The Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran will be loaded with fuel

[BU BEAR]

on August 21, 2010.

What next for Barack Obama?

What next for Benjamin Netanyahu?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Question is Do we want Iran with a nuke or do we fight a screaming brown hoard? (to paraphrase and borrow a Monte Python phrase)

[JohnnyMack]

Israeli air strike before end of year.

[swardboy]

I'm so glad Obama is there to talk to the Iranian nutjob....

[stoopified]

on August 21, 2010.

What next for Barack Obama?

What next for Benjamin Netanyahu?More vacation or TV face time?

Nuke em

[Curly Bill]

I guess Michelle can mark Iran off the places to see list.

[Breadburner]

Yup....Give Isreal our blessing and let them handle it....

[jkjsooner]

I don't think there is a good answer. It's a crappy situation altogether.

Isreal might be able to take out a nuclear reactor but taking out all of the underground uranium enrichment facilities would be very difficult.

[jkjsooner]

Seriously, who here thinks we'll go another 65 years without a nuke being used against a population? Things were a little contained during the Cold War but with multiple states and rogue groups to worry about now I think something will happen sooner or later...

[Turd_Ferguson]

I think something will happen sooner or later...Don't go out on a limb or anything...:D

[jkjsooner]

Don't go out on a limb or anything...:D

Okay, you got me. I'll be more specific. We will not go another 65 years without nukes being used against a population.

The use of nukes will play a major role in the next 100 years. We might not have the end of the world nuclear exchange that we feared during the Cold War but we will have incidents and the consequences will be dire. The IAEA has done about as good of a job as possible but it really is a losing battle.

[SicEmBaylor]

I'd rather the Israelis not hit the reactor. It could very possibly setoff a major mid-east war with us, literally, right in the middle of it. I'd really rather not go to war on the Israelis behalf, and I don't see how we could stay out of it.

I'd really really really like to get the hell out of that entire region and tell everyone, including the Israelis, to **** off. But of course as long as we are energy dependent we'll never be able to do that.

[StoopTroup]

Bay of Bama

3 part Mini-Series on ABC.

[JohnnyMack]

I'd rather the Israelis not hit the reactor. It could very possibly setoff a major mid-east war with us, literally, right in the middle of it. I'd really rather not go to war on the Israelis behalf, and I don't see how we could stay out of it.

I'd really really really like to get the hell out of that entire region and tell everyone, including the Israelis, to **** off. But of course as long as we are energy dependent we'll never be able to do that.

Werd.

[jkjsooner]

I'd rather the Israelis not hit the reactor. It could very possibly setoff a major mid-east war with us, literally, right in the middle of it. I'd really rather not go to war on the Israelis behalf, and I don't see how we could stay out of it.

I'd really really really like to get the hell out of that entire region and tell everyone, including the Israelis, to **** off. But of course as long as we are energy dependent we'll never be able to do that.

I don't know. Iran is a threat to a lot more countries than just Israel. I think the Saudis/ect. would say whatever their public wants to hear but on the flip side they would be happy if Iran's nuclear abilities were neutralized.

Either way, it sounds like Iran's nuclear abilities can't be neutralized with a simple strike so it's all a moot point.

[olevetonahill]

You dont know jack **** about nukes do ya ?

[MR2-Sooner86]

I'd rather the Israelis not hit the reactor. It could very possibly setoff a major mid-east war with us, literally, right in the middle of it. I'd really rather not go to war on the Israelis behalf, and I don't see how we could stay out of it.

I'd really really really like to get the hell out of that entire region and tell everyone, including the Israelis, to **** off. But of course as long as we are energy dependent we'll never be able to do that.

I agree but when they hit Iraq in '81 did all hell break loose?

[jkjsooner]

You dont know jack **** about nukes do ya ?

Is this addressed to me? If so I guess I don't understand your point.

First, the scenario we're looking at is for Israel to perform a tactical strike similar to what they did against Iraq years ago. Nobody is suggesting that they will nuke Iran. If that happened then I would agree with Baylor that all hell would break loose in the Islamic world.

From all intelligence a tactical strike wouldn't be effective due to the fact that Iran's enrichment facilities are buried and very spread out. These aren't my words. They're the words from our intelligence guys.

Again, what is your point?

[King Barry's Back]

I'd really really really like to get the hell out of that entire region and tell everyone, including the Israelis, to **** off. But of course as long as we are energy dependent we'll never be able to do that.



