digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

Iranian official: If threatened, we will use nuclear weapons

ynetnews.com — "After countless declarations of peaceful intentions of nuclear plan, Iran's chief nuclear envoy confirms fears by saying if county is threatened, situation may change" - They are going to nuke the world!.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -48/+64If I were Iran, I would want nuclear weapons.

    Sure, the Iranians are terrifying religious nutcases. But they didnt just suddenly turn into the demons from the lower circles of hell. They are still humans and their mind functions as human minds do. They follow predictable paths and logic. Push a human hard enough and he will exhibit corresponding behaviour.
    • AdmiralAdama, on 10/12/2007, -54/+68Uh-huh. The country that thinks Hitler is a Jew and the holocaust never happened and that Israel should be wiped out and has run terror plots against Jews in Argentina and American GIs in Saudi Arabia is rational. Right.
    • vbr2, on 10/12/2007, -7/+33if say a nuclear war breaks out, how do you stop it?
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -31/+24The Predictible course of action is found in the Koran, that explains everything they are doing quite rationally.

      *****, just read what they're saying.. it isn't like they're even hiding what they want to do and why.
    • abid786, on 10/12/2007, -43/+31Yet it stands that nuclear weapons have been used only twice in history. Both by the same country. (Hint: It wasnt Iran).
    • uhhhh, on 10/12/2007, -24/+16What nuclear weapons? They won't have any for quite some time if ever. This kind of technology is no walk in the park.
    • kiantech, on 10/12/2007, -12/+85my family is from Iran and trust me, the people there hate the government, and all agree the president is nuts, and they do not dislike America, most of them are trying to come here, took my cousins 10 years to get their okay to move to the US, the president just wants attention and power.
    • Yashar, on 10/12/2007, -4/+38@ vbr2

      http://70.85.12.163/albino_flash02/end(www.albinoblacksheep.com).swf
    • xarc13, on 10/12/2007, -16/+1@vbr2

      Use Area 51 tech?
    • masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -24/+31@abid786: Apparently some people (you) will never forgive the United States for using nuclear weapons during a war, the likes of which have never been seen before and have been been seen again, and a war which the world was desperate to end, minimizing human casualties despite any horrors that may directly come of it.

      Hell, most internet users weren't even alive at the time of the detonations, and yet we are still to blame? Get over it. It is in the past -- Japan has forgiven us and is now quite possibly our best ally, aside from the U.K. If Japan can do that then surely you can, too.
    • xarc13, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8@Yashar

      Thanks for the video. That was the funniest ***** I've seen this week.
    • drizek, on 10/12/2007, -11/+27"The country that thinks Hitler is a Jew "

      Instead of criticizing, why not actually read about it? There is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that hitler had "jewish blood". I personally dont think its true, but there are plenty of perfectly rational and intelligent people all over the world that believe that do. Its an interesting theory.
    • DogmaticAtheism, on 10/12/2007, -31/+5AdmiralAdama: stop spreading jewish propaganda you jew
    • happygiraffe88, on 10/12/2007, -24/+9And how exactly are they going to deliver a nuclear payload, via camel?
    • happygiraffe88, on 10/12/2007, -21/+5Dupe comment...dig me down.
    • drizek, on 10/12/2007, -7/+43"And how exactly are they going to deliver a nuclear payload, via camel?"

      Iran has a very powerful military with a strong air force.

      All this stupid stereotyping of them as running around on camels is exactly the reason why people like rumsfeld can say that the war in iraq will last for "6 days, maybe 6 weeks" and have people believe him. If we go to war in Iran, it will take years, cost hundreds of billions of dollars, tens of thousands of lives and probably result in failure. Not only does Iran have a strong military, it also has the potential to have a far more powerful insurgency than the one we have seen in Iraq. The US military would be spread over 3 countries at this point.

      The US cant just pick a country on a map and expect to be able to invade it. It would do you some good however to pick a country on the map and read the wikipedia article on it.
    • nendoke, on 10/12/2007, -3/+48I am Iranian and We do NOT want war, Start war = New revolution in Iran Against the goverment , People are in suffer and Goverment searching for Nuclear (Energy || Weapons), No one like this situation. :
    • physphd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19@drizek

      I think what giraffe was getting at is the lack of delivery vehicles, and in particular the lack of an ICBM, or even SRBM, network. Conventional aircraft are only useful if you have either 1) complete air superiority, which Iran will not have over the US or Israel, or 2) sheer volume of bombers and nukes that you can absorb the losses of most being intercepted prior to delivering their payload. Iran has the potential for neither.

      The technology is out there and for sale, no doubt, just look at Chinese missile systems renamed Shaheen (Pakistan) or No-Dong (N. Korea). Iran's Shahab series is not up to the task, though I don't know the current status of the Shahab 5 or 6 booster additions. One of these years, though....

      @nendoke and kiantech

      Thank you for your words. People and their governments often have very different views. I guess you could say we have a lot in common.
    • drizek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Iran does not currently have a nuclear bomb and they are several years away from building one. The delivery method is just an annoyance compared to the amount of work required to build the actual bomb.
    • Pas3n7, on 10/12/2007, -20/+15OK, seriously, can we have a new president yet?

      please?
    • Araya213, on 10/12/2007, -12/+21Nice propaganda! I dont believe for a second that he said that, it would be stupid. Sounds like somebodys trying to rally support for a preemptive strike.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -11/+10Araya213 "Nice propaganda! I dont believe for a second that he said that, it would be stupid. Sounds like somebodys trying to rally support for a preemptive strike."


      What exactly are you referring to? It's hard to tell in this forum.
    • sotopheavy, on 10/12/2007, -16/+9
      America! ***** Yea! Terrorists, Put down the weapons of mass destruction and give yourselves up!


      ~ T.A.W.P.

      Actually Iran doesn't seam that bad lately. Is this real?
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -12/+9Coming to save the mother ***** day now!
    • returnofmalv, on 10/12/2007, -25/+19Good, Iran has every right to use nuclear weapons if invaded. America has already proved itself to be ***** insane through its invasion of Iraq. A perfectly rational response on their part. Maybe if Americans pulled their heads out of their asses and saw the real enemy, big oil, they might be able to avoid the inevitable catastrophe. But of course, that would mean we would have to avoid scapegoating all of our problems on those crazy Arabs that hate our freedom.

      Sigh, I ***** hate Americans; completely clueless in every way. Somehow they believe that their crazy secular fundamentalist president is less insane than the Iranians crazy secular fundamentalist president.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -16/+14You realize you presupposed an invasion that would never happen. It's only because the Iranian govt is detemined despite any cost to get nuclear weapons which it said it's going to use on Israel has iran put itself up a threat.

      It's completely a lie to turn it around.

      Most of the West on the Left are completely blind to what is going on, not even realizing Europe is in process of dying , so consumed with their anger at America for fighting their wars for them when they have their little EUtopia. (BTW: History lesson, England and France occupied the ENTIRE midle east after they destroyed the last Caliphate and set things up how they are).

      You should be pissed at them .

      Well, not everyone has the wool over their eyes.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -19/+10And the only reason Bush went to war is because of what you Arabs did in NY and Washington. He ran for President on a campaign to lighten our involvement all over the place, but Arab hate had to go to far, which is just what Osama's plan called for.

      You hate Americans? No kidding. What else is new.
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16You base your opinion about an entire nation on what? Do you know any Iranians? Do you really believe an entire nation wants to wipe Israel off the map? Do you believe that all Americans wanted to invade Iraq? Do you believe all Americans want our troops still there?

      Don't let the propaganda machine toy with your emotions so hard. Try some rational thought once in a while.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -12/+8Suck my digg. All the Iranians agreed me up to the point of whether or not the President there means to use them. So its obvious you dont.

      And if you're like most Westerns you know very little about their ideology and probably dont pay atttention to anything the leadership there says.

      in fact anyone who thinks this is about oil is either putting up a pretext or truely is ignorant.

      My job here is done for now.
    • returnofmalv, on 10/12/2007, -15/+7"And the only reason Bush went to war is because of what you Arabs did in NY and Washington."

      So I say I hate America and that automatically makes me an Arab? Idiot. More than just Arab rejoiced at the fact that America was hit on 9/11. American has a long, proud tradition of ***** with the political systems of countries it has no business being in the first place. 9/11 should have been a wakeup call for the clueless Americans, but instead it made them even more arrogant and disrespectful of the world around them. Sorry America, you deserve everything you have coming to you. The world won't put up with your ***** forever.

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144
    • bluenet, on 10/12/2007, -14/+6The Jews in Israel threatened Europe with their Nukes several months ago but that was OK. If the Jews want the Iranian oil like they wanted Iraq's, let them get it themselves. No more wars for these Askenazi's. What ever hapened to the "Balance of Power" and "Nuclear Parity" doctrines anyway; guess because Jews are involved they no longer apply. God's chosen people, the Antichrists. LOL
    • tomslatin, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7"Sure, the Iranians are terrifying religious nutcases."

      You said it right!
    • vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14@"And the only reason Bush went to war is because of what you Arabs did in NY and Washington."

      Umm.... You are aware that Iranians aren't Arabs right?

      They are ethnically Persian and religiously Shi'ite.

      Wheras Al Queda, Saudis, and the Taliban are Arab and Sunni.

      It is like the difference between English and German and Catholicism and Protestantism.

    • TheEditor1, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1@dagonweb

      How stupid are you really?
    • floorman56, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4And how exactly are they going to deliver a nuclear payload, via camel?

      3 ways
      1 power boats or cargo ships pull into port and when the inspectors com on board "drop the hammer"

      2. Refit a couple of cargo ships to hide 10 of the 1500 mile range missiles that they do have. park them 500 miles off the east and west coast and send 20 U.S. city's to hell that are in 1000 miles of the coast

      3 buy a bunch of Lear jets and fly the same route and the drug lords do everyday then BOOM
    • fauxXenophanes, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4BEGGING to be flattened... might happen.
    • h2d2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9What ***** surprises me is that we are giving so much attention to Iran and on the other side of the world there's a communist nation that not only has broken it's "signed contract" not to develop nukes but has also tested one recently. Yet, it's all forgotten...
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@h2d2:

      Not only that, but it appears they're planning for another test.

      http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070105/ap_on_re_as/japan_nkorea
    • Charlotte_Web, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Iran IS already a part of the War on Terror. They have been supporting global terrorism for DECADES.

      Iran does not have the technology to reach the US with a nuclear rocket; they would have to sneak it into the US through a more conventional means, like hiding it in a shipping container. However, if war broke out between Iran and the US, would they have the time to plan and execute something like that? Probably not.

      A more likely target for Iran would be Israel, just like Saddam did during the first Gulf War. Jersusalem, the most populous city would not be targeted because Iran wouldn't want to risk destroying the Al-Aqsa Mosque compund, the third holiest site in Islam (I doubt that they would be concerned about killing Palestinians; they've spent thirty years trying to increase the violence in Israel). The most likely target for Iran would be Tel Aviv, the second largest city in Israel, and it's over 90% Jewish.

      A revolution in Iran? I just don't think it's gonna happen. Now is the time to have a revolution, BEFORE President Ahmadinejad starts a nuclear war with the US. It's the same situation as it was in Iraq. Sure, there were a lot of Iraqis who were discontented with their government, and we brought that government to the brink of collapse in 1991. And probably would have supported revolutionaries with arms and finances. But still, there was no revolution.
    • bobbknight, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4If we Americans as decedents of Europe, knew our history we would be able to see the answers to todays problems.
    • enemyofstate430, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2he never says they would use nuclear weapons, but that they might develop them if they are threatened.

      buried as inaccurate.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2 vertinox
      > @"And the only reason Bush went to war is because of what you Arabs did in NY and Washington."
      > Umm.... You are aware that Iranians aren't Arabs right?

      Yes that's why I said Arabs attacked NY and Washington and not Persians. Are you saying the Iranians were involved in 9/11? Or you just cant read and were all gleeful I said something wrong.


      > They are ethnically Persian and religiously Shi'ite.

      Duh.

      >Wheras Al Queda, Saudis, and the Taliban are Arab and Sunni.

      Yes, and that's why I said they did the attack on NYC and Washington.

      So , yeah, your post was a nice waste of time.
  • earlgreyrooibos, on 10/12/2007, -15/+8I don't think any of this business is rational at all, and I'm frustrated that my boyfriend decided to take a trip to the Middle East this winter. It's ridiculously frustrating to read about this stuff and know that a loved one is over there. Honestly, I try to be tolerant, but it's a lot harder to be tolerant of anybody when you're worried about something happening to a very important person in your life.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -20/+26Statements by Iranians over the past few years , stating their intentions.

    “The kind of service that the Americans, with all their hatred, have done us — no superpower has ever done anything similar,” Mohsen Rezai, secretary-general of the powerful Expediency Council that advises the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamanei, boasted on state television recently.
    “America destroyed all our enemies in the region. It destroyed the Taliban. It destroyed Saddam Hussein… The Americans got so stuck in the soil of Iraq and Afghanistan that if they manage to drag themselves back to Washington in one piece, they should thank God. America presents us with an opportunity rather than a threat — not because it intended to, but because it miscalculated. They made many mistakes.”


    Jerusalem - Iran reportedly told Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh that Hamas should "wait quietly" for a dramatic Iranian announcement that is coming in a few months, the Hebrew daily Ma'ariv reported. The Iranians also told Haniyeh to lower Hamas' profile and calm the situation, the report said. Haniyeh met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad 11 days ago and received promises of economic aid and military cooperation as well as millions of dollars in cash. In four months, Iran is going to issue a statement that will dramatically change the strategic balance in the Middle East, the paper quoted Iranian officials as saying. The head of the Israel's Mossad (secret service) Meir Dagan was quoted as telling Israeli lawmakers on Monday that Ahmadinejad wants to have "3,000 centrifugal processors in bunkers by March 2007." The centrifuges enrich uranium, which can be used as fuel for a nuclear reactor but also is a key ingredient in the production of nuclear bombs. Experts here have warned that if Iran does acquire nuclear capability, it could then pursue its religious goal of spreading the Islamic revolution throughout the Middle East.

    the older stuff

    Commandant of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, said on state television. “God willing, the 21st century will see the defeat of the U.S. and the Zionists, and the victory of freedom-seeking nations of the world. The final goal of the [1979] revolution is to create global Islamic rule and a regime of law to be led by the Imam Mahdi”.

    Here is what the advisor to thI'm more worried about those crazy people running the show in Irane The folks in charge of Iran think they're going to cause thier messiah to appear by them destroying US/Israelnew Iranian president has said:The new Iranian President called for Israel to be anihilated. The first time a UN member atually called for the obliteration of another


    The [Iranians] President’s chief strategist, Hassan Abbassi, has come up with a war plan based on the premise that “Britain is the mother of all evils” – the evils being America, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, the Gulf states and even Canada, all of whom are the malign progeny of the British Empire. “We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization,” says Mr Abbassi. “There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and in the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them… Once we have defeated the Anglo-Saxons the rest will run for cover.”

    The IRGC chief warned that Iran was seeing through “critical days” and “fate-determining years”. He described the purpose of Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution as the “Salvation of Muslims” from the hands of the “oppressive U.S. and Israel”.


    commandant of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, said on state television, “The final goal of the [1979] revolution is to create global Islamic rule and a regime of law to be led by the Imam Mahdi”. “God willing, the 21st century will see the defeat of the U.S. and the Zionists, and the victory of freedom-seeking nations of the world”.

    • oskite, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6tl;dr
    • aceg1357, on 10/12/2007, -16/+19Nice post.

      All we have to do is stop and listen to what Iran's President is saying. He isn't hiding anything yet many in the west put their heads in the sand.

      Yes he wants nukes
      Yes he wants Islam to dominate the world
      Yes he hates the West
      Yes he wants to kill every Jew in Israel.
      Yes he thinks it is the end of days.

      Also, it is important to realize that this guy is a madman but a lot of Iranian people are moderate.
    • fnaqzna, on 10/12/2007, -14/+28Oddly enough... after translation to English, he doesn't sound any more or less nuts than George W. Bush.
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -14/+21Statements by Americans over the years:

      "All the ***** should be shot."

      "God you're such a ***** jew."

      "I say we just nuke them into a glass parking lot!"

      "Everyone just hates America because we're so free!"

      I really can't imagine what propaganda programs really entail... from our educational system to what you're allowed to watch on tv and read in the papers, but it's a pretty sad state of affairs when a good portion of any "peace loving" population ( sometimes multiple populations from multiple countries ) can be turned into vicious attack dogs on command.

      People need to learn a bit of rational thought. Stop impulsively jumping to act on emotions and for once just sit and think about why you feel the way you do. Is it because you choose to, or is it because someone is trying to make you?

      The more I visit sites like Digg and Slashdot and all the other places where people can post their comments, the deeper I fear we're all doomed to slavery or just plain old death and destruction.
    • jferrari, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12@SuckMyDigg - Did Mel Gibson say all that?
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2That's a bit beside my point, but still pretty funny. :)
    • Charlotte_Web, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6@SuckMyDigg:

      So, in your mind, there's no difference between a private citizen making such remarks in the US, and the President of Iran making similar remarks and basing policy on those beliefs.

      You have an incredibly naive world view.
  • sicc, on 10/12/2007, -14/+30This is why(as a shamed republican) I hate Bush. He has ruined out credibility to the extent that we are now UNABLE to attack our real enemies. Why? Because he tripped and fell into Iraq, now we are stuck there like a bunch of ***** idiots. Bush is a failure and an embarrassment. I have ***** had it with the illegals, the bickering, lies, corruption, BS wars, and everything else you have done. You stupid idiot, I hope you're happy now. I hope a ***** pillar from the White House falls on top of you and breaks your neck.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -23/+9oh right. like you would ahve supported an iranian war. The chorus of all the iraq bs would be even more!

      Blame the Europeans for thiking they could negiotate with Iran. The US and EU made a deal years ago that EU would handle the nukes with Iran. This is the result.

      This country has attacked Bush like I've seen perhaps only Lincoln be attacked.. and now you're goign to complain he's not agressive enough?

      What else did you expect?
    • Nocturnal, on 10/12/2007, -22/+4Neocons, gotta love it when they mod you down. Idiots. This man speaks the truth and you guys mod him down, LOL. Imagine when you can no longer access the interwebs because Iran blows us the ***** up. All praise be to Allah Akbar, JIHAD BALALLALALALALLALALALAAAAAAAAAALALALALAL!!!! ***** that!
    • eurofooty, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13A little bit of sensability for once, something the Bush regime hasn't displayed a lot of since Day 1. Put more effort into the solving the global distribution of wealth problem, and you'll have less disenfranchment. Fix Global Debt too. Too much wealth is staying at the top of the tree and not making its way down to the common man. That's just creating boundaries and instability in alot of regions.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -16/+5noctural, you must be , what, about 10 years old and beat up all the time? grow up
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -15/+8Eurofooty: Until Europeans start doing some work with this *****, and in addition to have some more babies so you're not overrun in 50 years, I dont think we in America want to hear anything from you.

      Thx
    • eurofooty, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7Thanks entirely to the US dominated Iraqi oil hunt (i.e. war), it has made all of the traditional opponents in the region extremely nervous. Governments in the region are scrambling to protect themselves and their citizens. Nuclear is the only ultimate deterrant, or?
    • AReallyGoodName, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13The Iraq war wasn't a mistake because it prevents the US from attacking Iran.

      The Iraq war was simply a mistake full stop. Like all wars.
    • JonAce, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2"I hope a ***** pillar from the White House falls on top of you and breaks your neck."

      Then we'd have Cheney as President and I doubt he'd be any better.
    • Charlotte_Web, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@eurofooty:

      "A little bit of sensability for once, something the Bush regime hasn't displayed a lot of since Day 1. Put more effort into the solving the global distribution of wealth problem, and you'll have less disenfranchment."

      COMPLETELY ridiculous.

      Yes, poverty in the thrid world is a global problem. But that is NOT Iran's problem. They control over 10% of OPEC's oil !!!!!

      Iran's economic woes are due to POLITICS, and not a lack of wealth.

      http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/12/16/stories/2005121600161100.htm

      How do you solve a political problem? Through political change. By his policies and his rhetoric, President Ahmadinejad is pushing the West to get involved and force a political change.
    • BigKitty, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@sicc and vincep1974,
      Actually, both of you have a point...Both of you should be on the same side (i.e., against the jihadis) along with me, so please make an effort to settle your differences without modding each other down or flame wars.

      I don't think many people here would call themselves neocons. For what it's worth, I am the most right-wing person that I've ever met or even heard of thus far, and for lack of a better term I generally describe myself as a paleoconservative.

      This war against terrorism, as it is called, has not been handled properly, and serious mistakes were made both on the part of Europe and the US. I think that George W.'s advisers have been, and are, bad. Also, there is a long heritage of mistakes that go back all the way to the Carter Administration. The biggest problem is a refusal to acknowledge the unpleasant but inescapable fact that Islam itself is at the root of the problem - not merely "radical Islamists," not specific terrorist organizations, not Sunnis or Shiites or any other subgroup, not the government of any particular Islamic country, but Islam itself.

      Jimmy Carter was financially beholden to the Saudis and the Pakistanis, and therefore he began the process of selling out to the Saudis and Pakistanis. George Bush Sr., Billary, and George W. have never had the common sense or the political will to turn back from that catastrophic path.

      The US made the mistake of aligning itself with Pakistan and with Saudi Arabia, who act as though they are our enemies. Conversely, the US has done many things to make enemies of Russia, China, and India, because some foolish Beltway policy "experts" want to make sure that those three countries never become a rival to the US. Well, so what if Russia, China, and India become prosperous, self-sufficient, secure, and influential? What risk is that to the US? None at all! In fact, we should hope for that, because then they could work together to become the best bulwark against militant Islam that anybody could possibly ask for.

      Iran is indeed a serious threat. There is a big, dangerous poker game going on, in which the Iranian government is demanding the right to obtain nuclear weapons, while at the same time declaring (or bluffing) that they already have those weapons and will use them against any country that threatens their nuclear program. We don't know what they already have or don't have.

      By the way, there are some loose nukes that disappeared to parts unknown during the collapse of the former Soviet Union, including some suitcase nukes. One or more of them might have found its way to Iran, which shares a border with Russia. These nukes could be delivered by means other than aircraft or missiles. They could simply be smuggled into whichever country is being targeted, and then set off either by some sort of a timing device or by a suicide bomber. Now that's a whole lot of ugly, and that's another reason why border and seaport security is so vitally important to any country that has any sense of self-preservation.
  • AdmiralAdama, on 10/12/2007, -18/+16This is like somebody saying Islam is peaceful and if you say otherwise I'll behead you. Iran says it has a peaceful nuclear program but if it's threatened they'll nuke you.
    • JonnyTrombone, on 10/12/2007, -7/+27Do Pat Robertson or Fred Phelps represent all Christians? I can tell you that the policies of Israel don't describe me as a Jew. So why would the nutcase president of Iran represent all Muslims?
    • mbthompson, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4@JonnyTrombone
      Because dear friend it has nothing to do with a mindset of Islam. There are Muslims from areas other than the middle east that do not think violence 24/7. Like it or not, the mid-eastern mindset is violent, always has been, and will always continue to be. These are not my own words either. They come from Walid Shoebat, who has been featured on many news programs and at many Universities. He is a former PLO member who now renounces the violent practices of Islam.

      http://www.shoebat.com/bio.php?PHPSESSID=de9063bf69feb2b160b85e28d3775094
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4Shoebot became a Christian! That's why he's no longer advocating violence.
    • mbthompson, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3I misread Shoebat's position and so I take back what I had said. It has EVERYTHING to do with the mindset of Islam, his words, not mine.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5I agree with him. All the people (who aren't lying) who are from that area they all say the same things. Things you never hear in the Western press.
    • freff, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4"All the people (who aren't lying) who are from that area they all say the same things."

      In other words, all the people that you agree with and that come to conform completely to your world view.
    • wowbagger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Rubbish. Pat Robertson is not attempting to build nuclear weapons and threatening to use them.
      Islam IS a violent religion, like it or not islam has a certain amount of violence just "built in". It is an anti social, intolerant religion and the world is taking action against it.

      Like the little punk in the UK yesterday that got jailed for incitement of murder over the stupid cartoons. Cartoons for goodness sake ?
      A report the BBC published says 60% of muslims think the same way.

      To quote the late, great Douglas Adams : "You know, there a bunch of really sweet guys, but you wouldn't want to live in the same galaxy as them, not if they keep going at it, not unless they learn to relax a little."
    • Charlotte_Web, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Interesting quote I found regarding the nature of Islam:

      "The key to understanding the role of violence in Islam is that the religion was founded to motivate an army, the army that Muhammad would eventually use to begin the conquest of Arabia. Armies have to endorse violence, because that is their purpose. Other features of Islam are consistent with this view, in particular the notion that the Muslim warrior will receive his reward in Heaven if he dies in jihad. Without a perpetual war, there is no real rationale for the existence of Islam."

      http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/48264
    • AhmedB, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@AdmiralAdama
      Do you want to threaten a country (or a person) to death and expect him to stand there doing nothing? WTF are you thinking, there's this part of human nature called the 'self defense' instinct you know...

