Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Mosby

(16,259 posts)
76. You have it completely backwards
Mon May 28, 2012, 07:18 PM
May 2012

Iran is a rogue state that is supporting the ongoing killing in Syria with money, weapons and personnel support. The death toll in Syria is over 10,000 now. They also support two terrorist orgs in Hezbollah and Hamas, providing them with money and weapons so they can attack Israel. Through Hezbollah they control large parts of Lebanon.

The government and religious leaders in Iran have repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel and refuse to comply with IAEA inspectors requests. Many world leaders have publicly stated their opposition to these developments in Iran including Germany, Italy France, and Canada.

It's SO bad now that Saudi Arabia and Turkey have publicly stated that if Iran obtains nukes they will start their own nuclear weapon program. No way to blame that on Israel, clearly Iran is the biggest threat to world peace right now.

I don't know "The Institute for Science and International Security." Jackpine Radical May 2012 #1
This message was self-deleted by its author cstanleytech May 2012 #2
I just did a quick check of the place MrScorpio May 2012 #3
Wouldnt surprise me if that turned out to be the case. nt cstanleytech May 2012 #4
No it's not, and the estimate is probably correct bananas May 2012 #11
Alright, I take back the crack about Heritage... MrScorpio May 2012 #15
He didn't say or imply they're making nuclear bombs. bananas May 2012 #27
If there was no implication that the Iranians are making bombs… MrScorpio May 2012 #31
Research kitt6 May 2012 #19
I'm up to my ears in research. Jackpine Radical May 2012 #58
EXTREMELY likely. Just in 2006 Kerry said that Iran was at LEAST 5 years away from having the blm May 2012 #23
It's David Albright's organization, and he's probably right. nt bananas May 2012 #12
Really? Is that the Albright that said back in 2002 cstanleytech May 2012 #18
He's better at physics than he is at chemistry and biology bananas May 2012 #32
No, this is fiction until something more concrete comes along to prove otherwise cstanleytech May 2012 #40
How good is he at NOT being a propaganda tool? That's the only question... JackRiddler May 2012 #68
Did they count how many nuclear bombs America has in its arsenal? freshwest May 2012 #38
Not very relevant imo to the topic on hand, sorry. nt cstanleytech May 2012 #41
It is to me. United States strategic nuclear weapons arsenal: freshwest May 2012 #43
You are right, it probably wouldnt happen while he is in office however cstanleytech May 2012 #44
More dramatic, but much less dangerous that our homegrown wackos who are much closer... freshwest May 2012 #45
Meh they (the tea party and the fanatics in Iran) are both equally dangerous but ya I get cstanleytech May 2012 #46
Entirely relevant. Who decides "relevance"? The Pentagon? Netanyahu? JackRiddler May 2012 #75
imo = in my opinion and last I checked we are still allowed to have those. Thanks for cstanleytech May 2012 #77
Yes we are, and no obligation to back them either. Lucky for you. JackRiddler May 2012 #80
Correction, its "Yes we are, and no obligation to back them either. Lucky for us all." cstanleytech May 2012 #81
Yes, we're all lucky to share in the freedom to present FMA opinions. JackRiddler May 2012 #82
from Scott Ritter legin May 2012 #66
"if it was further refined " Martin Eden May 2012 #5
"Balls!" said the Queen. "If I had two, coalition_unwilling May 2012 #13
It's 3.5% your uncle. boppers May 2012 #20
Maybe so, but ... Martin Eden May 2012 #26
Well, they'd still only have 5 shots. boppers May 2012 #28
3.5% is yellow cake which is feedstock and is not classified as refined uranium. Commercial grade is Monk06 May 2012 #62
Correction: It only takes a small amount of yellowcake to produce some weapons grade uranium. boppers May 2012 #65
Same garbage they were saying about Iraq. The war drum beats louder. sarcasmo May 2012 #6
Think tank = men in suits with their heads up their asses Warpy May 2012 #7
Well, then send in "The Institute for Science and International Security" to get it. KansDem May 2012 #8
I have a great chocolate chip cookie recipie that I found bluestateguy May 2012 #9
When you find a great recipe bupkus May 2012 #33
Too much work! Just eat the chocolate chips outta the bag and get it over with! freshwest May 2012 #36
Think tank, the guys in suits Iliyah May 2012 #10
+1,000. You win the thread. freshwest May 2012 #37
The guys that don't have to bother with silly elections, yet somehow they matter more than everyone harun May 2012 #61
Says a US think tank...who would profit incredibly from an endless war economy? Fire Walk With Me May 2012 #14
And how many nuclear weapons does the USA have? WHEN CRABS ROAR May 2012 #16
"We" didnt lie, now Bush, Cheney and some of those in their administration probably did cstanleytech May 2012 #25
Never mind the USA... Figaro78 May 2012 #56
The Pakistanis have many nuclear weapons Rosa Luxemburg May 2012 #60
why do you think Israelis are "kill crazy" Mosby May 2012 #72
So, not enough to level a single metropolitan city. boppers May 2012 #17
Where to start here? longship May 2012 #21
Here we go again, now. think4yourself May 2012 #22
Reuters had already posted it earlier today dipsydoodle May 2012 #30
I hope to goodness they make a nuclear weapon tcaudilllg May 2012 #24
+1 Purveyor May 2012 #34
This is disturbing oberliner May 2012 #50
Very disturbing. nt bananas May 2012 #64
The only three countries sulphurdunn May 2012 #29
I thought N Korea was under an embargo or something? nt cstanleytech May 2012 #42
Yes, but no-one sulphurdunn May 2012 #52
Thats because its to risky due to China being a close ally which means cstanleytech May 2012 #53
Yes sulphurdunn May 2012 #55
India, Pakistan, and Israel did not sign the treaty oberliner May 2012 #49
Since 1970 sulphurdunn May 2012 #51
This message was self-deleted by its author eek MD May 2012 #78
This is a non-story naaman fletcher May 2012 #35
Oh Oh, the war drums are beating again magic59 May 2012 #39
How would Iran having a nuke be worse bowens43 May 2012 #47
Isn't nuclear non-proliferation something you support? oberliner May 2012 #48
Yes. Which is why Israel poses the greatest nuclear threat on the planet. JackRiddler May 2012 #69
that's an absurd statement. Mosby May 2012 #73
Your choice of adjectives does not change the truth: Israel is a danger to world peace. JackRiddler May 2012 #74
You have it completely backwards Mosby May 2012 #76
Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon GeorgeGist May 2012 #54
Gas prices falling good for Obama... Time for Iran war talk. Problem Solved. AvBerkel May 2012 #57
They may very well be on to something. AverageJoe90 May 2012 #59
David Albright - the media's go-to guy on Iraq's WMDs in 2002. Prometheus Bound May 2012 #63
And the drum beat for war begins again. alarimer May 2012 #67
So if they make five bombs out of that they'll still have 115 to 395 fewer than Israel. JackRiddler May 2012 #70
Maybe....Iran is ALWAYS "five years from the bomb"--see link inside Maeve May 2012 #71
Personally, I don't think ANYONE should have nuclear weapons..... eek MD May 2012 #79
Bullshit blood-for-money garbage. woo me with science May 2012 #83
More fear mongering from the usual suspects. n/t Egalitarian Thug May 2012 #84
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Iran has enough uranium f...»Reply #76