On a somewhat related note, there's no real reason for anyone to be developing technology that relies on enriched uranium when thorium is much more efficient. Everyone just wants nukes, plain and simple.
High possibility of Nuclear war within 3-6 months?
- Thread starter Professor_Jiro
- Start date
And the current nuclear powers want to make sure that no other country gets them... because then the 'super powers' will lose one of the advantages that they have. And would take caution when trying to screw with the affairs of other countries. (Some advice that the US really needs to follow.)
TRIFORCE89
Guide of Darkness
- 8,123
- Posts
- 20
- Years
- Age 34
- Temple of Light
- Seen Nov 26, 2017
The cuts made to the US military are absolutely miniscule, percentage-wise, compared to the scope of military spending. The US still has the largest, strongest, most well-equipped military on the planet. The size of which dwarfs several of the next runner-ups combined. They're in prime condition for a fight.
Politically, and in terms of foreign relations, probably not. But physically, yes.
- 3,509
- Posts
- 15
- Years
- Seen Nov 5, 2017
I'm not saying they are making enormous cuts or that they are now incapable of winning a fight. The US military is the most powerful and most likely will be for many decades, I didn't suggest otherwise.
The only reason I mention it is because if they are making cuts to begin with it shows that there probably aren't any intentions of starting a serious conflict in the near future. The reason the military got so big in the first place was because of the Cold War, and the subsequent uncertain political atmosphere as we entered the 21st century. After Iraq and Afghanistan have demonstrated that war is not particularly effective, the idea of war is going to be even more unpopular; especially with a country like Iran, who will pose far more of a challenge.
- 14,092
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- Sunnyshore City
- Seen Dec 3, 2022
You have a better chance of getting hit by a pink asteroid made of confetti and unicorn tears. Nobody is stupid enough to use them. And, if we didn't use them in the 60's during actual "tension", we sure as hell won't be using them now. We wouldn't even need a nuclear ICMB to attack Iran with, anyways.
- 623
- Posts
- 12
- Years
- Age 32
- The Future
- Seen Apr 5, 2024
I've heard more about Syria recently than Iran and Israel. Maybe the media has just gotten used to the constant bickering and showboating between Iran and Israel, so they decide not to broadcast any news about it.
Sonicfan9988
Sonic, Hilda & Rosa! ♥
- 44
- Posts
- 13
- Years
- Age 32
- Starlight Carnival, Oklahoma
- Seen Mar 27, 2016
NO ONE should nuke Israel because they are God's chosen people. Iran should think long and hard about the consequences of nuking the holy land.
Last edited:
Ivysaur
Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
- 21,082
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- Age 33
- He/him
- Madrid, Europe
- Seen May 4, 2024
Iran haven't even finished their nukes yet, if there is a war it sure as hell won't be a nuclear one. Not to mention that the chances of Iran being destroyed by a barrage of American and Israeli nukes are far more likely than the opposite. Nobody is insane enough to commit suicide.
Chances of a war are increasing at an alarming pace though. The window of opportunity is closing down pretty quickly and soon Iran will have nuclear weapons. It all comes down to Syria: if their insane dictator falls as it happened in their neighbouring countries, Iran will lose their contact with their allies in the region (Lebanon and Hamas) and Iran will possibly be forced to negotiate instead of starting a war they will lose.
If Bashar el Assad survives the revolution by mass-murdering his citizens, with the Russian and Chinese Seal of Approval, it's pretty likely that, in the end, we'll have a regional civil war. And Iran will probably try and involve Israel and Israel, in turn, will grab the US by their ear and force them back to Middle East, a prospect that certainly seems exhilarating.
But, a nuclear war? No way. Nobody is insane enough. Countries want nukes just so nobody dares attack them. Mutually Assured Destruction, it is called, and we all know what "mutual" means. I'll say it again, no country wants to commit suicide.
Except Iran believes THEY, and not Israel, are the people chosen by Allah. And then a large amount of people (such as me) think both are delusional to think a group of people are "the chosen ones" just because they claim themselves to. So that argument isn't really going to convince anybody (outside of Israel, that is).
Chances of a war are increasing at an alarming pace though. The window of opportunity is closing down pretty quickly and soon Iran will have nuclear weapons. It all comes down to Syria: if their insane dictator falls as it happened in their neighbouring countries, Iran will lose their contact with their allies in the region (Lebanon and Hamas) and Iran will possibly be forced to negotiate instead of starting a war they will lose.