      @JonnyTrombone
      Kudos to you for a very well balanced logical reply, I haven't seen those on digg in ages.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Yes, perpetual war.. that is what Jihad is. Then once everyone is a woman-hating narcissist Muslim , or a dhimmi , then the world can live in glorious Islamic peace under Sharia.

      It sounds like being invaded by aliens.
    • mbthompson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Ahmed

      Yes of course, because it is we who riot and threaten violence en-masse over a cartoon.
  • RawGamer, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9Saddam said the same thing and yet last I checked he didn't have any nukes. So what makes you think that the Iranians are telling the truth?
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3Sorry, I dont engage in questions that ask me to prove what is plainly known.
    • Nocturnal, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Because they're openly, actively seeking nuclear power. Even the inspectors have said they can't conclude that Iran is not attempting to create nuclear weapons. IIRC the weapon inspectors that were in Iraq prior to us invading said that they found no evidence that they were creating any type of nuclear weapons and sure enough, they were right! OMFG they were right!
  • jackelsmack, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1stupidest... description... ever.
  • knaps, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17After reading the article, it really just sounds like Iran is saying that they have the capability to change their minds about having nukes. It's not saying that they've gone underway and already made a batch ready for the first group of people to pick a fight with them (although that's not entirely out of the park, either). It's just like telling the guy in the cubicle next to yours that if he ever steals your coffee, you have enough money to go buy something heavy to throw at him.
    • Nocturnal, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4Uh duh, that's our whole point of not wanting them to have nuclear power in the first place. The logic is VERY simple. If you do not have any nuclear power, you cannot make nuclear weapons. That's the exact point that the USA and many other countries have been trying to make.

      How can you compare a country, which is lead by someone who does not believe the Holocaust happend and wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth? That is nothing like a problem with someone in the next cubicle to you. Nothing. I don't even see the similarities.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2knaps: um, they're buying time keeping your dick wet until they get done with their work.
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3" You cannot 'make' nuclear weapons. "

      Keyword - make.

      If that helps you sleep at night so be it.

      Wasn't it just a few years ago when we were being scared by the mainstream media into believing that some foreign terrorists could easily set off a nuclear bomb in America? Now how do you suppose some 'terrorists' would manage to get a hold of said bomb(s)?

      If a loose knit group of politically motivated men can manage to get their hands on nuclear weapons, how much easier would it be for a large nation to get a few? What happened to the thousands upon thousands the Soviet Union had? Surely they are not all accounted for.

      This is a moot point. Regardless of whether or not a country has the capability to create their own weapons, they can still buy them from others.
  • electronicmaji, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4Are you going to compare something like Iran using nuclear weapons? A crazy dictatorship led by xenophobic muslims who hate anything thats different to the USA using nuclear weapons in world war 2 as a peace loving democracy that cared about freedom for all and stopping a war waged by the enemies of peace for years on end. Enemies of peace that today are incarnated in the likes of iran and north korea.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -14/+11Everything that Iran has been doing is in accordance with the rules of jihad.

    All those letters the President of Iran has been sending around. Those are called Dawa.

    Before a Muslim can launch a raid against Non-believers they must be given a choice to freely believe in Allah. Those letters were invitations to Islam. (read them and see).

    The Koran says that there are three ways to go from there
    - The non believer accepts and he is converted to Islam
    - The non believer refuses and he is a Jew or (as they see it) polytheist (of the Christian kind),, he can live under dhmittuitude and be their slave basically
    - Non believer who isn't a person of the book.. atheists, or people of the book who dont want to be dhmitts... kill them.


    So he's sent out his letter and right now he's getting ready to respond to our response. Just as Muslims did with pre-Islamic Persia.

    • awesomelin, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1true;
      return;
    • Nocturnal, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5Does the Koran honestly teach that? Is this usually taught to people within the USA as well? I know Christianity deals with spreading the gospel and trying to get people over to Christianity but I don't recall anywhere in the bible that says they'll wage war in order to do so. That's just crazy if you ask me! I guess that is why they call them fundementalist/radicalists. It's really sad to be honest.
    • JonnyTrombone, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@Nocturnal: there is a lot of killing in the Christian bible, but most people pretend it isn't there. Philistines, unwed mothers, adulterers... plenty of commandments from Gd to kill people.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5The violence in the bible is narrative. it's in the context of relating historical events. No one believes, not the Jews or the Christians, that they are commanded to kill.

      The OT Law is the Jewish Ritual Law and it was given only to Jews and only them. Not non Jews.

      There is no comparaion other than a false disingenious uninformed comparison.
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Nowhere in the Bible does it state that Christians should selectively label certain sections as "narrative" when they become socially unacceptable or illegal.

      If the Gospels were truly the word of God, using the Gospel writers as a conduit, you'd have presumed God would have had the foresight to add "lol, jk" to the portions which we find distasteful, immoral or are considered illegal today.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3And you can prove that by substantiating your words with facts.
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1First time I've ever heard of this. Is this actually described unambiguously in the Koran, or were these rules laid down by eccentric clerics who were born hundreds of years after the founding of Islam?

      Or are they just the teachings of the bizarre Shi'ite sect Ahmedinejad proscribes to?
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Do not use the Koran to make sense from the Bible.

      Mohemmed was given some bad information when he was making up his religion and there's only enough commonality to convince people without really trying but not enough to be actually in-common.
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I'm sure "Jesas" was just as mistaken as "Mohemmed" when fabricating Christianity.

      There have been thousands upon thousands of prophets throughout recorded history. It's through sheer (mis)fortune that 50% of the world either worships Jesus or damn near worship Mohammed.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3This isn't bible class. Stick to the topic.
    • gomezfreak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1WHich is why here in the US many atheist and christians alike have ***** guns. Let's see you behead me when you're lying on the floor in ***** pieces.
  • xarc13, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3The Israelis will not allow Iran to go nuclear. Trust me, with the technological prowess of their military and intelligence services, Israel will glass the country before Iran get's the capabilities to build nukes.
    • Aharoni, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Glass the country? Has Israel joined the Covenant?
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12If Israel launched its own nuke, it'd cause an international crisis. Israel has refused to confirm or deny the existence of its nuclear arsenal for half a century in order to avoid being forced to join the nuclear NPT which is expected of all UN members who possess a nuclear capability. This is because they'd have to allow inspections of their arsenal, and questions would be asked as to how Israel came to have the capacity to develop its own nuclear arsenal.

      So as you can see, Iran is quite right when it states that the world is being hypocritical. I want the UN to hold both Israel and Iran to account on this issue; the Israeli government enforces state-sanctioned racism, and Iran is a fundamentalist theocracy.

      Of course, given a choice, I'd rather see Israel with nukes. A simple threat from the US to withdraw the billions of dollars worth of aid they send to Israel every year, and a commitment to avoid vetoing UN SC resolutions which are critical of Israel would ensure that they don't launch a nuke. There isn't anything we can do to compel Iran to not attack anybody (assuming they have nuclear capability) apart from threatening to blast them off the face of the earth.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Oh, Israel will cause an international crisis? That's probably in the agenda too.

      I dont know what exactly Iran, hezbellah, al qaida, hamas, the muslim brotherhood all have planned but I can only imagine the world will take forever to recover from it.
    • aOenEz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA. OMG that was effin' hilarious. Ah, a jew with a plasma rifle. Good times. :)
  • xarc13, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1The Israelis will not allow Iran to go nuclear. Trust me, with the technological prowess of their military and intelligence services, Israel will glass the country before Iran get's the capabilities to build nukes.
  • drjekelmrhyde, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13To be fair tell Israel to open up its Nuke program to inspectors They have nothing to hide right
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Israel didn't sign the Nuclear Non Proliferration Treaty, Iran did. Iran has the obligation to not make them and to go through inspections. It was a obligation it freely choose to sign on to.
    • drizek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14But Iran doesnt have any nukes.

      India however does, and they havent signed the treaty. The US is now selling nuclear equiment to India.

      Israels nuclear weapons will always be a major destabilizing force in the region, and they should be our first priority. If we can get israel to get rid of its nukes, then it will be much easier to stop Iran from going nuclear as well.
    • AdmiralAdama, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6It should be fairly clear to differentiate our enemies from our friends. Iran has declared war on america, chants death to America, is arming our enemies in Iraq, and has carried out terrorist acts. Israel is an ally of America who is surrounded by countries sworn to its destruction. We don't want Iran to have nukes because of its history of terrorism and threats against America. Israel, on the other hand, is our ally. Why would we take the one thing away from Israel that protects her against threats from, for example, Iran? This is war, and you don't disarm our allies.
    • jewdiknight, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5There is no Issue with Israel having Nukes. Israel does not want to go to war with anyone. But they are surrounded by several countries that openly admit to wanting Israel to be completely destroyed. Iran just had a summit to deny the holocaust. Israels strong military is the only thing that is keeping Iran from attacking.
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8What happens when your ally turns against you?

