Ruh Row, Korean Conflict Brewing (1 Viewer)

Fred

Senior Member
Oct 2, 2003
41,113
#62
ßüякε;2460033 said:
Well, that and 60 years of development, study, and application.

Plus, we had great Jews doing it for us, which Iran would never do.

:D
The bolded part is definitely true :D
 

Fred

Senior Member
Oct 2, 2003
41,113
#63
ßüякε;2460033 said:
Well, that and 60 years of development, study, and application.

Plus, we had great Jews doing it for us, which Iran would never do.

:D
The bolded part is definitely true :D
 
Apr 12, 2004
77,165
#65
Are they banned for a certain reason, ir are they just not allowed to use them as anti-personnel incendiaries?

Because white phosphorus is used wuite often in smoke grenades, as some of the articles depict.

"WP (White Phosphorus) is also a highly efficient smoke producing agent, burning quickly and causing an instant bank of smoke. As a result, smoke producing WP munitions are very common, particularly as smoke grenades for infantry, loaded in defensive grenade dischargers on tanks and other armored vehicles, or as part of the ammunition allotment for artillery or mortars. These create smokescreens to mask movement from the enemy, or to mask his fire."
 

Fred

Senior Member
Oct 2, 2003
41,113
#66
ßüякε;2460053 said:
Are they banned for a certain reason, ir are they just not allowed to use them as anti-personnel incendiaries?

Because white phosphorus is used wuite often in smoke grenades, as some of the articles depict.

"WP (White Phosphorus) is also a highly efficient smoke producing agent, burning quickly and causing an instant bank of smoke. As a result, smoke producing WP munitions are very common, particularly as smoke grenades for infantry, loaded in defensive grenade dischargers on tanks and other armored vehicles, or as part of the ammunition allotment for artillery or mortars. These create smokescreens to mask movement from the enemy, or to mask his fire."
From BBC:
"Phosphorus shells are legal to use as a battlefield obscurant, but are banned from use where civilians may be harmed."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7831424.stm
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
#67
So you are saying if Israel held "death to Jordan" rallies every year, denied Jordan had a right to exist, and wanted to wipe them off the face of the planet you would be totally cool with Israel developing nuclear weapons?
I multi-quoted many of your poor replies but then I read what Osman and Fred said and I was satisfied.
Don't hate us because we have electricity and you don't.
:lol:
 
Apr 12, 2004
77,165
#68
From BBC:
"Phosphorus shells are legal to use as a battlefield obscurant, but are banned from use where civilians may be harmed."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7831424.stm
"May be harmed" doesn't really define much, which sucks. Civilians could be harmed anywhere they are.

It's like if I said I'd do something "in due time." What does that even mean, there is no frame of reference.

Boo to bad definitions, BRITTERS!
 

Fred

Senior Member
Oct 2, 2003
41,113
#69
ßüякε;2460135 said:
"May be harmed" doesn't really define much, which sucks. Civilians could be harmed anywhere they are.

It's like if I said I'd do something "in due time." What does that even mean, there is no frame of reference.

Boo to bad definitions, BRITTERS!

When using white phosphorus in civilian housing areas, that is using the banned weapon where civilains may be harmed.

Not the clearest of definitions i know, but you and I both know the IDF used it with the intent to harm innocent civilians in direct violation of the international war.
 
Apr 12, 2004
77,165
#70
Well, that's hard to say, even though you may be 99% sure of something, you still can't say, "they did it with the full intent."

Plus, I'm not against WP, or depleted Uranium rounds...

But with that said, you know where I stand on the issue, and I feel sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.
 

Vinman

2013 Prediction Cup Champ
Jul 16, 2002
11,482
#71
Iraq invaded Iran, Vinni. Not the other way around. The US and Reagan gave their unconditional support to Iraq throughout the war, urging them to take action.
I shouldn't have to say why the hostage crisis doesn't count.

Remember that our government funded the coups and uprisings in Iran, helping the situation on towards its present day state.

When it comes to Iran's nuclear capability, we have heard this same story before; prior to going into Iraq. The same demonization and disinfo propaganda campaign is being used today, which is very simple to do because the scriptors only have to change one letter. The boy has already cried wolf once and there is no reason to believe he's not doing it again.