That's a nice sentiment, and such isolationism has a long and storied history in American foreign policy. However, I believe the cut and run strategy wouldn't be in the long-term US interest.

The dilemma reminds me of a Cold War poster I once saw. It was fashioned to look like a travel agent add for travel to the Soviet Union, but it showed a Red Army parade on Red Square in Moscow. Beneath the threatening military display, the caption read "Visit Us, Before We Visit You."

I think the lesson of Sept 11 is that the Islamists aren't going to stay in the Middle East. I think they have every intention of bringing trouble here (American AND Germany).

I just don't think we can ignore them anymore. We could stand aside and let them push the Jews into the sea, as the Islamists dream of, but seems to me that would only free them to focus more on the US.

[King Barry's Back]

Is this addressed to me? If so I guess I don't understand your point.

First, the scenario we're looking at is for Israel to perform a tactical strike similar to what they did against Iraq years ago. Nobody is suggesting that they will nuke Iran. If that happened then I would agree with Baylor that all hell would break loose in the Islamic world.

From all intelligence a tactical strike wouldn't be effective due to the fact that Iran's enrichment facilities are buried and very spread out. These aren't my words. They're the words from our intelligence guys.

Again, what is your point?


jkj, I agree that's what they say in the papers. But based on my miniscule nuke knowledge -- it seems to me that destroying SOME of Iran's nuclear R&D and manufacturing, and launching infrastructure, and some of their missiles and warheads, would be preferable to destroying NONE of it.

If the Israelis could, let's say, put the Iranians behind by another 5 years, that's five years we wouldn't have if there was no strike.

[jkjsooner]

Agreed and I'm by no means completely against an Isreali strike. I'm not sure if it would be in our best interests or not. I think arguments could be made either way.

On another point, I think naming Iran in the "axis of evil" was a major tactical mistake. Iran had been becoming more and more moderate every year. It's my opinion that that statement alone pretty much secured Ahmadinejad's rise.

[Sooner_Havok]

Everyone just needs to relax, we just gave Israel 4 billion dollars worth of our top fighter jets. Yup, that ****ing Obama, he is such a jew hater.

Link (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/08/15/world/AP-ML-Israel-US-Jets.html?ref=world)

[texaspokieokie]

says it is a "purchase". if so, & if they really pay for them, really good for
Lockheed & the economy.

[Sooner_Havok]

says it is a "purchase". if so, & if they really pay for them, really good for
Lockheed & the economy.

It was only 5 sentences long, how did you miss this?


Israel's government is expected to approve the deal soon. The purchase will be funded by U.S. military aid to Israel.

[texaspokieokie]

yep, stupid on my part !!!

[OklahomaTuba]

I'd really really really like to get the hell out of that entire region and tell everyone, including the Israelis, to **** off. But of course as long as we are energy dependent we'll never be able to do that.

Last time I checked, Israel doesn't export oil to us.

[Sooner_Havok]

http://2parse.com/images/simpsonsisrael-1.jpg

[sooner_born_1960]

Come on tuba. You know he's talking about the whole Middle East.

[Sooner_Havok]

yep, stupid on my part !!!

Maybe not stupid, but naive to think the US would make Israel pay for anything.

Why are we Israel's bitch? We are only one of their parents, where the hell is Europe? They are more responsible for bringing Israel into the world than we are, so why do we have to answer Israel's every beck and call? Can't we kick them out of the nest yet?

[Sooner_Havok]

Come on tuba. You know he's talking about the whole Middle East.

He's a political hack. That aside, I doubt he even knows how to tie his own shoes so I wouldn't give him credit for knowing anything.

[texaspokieokie]

i think it's more "stupid" & poor reading.

[OklahomaTuba]

Come on tuba. You know he's talking about the whole Middle East.No, he singled out Israel. A country we don't have soldiers in.

And the only reason we even have to be involved with them is because the religion of peace would like to see Holocaust: Part II.

But given the left's usual antisemitism and enthusiasm at building mosques whereever they please, letting Iran have nukes and supporting things like Shria Law, I'm sure it won't be too long till we allow the freedom fighters in Hezbollah and Hamas to drive the Jews into Med and we won't have to worry ourselves with little ol Israel.

[Sooner_Havok]

No, he singled out Israel. A country we don't have soldiers in.

And the only reason we even have to be involved with them is because the religion of peace would like to see Holocaust: Part II.

