• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I Want To kill. I Mean, I Wanna, I Wanna Kill. Kill....

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Disagreed. All it did was slow down their acquisition of nukes by about 10 years.

Cancelling the agreement let them go back to their normal track of research and acquisition.
It is now less than 8 years that under the agreement they would have nukes, guaranteed.

There is no research left for them to do, they know how to build the weapon, they have the missiles, they have the array of centrifuges which produce weapons grade material.

That weak piece of paper prevents nothing. They need to be totally stopped, period.

They easy way for them or the hard way for them, they need to be stopped.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
It is not inevitable. We can stop it.
with what?....more word games?

as with Japan.....they did not believe it could be true
the first bomb was a shocker

then they got stubborn

the second bomb was a line drawn

but now.....EVERYBODY has a copy and itchy trigger fingers

it's just a matter of time
some jerk will just do it

just to be doing it
 

Road Warrior

Seeking the middle path..
It is now less than 8 years that under the agreement they would have nukes, guaranteed.

There is no research left for them to do, they know how to build the weapon, they have the missiles, they have the array of centrifuges which produce weapons grade material.

That weak piece of paper prevents nothing. They need to be totally stopped, period.

They easy way for them or the hard way for them, they need to be stopped.
Disagreed that they'd have nukes faster under the agreement than without, but I'd like to see your data.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It is now less than 8 years that under the agreement they would have nukes, guaranteed.

There is no research left for them to do, they know how to build the weapon, they have the missiles, they have the array of centrifuges which produce weapons grade material.

That weak piece of paper prevents nothing. They need to be totally stopped, period.

They easy way for them or the hard way for them, they need to be stopped.
Should we use military force to stop every enemy or theocratic country that has or seeks nukes?
We could attack Israel, Pakistan, N Korea, China, Russia, & perhaps even Cuba (now that Russia is revisiting them).
How much war should we wage....
Take out military & manufacturing installations?
Power plants?
Civilians in cities?

Is all out war worth waging in order to ensure that only friendlies have nukes?
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Should we use military force to stop every enemy or theocratic country that has or seeks nukes?
so let's think about that

I have a gun
you have a gun

you wanna shoot my drone?

so WHAT if I was spying on you

got something to hide?
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Huh? Can you elaborate on this?
The agreement was for 10 years ( less than eight now ) after that there were no restrictions nor any requirements for renewed negotiations on a new agreement after the first ends.

The implication was that after 10 years they would be accepted as a nuclear power.

There were secret side deals that the details of them still haven´t been released.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
so let's think about that

I have a gun
you have a gun

you wanna shoot my drone?

so WHAT if I was spying on you

got something to hide?
There's the old double standard.
Don't spy on us.
Don't kill our drones.
But we can spy on you, & attack you if you if we wish.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Should we use military force to stop every enemy or theocratic country that has or seeks nukes?
We could attack Israel, Pakistan, N Korea, China, Russia, & perhaps even Cuba (now that Russia is revisiting them).
How much war should we wage....
Take out military & manufacturing installations?
Power plants?
Civilians in cities?

Is all out war worth waging in order to ensure that only friendlies have nukes?
All you list are except Cuba already are nuclear powers, itś too late. Kennedy in the cuba missile crisis agreed to never invade Cuba if Russia removed their missiles. That agreement still stands with Cuba and Russia. If Cuba in any way pursues nukes, invasion is guaranteed.

In no case has any country seeking nukes been a theocracy whose religious beliefs support a nuclear war as a way to bring in their theological new world. Further, as far as I recall, none has repeated endlessly for 40 years the aim of totally destroying another country.

Pakistan, the Muslim nuclear power, is a Sunni country, not at all the same as Shia.

It is a massive mistake to view Iranś religious government as rational by our standards, or as viewing the world and beyond as we do.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
All you list are except Cuba already are nuclear powers, itś too late. Kennedy in the cuba missile crisis agreed to never invade Cuba if Russia removed their missiles. That agreement still stands with Cuba and Russia. If Cuba in any way pursues nukes, invasion is guaranteed.

In no case has any country seeking nukes been a theocracy whose religious beliefs support a nuclear war as a way to bring in their theological new world. Further, as far as I recall, none has repeated endlessly for 40 years the aim of totally destroying another country.

Pakistan, the Muslim nuclear power, is a Sunni country, not at all the same as Shia.

It is a massive mistake to view Iranś religious government as rational by our standards, or as viewing the world and beyond as we do.
I suspect that Russia might try to station nuclear weapons
in Cuba as a result of our efforts in eastern Europe.
What evidence is there that Iran would use nuclear warfare
to the ends you claim?
Do you think we should take military action to stop N Korea
from developing platforms for their nukes?

To brand countries as rational or irrational is an illusion.
Those traits are both present in all countries.
Certainly, Ameristan behaves irrationally often.

Looking at the differences between Sunni & Shia....
Key Differences Between Shia and Sunni Muslims
...& also at how both have behaved, I'm not inclined
to say that one is safe relative to the other.
 
Last edited:

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
The agreement was for 10 years ( less than eight now ) after that there were no restrictions nor any requirements for renewed negotiations on a new agreement after the first ends.

The implication was that after 10 years they would be accepted as a nuclear power.

There were secret side deals that the details of them still haven´t been released.
That is hardly a guarantee and now there is nothing.

Ah yes, secrets that no one knows about, except they are all over the internet. Funny how that always works that way.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
There's the old double standard.
Don't spy on us.
Don't kill our drones.
But we can spy on you, & attack you if you if we wish.
Nope. Everybody spies on everybody else. Don´t attack our assets if they are not in your territorial waters or on or above your territory.

We will attack you to stop you from obtaining the means to start a nuclear war. Your neighbors in the region are terrified of you having nukes, and your religious beliefs make you totally irresponsible with conventional weapons let alone nuclear.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
There's the old double standard.
Don't spy on us.
Don't kill our drones.
But we can spy on you, & attack you if you if we wish.
now now now

you know very well.....
if you think it's in the best interest of your country...….
you are going to do what you think your country needs
including the development of high end weapons

and if you need to spy on other countries developing high end weapons …..
yes you will

and if your drone gets shot down...…

oh oh
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
I say....let the spying be allowed for all

no secrets

I have a gun......you should know it
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Nope. Everybody spies on everybody else. Don´t attack our assets if they are not in your territorial waters or on or above your territory.
Russian & China have downed manned planes.
We made no military response.
We will attack you to stop you from obtaining the means to start a nuclear war. Your neighbors in the region are terrified of you having nukes, and your religious beliefs make you totally irresponsible with conventional weapons let alone nuclear.
Irresponsibility abounds in more places than Iran.
I don't trust India, Pakistan, China, N Korea, Russia or Israel.
Should we stop them?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
now now now

you know very well.....
if you think it's in the best interest of your country...….
you are going to do what you think your country needs
including the development of high end weapons

and if you need to spy on other countries developing high end weapons …..
yes you will

and if your drone gets shot down...…

oh oh
I don't get upset when other countries play by the rules we observe.
If anything, we get away with far more than they.

We shot down Iran Air flight 655.
No apology.
Imagine if they'd shot down one of ours.
 
Top