradicts the evidence, it seems credible.

But how can it seem crdible though?

How can it be credible to claim that Shi'i are funding Sunnis to attack Shi'i?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #82 of 207
You argue 'tll you're blue in the face, but for the sake of clarifying the title of this thread how will you attack, SDW? What's the plan; the goal?
post #83 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

If the article is false, then we'll find out soon enough. The article I linked to seemed pretty clear to me. Obviously I don't believe everything I hear and read, but until I see something that contradicts the evidence, it seems credible.

Mind boggling.
post #84 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Obviously I don't believe everything I hear and read, but until I see something that contradicts the evidence, it seems credible.

Exactly! But what, precisely, constitutes this evidence? Direct observation? Hardly! Everyone knows that the act of direct observation alters the very thing we seek to study! Newpaper reports? All biased. Government reports? Biased.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #85 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

But how can it seem crdible though?

How can it be credible to claim that Shi'i are funding Sunnis to attack Shi'i?

THEY ARE FUNDING THE TALIBAN TO ATTACK WESTERN FORCES. Can I put that in a different language for you?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #86 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Exactly! But what, precisely, constitutes this evidence? Direct observation? Hardly! Everyone knows that the act of direct observation alters the very thing we seek to study! Newpaper reports? All biased. Government reports? Biased.

I see...so if some articles are false, all are suspect until proven. And what constitutes proof? Nothing, because we can't prove anything.

I am banning post-modernism from AI, forever. So it is written, so it is done.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #87 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunocrat View Post

You argue 'tll you're blue in the face, but for the sake of clarifying the title of this thread how will you attack, SDW? What's the plan; the goal?

I have already answered that question as to the manner of attack, if needed. That's a separate issue. And don't deliberately distort what I'm saying. I don't want a war...I don't, I don't...I don't. I think it's going to come down to war though, unless we have some kind of diplomatic breakthrough. Iran is doing whatever the hell it pleases. It can't be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. It simply cannot. It's intolerable.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #88 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

THEY ARE FUNDING THE TALIBAN TO ATTACK WESTERN FORCES. Can I put that in a different language for you?

Yes I am aware of the contention what I am at a loss to understand is THE SORT OF MINDSET THAT CAN UNQUESTIONINGLY ACCEPT SUCH MORONIC PROPOSITIONS WITHOUT EVEN THE SLIGHTEST SCIINTILLA OF RATIONAL REFLECTION

It's like you're hooked up to a media version of an intraveneous drip......
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #89 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I see...so if some articles are false, all are suspect until proven. And what constitutes proof? Nothing, because we can't prove anything.

I am banning post-modernism from AI, forever. So it is written, so it is done.

Fine, join the Republican Clown Car.


I still don't understand why SDW2001 has such a huge problem with Iran becoming a nuclear state. How is it worse than Pakistan becoming a nuclear state?

And, Pakistan has been known for nuclear proliferation. Correct me if I'm wrong, didn't North Korean scientists get nuclear technology from Pakistani scientists? But, Pakistan is still an ally in the War Against TerrorTM. If General Pervez Musharraf steps into a bullet or a Mercedes filled with C4, Pakistan is going to be the next Saddam/Al Whateva...you know, people who the U.S. supported at one point of time who turned around and bit U.S. in the ass.
post #90 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I see...so if some articles are false, all are suspect until proven. And what constitutes proof? Nothing, because we can't prove anything.

I am banning post-modernism from AI, forever. So it is written, so it is done.

Oh come on, SDW, push it a little further. It's just the logical conclusion! It's not that some articles are false then all are suspect. It's that there is no "false" because there is no "true"! Silly man!

And if you're banning PoMo, I would expect you to post a looooot less, since you use its techniques all the time to call into question both the facticity of facts and to interrogate any supposed master narratives defining our thinking.

Come on, SDW! It's not scary! It's LIBERATING!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #91 of 207
Proliferation issues aside, the only useful reason for a nation to want nuclear weapons, is to keep other nations with nuclear weapons from attacking it. (The MAD theory)

Are there any nuclear armed nations running about being aggressive about attacking other countries that Iran should be afraid of?

