Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

US considering use of nukes in Iran

Iran Bush Administration Nukes 2006

  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#1 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:07 AM

New Yorker Magazine has a troubling piece by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Sy Hersh detailing the Administration's plans for Iran.

Quote

The adviser added, however, that the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons in such situations has gained support from the Defense Science Board, an advisory panel whose members are selected by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. “They’re telling the Pentagon that we can build the B61 with more blast and less radiation,” he said.
The chairman of the Defense Science Board is William Schneider, Jr., an Under-Secretary of State in the Reagan Administration. In January, 2001, as President Bush prepared to take office, Schneider served on an ad-hoc panel on nuclear forces sponsored by the National Institute for Public Policy, a conservative think tank. The panel’s report recommended treating tactical nuclear weapons as an essential part of the U.S. arsenal and noted their suitability “for those occasions when the certain and prompt destruction of high priority targets is essential and beyond the promise of conventional weapons.”

Several signers of the report are now prominent members of the Bush Administration, including Stephen Hadley, the national-security adviser; Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence; and Robert Joseph, the Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.

The Pentagon adviser questioned the value of air strikes. “The Iranians have distributed their nuclear activity very well, and we have no clue where some of the key stuff is. It could even be out of the country,” he said. He warned, as did many others, that bombing Iran could provoke “a chain reaction” of attacks on American facilities and citizens throughout the world: “What will 1.2 billion Muslims think the day we attack Iran?”

Quote

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that 'a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.' He added, 'I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, 'What are they smoking?''

Seriously.  Violent, messiah-complex -- Sounds like PCP.   :angel:

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#2 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:13 AM

Are they stupid?!!  :blink:  Oh yeah.  :suspect:  

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot

#3 Captain Jack

Captain Jack

    Where's the rum?

  • Islander
  • 14,914 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:31 AM

View PostNonny, on Apr 8 2006, 10:13 PM, said:

Are they stupid?!!  :blink:  Oh yeah.  :suspect:  

Nonny

I was thinking the same thing.
Posted Image
689 Reasons to Defeat Barack Obama in 2012:

https://www.national...at-barack-obama

#4 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:43 AM

Stupid? I was thinking more along the lines of stupid and insane. ;)
"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"

#5 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,681 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 01:14 AM

View Post_ph, on Apr 9 2006, 01:07 AM, said:

Quote

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that 'a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.'


This has got to be the single most stupid idea yet. You nuke them you're going to have to also, at the same time, nuke every muslim country that has nukes. You'll have to take them out hoping that you do so before they can launch their nukes....which really isn't an option.

If they just nuke iran the result isn't going to be them overthrowing their own government, its going to be every single muslim against America...and I don't think that's a fight America can afford at the present time.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

Looks like the Liberal Elite of Exisle have finally managed to silence the last remaining Conservative voice on the board.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” ~Thomas Jefferson

#6 tennyson

tennyson
  • Islander
  • 6,173 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 01:46 AM

The B61 isn't a tactical nuclear weapon. It is pretty much the defintion of a strategic nuclear weapon and has been for the last thirty some years. That variant designed to destroy deep hardened bunkers hasn't even been built yet. It was studied but no one to my knowledge ever gave the go ahead to make any.
All America's tactical nuclear weapons were either destroyed or stored under George H. W. Bush's order in 1992 and no one in the military is particularly willing to uncrate them now.
Here's another quote from the same article that wasn't included.

Quote

“There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries,” the adviser told me. “This goes to high levels.” The matter may soon reach a decisive point, he said, because the Joint Chiefs had agreed to give President Bush a formal recommendation stating that they are strongly opposed to considering the nuclear option for Iran. “The internal debate on this has hardened in recent weeks,” the adviser said. “And, if senior Pentagon officers express their opposition to the use of offensive nuclear weapons, then it will never happen.”
The sustained bombing offensive refers to conventional strikes with precision weapons the same plan that has been on the books since at least the mid 1990s with updates.
As far as muslim countries with nuclear weapons goes there is only one, Pakistan, and in the unlikely event of a war with Iran and the even more unlikely event that it includes nuclear weapons use by the US Musharaf would have to then fall and the new leadership would have to then give what primitive weapons they have to terrorists because their missiles can't reach the US or Saudi Arabia. Thier best has a range on the order of 1500km. A whole row of things would have to happen before anything remotely like that could even start. Even dictatorships aren't hardwired entities with an "all jump button" and ethnic and cultural differences do matter as much as religion.

