The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux) - Page 521

Snowflake · 09-28-2009, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Oh, and I'm going to rename this the "JW, Wendybeth and Scaeagles Poking Thread'. Uhm, on second thought..... maybe not. Sounds kind of dirty.

Bwahaaaaaaaaaaa

wendybeth · 09-28-2009, 11:31 AM

I thought things were going along pretty much as they always do- which may or not be the point of whoever is cranky about whatever (and by that I mean the 'Always the same thing' crowd, the 'Read everything and then maybe you can post' crowd, and the 'Why is everyone always picking on me?' crowd), but I don't really care. We could go all the way back to MP and see the same rhythm- it's the nature of message boards, discussions in general, and absolutely not worth hurt feelings, rudeness, or potential loss of friendship. I like everyone on the LoT, and even if I don't agree with you or you with me, I don't see that as a barrier to continuing our friendships.

Scaeagles is still wrong, though.

(Kidding!!!)

BarTopDancer · 09-28-2009, 12:20 PM

B. Clinton says the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy is still present.

So there is a right-wing conspiracy to destroy Obama's administration and a left-wing conspiracy to indoctrinate children into the left-wing arena.

Everyone is out to get everyone.

I think the entire country needs anti-paranoia drugs.

Or, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

BarTopDancer · 09-28-2009, 12:22 PM

Iran lies about their missiles and nuclear program (big surprise!).

I think we can all agree that Iran with these types of missiles is not a good thing. And it seems like most of the international world agrees.

Quote:

"There has never been a stronger international consensus to address Iran and its nuclear program than there is right now,"

wendybeth · 09-28-2009, 12:32 PM

I feel Iran is more of a danger to the world than Iraq ever was. We even sided with Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war- Rummy went on a 'goodwill' mission, had his picture taken with Saddam, and when asked later about WMD's in Iraq he said he knew they had them because the U.S.A. gave them some.

Alex · 09-28-2009, 12:39 PM

Iran should have every right to pursue nuclear weapons if they want. Of course, they should first withdraw from whatever agreements they've entered into saying they wouldn't.

But if they did so then I'd strongly argue for them being left alone do nuke up to their hearts consent. Same answer if it were Tonga, North Korea, Brazil, Canada, etc.

That said, while I have no doubt that Iran would like to see Israel be gone, I find the idea that they'd launch a missile attack directly on them. Or anybody else in the area. They'll get them and then they'll be a great big negotiating stick with which to say "**** off, we're going to do what we want and you're not going to do much more than huff and puff about it." Just like for everybody else who has them.

BarTopDancer · 09-28-2009, 12:45 PM

If Iran and North Korea had leaders who weren't batsh*t crazy I'd feel differently.

I'm also more concerned about them aiming them at oh you, know, us than Israel and the environmental fallout if they nuke anyone.

Alex · 09-28-2009, 01:23 PM

Oh, how I feel about them having nuclear weapons has absolutely nothing to do with how I think about their right to get them.

And I find the idea that Iran would launch an aggressive strike against us to be more laughable than them doing it against Israel. There's "insane" as in not caring a lick what the rest of the world thinks and then there's "insane" as in willing to risk your very existence. Kim Jong Il may be the latter (though there's not been any real evidence of that) but Ahmadinejad definitely isn't.

BarTopDancer · 09-28-2009, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Oh, how I feel about them having nuclear weapons has absolutely nothing to do with how I think about their right to get them.

And I find the idea that Iran would launch an aggressive strike against us to be more laughable than them doing it against Israel. There's "insane" as in not caring a lick what the rest of the world thinks and then there's "insane" as in willing to risk your very existence. Kim Jong Il may be the latter (though there's not been any real evidence of that) but Ahmadinejad definitely isn't.

If they launch against Israel (which I think is more likely then launching against us, though I'm more worried about them launching against us) wouldn't they still be risking their very existence based upon our relationship with Israel?

Alex · 09-28-2009, 02:16 PM

Yes it would just be slightly less direct and conceivably (not at all likely, but conceivably) a situation could be engineered that would give us pause before joining in.

And also, to launch an attack on Israel would require either shooting the missiles over our army in Iraq or through the airspace of a NATO member.

All of which is to say that I have very little fear of Iran launching a missile attach on either the US or Israel (there are other things that Iran may do that are less remote, in my opinion).

If you mean them launching missiles against us as in the mainland United States then you can stop being worried. Iran is very far away from having a delivery mechanism that could do that.

09-28-2009, 11:31 AM	#5202
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	I thought things were going along pretty much as they always do- which may or not be the point of whoever is cranky about whatever (and by that I mean the 'Always the same thing' crowd, the 'Read everything and then maybe you can post' crowd, and the 'Why is everyone always picking on me?' crowd), but I don't really care. We could go all the way back to MP and see the same rhythm- it's the nature of message boards, discussions in general, and absolutely not worth hurt feelings, rudeness, or potential loss of friendship. I like everyone on the LoT, and even if I don't agree with you or you with me, I don't see that as a barrier to continuing our friendships. Scaeagles is still wrong, though. (Kidding!!!) __________________
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2009, 12:20 PM	#5203
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	B. Clinton says the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy is still present. So there is a right-wing conspiracy to destroy Obama's administration and a left-wing conspiracy to indoctrinate children into the left-wing arena. Everyone is out to get everyone. I think the entire country needs anti-paranoia drugs. Or, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2009, 12:32 PM	#5205
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	I feel Iran is more of a danger to the world than Iraq ever was. We even sided with Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war- Rummy went on a 'goodwill' mission, had his picture taken with Saddam, and when asked later about WMD's in Iraq he said he knew they had them because the U.S.A. gave them some. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2009, 12:39 PM	#5206
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Iran should have every right to pursue nuclear weapons if they want. Of course, they should first withdraw from whatever agreements they've entered into saying they wouldn't. But if they did so then I'd strongly argue for them being left alone do nuke up to their hearts consent. Same answer if it were Tonga, North Korea, Brazil, Canada, etc. That said, while I have no doubt that Iran would like to see Israel be gone, I find the idea that they'd launch a missile attack directly on them. Or anybody else in the area. They'll get them and then they'll be a great big negotiating stick with which to say "**** off, we're going to do what we want and you're not going to do much more than huff and puff about it." Just like for everybody else who has them.
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2009, 12:45 PM	#5207
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	If Iran and North Korea had leaders who weren't batsht crazy I'd feel differently. I'm also more concerned about them aiming them at oh you, know, us than Israel and the environmental fallout if they nuke anyone. __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver* Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2009, 01:23 PM	#5208
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Oh, how I feel about them having nuclear weapons has absolutely nothing to do with how I think about their right to get them. And I find the idea that Iran would launch an aggressive strike against us to be more laughable than them doing it against Israel. There's "insane" as in not caring a lick what the rest of the world thinks and then there's "insane" as in willing to risk your very existence. Kim Jong Il may be the latter (though there's not been any real evidence of that) but Ahmadinejad definitely isn't.
	Submit to Quotes

09-28-2009, 02:16 PM	#5210
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Yes it would just be slightly less direct and conceivably (not at all likely, but conceivably) a situation could be engineered that would give us pause before joining in. And also, to launch an attack on Israel would require either shooting the missiles over our army in Iraq or through the airspace of a NATO member. All of which is to say that I have very little fear of Iran launching a missile attach on either the US or Israel (there are other things that Iran may do that are less remote, in my opinion). If you mean them launching missiles against us as in the mainland United States then you can stop being worried. Iran is very far away from having a delivery mechanism that could do that.
	Submit to Quotes