You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #92 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post

Proliferation issues aside, the only useful reason for a nation to want nuclear weapons, is to keep other nations with nuclear weapons from attacking it. (The MAD theory)

Are there any nuclear armed nations running about being aggressive about attacking other countries that Iran should be afraid of?


I disagree. Nations with nukes get treated differently on the world stage (e.g. in the UN).
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #93 of 207
Since it's a waste of space- good thing you quoted it. Twice the space!

That's all I am saying.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

And I'm angry?

You're not contributing to the thread with an animation like that. It's not even funny. It's just...a waste of space. That's all I'm saying.
post #94 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post

Proliferation issues aside, the only useful reason for a nation to want nuclear weapons, is to keep other nations with nuclear weapons from attacking it. (The MAD theory)

Are there any nuclear armed nations running about being aggressive about attacking other countries that Iran should be afraid of?


We do not know that Iran is actually pursuing weapons for sure - that is merely the wingnut rhetoric in pursuit of more war and should be treated with caution, much less uncritically accepted.

We do know that even if they are then they are 7 - 10 years off. Which would seem to argue against the urgent haste for carnage.....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #95 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

If the article is false, then we'll find out soon enough. The article I linked to seemed pretty clear to me. Obviously I don't believe everything I hear and read, but until I see something that contradicts the evidence, it seems credible.

Ok. let's try another article from exactly the same source as your original 'Iran funding Taleban' article which you unreservedly accept.

Here it is: US funds Terrorists against Iran.

How wrong is it possible for you to be? Let us count the ways:

1) This article - remember, from the same source you claim is 'credible' - claims the US is funding terrorists. Something you deny.

Quote:
A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News.

The group, called Jundullah, is made up of members of the Baluchi tribe and operates out of the Baluchistan province in Pakistan, just across the border from Iran.

2) The group is a Sunni one. Killing Iranians - although you claim that the two are actually in league.

In fact the leader of the group doing the killing of Iranians is a Talebani:

Quote:
The leader, Regi, claims to have personally executed some of the Iranians.

"He used to fight with the Taliban. He's part drug smuggler, part Taliban, part Sunni activist," said Alexis Debat, a senior fellow on counterterrorism at the Nixon Center and an ABC News consultant who recently met with Pakistani officials and tribal members.

Sounds like a nice guy...just the sort of person to spread US 'freedom'.

A more in depth analysis can be found at online journal.


Quote:
The Bush administration is supporting terrorist attacks inside Iran while accusing the Iranians of doing the very same thing in Iraq, but if you think their hypocrisy cant get any worse, think again.

The Jundullah, in addition to its role as a proxy force for the United States, has been implicated in what officials described as the deadliest plan since 9/11: the alleged plot to bomb multiple trans-Atlantic flights last summer.

Keep in mind that according to recent reports, the Jundullah has been receiving U.S. support since 2005, meaning the militant group was receiving support as they purportedly planned to blow up multiple commercial airliners bound for the United States.

The reported emir of the Pakistani-based Jundullah is none other than Matiur Rahman, the alleged mastermind behind the liquid explosive plot. Moreover, in late 2005, several of the suspects arrested in connection to the plot traveled to Jundullah camps in Pakistan, where they were reportedly trained in the fabrication and use of explosives before returning to London.

So just to be clear, if these reports are true, the U.S. is secretly supporting the same group that helped facilitate a plan to blow up multiple airliners and murder hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent civilians.

That is the degree of sickness we are dealing with. The current US and UK regime ARE the terrorists.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #96 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

We do not know that Iran is actually pursuing weapons for sure - that is merely the wingnut rhetoric in pursuit of more war and should be treated with caution, much less uncritically accepted.

We do know that even if they are then they are 7 - 10 years off. Which would seem to argue against the urgent haste for carnage.....

I was implying that they should be afraid of the USA, at least as long as BushCo is in charge.