But given the left's usual antisemitism and enthusiasm at building mosques whereever they please, letting Iran have nukes and supporting things like Shria Law, I'm sure it won't be too long till we allow the freedom fighters in Hezbollah and Hamas to drive the Jews into Med and we won't have to worry ourselves with little ol Israel.

heh, no soldiers. You're 100% right. But, where does Israel get every piece of their military equipment. What is stamped on every Israeli M-16, every F-15 and now F-35? What three little letters? give you a hint, two vowels with an 'S' in between them.

But you are right, the USA will let Israel die.

[Sooner_Havok]

Does anyone else ever get a sense of hope from reading a Tuba post?

[OklahomaTuba]

heh, no soldiers. You're 100% right. But, where does Israel get every piece of their military equipment.

Probably the same place every other ally we have does.

[JohnnyMack]

Atheism would solve this problem.

Just sayin'.

[OklahomaTuba]

Atheism would solve this problem.

Just sayin'.

Worked well for 30 Million dead Chicoms, among others...

[OklahomaTuba]

BTW, we've given much more to the Muslim world than we have given to Israel.

Just think of what we have given to Iraq and Afghanistan alone.

Not to mention the 1.5 billion we are now giving to Pakistan, and billion we give to Egypt, and the 500 Million we give to the terrorists in Hamas.

Oh, and we keep the KOSA royal family firmly in power as well.

Help's keep them nicely divided, and away from forming a large caliphate super state controlling with world's oil which was AQ's goal, and is also Iran's.

[JohnnyMack]

Worked well for 30 Million dead Chicoms, among others...

Heh. Only took 1 minute to reel in Tuba on that one.

[Fraggle145]

Heh. Only took 1 minute to reel in Tuba on that one.

I laughed too.

[texaspokieokie]

off topic;

i see that canada is also gonna buy some f-35s. hopefully, they will pay for them.

6.5 bil worth

[Sooner_Havok]

Oh wow, it gets even ****ing better! We are handing over 20 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters to the Israelis, and Lockheed Martin agreed to buy more component parts for the JSF from Israeli firms; at a price of around $4 billion.

Please, remind me again, which group over there is the terrorists, and which group is our friend, cause they both seem to like ****ing Uncle Sam with a sandpaper baseball bat!

[BU BEAR]

To understand how our relationship with Israel has benefited us, please read the following well-written article:

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/html/pdf/Satloff20100720

BTW, Havok, I enjoyed your Simpson's cartoon. Truly, if American tax dollars are at work in Israel, then the Holy Land is one of only a few places that our tax dollars actually do work. Our tax dollars seem to be prone to lethargy in most areas where they were intended to work.

[SicEmBaylor]

Yeah, Israel sure knows how to repay its greatest ally.
http://www.alternet.org/world/130891/breaking_the_taboo_on_israel's_spying_efforts_on_t he_united_states/

Look, in the battle between Israel and their enemies...I wish Israel the best. But our relationship with Israel has had a major detrimental effect on our ability to conduct diplomacy in the region. And there is NOTHING more dangerous to our security than getting involved with Israel in a mid-east war.

It's long time we cut off our support for Israel and leave Israeli security up to the Israelis.

God, I hate that region of the world.

[BU BEAR]

Yeah, Israel sure knows how to repay its greatest ally.
http://www.alternet.org/world/130891/breaking_the_taboo_on_israel's_spying_efforts_on_t he_united_states/

Look, in the battle between Israel and their enemies...I wish Israel the best. But our relationship with Israel has had a major detrimental effect on our ability to conduct diplomacy in the region. And there is NOTHING more dangerous to our security than getting involved with Israel in a mid-east war.

It's long time we cut off our support for Israel and leave Israeli security up to the Israelis.

God, I hate that region of the world.


I hate to break it to you, but even if we disengage from Israel, the rogue governments of that region will continue to actively work against and undermine us. You might want to actually read the document that I posted to understand what a strategic asset Israel is in terms of diplomatic relations and counterbalancing the Arab states who are not friendly to our interests (that would be all of them except maybe Jordan). Iran's interest in our destruction comes from an apocalyptic religious ideology, not our support for Israel. Israel just happens to get thrown in the rhetoric to help drum up the masses. It was not our support for Israel that created the current mess in the middle East. It was a fatally flawed foreign policy by the Carter administration that allowed the Shah to be deposed and the Ayatollahs to come to power. Boy, I am glad those people wont be back in charge. Oh wait, Obama's foreign policy is being implemented by a bunch of Carter and Clinton retreads. What could go wrong?