I care much more about the American economy and our overall well-being than Israel's safety. If the latter attacks Iran we will face horrendous consequences regardless of whether we help them or not. These phony allies can go to hell.
you forgot to mention that Iran had many border skirmishes with Iraq before the war ever started, not to mention that the Revolution was attempting to unsettle the Shia in Iraq into starting a civil war

Sorry to burst the bubble on your fascination with a bunch of fanatics...why not move there, Andrew, if its such a great place. Ask Hoori about Iran

are you Israel?

a nuclear armed United States of America is certainly not good for the world.
Nah man, I'm an American who likes Juve and the Gunners, your 2 fav teams as well. We havent used or threatened anyone with our missiles, btw

Do you think a nuclear armed Israeli government is good for the world?
unless their attacked first, they wont use them (you really think they would attack any neighboring counties ?? They would be signing their death warrants as well by nuclear fallout

You've got to be kidding me, you support Iran getting nuclear weapons?! If it wasn't for the all of the negative effects that would ensue for countries around the world I would be in full support of Israel doing whatever they had to before allowing nuclear weapons in the hands of such.

I don't like Israel at all but they are far less radical and have every right to feel threatened by Iran's nuclear program. Iran getting nuclear weapons is the last thing that needs to happen to resolve this without bloodshed

No offense but I think that world is much safer with a majority of nuclear weapons in the hand of western nations and I support doing everything possible to keep them out of the hands of any middle eastern country. I don't care if its fair or not but nuclear weapons and unstable political environments is a bad combination.
well said, Kyle

Fact of the matter is, nobody can give a real logical and rational reason as to why an inhumane government like the Israeli one is allowed to have nuclear weapons why Iran is not.
Iran is a bunch of religious fanatics who would relish the chance of killing all infidels

Nobodys going to nuke anyone, but if we are talking about possibilities here, there is a bigger possibility that the US will nuke someone than Iran doing it.

Only difference between the US and Iran is a good PR office.
completely disagree
 

X Æ A-12

Senior Member
Contributor
Sep 4, 2006
88,000
#72
Replace Jordan with Palestine, and thats exactly what Israel is doing right now. Israel denies Palestinians right to exist and they want to systematically wipe them off the face of the earth.

All Iran ever said was that if Israel were to attack them, they would attack back. Plus, the Israeli's are already using banned weapons in Palestine. So actually the danger of Israel having nuclear weapons is ten fold more than the danger of Iran having them. Yet i don't see you calling for Israel to drop their nuclear programs, which just reinforces the notion that you are just a completely biased person in this issue.
An arab discussing Israel is going to call a neutral party biased?:howler:

I already said last page that Israel shouldn't have nuclear weapons either but its already to late for that anyway. The fact that the Israeli's have nukes is not at all a good reason to let the Iranians have them.

No country ruled by a religious dictatorship should have such weapons, whether they be Christians, Jews, or Muslims.

Iran having nuclear weapons is not good for anyone, we all agree on that. But the same can be said about Israel and the same can be said about the US.

Whatever you say and whatever you think of the Irani government, they are not developing nuclear weapons to use them. They are developing them for the same reason all countries with nuclear weapons developed their own, as a deterrent to others.

As for the last paragraph, well the US is the only country to have ever used nuclear force in warfare, so what your saying over there is absolute bullshit. You've used it before, so I as a citizen of a third world country do not feel safe knowing that an imperialist state that has invaded two countries over the past few years and who has already used nuclear force before, has nuclear weapons.

I think history and common sense tells me that my fears are much more understandable than yours, don't you think??
No I don't agree at all.

There is absolutely no way you can claim to know the reason the Iranian government is developing nuclear weapons, I don't claim to and that is what is frightening about it.

I am completely against Israel having nuclear weapons as well but of course I'm happy my own country has them if other countries do. The US is not going to be nuking anybody anytime soon because many people here view the use of nuclear weapons on Japan as absolutely shameful. Even though the use in WWII saved millions of lives that would have been lost on both sides had the United States instead done a land invasion of Japan. The projected loss of life would have been over 5 million who once again mostly would have been Japanese soldiers or citizens.


The Irani government for all their faults are much smarter than you give them credit for. I strongly doubt that they would ever use nuclear weapons, and i strongly doubt they are ready to die or sacrifice for any cause, they like any all other influential politicians are in it for the power and money.
As I said before, I don't think the Iranian government is going to attack anybody, but their development of nuclear arms could spark a war with Israel which my country will somehow drag itself into. I would like to avoid this at all costs.
Nobodys going to nuke anyone, but if we are talking about possibilities here, there is a bigger possibility that the US will nuke someone than Iran doing it.

Only difference between the US and Iran is a good PR office.
I completely disagree with this bit, who does the US need to Nuke?

