• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 13:33
CEST 19:33
KST 02:33
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic7Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic DreamHack Dallas 2025 - Official Replay Pack BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Ro8 - Group A [GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Ro8 - Group B RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu BW General Discussion StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Beyond All Reason What do you want from future RTS games?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine UK Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 20036 users

War in Gaza - Page 9

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 7 8 9 10 11 16 Next All
Xeris
Profile Blog Joined July 2005
Iran17695 Posts
December 31 2008 07:18 GMT
#161
Hah, ya.. that remains to be seen =P
twitter.com/xerislight -- follow me~~
Xeris
Profile Blog Joined July 2005
Iran17695 Posts
December 31 2008 07:18 GMT
#162
On December 31 2008 16:13 ieatkids5 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 31 2008 16:11 Xeris wrote:
On December 31 2008 15:58 ieatkids5 wrote:
Xeris did you purposefully punch in very very similar numbers (I've read 3409534908 books and As I said 34095834098x before) or did your fingers just happen to hit them like that? Not that it's extremely unlikely, since spamming keys with your fingers usually involves similar patterns of movements in your fingers. Heh.


No, I guess the number of books I've read is about 30-35, not including about 10-15 different public opinion polls, hundreds of news articles (I thumb through them daily and look for interesting stuff), and a couple other online articles / video conferences and interviews.

I was commenting on the similarity of the two numbers entered, presumably at random, to lighten up the thread
Wasn't questioning what you've read


lol wow, I didn't even realize that.. =P
twitter.com/xerislight -- follow me~~
Xeris
Profile Blog Joined July 2005
Iran17695 Posts
December 31 2008 07:20 GMT
#163
On December 31 2008 16:12 ahrara_ wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 31 2008 15:49 Xeris wrote:
On December 31 2008 15:38 Savio wrote:
On December 31 2008 14:10 Xeris wrote:
On December 31 2008 13:54 ahrara_ wrote:
1.) Ahmadenijad is a loud, obnoxious, figurehead who takes the credit and the blame for policies ultimately determined by Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamanei. Khamanei also exercises power through the council of guardians, a group of six "islamic jurists" who get veto power over any legislation and candidate for office. Almost everyone agrees that who is president has little influence of Iran's foreign policy, namely its nuclear program.

2.) Unless I missed it, why has nobody brought up the fact that the whole "wipe off the map" thing is a translational error and a stupid stupid stupid thing to repeat? A more accurate representation is "remove from power Israel's government," which every middle eastern country has always wanted, and is nothing new.



2) How would it get smuggled? Would terrorists steal them? Because Iran sure as hell wouldn't GIVE THEM AWAY. They wouldn't sell them either.


Why wouldn't Iran want an Islamic extremist organization to have a nuke? Why wouldn't they give them away? Sure they are expensive but that doesn't seem to matter to Iran. Imagine, the world's 2nd largest oil producer claiming that they need nuclear energy in order to provide energy to their people. Maybe Alaska should build snow machines to provide snow for their people.....

Iran is spending a LOT of money developing nuclear capabilities even though their whole country is floating on more oil than they could ever use and they already have the technology and infrastructure to pump it out and use it.

For Iran any trouble for the US is a good thing. This is why they team up with Chavez and why they support terrorists in Iraq. Don't you think a nuke in an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist group's hands would be worse for the US than for Iran? Its like they get to do the damage without taking the blame.


Now, I am not sure that Iran would actually DO such a thing, but I DO think that Iran developing nukes raises GREATLY the possibility of a terrorist organization getting one. Plus, if it was about money, I am sure extremely weathly fundamentalists like bin Laden would be willing to pay more than the cost of making the material.

Iran having nukes is just trouble no matter how you look at it.


This post shows how ignorant you really are about the issue. First off, I already explained why Iran wouldn't give their nukes away. How the fuck do you get around explaining why a terrorist group GOT A NUKE IN THE FIRST PLACE??? "They built it themselves, it wasn't us I swear" isn't gonna fly. Everyone will know it was Iran - they wouldn't do that, their government is not retarded. The fact that you seem to think they are is the biggest mistake anyone who ever deals with Iran will make.

Iran is "floating on oil" but do you have any idea what their oil production actually looks like? No you don't, because if you DID KNOW, you would know that Iranian oil production is not nearly producing at its peak capacity, their oil refining infrastructure is still weakened from the Iran-Iraq war and from 50 years of imperialism to British influences, who pretty much controlled their oil and didn't let Iranians run it, Iran is still figuring out how to refine it's oil better. In fact, Iran is actually a net importer of oil, that shows how much farther they have to go when it comes to their oil.

