|
Post by soulflower on Apr 19, 2024 15:34:45 GMT -5
For now, yes. I believe that if Iran wanted to have nukes, they would have them already. Lots of countries, including Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, India, etc have been able to successfully build nukes in secret. The only thing stopping Iran so far appears to be their own decisions (so far) to not build the bomb. Iran has all the ingredients they need to build a bomb in short-order when (or if) they decide to. Do you know of any country that has had the capability to build a nuclear bomb but didn't do it? Japan
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Apr 19, 2024 17:07:49 GMT -5
The iron dome was being tested just by Palestinian rockets. I believe damage would have been much worse if other countries didn't step in.
|
|
|
Post by WKDWZD on Apr 19, 2024 17:36:36 GMT -5
For now, yes. I believe that if Iran wanted to have nukes, they would have them already. Lots of countries, including Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, India, etc have been able to successfully build nukes in secret. The only thing stopping Iran so far appears to be their own decisions (so far) to not build the bomb. Iran has all the ingredients they need to build a bomb in short-order when (or if) they decide to. Do you know of any country that has had the capability to build a nuclear bomb but didn't do it? There are many countries capable of producing nuclear weapons, or at least enriching uranium or manufacturing plutonium. Among the most notable are Japan, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and Australia.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 19, 2024 17:55:25 GMT -5
The iron dome was being tested just by Palestinian rockets. I believe damage would have been much worse if other countries didn't step in. In spite of that, the Iranians could've hit more targets if they wanted to. They sent a message. Israel admits Iranian ballistic missiles struck two military bases"US officials believe that at least nine Iranian ballistic missiles hit Israeli air bases on Sunday, evading air defences, although the damage appeared to be minimal..."
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 19, 2024 18:09:10 GMT -5
Do you know of any country that has had the capability to build a nuclear bomb but didn't do it? Japan Add Canada and Australia. I should have thought a little more before I asked that question. However there is a difference between those 3 countries and Iran. None of those countries has chanted death to a nuclear power. If I were to threaten some country that had nukes I'd want to have nukes too. Time will tell if Iran is lying about their nuclear ambitions. I think they are.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 19, 2024 18:10:14 GMT -5
See my response to SF above.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 19, 2024 18:48:59 GMT -5
‘Trust but verify’ Ronald Reagan The agreement allowed inspectors in to look at facilities and limited the amount of centrifuges and had procedures and mechanisms in place for addressing suspected cheating. It gave us an unprecedented window into their activities as well as channels of communication to resolve disputes. That is all gone. Many argue that Iran is closer to a nuclear bomb now than before Trump pulled us out of the deal. Again, a short sighted and bone headed decision Same question to you as to SF: Do you believe Iran when it says it does not seek nuclear weapons? And as with SF, I'll bet my IRA you won't provide a "Yes" or "No" answer to that question. I believe that Iran enjoys the ambiguity and I know that Iran has progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. It is just a matter of making the decision to go the last yard and that is on Trump's bone-headed decision to unilaterally pull out of the most comprehensive non proliferation agreement in history. I once saw you mention Sandia labs so I am sure you remember Sig Hecker who was head of LANL for more than a decade. He had nothing but good things to say about that agreement.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 19, 2024 21:45:04 GMT -5
Same question to you as to SF: Do you believe Iran when it says it does not seek nuclear weapons? And as with SF, I'll bet my IRA you won't provide a "Yes" or "No" answer to that question. I believe that Iran enjoys the ambiguity and I know that Iran has progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. It is just a matter of making the decision to go the last yard and that is on Trump's bone-headed decision to unilaterally pull out of the most comprehensive non proliferation agreement in history. I once saw you mention Sandia labs so I am sure you remember Sig Hecker who was head of LANL for more than a decade. He had nothing but good things to say about that agreement. Iran says it does not seek nuclear weapons but have progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. That makes them liars. Why would you want the U.S. to continue to honor an agreement with liars?
|
|
|
Post by WKDWZD on Apr 20, 2024 5:29:27 GMT -5
I believe that Iran enjoys the ambiguity and I know that Iran has progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. It is just a matter of making the decision to go the last yard and that is on Trump's bone-headed decision to unilaterally pull out of the most comprehensive non proliferation agreement in history. I once saw you mention Sandia labs so I am sure you remember Sig Hecker who was head of LANL for more than a decade. He had nothing but good things to say about that agreement. Iran says it does not seek nuclear weapons but have progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. That makes them liars. Why would you want the U.S. to continue to honor an agreement with liars?