Yes, Israel spies on us. We spy on them. Britain spies on us. We spy on them. Everyone spies on everybody else. The game has been played that way for centuries.

[jkjsooner]

It was a fatally flawed foreign policy by the Carter administration that allowed the Shah to be deposed and the Ayatollahs to come to power. Boy, I am glad those people wont be back in charge. Oh wait, Obama's foreign policy is being implemented by a bunch of Carter and Clinton retreads. What could go wrong?

So the Carter administration caused the Shaw's secret police to brutally repress the people for 20 years before Carter took office?

Please enlighten us to your view of what Carter did? Historians criticize Carter because he supported the Shah far too long and made a fool out of himself telling the Iranian people how great of a ally the Shah is with the U.S. when it was clear that public sentiment in Iran was leading towards the overthrow of the Shah.

Our foreign policy to prop up the Shah sure as hell didn't start with Carter...

[PDXsooner]

Too bad we used our "invade on the basis of nukes" card on a country that didn't have nukes.

[Sooner_Havok]

Too bad we used our "invade on the basis of nukes" card on a country that didn't have nukes.

Israel does...

[jkjsooner]

Too bad we used our "invade on the basis of nukes" card on a country that didn't have nukes.

One of the many reasons the war in Iraq was one of the biggest policy gaffes in decades. I'll defend Bush in saying that the war was justified but being justified does not make it prudent or wise.

[BU BEAR]

So the Carter administration caused the Shaw's secret police to brutally repress the people for 20 years before Carter took office?



The Shah's use of Savak was one of many causes of the revolution, but it does not absolve Jimmy Carter of his naivety and negligence in allowing the Ayat'allah Khomeini to come to power. Clearly, if we did not have anyone better than Ayat'allah Ruhollah Khomeini waiting in the wings to assume power, then Carter should have continued to support the Shah. Carter pressured the Shah to allow more political freedom, relax censorship, and release political prisoners. That all sounds good on the surface, but Carter did not have a clue about the fallout from these actions. The more relaxed (or less repressive) environment allowed the youth to take up radical Islam in droves. Net result: Massive popular support for the crackpot in exile, Ayat'allah Khomeini.

By removing our support for the Shah, we traded a leader who repressed his people, but was friendly to our interests with a religious dictator who repressed his people, was unfriendly to our interests, and turned the state of Iran into the world's largest state sponsor of terror. Prior to 9/11, the Ayat'allah's proxy, Hizb'allah, had killed more Americans than any other terrorist group. The Ayat'allah's proxies continue to work to weaken our nation and kill Americans.

Only a foolish person would take Carter's side in Carter's decision to withdraw support for the Shah. This is doubly true since you have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight and you see that Carter's decision led to the modern father of state-sponsored terror being installed as the head of the Iranian government.

[PDXsooner]

Israel does...

True, but building any kind of alliance would be a lot tougher for Israel than it was for us.

[jkjsooner]

I think you give us way too much credit in our ability to control the internal affairs of Iran. Had we not been so involved the years preceeding the revolution it's doubtful that Iran would have swung so far toward fundamentalism.

You act as if we just flip a switch and control the rest of the world. We have great influence for sure but nothing like you assert.

[Sooner_Havok]

True, but building any kind of alliance would be a lot tougher for Israel than it was for us.

True, they have pretty much pissed the rest of the world off. America is their only ally. Gee, wonder why everyone else left? Israel is soooooooooo nice and doesn't grab countries that are their "allies" by the short hairs. :rolleyes:

[ouwasp]

Iran has had it coming since 1979. :mad:

America's policy regarding those vagabonds has been:
Sit on hands
Now wring hands
Repeat

Heaven knows what sort of Pandora's Box may be opened with an Israeli strike on Iran. But Israel has been tolerating an Iranian war by proxy for years. They seem to have adopted our spineless policy. Don't see why that would change...

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Sooner_H: While Isreal may not have all the best interests of the U.S. on their mind, they are ideaologically close thinking to us than the others in the area. I would rather be closer to them than the others - outside of keeping your enemies clser than your friends attitude...

Agree with BUBear: Iran would likely have swung over to fundamentalism either way (the pan arabia, aryan/french enlightment thinking was way too entrenched), Jimmah just made it happen sooner with his incompetency. Oblahma will give them the keys...