Iran is not a net importer of oil what are you smoking? Just to make sure I didn't pull a van winkle and wake up in an altered dimension I looked it on the CIA world factbook:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ir.html#Econ

If Iran is a net exporter, and it is, then there is no reason for it to want to invest in nuclear power unless it's to help develop weapons. It doesn't get to export as much, but developing nuclear power is in itself an extremely costly endeavour. The reason the US or net importing nations has an interest in developing nuclear power is more strategic than economic. First, they know how to and have a lot more experience with them. Second, it allows them to reduce dependence on imports, enhancing their soft power. Down the road, it could become a profitable investment for Iran, but for now, its money could be spent on better things than nuclear weapons.

The fact is, Iran exports nothing but oil today. Western sanctions have all but obliterated its export sector. These sanctions don't work for oil because demand is high in places like China. Iran could greatly improve its own economy if it were to comply with western demands. It doesn't do so for a couple of geopolitical reasons: a.) Nuclear power enhances its status in the region. Iran would very much like to be a leader in the Middle East. b.) Nuclear power keeps the US from executing, erm, "regime change."


sorry, I mis-said... I was stating that Iran's oil production is a lot lower than it should, I.E, they don't even produce enough oil after exports for their own domestic use.

PS. CIA factbook is not entirely accurate.
twitter.com/xerislight -- follow me~~
Savio
Profile Joined April 2008
United States1850 Posts
December 31 2008 07:21 GMT
#164
On December 31 2008 15:49 Xeris wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 31 2008 15:38 Savio wrote:
On December 31 2008 14:10 Xeris wrote:
On December 31 2008 13:54 ahrara_ wrote:
1.) Ahmadenijad is a loud, obnoxious, figurehead who takes the credit and the blame for policies ultimately determined by Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamanei. Khamanei also exercises power through the council of guardians, a group of six "islamic jurists" who get veto power over any legislation and candidate for office. Almost everyone agrees that who is president has little influence of Iran's foreign policy, namely its nuclear program.

2.) Unless I missed it, why has nobody brought up the fact that the whole "wipe off the map" thing is a translational error and a stupid stupid stupid thing to repeat? A more accurate representation is "remove from power Israel's government," which every middle eastern country has always wanted, and is nothing new.



2) How would it get smuggled? Would terrorists steal them? Because Iran sure as hell wouldn't GIVE THEM AWAY. They wouldn't sell them either.


Why wouldn't Iran want an Islamic extremist organization to have a nuke? Why wouldn't they give them away? Sure they are expensive but that doesn't seem to matter to Iran. Imagine, the world's 2nd largest oil producer claiming that they need nuclear energy in order to provide energy to their people. Maybe Alaska should build snow machines to provide snow for their people.....

Iran is spending a LOT of money developing nuclear capabilities even though their whole country is floating on more oil than they could ever use and they already have the technology and infrastructure to pump it out and use it.

For Iran any trouble for the US is a good thing. This is why they team up with Chavez and why they support terrorists in Iraq. Don't you think a nuke in an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist group's hands would be worse for the US than for Iran? Its like they get to do the damage without taking the blame.


Now, I am not sure that Iran would actually DO such a thing, but I DO think that Iran developing nukes raises GREATLY the possibility of a terrorist organization getting one. Plus, if it was about money, I am sure extremely weathly fundamentalists like bin Laden would be willing to pay more than the cost of making the material.

Iran having nukes is just trouble no matter how you look at it.


This post shows how ignorant you really are about the issue. First off, I already explained why Iran wouldn't give their nukes away. How the fuck do you get around explaining why a terrorist group GOT A NUKE IN THE FIRST PLACE??? "They built it themselves, it wasn't us I swear" isn't gonna fly. Everyone will know it was Iran - they wouldn't do that, their government is not retarded. The fact that you seem to think they are is the biggest mistake anyone who ever deals with Iran will make.

Iran is "floating on oil" but do you have any idea what their oil production actually looks like? No you don't, because if you DID KNOW, you would know that Iranian oil production is not nearly producing at its peak capacity, their oil refining infrastructure is still weakened from the Iran-Iraq war and from 50 years of imperialism to British influences, who pretty much controlled their oil and didn't let Iranians run it, Iran is still figuring out how to refine it's oil better. In fact, Iran is actually a net importer of oil, that shows how much farther they have to go when it comes to their oil.

