"Punch in the mouth"

britboy4321 said:
If they get nukes (and a decent delivery system) it's not going to be funny anymore ...
Click to expand...
You're right. I think a pre-emptive strike is in order.......

nukeitfromorbit.png
 
wozencl said:
It was a threat. In effect, stop speaking out against our repressive, religion based and backwards policies as well as our killing of, relatively, peaceful protestors or receive a "punch in the mouth".
Click to expand...

Exactly... They are not thretening to bomb us or anything extreme, just telling us to shut up...:confused:

Sorry I though this was the Iran that wasn't repressive or backwards, you must be thinking of the other Iran, not the one next to Iraq...
 
Iran won't launch Nuclear missiles, same reason why no-one else in the age of Nuclear proliferation would, M.A.D. Iran would be vapourized, if they hit us with a nuclear weapon then we will have no options but to retaliate in kind, there would be no alternative response we could take.

In all likely hood the more effective method of "hitting us" would be as it stands right now, terrorist acts. They cause damage, kill, and disrupt all without the serious consequences of nuking a country. They can do it covertly and over an extended period, hell they could resort to cyber-terrorism.
 
Amp34 said:
Exactly... They are not thretening to bomb us or anything extreme, just telling us to shut up...:confused:

Sorry I though this was the Iran that wasn't repressive or backwards, you must be thinking of the other Iran, not the one next to Iraq...
Click to expand...


It's a metaphor. Who knows what they mean by it? If anything. Just another random threat from a county that still thinks we have any real power on the world stage.

I'm guessing they'll just detain some more sailors. The Iranian govenrment, it seems, has a fetish for those. :D
 
VaderDSL said:
Iran won't launch Nuclear missiles, same reason why no-one else in the age of Nuclear proliferation would, M.A.D. Iran would be vapourized, if they hit us with a nuclear weapon then we will have no options but to retaliate in kind, there would be no alternative response we could take.

In all likely hood the more effective method of "hitting us" would be as it stands right now, terrorist acts. They cause damage, kill, and disrupt all without the serious consequences of nuking a country. They can do it covertly and over an extended period, hell they could resort to cyber-terrorism.
Click to expand...

yes they couldn't nuke us.

But they could threaten and invade their neighbours with impunity.

No western nation would willingly enter a nuclear war to help Iran's victims.
 
Is it just me, or are they trying to talk like common English people?

"I'll give you a slap in the mouth if you don't stop that nonsense."

You can just hear it echoing around the estates.
 
Oi Ahmadinejad, bring it on bitch. I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
 
Tefal said:
yes they couldn't nuke us.

But they could threaten and invade their neighbours with impunity.

No western nation would willingly enter a nuclear war to help Iran's victims.
Click to expand...

Depends how much oil is at stake :p But yeah you're right it's like bluffing in poker only with hydrogen bombs :eek:
 
The speach wasn't really meant for us (we are going to ignore it anyway) but for segments of the Iranian population. Make the government look good standing up to the old Imperialist powers and all that.
 
Ranger07 said:
Getting hit with a nuke wouldnt be funny at all but would Iran want to be vaporised in retaliation?, they might be lucky to get 1 or 2 working missles but Britain has roughly 200 with probably about 75 deployable within a very short time frame.
Click to expand...

Not to mention America, who are just looking for an excuse to remould that corner of the world... with a few H bombs (or whatever they use nowadays, photon torpedos?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom