Centurian Comman sense.

Trim If every little country had a nuke, the only result would be the extermination of most the life on the planet. The only reason that has not happen yet is that the players in the nuke game have redundent systems to minamize the chance of error. The cost for the training the hardware and maintaining it is more than most counties GNP.

Well said, warsprite. It's good to know I'm not entirely alone in at least some of my positions.

I thought there were a kind of bunker busters that used nukes to get at real deep areas, but I'm not one of those military hardware types so I'll take your word on it.

Wow Trim. I've got a whole lot to bash you on this time.

You're right, America did use nuclear weapons offensively. The first time they were ever used. Before we truly understood what they did. Yes, we did. Now, everyone knows what they are capable of and what the repercussions are. Invictus was correct in stating that I was speaking of the here and now, the current situation today. You'll note the tense I was speaking in does not indicate the past. You didn't even come close to proving my point absolutely wrong. All you've managed to do is show how biased you are.

No agent of the US government, to my knowledge, has threatened Iran with a nuclear strike. I searched for a news story containing something along that line, and nothing showed up. Sorry. Back up your statements before you make baseless accusations.

Any sane person should disagree with you. Yes, lets give nukes to the Taliban, Ahmadinejad, North Korea, South Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Taiwan, the Phillippines, all the former Soviet states... Yes, pure genious, Trim. Lets arm the entire world with nukes and lets see what happens. I guarantee you there's at least one insane leader somewhere in the world who won't hesitate to use them... and now you've set off a chain reaction as everyone starts using them in response. Congratulations! You've just scored a Nuclear Winter. Game, set, and match.

"...he and you do look at america with rose tinted glasses on, it can do no wrong."

Apparently you haven't been paying attention because I've bashed the hell out of Bush here, and in the "Fascism in America" thread I beat the hell out of our political system, too. No, I'm not a blind follower of everything American. I love my country, yes. I've sworn to uphold its constitution, I'm former military. But I'm a realist about things. Nothing is ever perfect.

Except my hated for all things terrorist. That, my friend, is pure and unfettered, and absolutely perfect.

As for the bunker busters- no, they're just hardened conventional explosives so that they can penetrate deep into the earth and have a delayed fuse so that they don't explode on impact, they explode after they've burrowed deeply.

Well, we -do- have nuclear bombs that burrow like that, but, again, we won't use them without nuclear provocation :P

if you actually read what i said, i said i wasnt sure if america had threatened iran like that, i thought they had but only as a memory.

And i also said i read the context of your statement wrong, but i do love how you and invictus just try and score cheap points and ignore comments i make that you dont have a response to. I would prefer no one had nuclear weapons, but as they do i think everyone should have them.

There a deterent thats the point and whats the biggest deterent to not use nuclear weapons, than the complete distruction of the human civialization.

I did have a feeling you were miltary. By the way North Korea have nukes, why do you think people have stopped threating them, it wouldnt surpirise me if south korea were givern nukes as well.

by the way marchosias you couldnt have looked very hard for that news story, http://www.nukewatch.com/Quarterly/20062summer/page%201.pdf as i found it in about 2 secs, so i was right and it wasn't just a memory

http://revcom.us/a/044/us-threatens-war-on-iran.htm

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/10/353701.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3362443.stm-check 2006 so god knows where you were looking marchosias it is hard to see a computer screen through those tinted glasses :p

trim, it is called "selective perception" :) They only see what they want to see. That's why there's no point in bringing out evidence ;)

very good point

"I've sworn to uphold its constitution, I'm former military. "

So, I was right about the brainwashing part :)

Joking, I'm a psychologist, and I'm perfectly aware of what real brainwashing is. American Patriotic Way is nothing compared to what we had to endure while Yugoslavia still existed. Our elementary schools were teaching kids ONO & DSZ (OpćeNarodna Obrana i Društvena Samozaštita) - something like "General National Defense and Social Self-preservation". 13-year old kids were taught to bury landmines and shoot military rifles. And guess why? To be ready in case of NATO/US invasion. Or Russian invasion. Or alien invasion, for that matter :)

Right, I looked at all of your links, and well... Amazing. First of all, your first link, the "proof" that the US threatened Iran with a nuclear strike... The only threat is in the title of the article. No US officials are quoted with any threats. But, here, let me quote one of your other 'news' stories for you.