If Bashar el Assad survives the revolution by mass-murdering his citizens, with the Russian and Chinese Seal of Approval, it's pretty likely that, in the end, we'll have a regional civil war. And Iran will probably try and involve Israel and Israel, in turn, will grab the US by their ear and force them back to Middle East, a prospect that certainly seems exhilarating.
But, a nuclear war? No way. Nobody is insane enough. Countries want nukes just so nobody dares attack them. Mutually Assured Destruction, it is called, and we all know what "mutual" means. I'll say it again, no country wants to commit suicide.
Except Iran believes THEY, and not Israel, are the people chosen by Allah. And then a large amount of people (such as me) think both are delusional to think a group of people are "the chosen ones" just because they claim themselves to. So that argument isn't really going to convince anybody (outside of Israel, that is).
Last edited:
Haguri
Wish Maker Haguri
- 51
- Posts
- 12
- Years
- North Carolina
- Seen Sep 29, 2015
@Sonic, I can't tell if that was sarcasm, trolling, or honest o-o
Anyway I think it's retarded that people are protecting it like the Holy land. Nothing is going to matter if it's destroyed. Which is WHY it's all stupid. I mean if all the ally crap is true (as I've stated in my many posts before and as twocow posted) then Iran would never create there own demise, but you think they're afraid of the "holy land" ? No. Sure they're Qur'an shares similar things with the other Bibles, (Christian, Jewish, the original Hebrew created part of them all (Christian, Jewish, and Muslim) ) but that doesn't mean anything. Israel better fear the crap that they're doing to the Arabic to anger them in the first place ._. Blowing up the cars of their scientists is pushing it a bit too far. So the Holy people can do whatever they so please? Though those that worship something different or are not part of the "Holy Land" may not? There were 7 original Empires at the beginning of time, they should all be thought of as "Holy" in my opinion, because so much came before the Bible and all it's nonsense written by a bunch of Hebrews trying to make piece with the first 5 books of the Bible (The Torah or rather Law in English) then the next few stories of the Prophets, followed by collection of writing the Psalms. It derived from the word Biblia which in fact means "Collection of Writing" and that's all the Bible is and will ever be. I mean really in one part it says not to kill, but in another it says war is different and okay. No it's not, they merely wrote this to fit their time period to help stop wrong doing. Though they needed to protect themselves from the Persians (who were invading everyone it seemed) and also any other Empire making their way through; therefore, they added the part about war into there little collection of stories/writing. None of it was written by Jesus, and of course not God. Sure there may have been a Jesus, but rising in 3 days? Hmmm sounds like witchcraft or Spiritualists to me. I mean really there are still spirits on Earth today, are all those Jesus? o.O Just saying.
@Went, I see what you're saying by what could happen with Syria and Israel and such, but if you look at things half the time we've ever went for Israel they didn't really WANT us, I'm not even sure if they needed us, or if we went there to be the hero like it seems the US enjoys doing.
Also the thing about Syria's leader. Part of Syria likes their leader/dictator, but the other half wants democracy, and they will KILL to get it. Assad is nothing like Hitler, nor is he like Qaddafi, nor the battle between the Hutu and Tutsi's in Rwanda, followed by Somalian genocide, nor Genocide started by the government in the Darfur region, he killed his citizens not for genocide, but to protect himself and government officials. No I DO NOT support him, but it is different and we should keep our nose out of others business and stop trying to spread Democracy with things such as the start of the Arab Spring. I mean what if Americans fought, like actually took guns and weaponry and FOUGHT the government like people in Syria were doing? Then on our first shot or hit, we'd me dead or severely maimed, if not sentenced to death and waste tax payer money in jail/prison until their trial. So either way you look at it it's bad, but would even happen in the United states, point a gun at the President and a sniper has your ass immediately. (Except for a long time ago when they believed there wasn't too much danger for the president) Though NOW they believe that terrorists and crap are after them and fly two separate planes to trick people (sometimes more) so no one knows which the president is in. Maybe we wouldn't even have involvement with terrorists if we didn't have to play hero, our conflicts with Middle Eastern countries started way before 9/11, my father was on the front lines for Operation Desert Storm, and he said it was some of the worse crap he'd ever seen. Like those boys peeing on an Arab (A dead Arab soldier that is) was such "blasphemy", but they took American soldiers (Not the same group of Arabs) and would drag their bodies through the streets cheering and maiming their dead bodies, stealing things, and going through personal belongings and just completely trashing them.