If they are pursuing weapons, the only downside I can think of is it upsetting the Middle East balance even further. People who are afraid Iran would 'sell weapons to terrorists' or such need a wake up call. Any terrorist who wants a nuke can get one today, probably without too much difficulty.
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #97 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Yes I am aware of the contention what I am at a loss to understand is THE SORT OF MINDSET THAT CAN UNQUESTIONINGLY ACCEPT SUCH MORONIC PROPOSITIONS WITHOUT EVEN THE SLIGHTEST SCIINTILLA OF RATIONAL REFLECTION

It's like you're hooked up to a media version of an intraveneous drip......

How about because it's not moronic? What do you not understand? Iran is fighting a proxy war. With us. Not just Sunni muslims. Are you honestly questioning that fact?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #98 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Fine, join the Republican Clown Car.


I still don't understand why SDW2001 has such a huge problem with Iran becoming a nuclear state. How is it worse than Pakistan becoming a nuclear state?

And, Pakistan has been known for nuclear proliferation. Correct me if I'm wrong, didn't North Korean scientists get nuclear technology from Pakistani scientists? But, Pakistan is still an ally in the War Against TerrorTM. If General Pervez Musharraf steps into a bullet or a Mercedes filled with C4, Pakistan is going to be the next Saddam/Al Whateva...you know, people who the U.S. supported at one point of time who turned around and bit U.S. in the ass.

How about because they are enriching uranium in violation of UN mandates? How about because they are blatantly anti-semitic and have made threatening statements against not just Israel, but the US as well? How about because they are ruled by a radical theocracy, with mullahs that think the end of the world is a good thing? Hmmm?

Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Oh come on, SDW, push it a little further. It's just the logical conclusion! It's not that some articles are false then all are suspect. It's that there is no "false" because there is no "true"! Silly man!

And if you're banning PoMo, I would expect you to post a looooot less, since you use its techniques all the time to call into question both the facticity of facts and to interrogate any supposed master narratives defining our thinking.

Come on, SDW! It's not scary! It's LIBERATING!

I use it according to you, mid. I disagree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post

Proliferation issues aside, the only useful reason for a nation to want nuclear weapons, is to keep other nations with nuclear weapons from attacking it. (The MAD theory)

Are there any nuclear armed nations running about being aggressive about attacking other countries that Iran should be afraid of?


MAD doesn't work with Iran, not if a portion of their government believes The Apocalypse is a good thing.

And don't compare the US to Iran. That's so hack-ish. Or Seg-ish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

We do not know that Iran is actually pursuing weapons for sure - that is merely the wingnut rhetoric in pursuit of more war and should be treated with caution, much less uncritically accepted.

We do know that even if they are then they are 7 - 10 years off. Which would seem to argue against the urgent haste for carnage.....

I agree with point one. I also think that we can't really know what they are doing because they refuse to open up their program.

From globalsecurity.org:

Quote:
Since the end of the Iran-Iraq War, Tehran redoubled its efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missiles. In addition to Iran's legitimate efforts to develop its nuclear power-generation industry, it is believed to be operating a parallel clandestine nuclear weapons program.


I think they are much closer than you think, though.

Quote:
Iran does not currently have nuclear weapons, and would appear to be about two years away from acquiring nuclear weapons. By some time in 2006, however, Iran could be producting fissile material for atomic bombs using both uranium enriched at Natanz and plutonium produced at Arak.




Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Ok. let's try another article from exactly the same source as your original 'Iran funding Taleban' article which you unreservedly accept.

Here it is: US funds Terrorists against Iran.

How wrong is it possible for you to be? Let us count the ways:

1) This article - remember, from the same source you claim is 'credible' - claims the US is funding terrorists. Something you deny.



2) The group is a Sunni one. Killing Iranians - although you claim that the two are actually in league.

In fact the leader of the group doing the killing of Iranians is a Talebani:



Sounds like a nice guy...just the sort of person to spread US 'freedom'.

A more in depth analysis can be found at online journal.




That is the degree of sickness we are dealing with. The current US and UK regime ARE the terrorists.

You're seriously deranged. I already acknowledged the standing of MEK as a "terrorist" group.

