One Man Saved Us From The Greatest War Of All

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to One Man Saved Us From The Greatest War Of All

  1. DGP says:

    The Iran agreement might not be the worst thing the Obama administration has done this week.

    • Bob Greene says:

      I suppose I’ll comment on this one, but after 30 years of writing permit applications and doing environmental compliance I’m more inclined to hang it up. So, what do you suppose the social cost of NO CAHBAAAHN would be? Life expectancy approaching 25?
      Any comments I’d enter now would suggest that in a dumb contest with a post these idiots would take the first three places.

  2. John B., M.D. says:

    Liberals celebrate ending sanctions on a nation that lynches gays, stones women and wants to exterminate Jews, but they boycott Chick-fil-A.

    A decent analysis of the Iran agreement by Stratfor Global Intelligence:

    • David A says:

      I do not agree with many aspects of the report, although it was informative. It was a complete fail in discussing the negatives, Iran really does want nuclear weapons capacity. The history of the middle east is to try for such capacity, until stopped by force.
      The potential for the Saudis, under such a threat, to develop there own nuclear capacity.
      The potential to force Israel to try and take out Iranian capacity on their own, a dangerous course. The area around Israel is already radicalized,

      The author assumes benign interest in the region by a certain 2nd term US man who is clearly not stable It is always dangerous to attempt a new paradigm in such a region. Iraq is threatened by strengthening Iran.

      I have heard that the proposed 20% reduction in nuclear fuel can easily be chemically reversed.

      In summary the deal gives to much, billions of dollars and political stability to a radical Islamic government, and demands to little. If they really do not want nuclear weapons, they will agree to far greater reduction of their capacity for said enriched uranium. It costs them nothing, but gives them much benefit to a suffering people. They could also go China’s direction with thorium third generation reactors, and if they did, they likely would get far more support. Letting an extremely volatile geographic area like the middle east develop conventional nuclear reactors is in and of itself, very dangerous.

  3. Jim says:

    Trying to compare present day Iran with Nazi Germany is ridiculous. Their evil might be at comparable levels, but the Power of Nazi Germany far exceeded any Power that Iran is ever going to have. If Iran ever unleashed a Nuclear Bomb, it would be squashed like an Insect.
    And, it is likely that any attempt by Iran to launch a Nuclear Attack would result in the the squashing of the Insect before the attack even started.

    • You would have said the same thing about the Germans in 1938. Some people just aren’t very bright.

    • David A says:

      Regimes like Hussein’s Iraq, and the Islamist Iran, have a long history of stealth terrorism.
      There are other ways to deliver nuclear weapons, including dirty bombs, then intercontinental missiles.

  4. Bob Greene says:

    More reason to wish Romney hadn’t tried so hard to be a terrible candidate.

  5. phodges says:

    You guys really need to bone up on some Geopolitics.

    This has nothing to do with nuclear weapons. It is about Russia, China, and the BRIC bloc.

    Medvedev was Chamberlain and now Putin plays Churchill.

    The fact is that Putin, acting as leader and spokesperson for the BRIC block, stood down the West in Syria….averting WWIII. Iran is much, much, more strategically valuable than Syria. “Iran is our close neighbor, just south of the Caucasus. Should anything happen to Iran, should Iran get drawn into any political or military hardships, this will be a direct threat to our national security” -Dimitri Rogozin

    Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program, does not want nuclear weapons, could not use them if they did get them. It would be a colossal liability, not an advantage. Just look at Pakistan…a country that actually does support terrorism, and actually does have nuclear weapons…which gives them zero benefit.

    Irans nuclear program is under the IEAA supervision and they are in compliance with the non-proliferation treaty. Most importantly Russia, their closest strategic supporter, does not want them to have nuclear weapons.

    Who needs nuclear weapons when Putin has your back?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s