09-08-2005 19:58									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

OOOPssss.....

And i still cannot delete my own post...

	09-08-2005 20:27									#32
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Sava we can only hope those morons blow themselves up in their efforts...

I've waited literally years for you to say something that made sense. FINALLY.

Iran has been a rogue nation for a very long time.
Syria is even worse.

	09-08-2005 20:37									#33
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

but given the choice, I'd rather nuke Texas than Iran...

	09-08-2005 20:45									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Iran cannot be allowed having nuclear weapons. Nothing else to say about it.

	10-08-2005 06:34									#35
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Datajack Franit Iran cannot be allowed having nuclear weapons. Nothing else to say about it.

Why exactly?

Sounds like there is MUCH more to say about it.

Iran would have nukes today if the dictatorial Shah had remained in power, much like their neighbors Pakistan have nukes today. Iran's sin is being on the US's bad side.

	10-08-2005 07:11									#36
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by GePap Iran's sin is being on the US's bad side.

Just like Saddam Hussein.

Bush warned Iran that they can't develop nuclear weapons - while the US is testing nukes and designing new ones.

	10-08-2005 09:21									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Its the same bullcrap, that somehow the Iranian regime can't be trusted with nukes aqs much as the other regimes that have them, which I view as utter nonsense, specially since no one ever brings up any worthwhile theories to back up such a spacious arguement.

And then the terrorism canard- wow, so some states actively support political violence vs. People in other states. HOw, well, normal. I fail to see how supporting "terrorism" invalidates you from nuclear ownership, but arming rebels or the corrupt governments trying to stop them, leaing to deaths in far greater numbers make you a responsible member of the international community.

	10-08-2005 09:33									#38
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by GePap Its the same bullcrap, that somehow the Iranian regime can't be trusted with nukes aqs much as the other regimes that have them, which I view as utter nonsense, specially since no one ever brings up any worthwhile theories to back up such a spacious arguement. And then the terrorism canard- wow, so some states actively support political violence vs. People in other states. HOw, well, normal. I fail to see how supporting "terrorism" invalidates you from nuclear ownership, but arming rebels or the corrupt governments trying to stop them, leaing to deaths in far greater numbers make you a responsible member of the international community.

Forgive me, but you sound like a third world version of Charlton Heston.

	10-08-2005 09:45									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Sorry for not letting go of the very simple fact that a few states attempting to retain control over a specific weapons technology is a plan doomed from the start to fail, specially not only when their overall notion violates the foundational idea of all modern international relations (that of the soverign state) but also is based on hypocritical and self-serving policies.

If we trully want to stop nuclear proliferation, the solution is total nuclear disarmament. Since none of the monopoly holders, and the states that stayed out of the deal and thus now get to have nukces (Israel, Pakistan, India), is anyone trully surprised that revisionists states might have aims on getting the means for self-defense?

	10-08-2005 09:50									#40
	Tired of ads?

I'm not surprised. They shouldn't be surprised either when their facilities get bombed.

I'm sorry, GePap, but I don't agree that the world can afford an extention of whatever misbegotten amendment of the Yankee Constitution allows assault weapons in private hands to nuclear weapons on the global stage.

Incidentally, there is broad agreement internationally on this issue. call it a law if you will.

	10-08-2005 14:49									#41
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither I'm not surprised. They shouldn't be surprised either when their facilities get bombed. .

Will the same hold true for Israel and Pakistan, India and China ?


Pakistan's secret services were with the Taleban when they entered Kabul and drove the Mujahedeen out, for instance.

Pakistan has been accused by India of harbouring Muslim terrorists and sponsoring terror attacks on Indian soil. Pakistan has gone to war with India in the past. Pakistan is ruled by a military dictator.

Clearly, Pakistan is dangerous too.


On the other hand, Iran guarantees political representation to its Christian and Jewish and Zoroastrian minorities, gives the franchise to women, and has elections.


Bomb- not bomb- you decide !

	10-08-2005 16:20									#42
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Dear God, molly, are you actually defending Iran's "right to bear arms"?

	10-08-2005 16:28									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Az Dear God, molly, are you actually defending Iran's "right to bear arms"?

I was ?


Whereabouts ?


