Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
My point is - if we go to war with Iran, the Democrats will lose their gains in Congress and the White House in 2014 and 2016.
Iran has a nuclear program, but they're not interested in making a nuke
.
edited 17th Nov '12 3:47:19 PM by Serocco
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.@Serocco: Yes, the Saudis will. They've been doing so for awhile, now. They want to keep power, and being less fundamentalist will allow them to do so.
It won't until the world wises up, and realizes that you never start a land war in Asia, and Afghanistan is in Asia.
Not as long as we continue supporting Israel. If we stop supporting them, they will be significantly less confident. That won't solve the conflict, but it would be an improvement.
Evidently, when Obama refused to support Netanyahu's calls for war with Iran, the Israelis backpedaled quicker than a turtle neck.
It hasn't stopped the Senate from voting for sanctions, which screw the Iranians' over economically. Sanctions are a prelude to war, more often than not.
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.What? We're not going to war with Iran. You've made less and less sense over the last two pages. There's little reason for us to go to war with Iran, and war in general is very low in popularity. Even if they have a nuke, what we're doing now is politicking.
Seriously, we're unlikely to go into another costly war without very serious provocation. you're being paranoid again.
No they're not. They're a peaceful alternative to war.
edited 17th Nov '12 3:50:37 PM by AceofSpades
Furthering on my point over how nukes are used for intimidation, or more specifically, deterrence, let's say Iran gets a nuke. What would that mean? Deterrence, because Iranian nuclear weapons could be used to prevent wars – ones started by the US
.
edited 17th Nov '12 3:53:26 PM by Serocco
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.Okay what is going on with you? First you say we should bomb the entire middle east so we'd stop having to put up with their bullshit then you say we're terrible people (despite previously advocating a terrible action) and now you're saying we should leave Iran alone...?
Serocco I'm being serious, are you okay? Your rapid shifts in behavior are concerning me. You seem like you're either tired, unwell, or both.
edited 17th Nov '12 3:53:31 PM by Kostya
I'm saying that as much as I want to bomb everyone, I know I can't because it's a ridiculous proposal and policy.
That same scenario applies to Iran, if they ever get a nuke. Why would they create a nuke and theoretically bomb Israel/America if it'll cause World War III? They won't, because its a fool's errand.
As far as our politics are concerned with Iran having a nuke, I think the reason Americans and Israelis are concerned with Iran having a nuke has more to do with how they won't be able to start as many wars in the Middle East.
Do I make sense now?
edited 17th Nov '12 3:58:23 PM by Serocco
In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.Well, you didn't make that very clear at the beginning. You just said "bomb everything and let the survivors lie there" and then started telling us how evil America was for WW 2. I think you need to get a grip on yourself.
Also, I doubt Iran having the bomb would really deter us if public will went that way. As it is though, I doubt that we'll be picking a fight with them anyway. There's nothing to gain and a crapload more money to lose.
edited 17th Nov '12 3:58:50 PM by AceofSpades
Newt Gingrich on Mitt Romney and Barack Obama’s gifts: ‘Why didn’t you outbid him?’
edited 17th Nov '12 4:01:13 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016![]()
![]()
WANTING to nuke people is not a good thing!
And while Iran having a nuke 'might' stop a invasion, thats only because THEY COULD WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE MAP WITH ONE.
Countries like that should not have nukes! hell, no one should have them really! [[hottip: well, ok, a couple big ones in case of meteors wouldn't be a bad thing but we dont need those ready 24/7]]
And besides that, The US, and a number of other countries, have the ability to shoot down missiles. A nuke wouldn't stop them, it'd just mean theyd need more interceptor missiles.
edited 17th Nov '12 4:02:36 PM by Joesolo
I'm baaaaaaackKrugman's basically said it would be better dubbed an Austerity bomb.

Do we know for sure whether or not Iran is building a nuke? Frankly given their track record I'm skeptical. This does not mean we look for a reason to invade though. It just means we keep our eye on them. Unlike North Korea, Russia, and China they are capable of being a threat at this point.
edited 17th Nov '12 3:46:47 PM by Kostya