      Ever heard of Mossad? Talk about terrorism. It's amazing how it's okay to pick and choose who is or isn't a terrorist in this day and age. If you ask me there isn't a single country out there that has not used terrorism to achieve an end.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -13/+8Nocturnal: Yes the Koran says that.

    Islam is the only religion that commands all its future (from the time the holy text is written) followers to kill all the non beleivers.

    It has the feature where its beleivers can deceive the non-believers so that the great cause isn't hurt. (In other words if you were to ask one some question that they may not want you to know about, they will blanatly lie about it).

    The chorus of people who are going to say "well my best friend is just nicest guy and he's a muslim and he doesnt that" well , sadly, he's just choosing those ignore those rules. there's not a different set of rules he's using, he's just not using any. So there is no acceptable Islamic way to show the Jihad is wrong. Jihad is a holy obligation that Allah expects and there is no greater deed a Muslim can do than die in jihad.
    • haussmeister, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1you loose at life
    • KMartSheriff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8"you loose at life"

      And you lose at spelling.
    • iranian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Vincep1974

      I wonder where did you get your information on Islam.

      You're claiming that Islam has such rules and if I tell you those
      rules are just misinterpretations of Islam done by a very few people
      (Muslims and non-Muslims trying to demonize Islam), you'll accuse me of
      trying to deceive you according to the same non-existent rules. Quite clever.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Iranian: Yes, that's the standard reply isn't it. No details. No correction. just oh you're misinterpreting. or that translation is wrong, or this or that or in 4976904789 BC some cat ate a cracker and vomited.

  • Snowspot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6ugh... Things just keep getting worse...

    Can't we just legalize marijuana before we are annihilated?

    Heck we should use it as a weapon too... smoke bombs, then the terrorists will be mad chill.


  • VEGETAble, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3the revolution of 79 put these religous nuts in power, ***** khomeni, and destroyed a great country. Iranians are great people, just their oppressive government kills anyone who even tries to rise against them. And who supported the coup?!?! Oh thats right, gj america.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6France was harboring Khomeni. France incubated the coup. Carter let them keep our Embassy hostage for like a year and set us up as being weak from the beginning.
    • freff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14The "revolution" that actually lead to the situation that we see today in Iran actually happened in 1953, when the UK urged the CIA to help overthrow the democratically elected leader of Iran. Which we did.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

      This lead to years of very repressive rule under the Shaw of Iran, which fostered the environment for Khomeni to return from his exile and overthrow the government in the Islamic Revolution. None of which would have been possible if the original democratically elected government in Iran had been allowed to remain in place.

      Sometimes, it pays to understand history in order to understand why problems exist today. Iran, just like the rest of the Middle East, is the way it is for a reason. We've got to deal with that, but in order to do this, we need to have a real understanding of the issues in place.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4Oh yeah, history started in 1953. hehe.. well lets go back even more then and blame UK and France for destroying the Islamic Caliphate and occupying it, lying to all the potential leaders and making up stupid borders and then leave so that Europe can kill even more millions of people.

      Yeah its the US fault.
    • freff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I am an American. The comment was that "the revolution of 79" put Khomeni in power. The facts are, Iran had a democratically elected government that the CIA overthrew in 1953 which directly lead to 25 years of very repressive and unpopular rule. You can go back further if you want to, but was what lead to Khomeni's rise to power in Iran.
  • Snowspot, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Hey, don't talk to America like that!
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Here's an intro to the documentry, Obssesion. Obssesion takes TV broadcasts that are shown every day in the MIddle East in arabic and demostrates how pervasive this threat is, and how it's not a response to the West. It's a religious revival.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vypKSWHlnKA

    This video is of a speech by Brigitte Gabriel. A Christian Lebanese who survived the Lebanon Civil War of the 80s. She talks about what she was raised to believe in about the Jews and what happened to her life when Jordan kicked out the PLO and they went to lebanon and started the destructive civil war there.

    http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/ev092706a.cfm
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6You're not going to get any real infoa bout what's going on from the Western Press.. go to the Middle East media and those sites which translate to english what is shown. None of you have any idea what they're being brainwashed with. Im not even going to tell you because no one wold beleive it.
    • thedzyan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6What the hell are you talking about? Iran hasn't done anything wrong. The president maybe nuts and saying crazy things, but he doesn't control the Army. The Supreme Leader decides if Iran goes to war or not. I would also like to point out that Iran is a Republic, they're not some crazy dictatorship like North Korea. Isolation is not the answer. I don't know or care what they are brainwashed with. Sanctions will not solve the problem. And there is no proof for nuclear weapons despite what we in the US and other nations are being brainwashed with. Seriously, Israel is more of a threat.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3My premise is that the govt is acting from a religious motivation. So lets see if the govt organs are controlled by Clerics.

      The Supreme Leader is a Muslim Cleric and he is the Commander of Army.

      All President Candidates must be approved by the Couincil of Guardians (Clerics)

      The Council of Guardians (Clerics) choose the Supreme Leader

      So whatever limited type of Republic it is, it strictly restrained to agree with thier Shiite beliefs, so there is no contradiction with what I said.
    • Osmanthus, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11The only brainwashing going on is how Americans are being led to believe this *****. Iran is not and never has been a threat to world peace. The US has nothing Iran wants, but they have oil that the US wants; they are a victim of a smear campaign and I am embarrassed that people are falling for it. Remember, the only country to ever nuke anyone is the US.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3If you have any factual refutation then state them. Otherwise you're not addressing the issue. What Iran is doing is not altered by the particulars of what anyone else is doing, so the only possible thing you can do by making comparsions is to conceed my point that Iran is doing what I say they are. your motivation is to change the suibject. not refute my assertion
    • sooperdooper, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"None of you have any idea what they're being brainwashed with. Im not even going to tell you because no one wold beleive it." [sic]
      Holy crap, are you ever full of it. Can you even read the Arabic or Farsi on these news sites? And what is your assertion, what are you saying that Iran is doing? Is it anything I couldn't have read in this article?
      Cut your *****, please.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Dont ask me "what are you saying" This whole page is full of what I'm saying.
  • sfacets, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Good one them. It's the only way they could be safe from invasion really. What would you expect with one of the world's superpower's acting like a kid with a magnifying glass on a rampage?
  • scratt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8They are prepaired to do no more or no less than the US would if put in the same situation. And they stand by their assertions that their intentions are peaceful to date.
    I don't see where the story is here.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Here is some words from teh gov't leaderships own mouth. Are you going to tell them they're not really serious too? you going to tell them what they beleive?

    “The kind of service that the Americans, with all their hatred, have done us — no superpower has ever done anything similar,” Mohsen Rezai, secretary-general of the powerful Expediency Council that advises the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamanei, boasted on state television recently.
    “America destroyed all our enemies in the region. It destroyed the Taliban. It destroyed Saddam Hussein… The Americans got so stuck in the soil of Iraq and Afghanistan that if they manage to drag themselves back to Washington in one piece, they should thank God. America presents us with an opportunity rather than a threat — not because it intended to, but because it miscalculated. They made many mistakes.”


    Jerusalem - Iran reportedly told Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh that Hamas should "wait quietly" for a dramatic Iranian announcement that is coming in a few months, the Hebrew daily Ma'ariv reported. The Iranians also told Haniyeh to lower Hamas' profile and calm the situation, the report said. Haniyeh met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad 11 days ago and received promises of economic aid and military cooperation as well as millions of dollars in cash. In four months, Iran is going to issue a statement that will dramatically change the strategic balance in the Middle East, the paper quoted Iranian officials as saying. The head of the Israel's Mossad (secret service) Meir Dagan was quoted as telling Israeli lawmakers on Monday that Ahmadinejad wants to have "3,000 centrifugal processors in bunkers by March 2007." The centrifuges enrich uranium, which can be used as fuel for a nuclear reactor but also is a key ingredient in the production of nuclear bombs. Experts here have warned that if Iran does acquire nuclear capability, it could then pursue its religious goal of spreading the Islamic revolution throughout the Middle East.

    the older stuff

    Commandant of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, said on state television. “God willing, the 21st century will see the defeat of the U.S. and the Zionists, and the victory of freedom-seeking nations of the world. The final goal of the [1979] revolution is to create global Islamic rule and a regime of law to be led by the Imam Mahdi”.