As for the last point, that is simply laughable. Or sad. Or I don't even know what. And you speak of sickness. Gotcha.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post

I was implying that they should be afraid of the USA, at least as long as BushCo is in charge.

If they are pursuing weapons, the only downside I can think of is it upsetting the Middle East balance even further. People who are afraid Iran would 'sell weapons to terrorists' or such need a wake up call. Any terrorist who wants a nuke can get one today, probably without too much difficulty.

You are extraordinarily ignorant. Iran is doing the provoking, not the US. If we really wanted to attack Iran, they've given us more than enough reason.

Your second point is, well, absurd. "The only downside?" How about the downside of attacking Tel Aviv with a nuke?

And really.."any terrorist can get a nuke." Please. If that were the case, every major US city would be in ruins by now.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #99 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

How about because they are enriching uranium in violation of UN mandates? How about because they are blatantly anti-semitic and have made threatening statements against not just Israel, but the US as well? How about because they are ruled by a radical theocracy, with mullahs that think the end of the world is a good thing? Hmmm?



I use it according to you, mid. I disagree.



MAD doesn't work with Iran, not if a portion of their government believes The Apocalypse is a good thing.

And don't compare the US to Iran. That's so hack-ish. Or Seg-ish.



I agree with point one. I also think that we can't really know what they are doing because they refuse to open up their program.

From globalsecurity.org:




I think they are much closer than you think, though.








You're seriously deranged. I already acknowledged the standing of MEK as a "terrorist" group.

As for the last point, that is simply laughable. Or sad. Or I don't even know what. And you speak of sickness. Gotcha.



You are extraordinarily ignorant. Iran is doing the provoking, not the US. If we really wanted to attack Iran, they've given us more than enough reason.

Your second point is, well, absurd. "The only downside?" How about the downside of attacking Tel Aviv with a nuke?

And really.."any terrorist can get a nuke." Please. If that were the case, every major US city would be in ruins by now.

" Rolling along with the rolling tumble weeds......."

Hey SDW. Do you duck and cover?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #100 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I use it according to you, mid. I disagree.

Excellent! Excellent! One of the signal techniques of it is to interrogate "expertise"! Well done!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #101 of 207
As I said before: The death knell of any philosophy is when conservatives start using it.

It was Mehlman's use of PoMo during the 2004 Presidential race in regards to Saddam and 9/11 that really signaled the end of PoMo as an intellectual philosophy of standing. Not that I am complaining.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #102 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

As I said before: The death knell of any philosophy is when conservatives start using it.

It was Mehlman's use of PoMo during the 2004 Presidential race in regards to Saddam and 9/11 that really signaled the end of PoMo as an intellectual philosophy of standing. Not that I am complaining.

Nah. Any philosophical movement with a name is dead.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #103 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Excellent! Excellent! One of the signal techniques of it is to interrogate "expertise"! Well done!

(electricity begins to crackle from Midwinter's fingertips)

"Your doubt will make you powerful!"
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #104 of 207
I always conceived of midwinter as a disembodied head on a large irregular prism body made of cheap looking black plastic with curved edges that gets around on wheels. Now I learn he has an ankle and fingers.

My world is crumbling.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #105 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

I always conceived of midwinter as a disembodied head on a large irregular prism body made of cheap looking black plastic with curved edges that gets around on wheels

Hey now! Don't make me come over there! My head's not "disembodied"!
post #106 of 207
Don't get me wrong Captain Pike, I loved you in that one flashback episode of the Original Star Trek, but I was more thinking about a head on top of one of these with wheels:
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #107 of 207
EXTERMI--

awww yeah, baby. Lemme put on some Barry White. Hang on, baby.

Bah dum dum BAH dum

...We got it together baby.....
post #108 of 207
Holy shit, Hardeeharhar, you got freaking Christopher Pike to register! You rule!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #109 of 207
it was only a matter of time.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #110 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Don't get me wrong Captain Pike, I loved you in that one flashback episode of the Original Star Trek, but I was more thinking about a head on top of one of these with wheels:

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #111 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


Yeah, you could stick some sort of cannon on that contraption and parachute it into Iran uploaded with a program to rush about wildly blasting anything that moves.

