first place

mattabesta wrote:

you know nothing
1. the us set up a dictatorship in iran 50 years ago and in 1979 the citicens revolted and critasise the us hevely.

That makes Iran more a victim of the US than an enemy.

mattabesta wrote:

2. iran dose not like israel wich is unafraid of using theyr nuclear capabylity potentally drawing pakistan and the inda into a nucklear war.

1. It's not classroom politics. Is not like "he doesn't like me so I don't like him and my friends don't like him". And how Israel making a nuclear strike on Iran would draw Pakistan and India into a nuclear war? It's not like France launches a nuclear missile at India and Immediately China lauches one to great Britain.

mattabesta wrote:

3. iran held the us embassy hosteg for a very long time.

And that conflict was solved by in the 1980's by trading some weapons. Else US had nothing to do in the Iran-Iraq war, yet US sank several Iranian ships and shot down an Iranian passenger aircraft.

Even inspite of all those actions US has made against Iran, Iran hasn't really done anything considerable against US.

Iran is very touchy. I am glad they have kind of backed down and war will not happen. Bush is leaving and Abumadenajad(not even gonna try and spell it right.) isn't that bad of a leader because he knows when to back down... Korea on the other hand...

Iran does not pose a threat to the US. The "War on Terror" is a lie; terrorism is not real threat, its just a Straussian rouse; and not the first one.

Diogritor wrote:

Iran is very touchy. I am glad they have kind of backed down and war will not happen. Bush is leaving and Abumadenajad(not even gonna try and spell it right.) isn't that bad of a leader because he knows when to back down... Korea on the other hand...

*Ahmedinajad

I personally think it wouldn't be bad if Iran or Korea had nuclear weapons. That would just balance things a bit.

It might be more balanced but Victorian deterrent plans never work.

oligarch wrote:

It might be more balanced but Victorian deterrent plans never work.

Well if Iran gets nuclear weapons and there is a Nuclear war between Israel and Iran (one of the least likely things to happen) it's two less problems for the world to care about... but a lot of cultural and intellectual wealth lost.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

It might be more balanced but Victorian deterrent plans never work.

Well if Iran gets nuclear weapons and there is a Nuclear war between Israel and Iran (one of the least likely things to happen) it's two less problems for the world to care about... but a lot of cultural and intellectual wealth lost.

well america backs isreal, i doubth they would let that happen, then again russia and china back iran what a world we live in eh?

I do not care if Iran or Evil Korea(as opposed to Zerg Rush Korea) get nukes because I do not think an organized nation would use them. Who I fear is Islamist extremist, If They attacked us with a nuke who would we hit back?

India and Pakistan could go at it but that wouldnt drag anyone in, So thats ok... I would almost be ok with lowering the population a few...hundred million.. Minus the that sounding terrible part.

Diogritor wrote:

I do not care if Iran or Evil Korea(as opposed to Zerg Rush Korea) get nukes because I do not think an organized nation would use them. Who I fear is Islamist extremist, If They attacked us with a nuke who would we hit back?

You'd just have to choose from a list of Middleeastern nations.

Diogritor wrote:

India and Pakistan could go at it but that wouldnt drag anyone in, So thats ok... I would almost be ok with lowering the population a few...hundred million.. Minus the that sounding terrible part.

Well, an incident would drag China.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Diogritor wrote:

I do not care if Iran or Evil Korea(as opposed to Zerg Rush Korea) get nukes because I do not think an organized nation would use them. Who I fear is Islamist extremist, If They attacked us with a nuke who would we hit back?

You'd just have to choose from a list of Middleeastern nations.

Diogritor wrote:

India and Pakistan could go at it but that wouldnt drag anyone in, So thats ok... I would almost be ok with lowering the population a few...hundred million.. Minus the that sounding terrible part.

Well, an incident would drag China.

And then the U.S and then Israel, france, Briton, Russia, etc...damn... Cant we have a nucular holocaust and not have people to watch and eat popcorn!?!

Eventually the non proliferation treaty will collapse; it wasn't that strong to begin with.

oligarch wrote:

Eventually the non proliferation treaty will collapse; it wasn't that strong to begin with.

so..we can watch the hilarity(come on. You gotta admit all out war because of religion is funny.) and not get dragged in, Alright!

Diogritor wrote:

oligarch wrote:

Eventually the non proliferation treaty will collapse; it wasn't that strong to begin with.

so..we can watch the hilarity(come on. You gotta admit all out war because of religion is funny.) and not get dragged in, Alright!

The West would be dragged in though, its 60 years too late for isolationism.

[quote="Zealot_Kommunizma"]

mattabesta wrote:

you know nothing
1. the us set up a dictatorship in iran 50 years ago and in 1979 the citicens revolted and critasise the us hevely.

That makes Iran more a victim of the US than an enemy.

mattabesta wrote:

2. iran dose not like israel wich is unafraid of using theyr nuclear capabylity potentally drawing pakistan and the inda into a nucklear war.

1. It's not classroom politics. Is not like "he doesn't like me so I don't like him and my friends don't like him". And how Israel making a nuclear strike on Iran would draw Pakistan and India into a nuclear war? It's not like France launches a nuclear missile at India and Immediately China lauches one to great Britain.

mattabesta wrote:

3. iran held the us embassy hosteg for a very long time.

the us is imperilistic it has to commtrole the goverment.

i am offically number one now at 22:43 gmt 19.02.08

mattabesta wrote:

i am offically number one now at 22:43 gmt 19.02.08

You can thank that to my illness Matti.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

i am offically number one now at 22:43 gmt 19.02.08

You can thank that to my illness Matti.

well i've been ill now for 2 weeks 40c