I really think you are way more paranoid about the US using nuclear weapons than you should be. Jessica Alba will show up naked at my doorstep before the US nukes anybody again.
I multi-quoted many of your poor replies but then I read what Osman and Fred said and I was satisfied.
Go have sex with men.
 
OP
Bjerknes

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,262
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #73
    you forgot to mention that Iran had many border skirmishes with Iraq before the war ever started, not to mention that the Revolution was attempting to unsettle the Shia in Iraq into starting a civil war

    Sorry to burst the bubble on your fascination with a bunch of fanatics...why not move there, Andrew, if its such a great place. Ask Hoori about Iran
    Okay, so does that mean we should bomb them because it isn't a "great place"?

    Hoori would probably say the government and leadership is horrendous, but the country itself is beautiful.

    And if you want me to go to Iran, I think you should go live in Israel if you're so worried about their well-being. Anybody who cares more about Israel than the US, and subsequently doesn't understand the ramifications of supporting Israeli actions, are traitors to my country, IMO.
     

    Vinman

    2013 Prediction Cup Champ
    Jul 16, 2002
    11,482
    #74
    Okay, so does that mean we should bomb them because it isn't a "great place"?

    Hoori would probably say the government and leadership is horrendous, but the country itself is beautiful.

    And if you want me to go to Iran, I think you should go live in Israel if you're so worried about their well-being. Anybody who cares more about Israel than the US, and subsequently doesn't understand the ramifications of supporting Israeli actions, are traitors to my country, IMO.
    you know the reasons why we have to be concerned about Iran, and it has nothing to do with the beauty of the country...

    and where did I say I care more about Israel than the USA ?? Putting words in my mouth, are we ??? When you openly support our enemy, who is the traitor, Benedict Arnold ????
     

    JBF

    اختك يا زمن
    Aug 5, 2006
    18,451
    #75
    unless their attacked first, they wont use them (you really think they would attack any neighboring counties ?? They would be signing their death warrants as well by nuclear fallout

    Iran is a bunch of religious fanatics who would relish the chance of killing all infidels
    Why would they be signing their death warrant if they did in fact begin a nuclear attack on their neighbors? its not like any Arab country has the military power to either absorb nor respond to any sort of Biological/Nuclear war. And I can see the world community condemning such a disaster but nothing else. They won't respond with the same shit for their beloved "only democratic" country in the Middle East :howler:

    And yea, all religious people would start a nuclear holocaust when given the opportunity, if it wasn't for the reasonable atheists we wouldn't have got past the 20th century :sergio:
    There is absolutely no way you can claim to know the reason the Iranian government is developing nuclear weapons, I don't claim to and that is what is frightening about it.


    As I said before, I don't think the Iranian government is going to attack anybody, but their development of nuclear arms could spark a war with Israel which my country will somehow drag itself into. I would like to avoid this at all costs.


    Go have sex with men.
    And you can come up with the reason why any country for that matter deployed/is deploying Nuclear weapons?

    Now you could have said that yesterday, the fact that you don't want Iran to have Nuclear weapons because you know that israel wont accept it thus making their move and costing a new war in the middle east, is understandable yet asking Iran to back down from their Nuclear project for that reason is ridiculous to say the least.

    And Calm the fuck down, Kyle.
     
    OP
    Bjerknes

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    116,262
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #76
    you know the reasons why we have to be concerned about Iran, and it has nothing to do with the beauty of the country...

    and where did I say I care more about Israel than the USA ?? Putting words in my mouth, are we ??? When you openly support our enemy, who is the traitor, Benedict Arnold ????
    You always seem to care about Israel's well-being more than our own. You side with them in every single topic that comes up here, even if it is detrimental to our own nation. For instance, you love giving aid to Israel to fight those "terrorists", but you say nothing about the fact they sold our weapons to China, our economic enemy.

    Not to mention the fact that these foreign escapades of bombing nations, having our troops die, and encouraging Islamic fundamentalism (we fund the terrorist group Jundallah in Iran who have ties to Al Qaeda) is anything but patriotism.
     

    IrishZebra

    Western Imperialist
    Jun 18, 2006
    23,327
    #78
    You always seem to care about Israel's well-being more than our own. You side with them in every single topic that comes up here, even if it is detrimental to our own nation. For instance, you love giving aid to Israel to fight those "terrorists", but you say nothing about the fact they sold our weapons to China, our economic enemy.
    I'd like to add that the Israelis are the original terrorists and that's a fact. Supporting them against terrorists is like merging the NAACP and KKK

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun


    Isn't everybody everybodys' economic enemy?
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)