    Here is what the advisor to thI'm more worried about those crazy people running the show in Irane The folks in charge of Iran think they're going to cause thier messiah to appear by them destroying US/Israelnew Iranian president has said:The new Iranian President called for Israel to be anihilated. The first time a UN member atually called for the obliteration of another


    The [Iranians] President’s chief strategist, Hassan Abbassi, has come up with a war plan based on the premise that “Britain is the mother of all evils” – the evils being America, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, the Gulf states and even Canada, all of whom are the malign progeny of the British Empire. “We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization,” says Mr Abbassi. “There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and in the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them… Once we have defeated the Anglo-Saxons the rest will run for cover.”

    The IRGC chief warned that Iran was seeing through “critical days” and “fate-determining years”. He described the purpose of Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution as the “Salvation of Muslims” from the hands of the “oppressive U.S. and Israel”.


    commandant of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, said on state television, “The final goal of the [1979] revolution is to create global Islamic rule and a regime of law to be led by the Imam Mahdi”. “God willing, the 21st century will see the defeat of the U.S. and the Zionists, and the victory of freedom-seeking nations of the world”.

    • flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1dugg down for the sheer size of your comment.
  • flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1I wish I had a bottle of mountain dew right now.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I expect to be heavily censored now. This information is out there and available..people go to a lot of effort to supress it.

    So dont let the censors win.
    • freff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3There is no censoring going on. The words you write still appear on the page, and even if you got banned tomorrow, digg leaves what you wrote up.

      I'm sick of hearing people complain about being "censored". Digg is a democracy as excercised on the net. Just because people express their opinions on your opinion, that does not equal censoring. You comments can still be read, if people want.
    • unitedstatians, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3On digg.com enyone can expression their ideas, even morons. But no one has immunity, not even Kevin Rose. Most of the time you won't get bury, if you use your own common sense. You want to know why your gettin' bury?, ask your own inferior content.
    • angulion, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Instead of blaming censorship, quit spouting drivel and racism. Maybe you'll even getting modded up.
  • Majin, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4gotta love a group that says stop saying were violent, or well hurt you.
    • evil-doer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5they are saying: stop being aggressive or we will be defensive.
  • ericsemail, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I agree with the above posts that Israel could never afford to let Iran go nuclear. Israel will strike first--as unfortunate as that is, they have no other viable solution that will eliminate the threat. I think most people fail to realize that Israel is an extremely small country--a single nuclear blast there would be crippling. My .02 ;).
    • firekhan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0 Its conveniant to FORGET that israel is built on stolen palestinian land.!!
  • MASH007, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14As an Iranian-American (born and live in US) I have to say a couple of things.

    First, Iran has gone through more revolutions than the US has gone through presidents. Iranian people are strong willed and rebel when there rights are being stepped on.

    Second, I've taken basic chemistry and know that the jump from nuclear energy to a nuclear bomb is HUGE! Its like telling the difference between a potatoe and a watermelon. It will be very obvious if Iran is aiming for a nuclear weapon. If US kept it peaceful then we would still have inspectors which could easily tell if a weapon is under-works.

    Third, obviously the Israels gov't doesn't like the gov't of Iran. Please note (with all due respect), that the source of this article is a Jewish press release.
    • AdmiralAdama, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4We must watch out for those scheming Zionists.
    • gomezfreak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Um..If you're born here then you're just American. Don't follow this whole "african-american," or "mexican-american" nonsense. If that's the case every single one of us here are "insert nationality"- American.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Oh I didnt realize I posted that big long thing of quotes twice. If I realized I had done it, i wouldnt have done it 2x. My mistake
  • SebK666, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14I live in Iran, I'm half-french half-iranian.
    Iranians HATE the government, and most of em love America.
    Lots of Iranians try to go live in USA, but it's hard.
    Noone here likes the president.
    The president is powerless, there are religious people with more power, they control everything.
    Noone tought that Iran would be an Islamic ''Republic'' during the Revolution!
    Ahmadinejad is only doing this to provoc, scare...etc
    If HE doubts on the existence of the holocaust, this doesn't mean the iranians think it too.
    GO IRAN, $^&^5&%^ THE GOVERNEMENT!
    • iranian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@SebK666

      I'm not a supporter of Ahmadinejad but to say every
      Iranian hates him and the government is unrealistic.
      He is a controversial figure. He has a lot of both supporters
      and criticizers. You're like a Democrat saying that
      everyone in the US hates Bush.

      Not to forget the history, Iranians themselves supported
      Khomeini and religious figures in the 1979 revolution and voted for
      an Islamic Republic and the constitution which requires the
      leader to be a cleric.

      Most of the Iranians are religious people,
      while peaceful and anti-war too. But not all of them.
      The non-religious anti-government ones tend to appear more
      on the Internet and foreign websites.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2All my criticizism is towards the Islamic leadership of the country. The Iranian people have my respect and i wish they would take care of this for everyone's good.
  • Schmack, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Flamingmb - me too. Gonna go get me some.

    Oh, and ***** Iran's crazy clerics.
  • Anonymouz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Although i feel like no one should have the type of power nuclear weapons possess that just not going to happen.

    As long as Israel have nuclear weapons i don’t see Iran disarming in a hurry. You want Iran to disarm then disarming Israel would be the first step otherwise it would leave Israel the most powerful and most influential country in the middle-east and we all know how comfy the US and Israel are. Its not something that the middle-east let alone the world would benefit from.

    Israel is a much worse trouble maker. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6231439.stm this is just one recent case. Many of these raids and Israely attacks go unnoticed or get shoved onto the back pages of newspapers if that yet we’re constantly hounded by stories of Iran MAYBE creating nuclear weapons. There’s far worse things going on specially in the middle-east. Got to get the priorities straight.

    Iran chat allot of crap but haven’t really done much. Top of the list should be disarm Israel that would be perfect timing to disarm Iran next.

    On a global scale i haven’t heard a peep outta KIM JONG IL lately! Must have got rid of those weapons of mass destruction quickly seeing as America anit made him the next man on their hit list.


  • teadrop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Iranians are deserting from Ahmadinejad, just like American are deserting from Bush. Ahmadinejad recently lost 13 of the 15 seats in the Tehran city council election (they do have some form of democracy in Iran). After all, Iranians, like Americans are much smarter than we thought they were. "You can deceive all the people some of the time, but never all the people all the time." Eventually people wise up and trash their idiotic president.

    The next Iranian president is likely to be Bagher Ghalibaf (you can check him up on Google). He seems much more reasonable, and less crazy. Will he give up the nuke? No. But he's like the old USSR: Dangerous but sane.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If the Supreme Leader is Commander in Cheif , what is the president doing making nuclear weapons ? What wold change if the President changed?

      Is the President able to make / not make nuclear weapons despite the head Supreme Leader cleric?


      Something doesnt make sense.

      Now I honestly beleive the people hate the govt but how is the govt policy going to change when the Clerics control it as they do now?
    • teadrop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes the clerics control the government. But the people do have some power. And the president, if capable, might snatch some power from the clerics. The power struggle is always dynamic.

      The change of president probably won't translate directly to change of policy. The nuclear program will continue (after the War on Iraqi, every idot will pursue the WMD program, because they don't want to end up like Saddam who slacked out on his WMD homework...) . But the situation would be less chaotic if they have someone wiser than Ahmadinejad to control the nuclear button.
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Saddam didn't slack off on *****. He was baited to attack Kuwait by the Americans, and then he ate ***** for it. He was then put under so many embargoes and trade restrictions that there wasn't a single thing he could do without the approval of the US.
    • iranian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@Vincep

      Yes, and the leader has rejected any attack on Israel.

      quoted from wikipedia:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#Interpretation_of_speech_as_call_for_referendum

      In November 2005 Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei, rejecting any attack on Israel, called for a referendum in Palestine:

      We hold a fair and logical stance on the issue of Palestine. Several decades ago, Egyptian statesman Gamal Abdel Nasser, who was the most popular Arab personality, stated in his slogans that the Egyptians would throw the Jewish usurpers of Palestine into the sea. Some years later, Saddam Hussein, the most hated Arab figure, said that he would put half of the Palestinian land on fire. But we would not approve of either of these two remarks. We believe, according to our Islamic principles, that neither throwing the Jews into the sea nor putting the Palestinian land on fire is logical and reasonable. Our position is that the Palestinian people should regain their rights. Palestine belongs to Palestinians, and the fate of Palestine should also be determined by the Palestinian people. The issue of Palestine is a criterion for judging how truthful those claiming to support democracy and human rights are in their claims. The Islamic Republic of Iran has presented a fair and logical solution to this issue. We have suggested that all native Palestinians, whether they are Muslims, Christians or Jews, should be allowed to take part in a general referendum before the eyes of the world and decide on a Palestinian government. Any government that is the result of this referendum will be a legitimate government.
  • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5To all you people who dont mind if Iran nukes Israel, search this phrase in google, be sure to put double quotes around it because it's an exact word match. See what your Anti-Israeli friends have in mind for you

    First comes Saturday then comes Sunday
  • vhold, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Erm, let me get this straight.

