The United States-Over 5000 Nukes. But you . . . Iran . . .

[Pete]

Love it the useful idiots bye the propaganda hook, line and sinker.

Pakistan is an amazingly unstable country has been for decades . . . they have nukes.   It's probably the most unstable its ever been thanks to Obama's drone wars.

 



Pakistan is no where near as unstable as Iraq/Iran.  They are moderately westernized compared to other middle eastern countries.  

On this point, Beams is correct.  They are a former British colony (by way of India).   A large segment of the population is very educated.  A large segment isn't.  You know, like the tea party in the U.S.

[jtksu]

Wasnt Pakistan ran by the taliban until recently?  Doesnt seem very westernized to me.  Also, werent we against Pakistan developing nukes as well?  Seems like we were afraid they would use them on India...

[sonofdaxjones]

You guys haven't been paying attention to what's going on inside Pakistan then.

There's hundreds of thousands of refugees now due to the fighting.   The country is full of US JSOC Forces and Hired Gun U.S. Mercs like Blackwater and lots of CIA Spooks . . . behind the scenes the situation in Pakistan scares the living $hit the defense officials in our government.   There's even reports that the United States Special Forces are updating their plans to go in and secure the Pakistani nuclear arsenal themselves if need be.    The U.S. has very little trust in the Pakistani military and even less in the ISI.  You do understand that some circles claim that it was faction in the ISI that assisted the 9-11 hijackers right??   The Tribal Regions near Afghanistan are all pissed off at the way contractors that support the NATO operations in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) treat them . . . running their trucks over people, damaging roads etc. etc. etc.  

Educate yourselves, put down your Encyclopedia Britannica and college textbooks and join the real world.

The upheaval in Pakistan is far more violent than what is going on in Iran (primarily driven by CIA backed entities).

When's the last time a presidential candidate in Iran got assassinated??  

Good gawd . . .  

[Pete]

You guys haven't been paying attention to what's going on inside Pakistan then.

There's hundreds of thousands of refugees now due to the fighting.   The country is full of US JSOC Forces and Hired Gun U.S. Mercs like Blackwater and lots of CIA Spooks . . . behind the scenes the situation in Pakistan scares the living $hit the defense officials in our government.   There's even reports that the United States Special Forces are updating their plans to go in and secure the Pakistani nuclear arsenal themselves if need be.    The U.S. has very little trust in the Pakistani military and even less in the ISI.  You do understand that some circles claim that it was faction in the ISI that assisted the 9-11 hijackers right??   The Tribal Regions near Afghanistan are all pissed off at the way contractors that support the NATO operations in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) treat them . . . running their trucks over people, damaging roads etc. etc. etc.  

Educate yourselves, put down your Encyclopedia Britannica and college textbooks and join the real world.

The upheaval in Pakistan is far more violent than what is going on in Iran (primarily driven by CIA backed entities).

When's the last time a presidential candidate in Iran got assassinated??  

Good gawd . . .  

Iran's been a totalitarian regime for decades now....so the last time one was assassinated was when the regime changed.  You remember what it was like then.  You remember the mass exodus out of Iran to the west. 

What's your point here?  Is it that things would be better if the GOP was in charge, or that it's just as bad now?  I have to tell you man, it's clear that it's no better, but I'll never believe that it's worse.  We need to get the eff out of Dodge, or suffer the fate of every nation that has attempted the same before us.

[sonofdaxjones]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/12/pakistan-nuclear-weapons-security-fears

However, a report by Harvard University's Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs, titled Securing the Bomb 2010, said Pakistan's stockpile "faces a greater threat from Islamic extremists seeking nuclear weapons than any other nuclear stockpile on earth".

Okay kids, its adult swim time.   We'll let you back in the pool when you get a little bigger.

[jtksu]

Holy crap, Dax is one paranoid bastard.  Love the stories about spooks and "in some circles."  Hilarious stuff here.

[sonofdaxjones]

http://www.thenation.com/article/secret-us-war-pakistan

JT . . . would "some circles" be Harvard and the Nation Magazine.

Really, you guys don't even want to go here with me, I've been studying the situation closely for months.

[Pete]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/12/pakistan-nuclear-weapons-security-fears

However, a report by Harvard University's Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs, titled Securing the Bomb 2010, said Pakistan's stockpile "faces a greater threat from Islamic extremists seeking nuclear weapons than any other nuclear stockpile on earth".

Okay kids, its adult swim time.   We'll let you back in the pool when you get a little bigger.

What are you advocating?  You have a number of posts now aimed at creating awareness.  OK, you've got my mother rough ridin' awareness.  Now what?

[jtksu]

Dax has been "monitoring the situation closely?"  And by that, you mean reading articles online?

[Paul Moscow]

I would have assassinated Xerxes for what its worth.  He was total queers.

[Paul Moscow]

Dax has been "monitoring the situation closely?"  And by that, you mean reading articles online?

He's just trying to put it in a context that you might actually be able to understand.  

Can't preach to the deaf with words, ya know?

[sonofdaxjones]

I just find the hypocrisy of the United States running around the world trying to control which countries do and don't get Nuclear Weapons amusing.  

If you look at the way U.S. Military Doctrine is progressing and U.S. Military Technology is progressing, about the only way a country will be able to defend themselves against the United States is Nuclear Weapons.   One of the biggest reasons we don't want Iran with Nuclear Weapons besides the obvious is because if the day ever comes we want to pull the trigger on them they won't stand a chance.

Obama is pushing hard for a reduction in nuclear weapons because the United States is well on the way to developing the ultimate conventional capability and other countries will be even further under the thumb of the United States.  

Again, if you were Iran, what would you be doing right now.   Thousands of U.S. troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are signing base agreements all over in the former Soviet countries that are close to Iran, we have hundreds of warships that patrol the waters around Iran and India, Pakistan, China (the most oil hungry country in the world) and Israel all have nuclear weapons.  

JT . . . welcome to the World Wide Web . . . we don't need libraries any more, we don't need Faux News or MSNBC to tell us what to think.   

[Pete]

I just find the hypocrisy of the United States running around the world trying to control which countries do and don't get Nuclear Weapons amusing.  

If you look at the way U.S. Military Doctrine is progressing and U.S. Military Technology is progressing, about the only way a country will be able to defend themselves against the United States is Nuclear Weapons.   One of the biggest reasons we don't want Iran with Nuclear Weapons besides the obvious is because if the day ever comes we want to pull the trigger on them they won't stand a chance.

Obama is pushing hard for a reduction in nuclear weapons because the United States is well on the way to developing the ultimate conventional capability and other countries will be even further under the thumb of the United States.  

Again, if you were Iran, what would you be doing right now.   Thousands of U.S. troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are signing base agreements all over in the former Soviet countries that are close to Iran, we have hundreds of warships that patrol the waters around Iran and India, Pakistan, China (the most oil hungry country in the world) and Israel all have nuclear weapons.  

JT . . . welcome to the World Wide Web . . . we don't need libraries any more, we don't need Faux News or MSNBC to tell us what to think.   

I agree man, it is very hypocritical for us to go bonkers about Iran getting a nuke, while shrugging off other at-risk nations.

[sonofdaxjones]

Also understand that our JCOS along with Centcom just did a huge study of what is going on Israel and basically established that current political and domestic situation in Israel is putting U.S. lives at risk . . .that's extraordinary given the source.  The study went on to say that there's no way the U.S. could achieve its political goals in the middle east until the Arab-Israeli conflict is resolved.

You've also got political factions within Israel putting a lot of pressure on the U.S. administration about Iran . . . but meanwhile Israel is feeling the heat more so every day in regards to their Nuclear Weapons. 

It's a fascinating study. 

[wetwillie]

Then let Israel nuke them the next day.