"One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites.”

The MILITARY always presents ALL options to the CIC. Thats Commander In Chief for you non-military types. That is not a threat. Bush didn't say "We're going to nuke Iran." Amazing how -your- tinted glasses allow you to perceive the world in a light like that. No US official has come out saying, "If Iran gets nuclear weapons, we're going to nuke them." Nobody. Yes, there are plans. There are ALWAYS plans. Because the one thing that the US military wants to avoid is being caught unprepared. So we prepare for everything. That includes nuclear exchanges. What do you think the #1 repeated drill is on nucelar missile submarines? Yeah, thats right. The launching of its missiles. So there's no mistakes, they won't get launched accidentally, and there's no question if they must be launched. It will go off without a hitch. Because it was -planned- for.

Summation... yes, of course there's a plan to nuke Iran. There's a plan to nuke every potential enemy on the globe. No, you're dead wrong, there were no threats made, and thus far, you've provided zero evidence of a Threat to nuke Iran.

Denzel... you're one to talk of selective perception. I've brought out 90% or more of the evidence in this thread, and yet, we're still having this discussion. And, in contrast to Trim's 'evidence', what I've brought out is actual quotes, actual facts, not some crazy journalist's skewed perception of world events.

I'm glad you're joking about the brainwashing part. Examine all the things I'm a realist about. I've bashed Bush. I've bashed our political system. There's not much left except turning against my own country, and it will take a hell of a lot more than the pro-terrorist words of Trim to get me to do that.

"The U.S. offered to use nuclear weapons against Iran if they did not “cease and desist” all nuclear activity." guessing you missed that one?

One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites.”-yeah play down facts put infront of you, i cant talk to you anymore, i shoudl have realised how brainwashed you were when you quoted websites with pictures of the prophet muhamed on them.

"pro-terrorist"??
Saying someone is pro-terrorist ought to be like invoking Hitler... once it happens the debate is officially over and the invoker of the absurd accusation loses.

Yeah, I caught that one at the very bottom of your .pdf link. Thats not American words. Those are the words of a British journalist who doesn't speak for the US military or any US political leaders. He doesn't even quote his source. Guessing you missed that one.

Play down facts? I just gave you the straight up truth, Trim. The US has a plan to nuke any WMD threat. We also have a plan to invade -everywhere-. Just in case. None of these things are threats- they're our military being prepared. So, yes, the Military presented the Political Leader of our country with the option to use nuclear weapons. Along with EVERY OTHER option on the table. None of these things are a threat to nuke Iran or any other country, and you STILL have yet to address that fact.

LOL! I'm sorry, but ROFL! I'm -brainwashed- because I post links to sites with the picture of the Prophet Muhammad on them? Ok, my Muslim friend. Sure. Keep wearing those tinted sunglasses, because you're going to need them.

Marchosias, it would be foolish to expect you to turn against your own country. I just want you to doubt your own country, and it's policies.

For example. you say that there's a plan for everything. I'm sure that there is a plan for aerial defense of Washington D.C. There must have been one in 2001, too. So, if SOMETHING flies in and manages to hit Pentagon (and I'd like to see ONE proof of that something being a Boeing passenger aircraft), the plan was either:
1) Very bad. Hard to believe that the plan of aerial defense of D.C. is as bad as the plan of defense of Pearl Harbor in '41
2) Turned off temporarily on purpose. Now, who would be able to do that? The same people that can relieve J.F.K. off his duty. The same people that will make sure Obama doesn't live long enough to see the end of his term (yes, I'm taking bets... I've already got huge amounts of ice-cream from my friends betting that Slobodan Milosevic won't live to hear the words "guilty" in Hague).

You haven't responded to my question about how is it possible that at least 10 of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were alive after the event?

