Iran appears to be on the verge of nuclear capability

It appears that Iran is very nearly capable of not only devastating Israel, but also of doing great damage to the US.

As The Jerusalem Post has just noted:

Here is the link: Column one: Iran, Obama, Boehner and Benjamin Netanyahu - Opinion - Jerusalem Post

 

So, lemme get this straight; this missile is capable of reaching the US totally because of its LENGTH??
...hoookkaayy... I think we can skip further reading here.

 

Ah yes, an opinion piece in an Israeli newspaper. Yep, I'll go with that for impartiality, accuracy and bias-free reporting...

 

It's alway such a thrill to wake up to yet another thread laced with anti-semetic responses.

 

You could argue the same for NK, but their attempts to test anything have been laughable.
Let's face it, Iran are not going to get a nuke built without Israel/US spies knowing about it well in advance. I don't see any real threat here at all.

Besides, Israel will bomb the (*)(*)(*)(*) out them before they get anywhere near a launch. Pre-emptive. Hell, they could do that now and claim pre-emptive. Maybe Iran should try to hit them first and claim pre-pre-emptive.

 

Really? Which one of the three preceding yours would you rate as the most anti-Semitic, and why?

 

There is no way you are getting a coherent answer on that one.

 

How is criticizing an opinion piece in an Israel news paper anti-Semite?

 

Another monthly 'Iran has the bomb' story?

I think the bald faced liars should up it once per week, I'm just not feeling the fear.

 

Listen folks I am going to lay down a hard truth, Iran IS going to get nuclear weapons. The technology is over seventy years old and any country that puts its people to the task will eventually get it. The question is when not if they get the ability to make these weapons will we invade? If the answer is yes then we should keep doing what we are doing because in the end it does not matter we are going to be in a conflict with them. If the answer is no then we need to reconsider our diplomacy and think of a way to get them involved with the rest of the countries of the world in a peaceful manner.

 

LOLOLOL.. You are a man of few words when calling BS.

 

According to propaganda, Iran has been building a bomb for over 14 years. When Washington's puppet regime was in power, the Ford administration worked to provide the Shah with the means for developing his nuclear program, including "the two pathways to a nuclear bomb."

Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said bluntly that, "I don't think the issue of proliferation came up," and that "they were an allied country, and this was a commercial transaction. We didn't address the question of them one day moving toward nuclear weapons."

Ford's national security team - including Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz - even argued that Tehran needed to "prepare against the time -- about 15 years in the future -- when Iranian oil production is expected to decline sharply."

 

What anti Semite responses ?

 

I'd worry less about Iran and more about ISIS.

We can honestly become friends with Iran if we play our cards right.

 

As long as Israel has the bomb its neighbours will strive to get it. It might be acceptable for the US to have such a strategic imbalance in this region but it certainly isn't for the bulk of those living there. I'm not for a moment suggesting its right that Iran should have such a weapon but that really that Israel shouldn't either. If the US is so desperately concerned with Israels security than let it guarantee that security with its own nuclear umbrella much like it did with Germany post WW2. Allowing a state like Israel independent access to such weaponry is a very grave error that could come back to bite us all one day. It only has to happen once after all

 

Iran was approved under Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace program when it was determined that in order to become a "fully industrialized nation", Iran needed to expand their electrical grid with nuclear power.

 

There is a principle in logic known as the falsification principle. Basically, it just states that if you are going to make a claim, you should be able to show what would be needed in order to falsify that claim.

But you appear (as so many on the left do) to have adopted the Alfred E. Neuman approach--"What? Me worry?"--so nothing that might be said would be likely to persuade you of any threat...

 

It would appear that any evidence that does not dovetail nicely with your own preconceived views is to be cavalierly disregarded, as mere "propaganda"...

 

The two are not mutually exclusive. (In the early 1940s, one might have argued that we should worry less about Nazi Germany, and more about Imperial Japan--or vice-versa--but it really was not necessary to choose one over the other.)

I seriously doubt it.

And why would we want to, anyway? (If it were theoretically possible for the US to "become friends" with, say, ISIS, would you endorse that, also?)

 

I know the game. Do you?

 

Uh, what is that supposed to mean, exactly?

 

Bibi said that in 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2011 (twice).....

Will you be kind enough to wake me when there's anything actually newsworthy in the Iran story?

 

It's probably more to do with Iran's de-dollarization than anything else. That's unforgivable sin these days.

De-Dollarization Complete: Iran Abandons US Dollar In Foreign Trade

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...omplete-iran-abandons-us-dollar-foreign-trade

 

Iran will not be allowed the bomb. All options are on the table to ensure an Iranian IslamoNuke does not happen.

 

So why is Israel permitted a nuclear arsenal and Iran is not?