    "Our nuclear program has nothing to do with nuclear weapons!"

    becomes

    "Leave our nuclear program alone or we'll use nuclear weapons!"

    aka

    "We are most definitely researching nuclear weapons, completely confirming all your fears, and proving that we have lied consistently."
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Now you're catching on.
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Unlike Israel, who neither confirm nor deny their possession of nuclear weapons so as to avoid actively deceiving the world on one hand, and avoiding having to sign the NPT on the other hand.

      Personally I'd rather see no country in the Middle East with nuclear weapons. I don't consider Israel to be a part of the "civilised club" of nations, as we in the West like to think of ourselves as being a part of.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Israel has nuclear ballastic submarines. Everyone knows it has missiles. What is there an inspection for? There's no doubt. And anyone who thinks they would be used in any other way then to destroy whoever it was that just nuked them is irrational.

      On the other, pretty much everyone, including the Iranians here say the Pres of Iran is not rational (he is rational in the framework of jihad where death is good).

      Anyone who says this is no big deal is basically laughing at the deaths of millions people that might be soon.
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Vincep1974:

      You've mixed my rebuttal in with his original statement, as if we're the same person. In case you didn't realise, I was criticising him for believing in wild conspiracy theories and labelling all Israelis as beggars.
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Edit: the above comment was posted in the wrong place. Oops.

      "Israel has nuclear ballastic submarines. Everyone knows it has missiles. What is there an inspection for?"

      An inspection would take place after they signed the NNPT, which they would have to do if it was officially confirmed that Israel had nuclear strike capability. As I understand it, aid of the type given to Israel cannot be granted to nuclear powers which aren't signatories to the NNPT under US law. The purpose of the inspection would be to ensure they're following international laws and conventions on the assembly of nuclear weapons. In other words, the IAEA would want to ensure Israel isn't pursuing a "dirty bomb" or anything of that kind.

      "And anyone who thinks they would be used in any other way then to destroy whoever it was that just nuked them is irrational."

      The only time nuclear weapons have been used in warfare was against a non-nuclear enemy. It boils down to trust. Do we trust the Israelis to not fire a pre-emptive nuke towards Iran if they feel threatened? I don't, but then I'm not an international diplomat.

      "On the other, pretty much everyone, including the Iranians here say the Pres of Iran is not rational (he is rational in the framework of jihad where death is good)."

      He's a religious fundamentalist, so of course he's not behaving rationally. Then again, he believes that Armageddon precipitates the coming of the hidden imam, so starting WW3 may be entirely rational if his objective is to bring about the end of the world.

      "Anyone who says this is no big deal is basically laughing at the deaths of millions people that might be soon."

      Who says this is no big deal? This has been top of the international agenda for well over a year, now.
  • AdmiralAdama, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2oops
  • NorthStateGonzo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2They don't have the balls to do it, We triple dog dare them..
  • azzrik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The biggest worry here is what happened in North Korea, after all the warnings and threats, they still let off the nukes, literally stuck their noses up at America and the whole UN, what picture does this give to Iran, "our threats are hollow", you have Iranians on here stating that they have families wanting to leave Iran because this ruler of Iran is a mad man, then the actual thing is not if he uses nukes, just when and where!
    • unitedstatians, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"If say a nuclear war breaks out, how do you stop it?" very important question vbr2 made on top

      In reality, you can't stop a nuclear weapon exchange crisis, BUT you can prevent it! It might well... magnify the consequences of cataclysms we are already aware of - like nuclear war, asteroid impact, severe global warming, flipping of the poles, strong Solar Storms (e.g. geomagnetic storm, a solar flare, or a coronal mass ejection ) etc.... We all know What will happen if we initiate removal of nuclear material from the entire world?, procrastinated disasters like a "WWIII".

      First step would be sending the very effective weapons inspectors to nuclear disorder infected countries in the region, starting with Israel, then Iran, etc….to show the Israelis our intensions have weight, resistance, muscularity and to also send a message to the Iranians that we have integrity and we mean business.

      Israel must prepare for loss of western support, if it doesn't cooperates and U.S and E.U must complete their defensive strategies. To prevent further, destabilization of the West as a result of degrading US foreign policy and consistencies.

      Retarded monkey suits and their agenda of image enforcing fallacies are preoccupied, with delusional convenient deterrence, single-sided incestuous propaganda and celebrity worship. Which creates unfavorable situations and produces blindness.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Premption and add Israel to NATO. Never feed the Jews to the wolves. First comes Saturday then comes Sunday.
    • osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It makes it hard to nuke a country when the rulers know that we don't want to kill the people, he knows we would never nuke them and he probably won't nuke anyone but I can't say we didn't see this threat coming. The next country to set off a nuke will surely be put off the map, it's a death sentence. If it isn't an all out armageddon, it will be starved by the world via economic means as a form of punishment I would imagine.
  • dp1mat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I don't know if I believe this crap either. They want attention. And someone there has to know if Iran does anything stupid their country could be turned to glass. I think its BS to get us to support another war on terror. Didn't i read somewhere that all the stuff the iran dude said about Israel was taken out of context? As in he said something else and it was interpreted as wiping Israel off the map. I don't care if they do either. I'm tired paying taxes to give money to Israel. They get like 2/3 of our aid to foreign country's. I dont think they have done nothing for me lately?
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Iran is following the Jihad ISO 9001 manual to the letter.
  • tralalaa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I'm so sick of the empty threats coming from that region.

    I'm quickly realizing they're all ***** talk and no action. Especially terrorists with their "impending attack" for what, 5 years now?

    Either do it, or STFU because no one believes ya.
    • dp1mat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yea Iran is trying to get nukes I beleive as well, dont blame em either. But im sure we the powers to be will have some kind of terror attack Supposedly done by Iran. Then we will have a reason to attack em. Hell I thought the WTC were brought down by planes, but its been talked about they couldnt do it. Then I saw something about the towers that made me go HUMM? Now I do beleive someon in this country brought em down and brought down building number 7 as well.
      Been passing around that dvd to anyone thats interested round these parts.
    • SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Just who is issuing the terrorist threats? Why would they threaten the most powerful nation on Earth and expect to get away with it? What gives these men the protection to issue such threats with no chance of being caught before they carry out the attack? Where are the tapes coming from and why are they not traced back to their origins? Why would our media play them for you, when we don't see half of what goes on around the world on a day to day basis?

      Just think about it for half of a minute.
  • buckrogers1965, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6So, let me get this strait.

    If someone threatens to invade them, then they would use nukes, if they had them to defend themselves.

    *scratches head*

    The United States has a stated policy of first use of nukes for offensive purposes.

    So their stated policy is for defense only, and our stated policy is first use.

    Whose policy is less aggressive?

    Oh, that's right, their policy is less aggressive.

    So why are they being portrayed as the bad guys?

    Because the powers that be want to invade.

    Anyone that looks at this and doesn't see Iraq all over again is intentionally being blind. Another war being created for us based on lies.

    Follow the money.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Follow the money? You think Muslim Clerics who are devoted to Allah's wants your money?

      Follow the motive. It's clear no one believes that Iran is actually going to do this yet all indications they are. This means they dont care about the deaths on their side.

      Under what scenerio would they not care if they themselves died?

      Jihad.
    • sicc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Lots of little kids getting blocked tonight...
    • azzrik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Iran will only use nukes for self defense, problem being what they consider self defense, it leave a gate wide open.
  • 3leggedHorse, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1If Kikes and rag heads want to nuke each other let them do it i say. It would make great T.V.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23legged: you have that wrong.

      Look this up in google, with the quotes

      "First comes saturday then comes sunday"
    • tobybuk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"First comes Saturday then comes Sunday" looked it up, go to the c4rpme.org website. Hardly an unbiased site, when its sponsored by the Jewish terrorists masquerading under the titles of:

      The American Jewish Congress
      The David Project
      Stand with Us

      In typical style Israel want to convince the west that its a war between east and west and not Israel/Arabs as it suits their purpose to trick people to supporting their Terrorism against the Arabs.