Edited by tennyson, 09 April 2006 - 01:55 AM.

"Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."

— Londo, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark" Babylon-5


#7 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 01:48 AM

View PostLORD of the SWORD, on Apr 9 2006, 02:14 AM, said:

View Post_ph, on Apr 9 2006, 01:07 AM, said:


Quote

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that 'a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.'


This has got to be the single most stupid idea yet. You nuke them you're going to have to also, at the same time, nuke every muslim country that has nukes.

AKA, Pakistan.

Quote

You'll have to take them out hoping that you do so before they can launch their nukes....

I hadn't thought of that--but Pakistan's nukes are aimed at India.  

Quote

If they just nuke iran the result isn't going to be them overthrowing their own government, its going to be every single muslim against America...and I don't think that's a fight America can afford at the present time.

Ya think??  You have been advocating nuking Iran for quite some time now, LoTS.  What's changed?

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#8 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 01:57 AM

Well we have gotten nickle and dimed into giving up on the idea of stopping them. I wonder how long till we allow the wonderful and peaceful arab world to dictate how our way of life will be allowed to continue.

Edited by G1223, 09 April 2006 - 02:13 AM.

If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#9 Denny

Denny
  • Just Washed Ashore
  • 46 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 08:09 AM

The scary thing is that Bush's religion has probably made him crazy enough and, paradoxically, amoral enough to do something like that.  He's not Ahmedinejad's opposite but his mirror image.

#10 Shalamar

Shalamar

    Last Star to the Left and Straight on till Morning

  • Forever Missed
  • 17,644 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 10:53 AM

Denny, Bush's recorded religious persuasion certainly does not encourage what you are suggesting - I am not christian, but I most certainly know that about the religion.
The three most important R's
Respect for One's Self / Respect for Others / Responsibility for One's Words & Actions.

Posted Image

#11 Denny

Denny
  • Just Washed Ashore
  • 46 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 11:00 AM

View PostShalamar, on Apr 9 2006, 03:53 PM, said:

Denny, Bush's recorded religious persuasion certainly does not encourage what you are suggesting - I am not christian, but I most certainly know that about the religion.

Jesus Christ certainly did not teach warmongering, just as Muhammad did not teach jihad in the current sense of the word.  To say that religion has no part in some of their' supposed adherents' craziness is, however, wishful thinking.  The Armageddonite wings of both Christianity and Islam teach exactly that sort of thing.

#12 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 11:09 AM

Yes Bush is a Christian. He has even acted proud of that faith. But he has never tried to use his faith in his war on terror. He has tried time and again to say how Islam is not the enemy.

Edited by G1223, 09 April 2006 - 11:15 AM.

If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#13 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 11:12 AM

Quote

Jesus Christ certainly did not teach warmongering, just as Muhammad did not teach jihad in the current sense of the word. To say that religion has no part in some of their' supposed adherents' craziness is, however, wishful thinking. The Armageddonite wings of both Christianity and Islam teach exactly that sort of thing.


Actually he did teach jihad and in the same sense that we view it in now.