Doubt it will be Nuke though.  Either way, I'd say there's a 75% chance somebody is going to be bombing Iran in the next 18 months.   Just can't let those Persians be a nuclear power.

I will be solidly against any administration that gets us involved with another conflict.  I'm obviously more liberal than your average GPC poster, but I am fracking done with this administration if they get us involved in another conflict.

Limestone is right, let fracking Israel clean up their own fracking mess.

Israel will gladly clean up this mess as they have been doing for the last half century.

[jtksu]

I just cant believe that Dax has an entire threat about how he wants Iran to have nuclear capability.

[wetwillie]

Love it the useful idiots bye the propaganda hook, line and sinker.

Pakistan is an amazingly unstable country has been for decades . . . they have nukes.   It's probably the most unstable its ever been thanks to Obama's drone wars.

Come on man, the cluster shazbot! in Afghanistan was set in motion the day boots hit the soil.  Just like every occupying regime that has ever set foot in that joint.  Has Obama kept it going?  Yep.  Would a republican have done the same (or more)?  Yep.  

I don't approve of either.  

I respect the hell out of our troops for following orders, but they are all dying in vain in both Iraq and Afghan.  

Recently watched the Hurt Locker, while I am not sure how much is based in reality, the sheer waste of life our troops have to bear is gut wrenching.  Can anyone of any political persuasion even muster a response as to what the eff we are doing there at this point?

[Dugout DickStone]

Dax, there is no res judicata in international politics.  We let paki have nukes in a cold war reprieve.  In hindsight, we wouldn't and I believe you that we have a whole gang of operators ready to secure the payloads if things go to crap.

That being said, no way Iran gets nukes.  This isn't the Brady bunch where Bobby gets a football because Greg got one.  Iran isn't getting the bomb.  Iran is currently our bitch and we intend on keeping it that way. 

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/12/pakistan-nuclear-weapons-security-fears

However, a report by Harvard University's Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs, titled Securing the Bomb 2010, said Pakistan's stockpile "faces a greater threat from Islamic extremists seeking nuclear weapons than any other nuclear stockpile on earth".

Okay kids, its adult swim time.   We'll let you back in the pool when you get a little bigger.

I don't see how anybody could disagree that Paki's nukes are vulnerable, but what good does it do to let Iran have them, too?

India helps keeps Pakistan in check.

[pike]

You guys haven't been paying attention to what's going on inside Pakistan then.

There's hundreds of thousands of refugees now due to the fighting.   The country is full of US JSOC Forces and Hired Gun U.S. Mercs like Blackwater and lots of CIA Spooks . . . behind the scenes the situation in Pakistan scares the living $hit the defense officials in our government.   There's even reports that the United States Special Forces are updating their plans to go in and secure the Pakistani nuclear arsenal themselves if need be.    The U.S. has very little trust in the Pakistani military and even less in the ISI.  You do understand that some circles claim that it was faction in the ISI that assisted the 9-11 hijackers right??   The Tribal Regions near Afghanistan are all pissed off at the way contractors that support the NATO operations in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) treat them . . . running their trucks over people, damaging roads etc. etc. etc.  

Educate yourselves, put down your Encyclopedia Britannica and college textbooks and join the real world.

The upheaval in Pakistan is far more violent than what is going on in Iran (primarily driven by CIA backed entities).

When's the last time a presidential candidate in Iran got assassinated??  

Good gawd . . .  

Just like those American "Hikers" that were caught in the middle of no where. They were definitely CIA dudes. 

[sonofdaxjones]

Limestone . . . really??  You just used a Brady Bunch analogy to describe what a sovereign nation can and can't do?? 

Plus, the only reason Pakistan was brought into the discussion was because apparently the World Police Force supporters that inhabit this board don't understand that Pakistan is far more unstable than Iran is . . . nothing more, nothing less. 

Gee, I wonder why the people of Iran have been so distrustful of the United States??


