Is the world teetering at the very edge?

[empip]

Of a nuclear strike.

Remember 'Osirak'?
Iran could be looking down the barrel .... There could be extreme fall out over this.

 

[Richardp]

reminds me of my youth is CND still going?

 

[tim west]

yes it' now headed by a certain Mr Bush so im reliably informed

 

[ellal]

Of a nuclear strike.

Remember 'Osirak'?
Iran could be looking down the barrel .... There could be extreme fall out over this.

Been reading The Times perchance?

 

[ETHunter]

Of a nuclear strike.

Remember 'Osirak'?
Iran could be looking down the barrel .... There could be extreme fall out over this.

That is truly unlikely and simply a case of paranoid scaremongering. There is no way any nation could justify a Nuclear strike on another that the international community would find acceptable. The UN has safeguards in place to ensure that any nation that perpetrates a "first strike" has to answer to the UN (ooh really scary that!). However any of the major world powers would not tolerate a Nuclear strike on any nation without very extreme provocation, and likely a serious conflict starting first and that the Nuclear option was the only resort left to them.

The scenario is so unlikely that it is a waste of time even contemplating it.

Bush would have to answer to the American people, and whilst I accept we can be a bit arrogant and rigid in our thinking, the number of Americans that would tolerate any policitician ordering a Nuclear strike without the nation being under very serious and immediate threat of invasion would find themselves in a very difficult position. In fact I would go so far as to suggest that armed conflict on US streets as a result of such action would be a distinct possibility.

 

[Softus]

That is truly unlikely...

Aha - not just unlikely, but truly unlikely. Do you find people doubt your words without adding that?

There is no way any nation could justify a Nuclear strike on another that the international community would find acceptable.

Hm, yes, because there are so many acceptable types of nuclear strike.

However any of the major world powers would not tolerate a Nuclear strike on any nation without very extreme provocation, and likely a serious conflict starting first and that the Nuclear option was the only resort left to them.

The scenario is so unlikely that it is a waste of time even contemplating it.

And yet here you are, contemplating it.

In fact I would go so far as to suggest that armed conflict on US streets as a result of such action would be a distinct possibility.

Oh per-lease. That is truly unlikely and simply a case of paranoid scaremongering.

 

[Richardp]

Its truly likely they would take John Wayne out of his cryogenic state to save them.


I don't think the yanks would mind bush doing a nuclear strike, they'd think it was a film a good film

 

[empip]

I thought Israel was 'Big John' by proxy !

 

[pickles]

What is actually being suggested is a strike on Irans nuclear facilities by bunker busting guided weapons with low yield nuclear warheads. The technology involved means that the weapons are relatively clean and don't generate much radiation. They explode underground so any fallout is contained. The major risk of fallout is going to be from the destroyed facility and that would be the same if a conventional weapon is used. Bear in mind that if you use a nuclear weapon to destroy a nuclear facility you cannot prove if the fallout comes from the weapon or the facility. This means it's unlikely anyone would know if one of these weapons is used or not.

The question we have to ask ourselves is, is it better to break the taboo now and use them, or is it better to do nothing and run the risk of Iran developing the technology and leaking it to terrorist groups who would not hesitate to use it.

 

[Richardp]

''Yer beautiful in yer wrath! I shall keep you, and in responding to my passions, yer hatred will kindle into love.''

 

[ellal]

The question we have to ask ourselves is, is it better to break the taboo now and use them, or is it better to do nothing and run the risk of Iran developing the technology and leaking it to terrorist groups who would not hesitate to use it.

What do you mean 'break the taboo'?...that was done over 60 years ago!

Letting Israel develop nuclear weapons was actually allowing them to 'fall into the hands' of 'terrorists of their day' who might use them, so double standards seem to apply here!!

 

[mlb3c]

uh what? Can someone pleeeeez break this down into one syllables for us yanks who seem to have our heads so far up our own arses that we cant see the light of day? How in the world, have you been able to survive all these years with our gun totin, tobacca chewin hicks just teeterin over the button, ready to blow our stacks because we're bored or is it just cuz we cant understand your humour?


sorry...bad hair day

 

[kevplumb]

sorry...bad hair day

hope geewubbya aint having one

 

[ETHunter]

I'm talking out of my arse again cos I'm a limey moron who has no knowledge of the real world everyone else lives in, forgive me I need edumacation

You see Softus, we can all do your little trick, it's not big, it's not clever and it's not funny, unless your someone, such as yourself, who takes pleasure in attempting to antagonize other people who you perceive you have an issue with.

Get a life and get over it.

 

[Softus]

we can all do your little trick

Er, you're gonna have to spell it out - what "trick" is it you think you're attempting?

...I'm a limey moron...

I don't know what the issue is that you believe that I "perceive" I have with you Eddie, but you're the one who appears to be name-calling. Or was this just a way to shoehorn into your post some tenuous reference to your claim of being an American citizen?

...edumacation

Are you using Jim's spellchecker?