The nuclear program if completed and used wisely will be the best thing they've ever done because it will given them cleaner, cheaper, and more renewable energy.

Again, a nuke given to a fundamentalist group would be a fucking terrible idea. Money alone doesn't explain it, what the fuck good is $50 billion (for example) going to do them if they are invaded by the entire world? None.

Please don't talk about the region, ESPECIALLY IRAN, if you haven't actually done research and don't know wtf you are talking about.


Xeris, you need to get some economic terms under your belt to continue. A "net importer" of oil would mean that it imports MORE oil than it exports. That is not the case. They do spend money on fuel imports but there is simply no way that they are a "net importer of oil".

In my post, I only mentioned that they have a ton of oil which is true. You are correct in saying that their refining capacity is limited, but do you really think it is cheaper to spend decades researching nuclear energy, starting from scratch than it would be to build a few more refineries? That would be an amazing thing to think.

As for the threat that they would be blamed for a nuclear attack done by a terrorist organization, that is probably true. If it could be proved that it was them and not a lost nuke from Russia due to corruption or Pakistan, then it would be a problem for them. It probably would be anyway, but not nearly the problem that launching a nuke from their own territory would present.

Its still true that a nuclear Iran certainly raises the chances of a terrorist organization getting their hands on one.

The fact that they are spending all this money to build nuclear energy which they don't have instead of refineries for oil which they DO have is evidence that this is not an economically motivated decision.
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. – Winston Churchill
ahrara_
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
Afghanistan1715 Posts
December 31 2008 07:23 GMT
#165
On December 31 2008 16:20 Xeris wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 31 2008 16:12 ahrara_ wrote:
On December 31 2008 15:49 Xeris wrote:
On December 31 2008 15:38 Savio wrote:
On December 31 2008 14:10 Xeris wrote:
On December 31 2008 13:54 ahrara_ wrote:
1.) Ahmadenijad is a loud, obnoxious, figurehead who takes the credit and the blame for policies ultimately determined by Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamanei. Khamanei also exercises power through the council of guardians, a group of six "islamic jurists" who get veto power over any legislation and candidate for office. Almost everyone agrees that who is president has little influence of Iran's foreign policy, namely its nuclear program.

2.) Unless I missed it, why has nobody brought up the fact that the whole "wipe off the map" thing is a translational error and a stupid stupid stupid thing to repeat? A more accurate representation is "remove from power Israel's government," which every middle eastern country has always wanted, and is nothing new.



2) How would it get smuggled? Would terrorists steal them? Because Iran sure as hell wouldn't GIVE THEM AWAY. They wouldn't sell them either.


Why wouldn't Iran want an Islamic extremist organization to have a nuke? Why wouldn't they give them away? Sure they are expensive but that doesn't seem to matter to Iran. Imagine, the world's 2nd largest oil producer claiming that they need nuclear energy in order to provide energy to their people. Maybe Alaska should build snow machines to provide snow for their people.....

Iran is spending a LOT of money developing nuclear capabilities even though their whole country is floating on more oil than they could ever use and they already have the technology and infrastructure to pump it out and use it.

For Iran any trouble for the US is a good thing. This is why they team up with Chavez and why they support terrorists in Iraq. Don't you think a nuke in an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist group's hands would be worse for the US than for Iran? Its like they get to do the damage without taking the blame.


Now, I am not sure that Iran would actually DO such a thing, but I DO think that Iran developing nukes raises GREATLY the possibility of a terrorist organization getting one. Plus, if it was about money, I am sure extremely weathly fundamentalists like bin Laden would be willing to pay more than the cost of making the material.

Iran having nukes is just trouble no matter how you look at it.


This post shows how ignorant you really are about the issue. First off, I already explained why Iran wouldn't give their nukes away. How the fuck do you get around explaining why a terrorist group GOT A NUKE IN THE FIRST PLACE??? "They built it themselves, it wasn't us I swear" isn't gonna fly. Everyone will know it was Iran - they wouldn't do that, their government is not retarded. The fact that you seem to think they are is the biggest mistake anyone who ever deals with Iran will make.