Anyway I think it's retarded that people are protecting it like the Holy land. Nothing is going to matter if it's destroyed. Which is WHY it's all stupid. I mean if all the ally crap is true (as I've stated in my many posts before and as twocow posted) then Iran would never create there own demise, but you think they're afraid of the "holy land" ? No. Sure they're Qur'an shares similar things with the other Bibles, (Christian, Jewish, the original Hebrew created part of them all (Christian, Jewish, and Muslim) ) but that doesn't mean anything. Israel better fear the crap that they're doing to the Arabic to anger them in the first place ._. Blowing up the cars of their scientists is pushing it a bit too far. So the Holy people can do whatever they so please? Though those that worship something different or are not part of the "Holy Land" may not? There were 7 original Empires at the beginning of time, they should all be thought of as "Holy" in my opinion, because so much came before the Bible and all it's nonsense written by a bunch of Hebrews trying to make piece with the first 5 books of the Bible (The Torah or rather Law in English) then the next few stories of the Prophets, followed by collection of writing the Psalms. It derived from the word Biblia which in fact means "Collection of Writing" and that's all the Bible is and will ever be. I mean really in one part it says not to kill, but in another it says war is different and okay. No it's not, they merely wrote this to fit their time period to help stop wrong doing. Though they needed to protect themselves from the Persians (who were invading everyone it seemed) and also any other Empire making their way through; therefore, they added the part about war into there little collection of stories/writing. None of it was written by Jesus, and of course not God. Sure there may have been a Jesus, but rising in 3 days? Hmmm sounds like witchcraft or Spiritualists to me. I mean really there are still spirits on Earth today, are all those Jesus? o.O Just saying.
@Went, I see what you're saying by what could happen with Syria and Israel and such, but if you look at things half the time we've ever went for Israel they didn't really WANT us, I'm not even sure if they needed us, or if we went there to be the hero like it seems the US enjoys doing.
Also the thing about Syria's leader. Part of Syria likes their leader/dictator, but the other half wants democracy, and they will KILL to get it. Assad is nothing like Hitler, nor is he like Qaddafi, nor the battle between the Hutu and Tutsi's in Rwanda, followed by Somalian genocide, nor Genocide started by the government in the Darfur region, he killed his citizens not for genocide, but to protect himself and government officials. No I DO NOT support him, but it is different and we should keep our nose out of others business and stop trying to spread Democracy with things such as the start of the Arab Spring. I mean what if Americans fought, like actually took guns and weaponry and FOUGHT the government like people in Syria were doing? Then on our first shot or hit, we'd me dead or severely maimed, if not sentenced to death and waste tax payer money in jail/prison until their trial. So either way you look at it it's bad, but would even happen in the United states, point a gun at the President and a sniper has your ass immediately. (Except for a long time ago when they believed there wasn't too much danger for the president) Though NOW they believe that terrorists and crap are after them and fly two separate planes to trick people (sometimes more) so no one knows which the president is in. Maybe we wouldn't even have involvement with terrorists if we didn't have to play hero, our conflicts with Middle Eastern countries started way before 9/11, my father was on the front lines for Operation Desert Storm, and he said it was some of the worse crap he'd ever seen. Like those boys peeing on an Arab (A dead Arab soldier that is) was such "blasphemy", but they took American soldiers (Not the same group of Arabs) and would drag their bodies through the streets cheering and maiming their dead bodies, stealing things, and going through personal belongings and just completely trashing them.
Ivysaur
Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
- 21,082
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- Age 33
- He/him
- Madrid, Europe
- Seen May 4, 2024
@Haguri But the US didn't start the Arab Spring (the angry citizens of Tunisia did, and the angry citizens of several other countries followed them). The US didn't get involved at all in any moment until Libya, and still, not a single American soldier (or from any other country, that is) set foot on the Libyan soil in any moment. But there is a difference between attacking a country and openly supporting one of the sides in a civil war, as the US have done too many times to count during the last two centuries. Specially when getting that criminal out of the way would help the US (and most of the Western world)'s interests.
