Iran to break uranium stockpile limit set by nuclear deal, spokesman says

As blackmail

If N. Korea attacks the south they will threaten US cities if we intervene

And liberal progressive president would do nothing

The threat could also extend to US troops in Japan

 

Could you work on that reply and make it make sense?

 

You should go to england and wait on line to see a doctor about that cough

If Israel did that it would be the least violent response to the iran nuclear threat imaginable

And nothing compared to an all-out war in the Gulf

 

So due to being prevented from doing business and providing economically for its people (even in time of disaster) Iran is gradually moving towards having nukes and the US admits it is to blame

OP link

As for Israel saying Iran should be blamed for going against the deal - I think Israel should notice above who broke the deal, that it was Israel who was pushing the Christian Zionists of the US to do this and that it is Iran the world now supports.

It will though be up to the EU to show whether it has any guts or whether it falls behind the US.

If someone breaks a deal with you and is working to starve your people to death and cause civil war in your country, even trying to put terrorists in to run your country and you do not use everything you have got to fight back then you are not human.

The US given its addiction to harming other states is bringing us to the brink.

 

You are conflating blackmail with "suicide". It is not suicide on our part that the N. Koreans engage in blackmail.

What does any of this have to do with the point I made - that having nuclear weapons serves as a deterrent to a US attack ? If anything your comments support my claim.

The only difference is that If Iran had nukes - the blackmail would be the nuking of Israel rather than S. Korea.

 

The longterm result of losing a power struggle with china and north korea means we will be cut off from asia

And through that china will someday own the United States

 

While that may be true- it has nothing to do with the fact that the Nukes serve as a deterrent against US aggression.

We can have the above conversation if you like - and have discussed this in the past. You are correct that the geopolitical chessboard has changed. Part of this change is due to the advent of nukes... in the days of old one could just attack one's neighbor if your economy was going south. This is no longer an option due to the horrifically negative consequences of such an action - to the point where it is MAD - ness.

The strongest piece on the geopolitical chessboard is no longer "Military Strength". It is economic strength. Making moves on the basis of an assessment of the position - where military is the strongest piece - is then flawed. We have been making huge blunders on the geopolitical chessboard on this basis of this flawed assessment of the position.

Given the fact that we can not attack the homeland of China, Russia - or any other nuclear superpower - without risking self annihilation, our 1 Trillion dollar annual total military/homeland defense spend is a huge blunder.

While this makes folks feel good - this is an illusion. We are spending a Trillion dollars a year on the basis of fantasy - a flawed assessment of our position on the geopolitical chessboard.

In 2000 the total military spend was roughly 300 billion (5 times more than what was needed for defense of the homeland). After 8 years of Bush waging useless wars - wars on the basis of false narratives with no return on investment - the total spend topped 900 Billion and under Obama topped 1 Trillion.

Had we maintained 2000 spending levels (increasing with inflation) - we could have diverted 500 Billion/year x 16 years = 8 Trillion dollars to things like infrastructure, technology, innovation, ramping up our economy to compete in the third millennium.

Instead we threw this money into the toilet on the basis of fantasy - a flawed illusion of what our position on the geopolitical chessboard is.

China and Russia on the other hand have been making smart moves. Russia has a total of 1 Aircraft carrier - yet they manage to throw their weight around the world just as well as we do.

What these nations did (including India) was focus on niche technologies such as building better missiles. These 3 nations have been working together on this. You can build a whole lot of 1 million dollar missiles for the price of a 15 billion dollar aircraft carrier (never mind the cost of the ships that accompany that carrier - never mind the operation costs).

The floating city of metal we call a "carrier" is now a sitting duck in the face of modern missile technology - and this gap grows with every passing year.

Even if this wasn't the case - what on earth do we need 19 carriers for (including the smaller version labeled "amphibious assault" - more than enough to wreck havoc on some small nation or terrorist cell) ?

The fantasy that we would be using these in some conflict with big bad Russia is just that - Fantasy. If we are engaged in attacking the Russian homeland - the nukes will fly and those ships will not have a home to come home to - assuming they did survive and they would not.

Rather than spend money on the basis of this absurd fantasy assessment of the geopolitical chessboard - we could have spent that money on the real war - the economic war - and in this war we are getting our asses handed to us due to the above and numerous other massive blunders.

 

I agree that the immediate threat from china is economic

But as they become richer at our expence they can afford to spend ore on their militsry

Enough to threaten the US with conventional war

With that card in their hand they can rule the world

It seems that you want America to be inferior to china

As do many liberal globalists clinging to free trade

 

I do not think you understood much of what was said. What part of "there is no threat to the US homeland from China via conventional war" do you not understand. The US is not going to stand buy and have China invade the homeland and not respond with nukes - and China knows this. The idea that this is not the case is madness and making policy on the basis that is the case is equally madness. Nukes deter the US from attacking China and China from attacking the US - conventional has ZERO to do with this equation.

You are the one that is touting policy that is pro- inferiority - and I detail why this is the case in my previous post. Rather than respond to logic and reason - you descend into name calling because reality does not fit into the fantasy world in which you insist on living.

 

North Korea doesn't have a deliverable nuclear weapons.

 

It wasn't even that. Because IRAN DIDN'T SIGHN IT!

https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/11/state-department-iran-deal-not-legally-binding-signed/

 

I have to take baby steps with their fragile psyches.

 

Ha! You really think a couple of nukes is a threat to us?

 

No idea what you mean by "deliverable". N. Korea can hit S Korea with a nuclear weapon.

 

They already have them. Their last missile test proved they have the capacity to put a warhead on the continental US and they’ve been minituarizing warheads for years.

 

How many of Iran’s Mullahs have ever conducted a suicide attack? I’ll take an estimated number.

 

According to the Bush administration - Saddam was a threat to the US. This turned out to be a preposterous falsehood as Saddam did not even have an active nuclear weapons program never mind actually having a nuke.

North Korea is a big threat to South Korea - that much is true. Whether or not they can hit the homeland - Hawaii for example -is a matter of debate. Recent missile tests indicate they are relatively close to achieving this goal.

N. Korea's nukes are certainly a threat to our carrier groups in close proximity. There is also the possibility that N.Korea could transport a nuke to the continental US.

 

If so that obviously makes you happy

But trump is not going to give up so easily

 

It does make me happy to show your “national suicide” fear mongering to be a bullshit argument.

 

All you are showing is your ignorance

 

Well, four other countries were involved for starters...

 

Really? Has our nation committed the suicide that you claimed would happen since North Korea has the ability got nuke the US?

 

When did Iran say that? Can you provide an exact quote?

 

Yes they have. Multiple acts of assassination and cyber warfare.

 

I wonder if you maintain this same standard vis a vis Congressional approval when it comes to Trump’s tariffs or his aid to the Saudis in their war of genocide in Yemen?