http://www.venusproj...tes1.html#jihad

Quote

Qur’an 2:216 “Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims), though you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and like a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not.” [Another translation reads:] “Warfare is ordained for you.”
Qur’an 4:95 “Not equal are those believers who sit at home and receive no injurious hurt, and those who strive hard, fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause with their wealth and lives. Allah has granted a rank higher to those who strive hard, fighting Jihad with their wealth and bodies to those who sit (at home). Unto each has Allah promised good, but He prefers Jihadists who strive hard and fight above those who sit home. He has distinguished his fighters with a huge reward.”
Bukhari:V4B52N44 “A man came to Allah’s Apostle and said, ‘Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad in reward.’ He replied, ‘I do not find such a deed.’”
Bukhari:V1B2N25 “Allah’s Apostle was asked, ‘What is the best deed?’ He replied, ‘To believe in Allah and His Apostle Muhammad.’ The questioner then asked, ‘What is the next best in goodness?’ He replied, ‘To participate in Jihad, religious fighting in Allah's Cause.’”
Qur’an 33:22 “Among the Believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah and have gone out for Jihad (holy fighting). Some have completed their vow to extreme and have been martyred fighting and dying in His Cause, and some are waiting, prepared for death in battle.”
Bukhari:V4B53N412 “Allah’s Apostle said on the day of the conquest of Mecca, ‘There is no migration now, only Jihad, holy battle. And when you are called for Jihad, you should come out at once.’”
Bukhari:V4B52N311 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘There is no migration after the Conquest of Mecca, but only Jihad. When you are called by the Muslim ruler for Jihad fighting, you should go forth immediately, responding to the call.’”
Muslim:C28B20N4631 “I heard Muhammad say: ‘I would not stay behind when a raid for Jihad was being mobilized unless it was going to be too hard on the believers. I love that I should be killed in Allah’s Cause; then I should be brought back to life and be killed again.’”
Qur’an 9:111 “Allah has purchased the believers, their lives and their goods. For them (in return) is the Garden (of Paradise). They fight in Allah’s Cause, and they slay and are slain; they kill and are killed.”
Bukhari:V4B52N196 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, “None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.”’”
Qur’an 47:4 “So, when you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (them based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.”
Qur’an 9:91 “There is no blame on those who are old, weak, ill, or who find no resources to spend (on Jihad, holy fighting), if they are sincere (in duty) to Allah and His Messenger.”
Qur’an 9:122 “It is not proper for the Believers to all go forth together to fight Jihad. A troop from every expedition should remain behind when others go to war.”
Bukhari:V4B52N46 “I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, ‘The example of a Mujahid [Muslim fighter] in Allah’s Cause—and Allah knows best who really strives in His Cause—is like a person who fasts and prays without ever stopping. Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Cause into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty.’”
Bukhari:V4B52N50 “The Prophet said, ‘A single endeavor of fighting in Allah’s Cause is better than the world and whatever is in it.’”
Noble Qur’an 2:190 Footnote: “Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshiped), and Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape from this duty, or does not fulfill this duty, dies as a hypocrite.”
Bukhari:V4B52N65 “A man came to the Prophet and asked, ‘A man fights for war booty; another fights for fame and a third fights for showing off; which of them fights in Allah’s Cause?’ The Prophet said, ‘He who fights that Allah’s Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah’s Cause.’”
Muslim:C40B20N4676 “Jihad Is Compulsory.”
Bukhari:V4B52N284-5 “When the Divine Inspiration [Qur’an surah]: ‘Those of the believers who sit at home,’ was revealed, Maktum came to the Prophet while he was dictating the verse. ‘O Allah’s Apostle! If I were able, I would take part in Jihad.’ So Allah sent down revelation to His Apostle: ‘...except those who are disabled, blind, or lame.’”
Muslim:C40B20N4676 “Believers who sit home and those who go out for Jihad in Allah’s Cause are not equal.”
Bukhari:V4B52N54 “The Prophet said, ‘Were it not for the believers who do not want to be without me, I would always go forth in army-units setting out for Jihad.’”
Bukhari:V4B52N216 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Were it not for fear it would be difficult for my followers, I would not have remained behind any army units. But I don’t have riding camels and have no other means of conveyance. No doubt I wish I could fight in Allah’s Cause and be martyred and come to life to be martyred again.’”
Bukhari:V4B52N231 “Allah’s Apostle came to Mecca the day of the Conquest riding his she-camel on which Usama was riding behind him.” [Muhammad was lying.]  Bukhari:V4B52N59 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘By Him in Whose Hands my soul is! Whoever is wounded in Allah’s Cause...and Allah knows well who gets wounded in His Cause...will come with his wound having the color of blood but the scent of musk.’”
Bukhari:V4B52N45 “Someone asked, ‘Allah’s Apostle, who is the best among the people?’ He replied, ‘A believer who strives his utmost in Allah’s Cause with his life and property.’