Well, it seems pretty ok with it, with Israel.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 20, 2024 14:13:30 GMT -5
Iran says it does not seek nuclear weapons but have progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. That makes them liars. Why would you want the U.S. to continue to honor an agreement with liars?
Well, it seems pretty ok with it, with Israel. Can you translate that into American? Who's OK with what?
|
|
|
Post by WKDWZD on Apr 20, 2024 16:02:34 GMT -5
Well, it seems pretty ok with it, with Israel. Can you translate that into American? Who's OK with what? Sure, I forgot that you guys are still learning English. If you relate my answer directly to your bolded question, all will become clear. But to simplify it even more, The US is okay with honouring agreements with Israel, in spite of their lying. Don't do your usual, come back asking for examples, I'm not playing your games, you well know what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 20, 2024 17:20:07 GMT -5
Can you translate that into American? Who's OK with what? Sure, I forgot that you guys are still learning English. If you relate my answer directly to your bolded question, all will become clear. But to simplify it even more, The US is okay with honouring agreements with Israel, in spite of their lying. Don't do your usual, come back asking for examples, I'm not playing your games, you well know what I mean. So you claim Israel lies but indicate you're going to refuse to provide any proof that your statement is true. You have a habit of doing that. That's libel, slander and defamation and if you did that to a person or an organization you'd find your ass in a courtroom. Anger is a common manifestation of arrogance in order to understand the effects of arrogance on debate. Superbia (which is the kind of arrogance that is the concern here) is a vice of superiority characterised by an overwhelming desire to diminish other people in order to excel and by a tendency to arrogate special entitlements for oneself, including the privilege of not having to justify one’s claims.
That's you alright, angry and arrogant.
|
|
|
Post by WKDWZD on Apr 20, 2024 18:21:31 GMT -5
Sure, I forgot that you guys are still learning English. If you relate my answer directly to your bolded question, all will become clear. But to simplify it even more, The US is okay with honouring agreements with Israel, in spite of their lying. Don't do your usual, come back asking for examples, I'm not playing your games, you well know what I mean. So you claim Israel lies but indicate you're going to refuse to provide any proof that your statement is true. You have a habit of doing that. That's libel, slander and defamation and if you did that to a person or an organization you'd find your ass in a courtroom. Anger is a common manifestation of arrogance in order to understand the effects of arrogance on debate. Superbia (which is the kind of arrogance that is the concern here) is a vice of superiority characterised by an overwhelming desire to diminish other people in order to excel and by a tendency to arrogate special entitlements for oneself, including the privilege of not having to justify one’s claims.
That's you alright, angry and arrogant. Listen to you, CTFU. nothing I posted here is slander because slander is a spoken statement. Libel is a written statement and if the statement is accurate, then it is not libel. So dude, sue me. Btw, if you're going to use someone else's work you should, out of courtesy credit them for it, otherwise you are guilty of plagiarism. Now be a good boy and go and troll someone else, preferably on a different bulletin board.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 20, 2024 21:08:02 GMT -5
So you claim Israel lies but indicate you're going to refuse to provide any proof that your statement is true. You have a habit of doing that. That's libel, slander and defamation and if you did that to a person or an organization you'd find your ass in a courtroom. Anger is a common manifestation of arrogance in order to understand the effects of arrogance on debate. Superbia (which is the kind of arrogance that is the concern here) is a vice of superiority characterised by an overwhelming desire to diminish other people in order to excel and by a tendency to arrogate special entitlements for oneself, including the privilege of not having to justify one’s claims.
That's you alright, angry and arrogant. Listen to you, CTFU. nothing I posted here is slander because slander is a spoken statement. Libel is a written statement and if the statement is accurate, then it is not libel. So dude, sue me. Btw, if you're going to use someone else's work you should, out of courtesy credit them for it, otherwise you are guilty of plagerism. Now be a good boy and go and troll someone else, preferably on a different bulletin board. Angry and arrogant redux.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 20, 2024 22:29:14 GMT -5
I believe that Iran enjoys the ambiguity and I know that Iran has progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. It is just a matter of making the decision to go the last yard and that is on Trump's bone-headed decision to unilaterally pull out of the most comprehensive non proliferation agreement in history. I once saw you mention Sandia labs so I am sure you remember Sig Hecker who was head of LANL for more than a decade. He had nothing but good things to say about that agreement. Iran says it does not seek nuclear weapons but have progressed to the point that they are months, not years, away from fielding a couple of uranium bombs. That makes them liars. Why would you want the U.S. to continue to honor an agreement with liars? Because the agreement had stymied the nuclear program and had the most invasive inspection regime of any non proliferation agreement in history. Trump's idiotic decision to pull out of the agreement is what led to Iran reconstituting the program in earnest.
