jump to last post 1-21 of 21 discussions (26 posts)

Things are about to get extremely interesting?

  1. paradigmsearch profile image88
    paradigmsearchposted 5 years ago

    If there ever was a way to make an aircraft carrier turn around, this is it.

    "Iran warns U.S. aircraft carrier not to return"

    http://news.yahoo.com/iran-threatens-ac … 24042.html

    1. lobobrandon profile image83
      lobobrandonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Hmm

  2. profile image68
    logic,commonsenseposted 5 years ago

    I'm guessing those on the aircraft carrier are shaking in their boots, NOT!
    Actually they are probably rolling on the floor in laughter.

  3. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    interesting how?  Im  American  i do not fear Iran. I do however  feel ashamed at the way were making them fear us. We have 5115 active nuke weapons . Iran has not one .We have 110 nuke power plants . Iran has 1. Our navy  can put Irans navy on the bottom of the ocean with ease . I dont understand this threat . I feel strongly that we need to stop pushing people around.

    1. SimeyC profile image90
      SimeyCposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The point the politicians would make is that Iran are likely to launch a nuke, the US are not...so even 1 nuke is 1 too many...

  4. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    launch one at someone with thousands?  nukes are fubar.  no one uses them . why ?  cus it defeats any cause that  would use one .   1 is to many  tho your right  . we need to lead thru example .  we just sold saudi   30 billion in f 15 jets . thats the proliferation that needs to stop .  we sell irans neighbors 80 f15s its ok ?

    1. profile image0
      Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I understand your reasoning that it would be foolish to launch your only nuke (if they have one) at another country that has thousands. The question is are we dealing with someone who's reasonable? From all indications, no.

      What this amounts to is the local school yard bully trying to intimidate the biggest kid on the play ground. Should we be scared? No. Should we be cautious? Yes.

      Now, in your opinion, what do you think we should do if Iran is foolish enough to attack one of our ships? Just asking.

  5. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    ""If they impose sanctions on Iran's oil exports, then even one drop of oil cannot flow from the Strait of Hormuz."" These sanctions are an act
    of war by the way.
    "On Saturday, President Obama took that step and signed crippling sanctions legislation as part of the Pentagon's massive $662 billion 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)."
    The west can block Iran's oil exports, but fire
    and brimstone if Iran blocks the west's oil exports. Apparently their crime is they are not ruled by a monarchy, like the rest of the gulf states.

  6. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    Apparently someone missed my earlier post. '"On Saturday, President Obama took that step and signed crippling sanctions legislation as part of the Pentagon's massive $662 billion 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)."'. This is an act of war. The US just declared war on Iran.

  7. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    a reasonable nation wouldn't hold 5115 active warheads when 100 will suffice .  im for leading by example while  keeping the power to destroy all and any enemy's  we have. hell the world if it need be ,with the drop of a hat . my current idea  on this is to offer them at cost.  help in building them  nuke plants and power grid infrastructure .  in return for complete over site  of the program
    this is a viable achievable idea.

  8. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    and yourself  . sanctions  are a attack on civilian populations in my view  another thing im tired of my great nation doing .

    1. profile image0
      Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps the civilian population will rise up against its government and do away with it, thus doing away with the need for sanctions. I don't agree with them completely either but they are a means to an end. Certainly much better than another war.

      When it comes down to it, nothing's ever going to change in the Middle East as they don't want it to. Until we start drilling for our own oil, we'll have to keep sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong.

  9. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    "complete over site  of the program"
    "Iran is prepared to give the International Atomic Energy Agency "full supervision" of its nuclear program for five years if UN sanctions are lifted."
    "Rather, belligerent threats and U.S. state-sponsored terrorism against the Islamic Republic are part and parcel of Washington's long-standing strategic goal of hegemonic control over the energy-rich regions of Africa, Central Asia and the Middle East."

  10. Greek One profile image77
    Greek Oneposted 5 years ago

    Hold on here.... are they saying that Iran has developed the power of aquatic navigation?

    1. profile image0
      Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      That's what's being said but that could be a rumor no more true than the one about them having nukes.

  11. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    yourself you know whose energy rich?  the united states .     im a unilateralist when it comes to over site
    \

  12. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    Actually free energy has existed for a long time.
    "Free energy technology changes the value of money. The wealthiest families and the issuers of credit do not want any competition. It's that simple. They want to maintain their current monopoly control of the money supply. For them, free energy technology is not just something to suppress, it must be permanently forbidden!"

  13. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    forbid killing another man.  ban  money . we need neither . i think my answers are better.

  14. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    confusing  the issue with country  creed and posturing  and pontification  will bring about war. one in retrospect we will regret like all the ones befor

  15. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    next war is   our failing . not the usa . but  ours . men.   such potential   still wasting

  16. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    I think your answers are better as well. Trouble is it is not the real world. If you don't want to be controlled you have to know what controls you.
    Matter and anti-matter.

  17. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    i prefer the not rusty army .  i am aware

  18. aware profile image70
    awareposted 5 years ago

    stop threatening  them they might not want a nuke . lets try that

  19. Evan G Rogers profile image83
    Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago

    Facts that we must deal with:

    Iran has not invaded another country for over 100 years; it's a peaceful country.

    Iran is NOT looking to build nuclear weapons; no one has any evidence otherwise.

    Iran can't even produce enough gasoline to power itself; they aren't self-reliant.


    ... why are we bullying this country?

  20. Moderndayslave profile image62
    Moderndayslaveposted 5 years ago

    Did anyone figure in Russia and China yet?

  21. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    Not that I am aware.

 
working