So lets review.   The U.S. overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran backed in the 1950's, the U.S. has invaded and conquered Iran's neighbor, thousands of U.S. troops sit right across the border from Iran,  the U.S. actively supported Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war,  the CIA is actively engaged in supporting anti government factions inside Iran, the U.S./NATO is pursuing military alliances and basing agreements in the former Soviet countries that are near to Iran, Iran shares a border with NATO partner Turkey where there's a huge U.S. airbase, the U.S. plans on deploying anti-missile shields in support of Oil Dictatorships and Theocracies in the Middle East and Israel has nuclear weapons and is sending its electronic war fare planes and Air Force out all the time to plan the routes for its bombers to go bomb Iran.   

Gee . . . what on earth are the Iranians thinking??

[Rage Against the McKee]

Dax, of course Pakistan is the most likely country for terrorists to secure nukes. Very unstable situation over there. What do you propose we do about it, though? Just march in and take them? Good luck with that.

None of this changes the fact that Iran with nukes would be just as much of a disaster as Pakistan with nukes.

[sonofdaxjones]

As far as Pakistan goes, yeah, we actually have plans to just "march in there and take them" if need be.

The goose steppers are missing the point here as always.   

Look at what we as a nation do, and then ask yourself why other nations react the way they do. 

Oh but wait, Barry W. Obama is now parroting the same Terra-ists lines and "can't let'm have nukes" lines of the previous administration and the Libratard ideologically driven useful idiots just line up and cheerlead.   

Just say no to war and U.S. hegemony . . . Unless a Democrat is president.

[Dugout DickStone]

As far as Pakistan goes, yeah, we actually have plans to just "march in there and take them" if need be.

The goose steppers are missing the point here as always.   

Look at what we as a nation do, and then ask yourself why other nations react the way they do. 

Oh but wait, Barry W. Obama is now parroting the same Terra-ists lines and "can't let'm have nukes" lines of the previous administration and the Libratard ideologically driven useful idiots just line up and cheerlead.   

Just say no to war and U.S. hegemony . . . Unless a Democrat is president.

For a guy who has been closely analyzing the situation, you seem a bit out of the loop. 

1.  Nations have been acting in their sole best interests since the advent of the nation-state.

2.  It is not in the US's best interests to allow Iran to become another nation in possession of deployable nuclear technology. 

3.  Profit.

To take it a step further, and as someone who has spent countless hours and tons of banwidth closely monitoring the situation you are no doubt aware, Iran has done nothing short of attack our troops in Iraq.  They have waged armed war against our troops in Iraq.  I would like a list of countries who would provide a country they are in armed conflict with access to nuclear weapons if they could at all prevent it.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

As far as Pakistan goes, yeah, we actually have plans to just "march in there and take them" if need be.

The goose steppers are missing the point here as always.   

Look at what we as a nation do, and then ask yourself why other nations react the way they do. 

Oh but wait, Barry W. Obama is now parroting the same Terra-ists lines and "can't let'm have nukes" lines of the previous administration and the Libratard ideologically driven useful idiots just line up and cheerlead.   

Just say no to war and U.S. hegemony . . . Unless a Democrat is president.

For a guy who has been closely analyzing the situation, you seem a bit out of the loop. 

1.  Nations have been acting in their sole best interests since the advent of the nation-state.

2.  It is not in the US's best interests to allow Iran to become another nation in possession of deployable nuclear technology. 

3.  Profit.

To take it a step further, and as someone who has spent countless hours and tons of banwidth closely monitoring the situation you are no doubt aware, Iran has done nothing short of attack our troops in Iraq.  They have waged armed war against our troops in Iraq.  I would like a list of countries who would provide a country they are in armed conflict with access to nuclear weapons if they could at all prevent it.

This is a good point. After the US, Iran is the largest arms supplier in the Middle East, specifically to radical Muslim extremists. If they get nukes, they will be supplying our enemies with those too.