Probably work out better than the Iraq battle plan and it'll kill hundreds of ragheads before it runs out of juice - all at no risk to any pure-blooded Aryan Christians.....

(Just to get this back on topic which - for those who forget - is "we need to start killing Iranians now Iraqis are not sport anymore.....")
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #112 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Yeah, you could stick some sort of cannon on that contraption and parachute it into Iran uploaded with a program to rush about wildly blasting anything that moves.

Probably work out better than the Iraq battle plan and it'll kill hundreds of ragheads before it runs out of juice - all at no risk to any pure-blooded Aryan Christians.....

(Just to get this back on topic which - for those who forget - is "we need to start killing Iranians now Iraqis are not sport anymore.....")

No!!! Just like Vietnam 2, AKA the Iraq war, this idea has been tried before, with disastrous results!

Look! And learn from history!
post #113 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

No!!! Just like Vietnam 2, AKA the Iraq war, this idea has been tried before, with disastrous results!

Look! And learn from history!

Judging from that clip, we could at least bore the Iranians to death.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #114 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Yeah, you could stick some sort of cannon on that contraption and parachute it into Iran uploaded with a program to rush about wildly blasting anything that moves.

Probably work out better than the Iraq battle plan and it'll kill hundreds of ragheads before it runs out of juice - all at no risk to any pure-blooded Aryan Christians.....

(Just to get this back on topic which - for those who forget - is "we need to start killing Iranians now Iraqis are not sport anymore.....")

Robotics dude, the new hotness...



Israeli Military Robot Is Built to Kill (Mini-Uzi Included)

Guess it gives the Israelis even less of a conscience.
post #115 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Robotics dude, the new hotness...



Israeli Military Robot Is Built to Kill (Mini-Uzi Included)

Guess it gives the Israelis even less of a conscience.

I guess so - but it could also take war into a new frontier: someone has to be operating the bot or it has to be running a program so it must be hackable.....

Some of these jihadis seem to be quite tech savvy - they can run websites undiscovered (from Texas even) and upload up to the minute content from the middle of the worst war-zone on earth so maybe they will strat to focus on 'turning' these bots or even kidnapping a few and reprogramming them.

Could one survuve an IED anyway? And they must be of limited use in the Iraq/Israel arena - a suicide bomber could presumably neutralize one or two.....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #116 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Yeah, you could stick some sort of cannon on that contraption and parachute it into Iran uploaded with a program to rush about wildly blasting anything that moves.

Probably work out better than the Iraq battle plan and it'll kill hundreds of ragheads before it runs out of juice - all at no risk to any pure-blooded Aryan Christians.....

(Just to get this back on topic which - for those who forget - is "we need to start killing Iranians now Iraqis are not sport anymore.....")

Plus it's made out of corbomite.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #117 of 207
The only way to affectively attack Iran is with several, simultaneous nuclear assaults. Not going to happen.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #118 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

The only way to affectively attack Iran is with several, simultaneous nuclear assaults. Not going to happen.

I know you're not actually advocating this, but I would just like to point out that the use of the term "effectively", when used to describe a strategy with geo-political ramifications, has to include more than just immediate results.

Certainly, a nuclear strike would be "effective" in fucking up Iran. However, assuming our goals in the region go beyond standing on a pile of rubble screaming "Boo-yah!!! Who's your daddy, now, bitches!!!!", it would be amazingly "ineffectual" with regards to things like stabilizing the region, lessening the violence in Iraq, dealing with terrorism, increasing strategic alliances, or convincing the rest of the world that we aren't more-or-less insane, and therefor to be resisted by every means in every instance.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #119 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

The only way to affectively attack Iran is with several, simultaneous nuclear assaults. Not going to happen.

Nope.

I say we send in Jimmy Carter again. He has such a great track record.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #120 of 207
Guys, Iran isn't in great shape as it is. A little slow, steady pressure will probably go a long way.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › We're going to have to attack Iran