And did Qadaffi kill his own citizens for "genocide"? No, he just wanted to keep his throne and his freedomless dictatorship. I really think it's incredibly selfish to not try to help the side that supports democracy in a war because "that's their own bussiness, if the dictator wins and punishes all the people who wanted frrdom that's their own problem, I'm too busy voting in my elections here".
In Irak there wasn't an organized side supporting a democratic system, that's why nobody could create a new State when Saddam's collapsed. Here there is a group of people with plans for a new one. Not helping or even caring about them means, in the end, helping a dictatorship.
And did Qadaffi kill his own citizens for "genocide"? No, he just wanted to keep his throne and his freedomless dictatorship. I really think it's incredibly selfish to not try to help the side that supports democracy in a war because "that's their own bussiness, if the dictator wins and punishes all the people who wanted frrdom that's their own problem, I'm too busy voting in my elections here".
In Irak there wasn't an organized side supporting a democratic system, that's why nobody could create a new State when Saddam's collapsed. Here there is a group of people with plans for a new one. Not helping or even caring about them means, in the end, helping a dictatorship.
- 138
- Posts
- 13
- Years
- Pokemon Center
- Seen May 29, 2013
There is no such thing as a War based on religion. At the end of the day, even if they claim it religious, it is always political and economical in the end. Israel is a strategic point for the US and its allies at the same time bordering the Red Sea is a benefit for Israel and its allies in trade. Osama Bin Laden is not a religious leader, nor does he represent all of Islam. His attacks on civilians are never religious, it's power and control he wants. He uses religion to justify his political ambitions. That is one example. As for Israel-US, it's still political. Israel's an ally of the US during the Cold War that actually stood against the Soviets and Arabic nations. Look at Francoist Spain, they're fascist yet became an ally of the US. Anyone who claims all wars are fought by religion in my view is wrong, all wars are fought for political and economic control.
Remember that World War II came to be because of the Treaty of Versailles. Everyone is at fault for World War I, not the Central Powers. It is through militarism, imperialism, and nationalism that caused the "Great War" to be. It is Imperialism that caused Austro-Hungary to invade Serbia, it is nationalism that caused Princep to kill Franz, it is militarism that caused the Germans to use brutal tactics and deadly weapons. The German embassy warned Americans about going onto ships headed towards Britain, which is part of the 'German Submarine War Zone'. Still, Wilson smuggled weapons into the Lusitania and Americans ignored the warning and hopped onto the ship. Look what happened. Compare that to today, you still see Americans traveling to countries and getting into trouble despite warnings. Still, why did the US support Britain? They owe the US more money than the Germans. It's economic. So really, nobody is justified in World War II, it is the result of Nationalism, Imperialism, and Militarism on both sides.
How does Cyan relates to red? I did mention all wars are fought for political and economic gains.
Awaiting flames such as "How dare you call both the Allies and Central Powers bad guys!"
- 22,953
- Posts
- 19
- Years
- Age 33
- 'cause it get cold like Minnesota
- Seen May 15, 2024
Can I just say that, at present, with Russia and China both saying they'd back Iran and get involved in the event of a US invasion or bombing of Iran, the only way the US is going to militarily get involved in this is if Iran attacks Israel (because then we're bound by treaty to get involved), and Iran isn't stupid enough (I hope) to be the one to initialize the war, since it's Israel with the itchy trigger finger this time.
- 10,769
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- California
- Seen Jun 30, 2018
If the US gets involved in fighting Iran it's going to be a few well-placed, non-nuclear missiles aimed at their nuclear facilities and, maybe, a few of those missions like the one that killed Bin Laden. You really don't need a war to cripple the enemy's willingness to fight, especially in Iran where there really are people who hate their government and how oppressive it is. Not saying it would be one of those "they'll greet us as liberators" thing if the US did help remove some of the government there, just that not everyone in Iran wants war with America, or at least they don't hate America enough to want to fight a war.
China and Russia, like the US, would rather play chess with other countries than fight openly.
China and Russia, like the US, would rather play chess with other countries than fight openly.