      Well, its not. Israel is hated in the Middle east because they terrorize the occupied population, steal peoples land etc etc. America is hated because they blindly support Israel.

      Israel be warned, someone sometime will get pissed enough at your behavior that they will fight back real hard.

    • osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@tobybuk - They have always been fighting, it's not like they are just relaxing over there. Thousands of years now.
  • spons, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I really don't understand why this topic isn't in every day news... Anyway that's how it is in Belgium. This seems like a pretty big threat to me and this is the first thing I read about it in almost a week. Even now this isn't posted on our biggest news site in Belgium and I don't know why. We're talking about nukes here people, things that could destroy the world in like 10 minutes (if you're good at it :p).
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3
      More Moslems came, and soon a small mosque was built, which attracted yet others. As long as Zoroastrians remained in the majority, their lives were tolerable; but once the Moslems became the more numerous, a petty but pervasive harassment was apt to develop. This was partly verbal, with taunts about fire-worship, and comments on how few Zoroastrians there were in the world, and how many Moslems, who must therefore posses the truth; and also on how many material advantages lay with Islam. The harassment was often also physical; boys fought, and gangs of youth waylaid and bullied individual Zoroastrians. They also diverted themselves by climbing into the local tower of silence and desecrating it, and they might even break into the fire-temple and seek to pollute or extinguish the sacred flame. Those with criminal leanings found too that a religious minority provided tempting opportunities for theft, pilfering from the open fields, and sometimes rape and arson. Those Zoroastrians who resisted all these pressures often preferred therefore in the end to sell out and move to some other place where their co-religionists were still relatively numerous, and they could live at peace; and so another village was lot to the old faith. "
      Boyce, A Persian Stronghold of Zoroastrianism, pp. 7-8;


      Sounds like Paris, London and Malmo today to me,.
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You obviously haven't been to London. There are particular boroughs which are predominantly Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi, but there is no "Muslim area" where they all live in harmony.

      We also happen to live in an apathetic, cultural Christian, yet secular society where taunts of "my religion is better than yours" have no meaning, as most cultural Christians don't practice Christianity or believe in the divinity of Jesus.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Well I didn't say "my religion is better than yours".. For one, I never told anyone what my religion may or may not be. and two, Islam , if followed perfectly to the letter.. I cant think of anything worse.

      If you're claiming to be one of those mythical "moderate" Muslims you should be putting your efforts to restraining your more energeic friends. You cant blame me for taking them at their word. All that I know is from what Muslims have said. I listened carefully and I'm about the only person in the room who knows what you guys think, as none of you bothered to even contradict me, which I was prepared for.
    • shaghab, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0why are you threatened.. I don't think belgium has any intention to threaten Iran (and that is a pre-req before they will want to nuke anyone)
    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"Well I didn't say "my religion is better than yours"

      My comment was in response to the passage you posted and the sentence you left at the foot of the comment. By "we" I meant "we British". I should have been clear about that.

      "Islam , if followed perfectly to the letter.. I cant think of anything worse."

      Try following literal interpretations of Christianity and Judaism. If I was a theist, I'd opt to live under Islamic rule, as Islam is the only religion which has historically permitted freedom of religion. Christians, Jews and Hindus have resided in Muslim empires without persecution, which was certainly not the case in Christian lands until relatively recently. However, being an atheist, I'm screwed under all three, so I've got no choice to make.

      "If you're claiming to be one of those mythical "moderate" Muslims you should be putting your efforts to restraining your more energeic friends."

      Correcting a false sociological quip doesn't make me a Muslim, moderate or otherwise. FYI, I'm an atheist.

      "Sounds like Paris, London and Malmo today to me,."

      To elaborate further, Muslims in Britain live separate lives from the mainstream population. Apart from the youth, they don't care to socialise with non-Muslims, so there's no religious harassment as described in that passage in London at least.
    • spons, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I'm not saying I'm threatened, I'm just saying it's quite big new and I don't understand why it isn't in the news so much, btw: the use of a nuclear bomb is also dangerous for the rest of the world.
  • cJw314, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I thought they didn't HAVE nuclear weapons and weren't developing them?

    They're LYING! -.-
    • freff, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Yeah, or you can call it political rhetoric meant to shape and mold the opinions of the people of Iran, by beating the drums of a potential war and declaring an external enemy. There's been a lot of that lately.

      You have no idea how saddening it is to me to see sources like this one and certain others use hyperbolic rhetoric to wage a war of information against Muslims people. I can honestly understand many of the reasons we've gotten to where we are now, but it's sad to see a proxy war being waged on the American conscious so relentlessly by the neo-conservatives and others who share their ideology.

      http://www.forusa.org/peacewalks/default.html

      Trust me, it's possible to live together without conflict. And this isn't some from some hippie, peace-at-all-costs ideolog. It's reality. Much more than whatever the neo-conservatives who seem to have President Bush's ear are spouting as their current ideology de jour.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Reff: What "Neo-conservative" has Bush's ear? Please name them.

      Other than the threat that Iran itself is making by causing violence all over the world, why would Iran otherwise rationally think it would be a target for anything? It isnt

      Stop blaming the US and letting Iran play victim. Iran has been up to no good for decades.

    • freff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Once again, I am American. And as such, I have the interests of this country in mind. If you don't know the basic makeup of the President's Cabinet, or know about the influence of think tanks like the AEI and of prominent neo-conservative on this White House, then I suggest you do a bit of googling.

      Iran is a geo-political threat. Their government is basically unfriendly towards the US. There are many within Iran that don't agree with the actions of their government, just like here in the United States, but that doesn't change the actions of their government. Which is also true of the actions of the Bush administration. Unfortunately, Bush's foreign policy has managed to increase Iran's influence in the Middle East, and by association, their threat to us exponentially. By miles and miles. You could make a very convincing argument that Bush was the best thing that has ever happened to the radicals in the Middle East. And the sad thing is, Bush was warned before hand. But that's besides the point...

      Additionally, by being as focused and bogged down in Iraq as we have been, the even more pressing threat from North Korea has been drummed out of people's heads, and they have only become more and more of a problem over the past 6 years. One that could destabilize the region of a much larger geo-political rival than Iran.

      Iran is doing what nations do. That is looking out for its self-interests. And right now, those self-interests are running counter to ours. There are a lot of ways to begin fixing this, but drumming up fear of the country and of Muslims in general is not one of them. That's what I'm saying.
  • shaghab, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2if one country has the right to build any kind of arsenal then so do others..

    PS: i think no one should have weapons of mass destruction. Especially USA :)
  • 3leggedHorse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@ vincep1974
    What i meant was Israel said they will preemptively strike Iran to stop them getting nukes, Most people believe Israel has nukes whether they meant that's what they would use i don't know. So now Iran retorts with that comment so screw it I am sick of hearing about it.
    I live in the U.K a few low yield nukes going of in the mid east would not effect me.

    BBQ anyone.
    • WoollyMittens, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3A few low yield nukes in the middle east will raise the price of your gasoline an order of magnitude. Your economy would be dead, even though you will survive the blasts.
    • h00ligan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1not for what.. 27 years.. by then they would rethink the anti electric car movement. National reserve is HUGE.
  • jewdiknight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Now say 'Nuclear weapons' in Russian!"
  • SebK666, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Muslim Clerics, the ayatollahs here don't care about Allah or religion... Religion is their ''excuse''... all they want is money!
    The real 'terrorist' here is Bush, he is the one destroying oriental countries, making war, accusing everyone...
    Operation Iranian Liberation? => O.I.L.
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Riight. One can never trust what a Muslim says to a Non-Muslim in wartime. I know about Taqiyya. Keep telling yourself those lies. If you are in Iran you know what your govt is up to.

      It's up to the Muslims to stop this but somehow I doubt that is what the Muslims want.

    • SebK666, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0BTW: I'm NOT muslim. I don't have any religions, I'm french, but I live in Iran.
      People cannot stop the gov't! What the gov't do isn't what the iranians want!
    • Vincep1974, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Well Seb: I think this situation pretty demands some Muslims somewhere to save their countries and their humanity.


      The entire Muslim world is one giant decayed spore. When are they going to take responsibly for their societies?
  • WoollyMittens, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Most people miss the point. They might not have a delivery vehicle, but even if they set this thing off in their own back yard it will cause major conflicts. Half the Arab world will believe any stupid conspiracy theory the imam thinks of, so calling any detonation an American plot will cause disaster. Remember that lots of muslims believed that the tsunami disaster was an American plot.
  • h00ligan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2well, i think the more interesting side of this is how bad Israel is going to freak out. Iran's threats are much larger within that region.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 82 of 82 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.