Iran, Nukes, and the End of the World

The difference Tal is the the Islamist Nutjobs do not have the capability to bring about the End Times while the Christian Nutjobs do.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't agree. The worst Christian "nut job" is currently in power and I don't think that we in the U.S. will allow anyone worse than him to gain any power. Even so, the U.S. has its nuclear arsenal locked and monitored.Nobody simply pushes the button because "Jesus" tells them to! The other nut jobs overseas, on the other hand, are much less stable. The weapons have filtered into the hands of unstable nations such as North Korea. Would you seriously argue that our government would be more likely to initiate a nuclear attack than would North Korea?

Yes, particularly a successful attack.List the nations invaded by North Korea.Now list the nations invaded by the US.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

i would, too.we have this nasty habit of being overly isolationist or overly punchy with the buttons... especially people who think we're being "threatened". why should this be different with unconventional arms?

I agree that we have been aggressive...and it was to protect our economic way of life, among other things. However....

We helped stop Hitler and the aggressive powers in WW II. That was necessary and honorable.

​

Had we failed to stop Communism, what would have been the end result?

​

Now, with Islam spreading throughout the world, what would you have us do? Allow it to happen and sit back until we become assimilated into a foreign culture?

But only after US colonies in the Pacific were attacked by Japan.I'll point out that the "democratic" nations the US allied with controlled vast undemocratic colonies in the world -- I suspect that the majority of people under British or French rule had no say in how they were ruled).But maybe I'll give this one to you anyway.- First, the U.S. did not stop Communism. Second, it's debatable whether Communism was really such a grave threat that it needed to be stopped.- Huh? What are you talking about?

---

You can observe a lot by watching. -- Yogi Berra

List the Nations we have invaded. List the places we have conquered and occupied. Build the list. What? Do you seriously think we stopped communism? You do realize that TV and Radio along with their piss poor management brought about the fall of the Soviet Union. I Love Lucy and Leave it to Beaver and Maytag commercials and Soap Operas destroyed the Soviet Union. Nothing. That is a religious issue and up to the individual.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I know some people that lived in Moscow before, during, and after the fall of communism in Russia. Listen to what jar said. Key word in the fall of communism in Russia was "bread".

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

While I agree with you that it's debatable whether communism needed to be stopped, I would argue that at least the bastardized versions of communism that sprung up in certain places absolutely needed some intervention from the free world.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

Well, the US tends to be in the extreme of anything. When our people had isolationist feelings, we tried everything we could to stay out of everybody's way. When we decided to become a superpower, we've been in everybody's face ever since. We have military bases virtually throughout the world. Even Antarctica has a US naval base there. I think we had a base in England for 50 after WW2.Anyway, I wonder if it's not too much to ask for the US to be just a regular joe in the international community... you know, like Spain and such? Sweden and Canada seem to be doing pretty well without spending a rediculous sum of money on their military every year.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

I fully agree.If the Islamist Nutjobs had the capability, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

---

If those WMD that don't exist were easier to identify and handled properly, then this would not have occurred.

So you agree with jar that christian nutjobs are the greater threat?Because I could have sworn that you stated earlier that you thought the islamic nutjobs were the greater threat.

I agree with what I quoted. If Islamic nutjobs had nukes, they would have used them on Israel and the United States by now along with anyone else who doesn't agree with thier theological thinking.

---

If those WMD that don't exist were easier to identify and handled properly, then this would not have occurred.

the problem is, though, that there's a lot in the way of international "peacekeeping" that couldn't happen without US capabilities. but. i do agree that we could stand to spend less on our military and more on i dunno, education? i think the biggest problem with everything we do is that it's poorly organized and implemented, including our budget. our enlisted men hardly make enough to support families who sacrifice enough already, and our veterans are getting the shit end of the stick. meanwhile, we throw money at problems with no solution and our education system is one of the worst in the developed world.

But you have offered nothing to really support that assertion.However, that is also irrelevant to the topic, which in case you have missed it is "Iran, Nukes, and the End of the World".A Nation State is unlikely to use nukes against another Nation State. Iran with nukes is no greater threat than Iran without nukes. One sad thing about the MAD concept is that it really does limit your actions.In addition, you have shown no reason to think that any nuclear explosion would lead to the end of the world.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion