Horace Heffner wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, at 3:18 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
And your point regarding occupation is?
I only asked what it meant, I didn't say you were wrong. I don't
disagree with
you that it would have that result. I do however disagree with the
ethics, the
legality, and with the original premise that any form of occupation
is necessary
to begin with.
My point was not about ethics at all though, merely that pursuit of
nuclear weapons capability is a *stupid* strategy for a country like
Iran. My only intended involvement here was to predict possible
scenarios, not consider ethics. Ethical or not, when any state
starts an unlimited war then that war is unlimited. A small power
has great disadvantages in such a war. Asymmetric conventional wars
are more sensible for small power war mongers that insist on having
their wars, and of course no war at all is way better.
I agree with Horace, nuclear weapons are dirty, both to make and use. If
you threaten another country with them, then don't be surprised if they
hit you first.
Robin was going on about the head Mullah in Iran being opposed to nukes,
Ahmadidajad is a figurehead, the council of Mullah's is running the
country. So if the Mullahs don't like it, they should silence Ahi,
before one of the three countries that he's threatened with
annihaliation does it for them. I assume that the Mullah's share the
same ology that Ahi does, and if you believe that your god has commanded
you to do the battle of Armageddon, then that's what your going to do.
Later he posted:
Once again, the Iranians have never made any such threat. How can they, they
don't even have any nukes. All the media is full of is stories about how the US
and Israel *think* they are trying to produce nukes. To me, it is blindingly
obvious that this is just a rehash of the same excuse that was used to invade
Iraq. Surely any thinking American must be able to see this too?
Come on Robin, Ahi has repeatedly given speeches in which he has made illusions to Israel, Britain, and the USA disappearing. I've heard translations of him saying it! What do you think that means?.
As for Osama Bin Laudin, I think that he's hiding out in a cave and has
eschewed the use of any high tech gadgets which can be traced in real time.
Pat Bailey just sent me a list, compiled by scholars for 9/11 truth, of
alleged war criminals whom they contend brought us 9/11. IMHO, this is a
complicated explanation for what happened. A simple explanation is that
a group of Moslem terrorists attacked us. I'm willing to concede that
they may have been advised to do it on the morning of that day, which
coincided with a planned air defense excersize which involved turning
off air defenses.
--- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! --
http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
