Iran Begins Uranium Enrichment

It ain't so much about whether or not Iran has nukes.

Cuz all they might do with 'em one day is lob one over and blow up Israel.

And the Israelis ain't gonna let 'em get 'em anyway.

From a national security standpoint the U.S. doesn't need a known
supporter of state sponsored terroism to have a fricken weapons grade
plutonium factory churning out product!

It is really really simple, really! Sheesh!
 
Winky said:
It is really really simple, really! Sheesh!
Go ahead and explain this stuff then. If it's so simple it shouldn't take much effort.

Winky said:
From a national security standpoint
Why do you think they're a threat to US national ssecurity?

Winky said:
the U.S. doesn't need
The US helped them make it right?

Winky said:
a known supporter of state sponsored terroism
Got some info about this?

Winky said:
to have a fricken weapons grade
plutonium factory churning out product!
What makes you think they have one of those?
 
I've never been against going into SA. I also see the fundamental reasons why it's a bad choice.

The U.S. government first listed Iran as a terrorist sponsor in 1984. Among its activities have been the following:
  • In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
  • Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
  • Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
  • U.S. officials say Iran supported and inspired the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 U.S. servicemen.
Council on Foreign Relation
 
multi-lateral action...
We are signatories to a treaty that requires us to do more than "hold Syria responsible" for this attack. Syria has staged a state-sponsored attack on our NATO partner on Danish soil, the Danish embassy. According to the terms of the NATO treaty, the United States and most of Europe have an obligation to go to war with Syria.

Or is NATO — like the conventions of civilized behavior, personal hygiene and grooming — inapplicable when Muslims are involved? Liberals complain about "unilateral action," but under the terms of a treaty created by Dean Acheson and the Democrats, France, Germany, Spain and Greece are all obliged to go to war with us against Syria. Why, it's almost like a coalition! OK, Mr. Commie: Saddle up!
...begins when?
 
Back
Top