Iran is "floating on oil" but do you have any idea what their oil production actually looks like? No you don't, because if you DID KNOW, you would know that Iranian oil production is not nearly producing at its peak capacity, their oil refining infrastructure is still weakened from the Iran-Iraq war and from 50 years of imperialism to British influences, who pretty much controlled their oil and didn't let Iranians run it, Iran is still figuring out how to refine it's oil better. In fact, Iran is actually a net importer of oil, that shows how much farther they have to go when it comes to their oil.

Iran is not a net importer of oil what are you smoking? Just to make sure I didn't pull a van winkle and wake up in an altered dimension I looked it on the CIA world factbook:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ir.html#Econ

If Iran is a net exporter, and it is, then there is no reason for it to want to invest in nuclear power unless it's to help develop weapons. It doesn't get to export as much, but developing nuclear power is in itself an extremely costly endeavour. The reason the US or net importing nations has an interest in developing nuclear power is more strategic than economic. First, they know how to and have a lot more experience with them. Second, it allows them to reduce dependence on imports, enhancing their soft power. Down the road, it could become a profitable investment for Iran, but for now, its money could be spent on better things than nuclear weapons.

The fact is, Iran exports nothing but oil today. Western sanctions have all but obliterated its export sector. These sanctions don't work for oil because demand is high in places like China. Iran could greatly improve its own economy if it were to comply with western demands. It doesn't do so for a couple of geopolitical reasons: a.) Nuclear power enhances its status in the region. Iran would very much like to be a leader in the Middle East. b.) Nuclear power keeps the US from executing, erm, "regime change."


sorry, I mis-said... I was stating that Iran's oil production is a lot lower than it should, I.E, they don't even produce enough oil after exports for their own domestic use.

PS. CIA factbook is not entirely accurate.

It is accurate within 2 million barrels per day i assure you
in Afghanistan we have 20% literacy rate
Locke.
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Israel562 Posts
December 31 2008 08:09 GMT
#166
Xeris, Iran is a dictatorship run by Muslim extremists who directly finance and train our biggest recent enemies Hamas and Hizbollah. That's a good enough reason to opposing them getting nuclear.

BTW Israel is one of the only countries were a single nuclear hit can destroy the entire country - the area of Tel Aviv is basically the only real center in Israel thus destroying it means virtually destroying Israel. I am not saying the Iranians will just go ahead and bomb us but we should be very worried of a nuclear Iran and act accordingly.

Just to clear up some misconceptions Kakylia is in the center of Israel close to Raanana and Tel Aviv, Bet Lehem is near Jerusalem in the East, Nebulous is in Samaria a bit to the North and Gaza is completely in the south of Israel (though Eilat is much more to the South). All of them are considered Palestinian cities.
Any future "Palestinian State" with territorial continuity through those places would have to cut Israel's territorial continuity to pieces and would virtually span most of Israel. That is one of the reasons the 2 states idea is never gonna work.
Wolverine
Profile Blog Joined September 2008
138 Posts
December 31 2008 08:34 GMT
#167
On December 31 2008 16:11 Xeris wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 31 2008 15:58 ieatkids5 wrote:
Xeris did you purposefully punch in very very similar numbers (I've read 3409534908 books and As I said 34095834098x before) or did your fingers just happen to hit them like that? Not that it's extremely unlikely, since spamming keys with your fingers usually involves similar patterns of movements in your fingers. Heh.


No, I guess the number of books I've read is about 30-35, not including about 10-15 different public opinion polls, hundreds of news articles (I thumb through them daily and look for interesting stuff), and a couple other online articles / video conferences and interviews.


I apologise for my ignorance earlier.. But may I ask you, in your country, do you really get stoned to death for adultery or homosexuality? In that case are you able to surf porn sites? If porn sites are restricted, then how are you able to read objective articles on the internet for other things, for example, articles that are pro-Israel?

Correct me if I'm wrong I don't know how liberal/totalitarian the legal system is in your country, cyber-laws or otherwise.

By the way Locke, I genuinely hope you would give this article a read: http://www.bidstrup.com/zionism.htm - gives you a good background behind the conflict.
Xeris
Profile Blog Joined July 2005
Iran17695 Posts
December 31 2008 08:46 GMT
#168
They still do stoning in Iran - I don't live there right now, I'm not sure if you can access porn on the internet. Iran has the highest internet usage in the region, so I'm assuming they have access to porn sites.
twitter.com/xerislight -- follow me~~
Locke.
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Israel562 Posts
December 31 2008 08:59 GMT
#169
I started quoting that article and correcting the lies one after the other I soon found out the amount of lies and fabrications in it reaches absurd proportions.