I simply find the notion that one country that was supposed to be working on the 'Islamic bomb', Pakistan, is our friend- despite its military regime, atrocious human rights' record, support for Sunni terrorists and extremists, war record with regard to India and patchy record with regard to democratic government.


Why is Pakistan therefore 'good' and Iran 'bad' ?

	10-08-2005 17:16									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I don't think anyone's too happy about Pakistan's nukes, if only for the fact that Mr. Khan later on sold lots of techs to just about everyone buying. The truth is, however, there is nothing you can do about Pakistan's nukes. However, Iran is an enemy, and them getting nukes is a danger to the world.

We also must remember that Pakistan wasn't always a military regime, IIRC.

	10-08-2005 17:28									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Az We also must remember that Pakistan wasn't always a military regime, IIRC.

And Iran isn't either, but Pakistan has twice in recent memory had (and has still) a military dictatorship, linked with Islamic terrorists and Sunni fundamentalists responsible for more American deaths than Iran.

It also has friendly links with China and both China and Pakistan have been at war with India- another member of the long range missile and nuclear power club.

Iran has had its diplomats killed by the Taleban regime- a regime which Pakistan recognised and supported.

quote: October 1, 1998 The Iranian Iran and Afghanistan are on the brink of war. The crisis threatens regional and global peace and stability. At the same time this crisis exposes the need for renewed cooperation between Iran and the United States. Both governments must take advantage of this new window of opportunity to change the unfortunate course of their relations while disarming the conflict. In August the Taliban militia executed eight Iranian diplomats and a journalist after overrunning the Iranian Consulate during the capture of Mazar-i Sharif.

Oh the irony... 'this crisis exposes the need for renewed cooperation between Iran and the United States.'


And yet somehow 'Iranistan' is the bad guy not allowed nuclear weapons or facilities (despite its elections, and constitution, and lack of a military dictator) whereas Pakistan is our friend.

I'm far from thinking a modified theocracy is somewhere I'd like to live, but it seems there's an awful big double standard in the room that no one's talking about.

	10-08-2005 17:36									#46
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison But it has so many other uses like...erm...yeah, loads

It can be used to make ceramic glazes, atleast.

	10-08-2005 17:36									#47
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Khamenei et al. certainly aren't nice guys. But at least they're not batshit crazy like some other leaders of rising nuclear powers are. It's not that big a deal. The biggest problem here is if some rogue Revolutionary Guards decide to have some fun. The essential difficulty we have in this situation is that nuclear weaponry is a supported among pretty much the entire Iranian political spectrum (of course some people may be more willing to sacrifice nukes for economic gains, etc. than others). Military action is absolutely not a realistic option here.

	10-08-2005 17:43									#48
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: It's not that big a deal.

Ugh, speak for yourself, your not the one that will be living under the threat.

	10-08-2005 17:48									#49
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Az quote: It's not that big a deal. Ugh, speak for yourself, your not the one that will be living under the threat.

Does Israel's weaponry not pose a threat to anyone ?

quote: Unlike Iran and North Korea - two countries whose alleged nuclear ambitions have recently come to the fore - Israel has never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, designed to prevent the global spread of nuclear weapons. As a result, it is not subject to inspections and the threat of sanctions by the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3340639.stm

	10-08-2005 17:56									#50
	Tired of ads?

The biggest reason why Iran's nuclear ambitions can't be derailed is probably Israel's nukes (followed closely by Pakistan's nukes). If Israel decided to disarm, that's probably the easiest way to get Iran to abandon their program (as its political support would be substantially reduced). But, it's your call Az, as you say, I'm not the one living there.

	10-08-2005 18:25									#51
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Does Israel's weaponry not pose a threat to anyone ?

Not really, if didn't even use them in 73', there is no chance that we'd ever use them offensively. It's just an excuse by the Iranians, so it's all pure rubbish.

How does the fact that Israel is not supervised by the IAEA make Israel's nukes more dangerous? Israel never posed any threat to Iran, not even to the Islamic Republic. No TEH EVIL ZIONAZIS theory can claim that Israel wants to occupy Iran or conquer it. Iran, however, has spoken against Israel all the time, and has an axe to grind with it, perhaps for the role of leadership in the muslim world ( trying to compensate for the obvious shia/Sunni rift, maybe), or maybe for the fact that Israel had good relations with the Shah, and would have good relations with any secular force in Iran, if any such forces arose.

The original reason Israel even got those nukes was that the USA wouldn't include us in their nuke umbrella, a clearcut defensive measure.

The original reason Iran got nukes? to gain geopolitical leverage, that is both offensive and defensive.

Now if you again think that Iran and Israel are equivalent, well, yawn.

	10-08-2005 18:31									#52
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Az quote: It's not that big a deal. Ugh, speak for yourself, your not the one that will be living under the threat.

Last I hear, US has missiles that can strike any target in the world. And if predictions of rising theocrazy in the US hold true, we'll have a fundamental theocrazy with global nuclear strike capability.

Thus, every citizen of the world outside the US is living under the threat of nukes, if they should stray from the global "leadership" of the US...

I'm only partly jesting...

	10-08-2005 18:33									#53
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Az you know better than me how easy it is for some people to believe at all the crap heard from world´s media about Israel.

Some people would rather like having a nuclear war in the Middle East instead of Israel being the only owner of nuclear power for defensive purposes

	10-08-2005 19:54									#54
	Put an end to popups!

Az, your argument is not very convincing, but we have to adjust for you being under threat (of potential Iran nuclear weapons), so you are not objective. I have yet to see someone explain why Israel should have nukes and Iran shoudn't, who should be the one to decide about it, and why have Europeans gotten so nervous about it.

	10-08-2005 20:10									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Az quote: It's not that big a deal. Ugh, speak for yourself, your not the one that will be living under the threat.

Point, game and match.

People like GePap that contiue to weep about Bush and the USA and UK in general need to realize that this position the USA and UK takes isn't taken to protect the USA.
Iran won't launch on the USA.
To insinuate that shows a firm grasp of moronic thought.
The point is that here's a terrorist nation, yes terrorist, that has potential targets at arm's length.

You really haven't got a valid argument against the
USA/UK stance.

	10-08-2005 20:29									#56
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Question - are there any internationally recognized states whose existence is denied by, and who are threatened regularly with destruction by, India or Pakistan or Israel?

While Iran regularly threatens to destroy Israel. IIUC Israel has for years been open to negotiations on establishing a nuclear free zone in the middle east, which would involve Israel giving up her nukes. These negotiations dont occur, because several states in the middle east, notably Iran, wont allow their representatives to sit in the same room as a representative of Israel.

	10-08-2005 20:32									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand Point, game and match. People like GePap that contiue to weep about Bush and the USA and UK in general need to realize that this position the USA and UK takes isn't taken to protect the USA. Iran won't launch on the USA. To insinuate that shows a firm grasp of moronic thought. The point is that here's a terrorist nation, yes terrorist, that has potential targets at arm's length. You really haven't got a valid argument against the USA/UK stance.

quibble. It isnt JUST a US/UK stance. Its the US/UK/ France/Germany.

Note, one of those four states is itself a non-nuclear state. Two of them are states that opposed the US and UK in regard to Iraq. Three are states that take a less pro-Israel position than the US does. Yet all of them have problems with Iran having nuclear weapons.

	10-08-2005 20:34									#58
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ramo The biggest reason why Iran's nuclear ambitions can't be derailed is probably Israel's nukes (followed closely by Pakistan's nukes). If Israel decided to disarm, that's probably the easiest way to get Iran to abandon their program (as its political support would be substantially reduced). But, it's your call Az, as you say, I'm not the one living there.

So Ramo, when does the Islamic Republic of Iran offer to send delegates to discuss mutual disarmament with Israel?

	10-08-2005 20:35									#59
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark So Ramo, when does the Islamic Republic of Iran offer to send delegates to discuss mutual disarmament with Israel?

It'd be a better idea for the one with the weapons to initiate discussion of disarmament.

	10-08-2005 20:35									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Yeah, France is a big backer. Don't get me started.

Here, have an update. Note UN?
Quibble.

Iran breaks U.N. seals on atomic plant
Reuters - 2 hours, 8 minutes ago

VIENNA - Iran began breaking U.N. seals at a uranium processing plant on Wednesday, U.N. and Iranian officials said, a step on the road to production of enriched uranium that could be used for nuclear weapons. "They have begun breaking the seals," International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said. "They are going to break all the seals and begin operating the plant in full."