- 22,953
- Posts
- 19
- Years
- Age 33
- 'cause it get cold like Minnesota
- Seen May 15, 2024
They may rather play chess, but they're playing rather boldly, having declared within the last couple weeks that they would get involved militarily if the US got involved militarily, like I said above. I'm not sure where I read it, but I think it was at a news source that's close to the Obama Administration.
Ivysaur
Grass dinosaur extraordinaire
- 21,082
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- Age 33
- He/him
- Madrid, Europe
- Seen May 4, 2024
China and Russia are in the same boat: they have a pseudo-dictatorship (or a full fledged one in China) where their citizens don't really count for anything, so of course they are going to get side-by-side with other dictators such as El-Assad. If they supported the revolutionary citizens of Syria, they would possibly be giving a heads-up to their own people to revolt against them.
They already made a mistake in Libya, allowing the NATO to intervene in favour of the revolution, and they aren't going to fall for it again. "That's only their bussiness, the same way our fake elections are our own problem- one we don't care about, by the way. Let us mind our own bussiness".
They already made a mistake in Libya, allowing the NATO to intervene in favour of the revolution, and they aren't going to fall for it again. "That's only their bussiness, the same way our fake elections are our own problem- one we don't care about, by the way. Let us mind our own bussiness".
- 22,953
- Posts
- 19
- Years
- Age 33
- 'cause it get cold like Minnesota
- Seen May 15, 2024
China certainly has a stake since Iran is a major oil supplier to them, from what I understand. China also made a similar statement about any US involvement in Pakistan back in May of last year.
Last edited:
Keiran
[b]Rock Solid[/b]
- 2,455
- Posts
- 13
- Years
- Age 32
- New Jersey
- Seen May 25, 2023
Of course there is going to be a war! I'll tell you how it will go!!!;
The USA won't do anything until it is attacked by "terrorists", and even then it will be another couple months before it responds. In the meantime media will be used to put citizens in a constant state of fear. We will then go to "war". Many innocent soldiers and citizens will be killed, but hey!, at least companies like the Carlyle group will profit at least a quarter-billion from it. That's great, right? Eventually, a random and unrelated target (albeit a believable one, our citizens aren't fooled easily, right?!) will be chosen by our government as our goal to destroy, cause you gotta keep your peasants in on the secrets! Anyway after enough money is made the "war" will "end" whether our target is killed or not, because that's what war is for- to profit off of duh!
We'll probably get another middle-eastern pipeline out of it, too. Which is nifty and not anachronous at all since the Keystone XL pipeline was *just* recently denied its permit to build. How fortunate for us!!
AMURICA!
The USA won't do anything until it is attacked by "terrorists", and even then it will be another couple months before it responds. In the meantime media will be used to put citizens in a constant state of fear. We will then go to "war". Many innocent soldiers and citizens will be killed, but hey!, at least companies like the Carlyle group will profit at least a quarter-billion from it. That's great, right? Eventually, a random and unrelated target (albeit a believable one, our citizens aren't fooled easily, right?!) will be chosen by our government as our goal to destroy, cause you gotta keep your peasants in on the secrets! Anyway after enough money is made the "war" will "end" whether our target is killed or not, because that's what war is for- to profit off of duh!
We'll probably get another middle-eastern pipeline out of it, too. Which is nifty and not anachronous at all since the Keystone XL pipeline was *just* recently denied its permit to build. How fortunate for us!!
AMURICA!
arbok
cobra pokemon
- 196
- Posts
- 12
- Years
- Seen Mar 10, 2013
There will be no nuclear war.
Tension is rising once more but Iran isn't even a nuclear state (yet). Israel, The USA, The UK and France all are nuclear states who oppose Iran and all have armed forces better then Iran's. I'm not saying war with iran would be walk in the park but there is no way it would be the end of humanity. Russia has pulled out of many dealings with Iran due to worries about the nuclear program and there is no way either China or Russia would go to war with the allies to defeand a country like Iran.
Tension is rising once more but Iran isn't even a nuclear state (yet). Israel, The USA, The UK and France all are nuclear states who oppose Iran and all have armed forces better then Iran's. I'm not saying war with iran would be walk in the park but there is no way it would be the end of humanity. Russia has pulled out of many dealings with Iran due to worries about the nuclear program and there is no way either China or Russia would go to war with the allies to defeand a country like Iran.