Ironically the quote he puts at the top of the article describes what he wrote perfectly.

"The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over."
-- Adolf Hitler
QibingZero
Profile Blog Joined June 2007
2611 Posts
December 31 2008 09:08 GMT
#170
Gah, Savio has reared his closed-minded and propaganda-filled head. Oh the joy.

It's nothing short of amazing that people actually believe Iran with a nuke is somehow any worse than Bush with a nuke. Or Pakistan, Israel, and India for that matter - all of which (unlike Iran) are not members of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

It reeks of self-righteous exceptionalism in here, and the culprit is, unsurprisingly, the only country to actually have used a nuclear weapon.
Oh, my eSports
Creationism
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
China505 Posts
December 31 2008 09:29 GMT
#171
On December 31 2008 17:34 Wolverine wrote:
Show nested quote +
On December 31 2008 16:11 Xeris wrote:
On December 31 2008 15:58 ieatkids5 wrote:
Xeris did you purposefully punch in very very similar numbers (I've read 3409534908 books and As I said 34095834098x before) or did your fingers just happen to hit them like that? Not that it's extremely unlikely, since spamming keys with your fingers usually involves similar patterns of movements in your fingers. Heh.


No, I guess the number of books I've read is about 30-35, not including about 10-15 different public opinion polls, hundreds of news articles (I thumb through them daily and look for interesting stuff), and a couple other online articles / video conferences and interviews.


I apologise for my ignorance earlier.. But may I ask you, in your country, do you really get stoned to death for adultery or homosexuality? In that case are you able to surf porn sites? If porn sites are restricted, then how are you able to read objective articles on the internet for other things, for example, articles that are pro-Israel?

Correct me if I'm wrong I don't know how liberal/totalitarian the legal system is in your country, cyber-laws or otherwise.

By the way Locke, I genuinely hope you would give this article a read: http://www.bidstrup.com/zionism.htm - gives you a good background behind the conflict.


did he just use porn as an indicator of objective articles about society?? hahaha, maybe thats the case, but thats fucking funny as hell if you need to judge a country by it level of censorship on adult information.
The hoi polloi is the plague upon the world.
ahrara_
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
Afghanistan1715 Posts
December 31 2008 09:37 GMT
#172
On December 31 2008 18:08 QibingZero wrote:
Gah, Savio has reared his closed-minded and propaganda-filled head. Oh the joy.

It's nothing short of amazing that people actually believe Iran with a nuke is somehow any worse than Bush with a nuke. Or Pakistan, Israel, and India for that matter - all of which (unlike Iran) are not members of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

It reeks of self-righteous exceptionalism in here, and the culprit is, unsurprisingly, the only country to actually have used a nuclear weapon.

thanks for totally ignoring my post which clearly articulates why nuclear proliferation is a real threat.
On December 31 2008 15:58 ahrara_ wrote:
I would agree with Xeris that no country would ever knowingly hand a nuclear weapon to a terrorist organization it doesn't directly control. The risk is too high, in fact it is almost certain in Iran's case, that the weapon could be traced back to its original owner. Moreover, these groups are unpredictable and have a history of biting the hand that feeds it -- Pakistan and the Taliban are a good example. Their loyalties are fickle and they have their own agenda which ultimately conflict with that of any nation-state. Not even Khamanei wants an Islamic Caliphate telling him what to do, for example.

The real proliferation threat in this instance comes in the case of political instability. There's a significant, if not very likely, chance that if Iran were to experience enough of a political upset that the military chain of command were to fall apart (highly unlikely), radical elements within the regime could covertly get their hands on a weapon. But then again, the last time this happened -- in the instance of the Soviet Union, which owned several thousand nukes, IIRC, there were no nuclear weapons lost.

The problem of proliferation comes from the accumulation of many such insignificant threats. If all of a sudden there's a dozen nuclear armed middle eastern countries with radicalist sympathies, then the chances of a nuke being placed in the wrong hands increases exponentially. This scenario is much more likely to happen if Iran were to get its hands on a nuclear weapon. Like with Pakistan, China, and France, it's likely they'll want to share or trade that information with allies, encouraging further proliferation.