Dexter, Trim has been against -anything- I have said that is against militant Islam, and therefore, terrorists. Its not absurd for me to call him pro-terrorist. Hell, he didn't even refute that in his post.

I don't have to respond to your "question" about "at least" 10 of the "alleged" hijackers being alive. Provide proof, and then we can talk about it. But its going to have to be some hardcore proof, because the simple fact that you said "alleged" when referring to the hijackers lends little credibility to your argument. While there are conspiracy theories I believe, that's not one of them.

Here's something to chew on, though. Maybe intelligence officials misidentified the hijackers, so the "suspected" hijackers are alive, but the real ones are dead.

As for the "plan" for the aerial defense of DC, no, I rather doubt that there was a plan for that.

Even if there was, how do you identify a "hostile" airliner? How does a US official justify shooting one down and killing hundreds of innocent people? It would be a tough sell to the American people without substantial proof that many more lives would have been lost if it hadn't been done.

i ignored it because of its stupidity, of course im against terroists you fucking idiot nothing i have said says i support them, an you assume im muslim im far from it mate, i can just see all sides of an argument and go research things properly.

Do you know how offense it is to show an image of the prophet, if you actually took notice of what goes on outside your own borders you would know.So any website that has such images is blatantly trying to be offensive, and cant ever be used as a reliable source.

So, yes, the Military presented the Political Leader of our country with the option to use nuclear weapons. Along with EVERY OTHER option on the table. None of these things are a threat to nuke Iran or any other country- did you not read what you wrote as im sure "with the option to use nuclear weapons" is a threat

your mistake is taking my comments as an attack on america which is far from it, i just dont see the reasoning why any country with nukes can tell another country that they can not have them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrKG8OOof1o

The plan. 5:10-5:36

Trim, it is their right given by God himself. remember, they have "In God we Trust" printed on their money, Yet, Iran is a theocracy with uneducated voters ;)

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

The FBI itself is not suspecting mr. Bin Laden of 9/11. He is wanted for embassy bombings in Africa. I guess he is not a suspect for 9/11 because of the lack of evidence?

lol, whats the uks right then?

UK has the right of having "Navy second to none"!... no, wait, that's obsolete :P Well, worked at the Falklands ;)

And Israel has the right to that part of land because some old Jewish men wrote that in a best-seller book 5 millenia ago!

And Russia has the right to support South Ossetia because they have an infinite number of Main Battle Tanks!

And St Vincent & Grenadines have the right to shut up and pretend nothing is happening when someone big is shooting someone small, unless they want to be shot at, too :)

I'm not sure I buy the claim that we overtly threatened Iran with a nuclear strike (haven't seen the evidence at least) - however, it is pretty darn clear to me that we were making it clear that was our intention by how we talked around the issue and how we were playing a serious game of Gulf-of-Tonkin chicken in the Persian Gulf there for a while. It was clear that at the very least we were strutting around itching for a fight. Thankfully (as with Krushev in Cuba) the other guy blinked and backed off a bit... (Threats don't have to be overt to be clear... no one questions what a thug means when he says "It'd be a shame if anything happened to your lovely wife" - threat or no threat? [on the international stage most countries are thugs - us included])

Is such gamesmanship wise diplomacy? That could be argued. But we don't really plan on using nukes someday someone will call our bluff and we would lose face and would have damaged our diplomatic efforts going forward. Or if we really plan on using nukes and follow through... then god forgive us - cause no one else will.

...not quite as impressive to say "Navy fourth to none"

Just like you never hear fans chant exuberantly "We're number two!" (waving their foam hand with two fingers raised up)

Well. the one bet I did lose to my friends (and I'm still buying beer for them when we meet for gaming on Fridays) was that Bush will attack Iran before the end of October. I'm thankful for that, because oil is now below 50$, and my children aren't dying of radiation sickness... Beer is a small price :)

Gentlemen, I propose we settle this matter in a gentlemanly fashion. Please join me in the following game:

http://www.phpdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=7321

trim, Marchosias, Invictus?

Good luck!