I would. And I don't think the House of Saud would risk it's close relations to the US over something they don't need. As it is, they're buddies with the nation with the most powerful military on the planet, and they've got oil to sell to everyone; they don't need nuclear weapons to defend themselves with, and they don't need nuclear plants to produce power with all their oil and gas.Xshayathiya said:
War with Iran and its consequences
- Thread starter Gelion
- Start date
Insane_Panda
Deity
Doesn't it seem like in every thread CivGeneral debates in, it starts with him refusing to believe anything you say, then suddenly admitting and apologizing for his mistakes...
Insane_Panda
Deity
Also, as for Iran, I think something has to be done eventually, if infact we cannot persuade Iran.
Little Raven
On Walkabout
Oh rly?Elrohir said:
Of course Saudi Arabia needs nukes. If the US fails in Iraq, and that's looking pretty likely these days, then the Saudis are very likely going to be drawn into a proxy war with Iran, who is likely to go nuclear herself sometime soon. Nobody wants to show up at a gun fight with a knife.
Pakistan is nuclear. Israel is nuclear. Iran will be nuclear soon. Can't blame the Saudis for wanting to get in on the action.
SS-18 ICBM
Oscillator
Why worry about Iran? Its nukes are a few years away from being developed. And if it decides to launch its nukes, Iran will be turned into a radioactive wasteland.
CartesianFart
Deity
Yeah,this thread is surely a place where Pentagon officials will do their reqruiting for future war planners.
SS-18 ICBM
Oscillator
Why not? Plenty of people here are skilled in war. 
Jawz II
Oh Dear
you better watch out, cause im a warmachine. 
BasketCase
Username sez it all
How about, worry about them now so they don't get nuked later? For all the sobbing everybody's doing about the supposedly horrible state Iraq is in right now, I would much rather invade Iran and put it in that same situation than incinerate the whole thing and kill millions of Iranians who never harmed anybody in their lives.SS-18 ICBM said:
Jawz II
Oh Dear
BasketCase said:
hey heres a really good idea, how about you just leave them the hell alone and dont invade nor incinerate them?
didnt think of that one, did you?
Xanikk999
History junkie
Jawz II said:hey heres a really good idea, how about you just leave them the hell alone and dont invade nor incinerate them?
didnt think of that one, did you?
That doesnt stop them from using their nukes on others.
Why would they develop nukes if they arent going to use them.
Detterent is BS.
Jawz II
Oh Dear
so US should get rid of all your nukes then? you know since deterrent is BS?
cause last i checked america had the most deterrents than anyone else?
how about the us get rid of their BS first? that would defenitly make all this nuclear profiliation talk alittle more credible.
cause last i checked america had the most deterrents than anyone else?
how about the us get rid of their BS first? that would defenitly make all this nuclear profiliation talk alittle more credible.
Xanikk999
History junkie
Jawz II said:
You may find this hard to beileve but most people think the U.S's handling of nukes is more credible then a fundumentalist theocratic dictorships credibility is.
Xanikk999
History junkie
I dont even see why there are so many thread topics recently about war with iran.
Bush states clearly he was seeking a diplomatic solution to this and had no plans to invade iran.
He stated his intentions on iraq on the otherhand so that was different. So il take his word for it unless he states otherwise.
Bush states clearly he was seeking a diplomatic solution to this and had no plans to invade iran.
He stated his intentions on iraq on the otherhand so that was different. So il take his word for it unless he states otherwise.
Jawz II
Oh Dear
Xanikk999 said:
if by "most people" you mean "most americans" then sure.
as for the rest of the world (which im a member of btw) i havent heard of iran attacking any country in the last 100 years at least, maybe longer.
america has been in a war what, every 10 years?
also america is the only country to actually nuke another country, and target civilians no less. so your international credibility isnt what you wish it was.
Xanikk999
History junkie
Jawz II said:if by "most people" you mean "most americans" then sure.
as for the rest of the world (which im a member of btw) i havent heard of iran attacking any country in the last 100 years at least, maybe longer.
america has been in a war what, every 10 years?
also america is the only country to actually nuke another country, and target civilians no less. so your international credibility isnt what you wish it was.
Nope not just americans. Most europeans would trust america with nukes over iran with nukes. Anyway the politicians would because they are also trying to get iran to backdown.
Is any country unhappy with the U.S with nukes? None have made an issue out of it however numerous countries do not trust iran with nukes.
And im not going to explain the situation about nuking hiroshima and nagasaki in full detail with you.
If you read a book with a neutral point of view about the situation you will understand it wasnt a black and white picture. We reviewed every option along with nukes to get japan to surrender and it wasnt an easy choice.
Not to mention nukes havent been tested fully and the side affects were unaware at the time. And they were weaker then todays nukes.
Comraddict
C.IV
1. Get troops out of Iraq
2. Bomb Iran (and Iraq if necessary) and don't send any troops.
2. Bomb Iran (and Iraq if necessary) and don't send any troops.
Jawz II
Oh Dear
Xanikk999 said:
dont count on it. our governments migh say that (they want that american bussines), i doubt the people would. hey, its pretty inaccurate, but why dont you make a thread with a poll if you really wanna find out? make it a public poll so we can see which european voted for what.
besides, europes population + us pop = 1/10 of worlds people? i think its even less than that. so it dosent really matter.
i dont trust irans government anymore than i trust the current us government, but im sure they wont nuke anyone, since they have nothing to gain from that (and dont tell me theyre insane, cause that truly is BS), and im sure the us government wont nuke anyone either, for the same reason. not even with that genius in charge. ideally id like none of them to have nukes, but thats not gonna happen any time soon.
CartesianFart
Deity
What do you think about trusting Iran(if they succeed in building a nuclear warhead)giving knowledge to other questionable nation-states,such as Sudan?Jawz II said:
BTW:No more animal jokes my friend.
Jawz II
Oh Dear
CartesianFart said:
first of all i dont think they would, even if they said they will.
second, knowing how to make a bomb and actually building it or 2 very diffrent things, iran is about 100 times harder to beat militarily than sudan, if theres talk of attacking iran because theyre enriching uranium (which is btw their legal right to do under the non-profiliation treaty as long its used for nuclear power), what makes you think the us is gonna let sudan build a bomb?
CartesianFart said:BTW:No more animal jokes my friend.
dont fill our forums with your crap!!
(thats a joke btw right there)