So yes, a nuclear armed Iran is bad.

in Afghanistan we have 20% literacy rate
Creationism
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
China505 Posts
December 31 2008 10:10 GMT
#173
first, his post was directed somewhere else, not towards your post, so ur post does not and would not derive from his argument that the people constantly worried about nuclear proliferation are the only ones to have used nuclear arms.

concerning political instability as a catalyst that actually makes nuclear proliferation dangerous because radical terrorist groups would get a hold of the nuclear technology, that is false from both historical aspect and pragmatic aspect.

historically, we have seen the nuclear weapon as the key issue several times, key points in WWII and the cold war. in both cases, it was a weapon of war, a military tactic, that requires economic backing and outright full-scale programs. why is this different from terrorist weapons? it is a military strategy on a level that terrorist are unable to attain. terrorist groups constantly use tactics that attack the civilian population at the cheapest cost: bombings, gunned attacks, hijacks.

pragmatically, a terrorist group cannot maintain such a weapon or even realistically launch it. unlike science fiction, a nuclear weapon is not constantly placed inside a silo that will open any second, with probably the exception of the U.S. they are not linked up to a red button that the terrorist leader can press once and launch. they are unstable nuclear arms that require scientific knowledge and a team of well trained men to manage, both of which requires a stable and powerful economic backing government.

lastly, the very fact that the first thing that radical power do when they come to power is nuke all their enemies, who happen to have nukes too, is asinine. the first order of business, no matter what world country you inspect, for any power that comes to power is securing its power. and it's sure as hell not going to do that by nuking its foreign enemies.
The hoi polloi is the plague upon the world.
KissBlade
Profile Blog Joined October 2004
United States5718 Posts
Last Edited: 2008-12-31 10:24:35
December 31 2008 10:24 GMT
#174
On December 31 2008 18:08 QibingZero wrote:
It reeks of self-righteous exceptionalism in here, and the culprit is, unsurprisingly, the only country to actually have used a nuclear weapon.


This post really nails why even Americans hate their own foreign policies at times.
ahrara_
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
Afghanistan1715 Posts
December 31 2008 10:37 GMT
#175
On December 31 2008 19:10 Creationism wrote:
first, his post was directed somewhere else, not towards your post, so ur post does not and would not derive from his argument that the people constantly worried about nuclear proliferation are the only ones to have used nuclear arms.

concerning political instability as a catalyst that actually makes nuclear proliferation dangerous because radical terrorist groups would get a hold of the nuclear technology, that is false from both historical aspect and pragmatic aspect.

historically, we have seen the nuclear weapon as the key issue several times, key points in WWII and the cold war. in both cases, it was a weapon of war, a military tactic, that requires economic backing and outright full-scale programs. why is this different from terrorist weapons? it is a military strategy on a level that terrorist are unable to attain. terrorist groups constantly use tactics that attack the civilian population at the cheapest cost: bombings, gunned attacks, hijacks.

pragmatically, a terrorist group cannot maintain such a weapon or even realistically launch it. unlike science fiction, a nuclear weapon is not constantly placed inside a silo that will open any second, with probably the exception of the U.S. they are not linked up to a red button that the terrorist leader can press once and launch. they are unstable nuclear arms that require scientific knowledge and a team of well trained men to manage, both of which requires a stable and powerful economic backing government.

lastly, the very fact that the first thing that radical power do when they come to power is nuke all their enemies, who happen to have nukes too, is asinine. the first order of business, no matter what world country you inspect, for any power that comes to power is securing its power. and it's sure as hell not going to do that by nuking its foreign enemies.

if i had your intelligence and reading comprehension i wouldn't know what to do with myself
in Afghanistan we have 20% literacy rate
StarBrift
Profile Joined January 2008
Sweden1761 Posts
December 31 2008 10:59 GMT
#176
Both sides are retarded. Anyone who dies and lets his family die (or worse) for something as fake as a nation (borders people drew on maps because they like to own stuff) is stupid and / or brain washed. I'm not saying Israeli or Palestine civilians are to blame but when two entire populations are hell bent on living in a war zone then something is very very wrong. The ones with power need to take responsibility for this and do something about it.

The countries down there need to get peace for 50 or so years so they can start educating people to break out of ignorance. It's fucking sick when an entire people breed their children as warriors because there is no other way of living for them.
anotak
Profile Blog Joined March 2008
United States1537 Posts
December 31 2008 11:21 GMT
#177
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_terrorism
Locke.
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Israel562 Posts
December 31 2008 11:23 GMT
#178
On December 31 2008 19:59 StarBrift wrote:
Both sides are retarded. Anyone who dies and lets his family die (or worse) for something as fake as a nation (borders people drew on maps because they like to own stuff) is stupid and / or brain washed. I'm not saying Israeli or Palestine civilians are to blame but when two entire populations are hell bent on living in a war zone then something is very very wrong. The ones with power need to take responsibility for this and do something about it.