Edited by Lin731, 09 April 2006 - 11:13 AM.

Posted Image
Posted Image

#14 Rhea

Rhea

  • Islander
  • 16,433 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 11:19 AM

View PostLORD of the SWORD, on Apr 8 2006, 11:14 PM, said:

View Post_ph, on Apr 9 2006, 01:07 AM, said:


Quote

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that 'a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.'


This has got to be the single most stupid idea yet. You nuke them you're going to have to also, at the same time, nuke every muslim country that has nukes. You'll have to take them out hoping that you do so before they can launch their nukes....which really isn't an option.

If they just nuke iran the result isn't going to be them overthrowing their own government, its going to be every single muslim against America...and I don't think that's a fight America can afford at the present time.

I agree.

But this is the same mind-set that made Bush willing to use provocation or assisnation as an excuse to invade Iraq (if he felt it was necessary). I go for stupid (he doesn't learn from those pesky mistakes he doesn't make) and insane - and SCARY.
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering.
- Robert A. Heinlein

When I don’t understand, I have an unbearable itch to know why. - RAH


Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done. One could write a history of science in reverse by assembling the solemn pronouncements of highest authority about what could not be done and could never happen.  - RAH

#15 Denny

Denny
  • Just Washed Ashore
  • 46 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 11:32 AM

The out of context quotations from the Quran mean nothing, for they were written (recited, actually) at a time when the Muslims were surrounded by hostile pagan tribes.  It is not a license to go out and attack anyone a Muslim feels like attacking, and call it a "jihad".

Edited by Denny, 09 April 2006 - 11:32 AM.


#16 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 11:41 AM

Quote

The out of context quotations from the Quran mean nothing, for they were written (recited, actually) at a time when the Muslims were surrounded by hostile pagan tribes. It is not a license to go out and attack anyone a Muslim feels like attacking, and call it a "jihad".

Perhaps someone needs to inform the current leaders of Islam of this fact. Perhaps someone ought to send a letter to Afghanistan since they based the desire to murder their former Muslim brother for converting to Christianity and the based that on theocratic law. According to the quotes anyone that isn't Muslim in an unbelieving infidel (regardless of whether it's then or now) so the context stands IMO.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#17 Denny

Denny
  • Just Washed Ashore
  • 46 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:01 PM

View PostLin731, on Apr 9 2006, 04:41 PM, said:

Perhaps someone needs to inform the current leaders of Islam of this fact. Perhaps someone ought to send a letter to Afghanistan since they based the desire to murder their former Muslim brother for converting to Christianity and the based that on theocratic law. According to the quotes anyone that isn't Muslim in an unbelieving infidel (regardless of whether it's then or now) so the context stands IMO.

I think there are better things to quote to people than the Quran, if we are going to be in the business of enlightening them, but the fact is that the Quran does not demand that every disbeliever anywhere be killed.  That interpretation is post-Muhammad.

#18 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:10 PM

Unfortunately, much like Christianity, it seems to come down to interpetation and who is giving it. Too much in religious is devoid of context. The same often happens in Christianity, unfortunately if this current interpetation of Islam is allowed to continue, it will become enshrined as the real meaning. We have the same kinds of issues in terms of end time prophecies here. They are taught by many religious demoninations but many don't release the context or the fact that the interpetation on say "The Rapture" are modern concepts.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#19 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:12 PM

Unfortunately both Islam and Christianity can be used to justify both extreme evil and good, the difference is that Islam's power as a state-religion was never broken decisively in the middle ages whereas Christianity was

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#20 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 09 April 2006 - 12:14 PM

Incidentally, and accepting that the new-yorker is hardly an unbiased middle of the road source.

http://www.newyorker...s/060417fa_fact

Quote

A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”

Fact? Opinion? Propaganda spin?

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Iran, Bush Administration, Nukes, 2006

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users