
gizmoy2k said:If they want a nuke so bad......give em one.

furnace said:
I think Iran are asking for it tbh... But that is just by going from what the news tells me.
Who would stand by Iran if they were attacked - like, who'd be their allies?

There is absolutely no point sitting on the sidelines.andy said:it would work quite well till they nuke us back
Cowardice is for the weak IMHO 
andy said:havent really paid allot of attention to any of these "wars" but i asume oil is still a major part of them
so random question here
where does china get oil from ? they must be almostneeding as much as the US these days
how come they dont need to start pointless wars so they can get more of it ?
anyone think theyre up to no good , its always the quiet ones isnt it![]()
Zip said:Syria is one.
And all the Islamic Militant groups floating around the world
There are others but i forget(Possably Saudi Arabia but im not too sure)
andy said:havent really paid allot of attention to any of these "wars" but i asume oil is still a major part of them
so random question here
where does china get oil from ? they must be almostneeding as much as the US these days
how come they dont need to start pointless wars so they can get more of it ?
anyone think theyre up to no good , its always the quiet ones isnt it![]()
Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are no more democratic than Iraq was, it is just that their rulers support the US. The UAE isn't that different although they are making real efforts to open up to the outside world and ensure prosperity "after oil".dbmzk1 said:I fail to see how it could be about oil. Just doesn't add up.
The worlds biggest oil reserve is in Saudi Arabia, and we appear to have no problems with them. The worlds second biggest is in Canada, but it is not as easy to get, being what is called non-conventional oil. Though Iran does have the worlds second biggest reserve of conventional oil, Kuwait and the UAE have almost as much, yet they are appear to be our friends. Pretty sure it would be easier to invade them over Iran too.
Not for a little while they wont, even the Americans admit that Iran will not have viable, deliverable nuclear weapons for five to ten years.dbmzk1 said:From what I can see, for Iran at least, it seems to simply be down to the fact that the US really, really don't want them to have a nuke. Probably because the chances are [the Iranians] will use it against Israel or Iraq.
I think that the only kind of "backing down" that will be acceptable to the Americans will be "regime change" - they want a tame, corrupt, pro-American puppet in Iran again.dbmzk1 said:As for my reply to the OP. Honestly I think that unless Iran back down we will see some kind of military intervention from the US.
It doesn't look as though Russia is going to back Iran on this one.Iran has rejected claims by Russian officials that it has failed to meet payments for work on the Bushehr nuclear plant in southern Iran.
. . .
Under the Bushehr deal, Russia would have started the fuel shipments by March, launched the plant in September and begun to generate electricity by November.
. . .
BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says it would be uncomfortable for the Russians if they began to supply nuclear fuel to Tehran before the International Atomic Energy Agency had given the country's nuclear programme a clean bill of health. He says many analysts see the reports that Tehran is falling behind on its payments as a pretext to delay the delivery. BBC Link
Chris1983 said:If the US attack IRAN this will be bad news. Don't forget Russia sits right next to IRAN and supply them with advanced arms.
Chris
TC1 said:Bush is a War-mongerer. He just wants to get in there and stir things up! God help us all if Iran is attacked as then we will have a big war on our hands! All the Islamic countries will join forces. There will be more terrorist attacks etc etc. Bush should be put on the front-line.
Visage said:If i recall correctly it was the reasoning behind deplying Patriot ABM batteries....which subsequently turned out to be nearly useless....