|
|
|
Post by WKDWZD on Apr 21, 2024 5:38:45 GMT -5
Listen to you, CTFU. nothing I posted here is slander because slander is a spoken statement. Libel is a written statement and if the statement is accurate, then it is not libel. So dude, sue me. Btw, if you're going to use someone else's work you should, out of courtesy credit them for it, otherwise you are guilty of plagerism. Now be a good boy and go and troll someone else, preferably on a different bulletin board. Angry and arrogant redux. Idiotic troll post, redux.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 21, 2024 14:01:50 GMT -5
Angry and arrogant redux. Idiotic troll post, redux. And you responded. What does that make you?
|
|
|
Post by zenwalk on Apr 21, 2024 14:08:04 GMT -5
Idiotic troll post, redux. And you responded. What does that make you? Actually your poast admits you are a troll.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 21, 2024 15:03:22 GMT -5
And you responded. What does that make you? Actually your poast admits you are a troll. I will certainly give that comment all the consideration it deserves.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 9:09:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 22, 2024 12:13:27 GMT -5
Israel did the smart thing. I hope that concludes this round at least. And it's good news that if the usual suspects start up with "Israel is conducting a genocide against Iranians" they will have a very weak case. Not that having a case ever concerned them. And if I were Iran I'd view this as a major concern.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 12:14:23 GMT -5
Israel did the smart thing. I hope that concludes this round at least. I agree
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 22, 2024 12:24:55 GMT -5
Kudos to Biden for drawing a line in the sand in saying the US won't be part of offensive attacks on Iran.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 22, 2024 20:34:42 GMT -5
So you claim Israel lies but indicate you're going to refuse to provide any proof that your statement is true. You have a habit of doing that. That's libel, slander and defamation and if you did that to a person or an organization you'd find your ass in a courtroom. Anger is a common manifestation of arrogance in order to understand the effects of arrogance on debate. Superbia (which is the kind of arrogance that is the concern here) is a vice of superiority characterised by an overwhelming desire to diminish other people in order to excel and by a tendency to arrogate special entitlements for oneself, including the privilege of not having to justify one’s claims.
That's you alright, angry and arrogant. Listen to you, CTFU. nothing I posted here is slander because slander is a spoken statement. Libel is a written statement and if the statement is accurate, then it is not libel. So dude, sue me. Btw, if you're going to use someone else's work you should, out of courtesy credit them for it, otherwise you are guilty of plagerism.
Now be a good boy and go and troll someone else, preferably on a different bulletin board. Speaking of plagiarism... Your Signature: "If, at first, you don't succeed - sky diving is probably not for you."Steven Wright Quotes: "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you."Another post from a "Rules for thee, not for me" blowhard.
|
|
|
Post by WKDWZD on Apr 23, 2024 6:24:47 GMT -5
Listen to you, CTFU. nothing I posted here is slander because slander is a spoken statement. Libel is a written statement and if the statement is accurate, then it is not libel. So dude, sue me. Btw, if you're going to use someone else's work you should, out of courtesy credit them for it, otherwise you are guilty of plagerism.
Now be a good boy and go and troll someone else, preferably on a different bulletin board. Speaking of plagiarism... Your Signature: "If, at first, you don't succeed - sky diving is probably not for you."Steven Wright Quotes: "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you."Another post from a "Rules for thee, not for me" blowhard. How sad are you? After a couple of days of brooding and smarting you come back with, my signature line being a plagiarism. It's a signature dude, its a common throw away line over here. I'm no pancake expert, but I know a tosser when I see one. There you go, waste a few more minutes of your life and tell me who first said that.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on Apr 23, 2024 12:55:37 GMT -5
How sad are you? After a couple of days of brooding and smarting you come back with, my signature line being a plagiarism. It's a signature dude, its a common throw away line over here. I'm no pancake expert, but I know a tosser when I see one. There you go, waste a few more minutes of your life and tell me who first said that. At least you're consistent. And it's not the throwing away that's the problem, it the using it w/o attribution. So you and I are both guilty. Difference is I didn't try to make some excuse for my mistake, you did.
|
|