The countries down there need to get peace for 50 or so years so they can start educating people to break out of ignorance. It's fucking sick when an entire people breed their children as warriors because there is no other way of living for them.


Imagine your city in Sweden being bombarded almost every day for 8 years. Imagine your children having 15 seconds to run in terror and find shelter before the rockets hit, your city becomes a ghost town the people are terrorized and every day a different house explodes.

This has been the reality in Sderot and the Negev in the past years it is gradually coming to Ashkelon, Ashdod, Beer Sheva.

Israel have every justification to destroy the people who do that to us with the open intention of destroying Israel.
TeCh)PsylO
Profile Joined October 2002
United States3552 Posts
December 31 2008 11:27 GMT
#179
Uhhh..I am pretty sure that the Jews didn't just charge into the middle East after WW2 blowing people away with guns. The UN set that land apart for them and the moved there


That is not quite true. The Jews were moving into Palestine prior to WWII. And during WWII they were actually "blowing people away with guns". They were engaging in terrorist attacks against the British government in order to manipulate them into giving them the land. Ironically, the arabs began to use terrost attacks against the British as well becuase the British were responding to the Jewish pressure.
People change, then forget to tell each other - Susan Scott
BlueRoyaL
Profile Blog Joined February 2006
United States2493 Posts
December 31 2008 11:44 GMT
#180
no one will ever understand the conflict unless you have a clear history of the bible.
sounds like bullshit? nope.

this conflict isn't much about politics or clash of civilizations. it's a religious conflict, and one that will never end until the world ends.
WHAT'S HAPPENIN
Prev 1 7 8 9 10 11 16 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 3h 27m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
mouzHeroMarine 728
ProTech69
JuggernautJason57
MindelVK 35
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 6412
Sea 2883
Rain 1092
Hyuk 990
Soulkey 146
HiyA 50
TY 36
hero 33
Nal_rA 17
scan(afreeca) 16
[ Show more ]
IntoTheRainbow 8
Noble 5
zelot 4
Dota 2
Gorgc6661
qojqva3162
League of Legends
Dendi1462
Counter-Strike
fl0m6404
olofmeister2843
Foxcn314
rGuardiaN78
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor151
Other Games
FrodaN838
C9.Mang0774
Mlord634
crisheroes392
Fuzer 144
ArmadaUGS131
elazer123
Mew2King116
Trikslyr85
XaKoH 82
KnowMe79
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream1602
Other Games
BasetradeTV42
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 21 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Adnapsc2 12
• Kozan
• sooper7s
• Migwel
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• IndyKCrew
• intothetv
StarCraft: Brood War
• HerbMon 32
• Rasowy 3
• ZZZeroYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 3109
• masondota2461
• lizZardDota264
League of Legends
• Nemesis5502
• Jankos3357
• TFBlade1154
Other Games
• Shiphtur214
• imaqtpie146
Upcoming Events
OSC
3h 27m
ArT vs ReBellioN
HonMonO vs Ziomek
Shameless vs LunaSea
MilkiCow vs GgMaChine
Moja vs HiGhDrA
Jumy vs TBD
Demi vs NightPhoenix
Solar vs Cham
Replay Cast
6h 27m
OSC
6h 27m
WardiTV Invitational
17h 27m
HiGhDrA vs Nicoract
MaNa vs HiGhDrA
HiGhDrA vs Reynor
Nicoract vs Reynor
MaNa vs Nicoract
MaNa vs Reynor
MaxPax vs Spirit
Krystianer vs Spirit
OSC
19h 27m
Korean StarCraft League
1d 9h
SOOP
1d 15h
sOs vs Percival
CranKy Ducklings
1d 16h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 17h
Cheesadelphia
1d 21h
[ Show More ]
CSO Cup
1d 23h
GSL Code S
2 days
Rogue vs herO
Classic vs GuMiho
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
Wardi Open
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
RSL Revival
5 days
herO vs sOs
Zoun vs Clem
Replay Cast
6 days
The PondCast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Serral vs SHIN
Solar vs Cham
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.