[IMG]http://i.tmgrup.com.tr/dailysabah/2014/07/03/HaberDetay/1404331388517.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE]The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militant group is planning on seizing Tehran’s nuclear secrets and urging its fighters to plan for war with Iran, UK weekly newspaper The Sunday Times reported.
The group urged its members to help them reach their ambitions in a manifesto which was allegedly written by Abdullah Ahmed al-Meshedani, a member of the group’s highly secretive six-man war cabinet.
In the document, which has been examined by western security officials - who believe it to be authentic - Meshedani wrote that ISIS is aims to get hold of nuclear weapons with the help of Russia, to whom it will offer access to gas fields it controls in Iraq’s Anbar province in return for the Kremlin to give up “Iran and its nuclear program and hands over its secrets.”
The manifesto said that Moscow would also have to abandon support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and back the Gulf States against Iran.
The document also includes 70 different plans to launch a new campaign of ethnic cleansing aimed at consolidating the new “Islamic Caliphate,” stripping Shiite Iran of “all its power” and destroying the Shiite authorities in Iraq.
ISIS considers Shiite Muslims as traitors and accuses them of “perverting” Islam in the same manifesto, which called for the assassination of Iranian diplomats, businessmen and teachers as well as Iraqi military chiefs, Shiite officials and Iranian-backed militias fighting for the Iraqi government.
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/10/05/ISIS-plots-to-seize-Iran-s-nuclear-secrets-.html[/url]
These guys are crazy enough to use nuclear power.
Yeah. Because Russia is just going to give up their nuclear missiles to the crazy terrorist group who commit genocide and who have Chechens fighting for them, and no doubt want those Chechens to go back home and cause trouble.
Great idea.
Tricks on you, they have none
No really having plans for a nuke and having facilities to make a nuke are two very different things. Unless they managed to find an underground nuclear enrichment facility of either Assad's or sadams then I really don't think they have the time frame to do anything
[QUOTE=redBadger;46161426]These guys are crazy enough to use nuclear power.[/QUOTE]
They might build a reactor in Iraq and let it meltdown. Scary stuff.
[QUOTE=redBadger;46161426]These guys are crazy enough to use nuclear power.[/QUOTE]
Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons.
Really weird that Isis isn't fighting Assad yet they believe they can somehow do this without actually getting stomped by assad
Yeah, good luck fighting a war against Iran.
You'd have Syria backed by Hezbollah on the western front and Iran on the Eastern front (not to mention the Kurds and Iraqis in their back garden), no way IS would come out victorious.
[QUOTE=agentalexandre;46161464]Yeah, good luck fighting a war against Iran.
You'd have Syria backed by Hezbollah on the western front and Iran on the Eastern front (not to mention the Kurds and Iraqis in their back garden), no way IS would come out victorious.[/QUOTE]
All of it backed up by western air power. USAF, RAF, USN, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's a few MiGs and SUs tossed in from Russia either at some point.
ISIS is pretty much done for. They just don't know it yet.
Im a bit worried about ISIS now, people keep talking about them about to get stomped, but so far they have been gaining land, money, and recruits. It seems like the airstrikes haven't put a dent in them, unless I'm just being pessimistic.
[QUOTE=Sableye;46161454]Really weird that Isis isn't fighting Assad yet they believe they can somehow do this without actually getting stomped by assad[/QUOTE]
They are fighting Assad, Although, Assad forces where the ones who kicked them out into Iraq. IIRC.
They gain nuclear power, they're going to be blown off the face of the planet
lolno
This'll be like knowing how to forge steel when all you have is a pit of coal and some copper.
[QUOTE=DJrorok;46161514]Im a bit worried about ISIS now, people keep talking about them about to get stomped, but so far they have been gaining land, money, and recruits. It seems like the airstrikes haven't put a dent in them, unless I'm just being pessimistic.[/QUOTE]
Well if we stop them now we won't be able to drag out the conflict in the middle east another 15 years.
its almost like they want to give israel an excuse to nuke them
what kind of "nuclear secrets" does Iran have that you can't just find on the internet? The process of building a nuclear bomb isn't nearly as hard as getting your hands on nuclear material in the first place.
Go ahead, try to get nukes. Give us a reason to drop a few of our own on you.
[QUOTE=Xystus234;46161875]Go ahead, try to get nukes. Give us a reason to drop a few of our own on you.[/QUOTE]
The United States will never use a nuclear weapon in combat unless it is literally Armageddon.
[QUOTE=urbanmonkey;46162004]The United States will never use a nuclear weapon in combat unless it is literally Armageddon.[/QUOTE]
Or if for some reason nobody else has nukes.
[QUOTE=urbanmonkey;46162004]The United States will never use a nuclear weapon in combat unless it is literally Armageddon.[/QUOTE]
I guarantee you if ISIS uses nukes then we will.
[QUOTE=Xystus234;46162160]I guarantee you if ISIS uses nukes then we will.[/QUOTE]
First of all ISIS won't be able to come near any nukes. Secondly even if they did, there would be no reason to nuke them. There's not some big spot with all of ISIS in some nuclear blast yield sized area.
[QUOTE=Xystus234;46162160]I guarantee you if ISIS uses nukes then we will.[/QUOTE]
I guarantee you have literally no idea what you're talking about
Even if they do capture nuclear weapons, no way in hell they can fire em. You need either:
To capture some guy who knows this shit and is willing to give in
spend years trying to study how to operate them
Plus nuclear weapons aren't a push button to launch thing, I'm not sure if Iran operate similar to the US or the Soviet Union/Russia, but I'm pretty sure they have some measures if terrorist were to get their hands on such weapons.
[QUOTE=Falubii;46162210]First of all ISIS won't be able to come near any nukes. Secondly even if they did, there would be no reason to nuke them. There's not some big spot with all of ISIS in some nuclear blast yield sized area.[/QUOTE]
That's not the point I'm trying to make.
Do you recall the reason why we used nukes on the Japanese? Because they were fanatically devoted to their god emperor and surrender was considered ultimate dishonor and worthy of suicide/death. ISIS is another case of an adversary that has no boundaries, has no incentive to use restraint. They have no problem with commiting mass genocide, like another certain group that is the subject of Godwin's law - only this time it's kill everyone who doesn't submit to Islam. Like it or not, we have another group of fuckers on the planet who will stop at nothing, no matter what the cost to see their sick dreams and fantasies live. These are religious fanatics, people who believe that we're living in the end-times and that god and nature itself is dictating the revival of totalitarian absolute monarchism so that when Isa (Jesus) comes back on their side he will destroy Rome (A metaphor for the United States that they're using) and behead all who opposes their twisted, absolutist, and fundamentalist version of Islam.
That's what were dealing with. A bunch of nasty motherfuckers who's fanaticism is comparable to WWII Japan. Bear in mind this is not literally Nazi Germany or Japan or whatever bogeyman some would want to bring up, but it's something around that level of crazy. The only difference is that we're stopping them before it gets to that level.
So if by some, rare, odd chance they do manage to get hold of nukes from Pakistan or (Much less likely) Russia, some random nation, or even from invading Iran, then the chances are they're going to use them simply because [I]they're that fucking crazy[/I]. And with proliferation as widespread, it's a small chance, but still possible they could - oh lets say - grab one of those missing Soviet suitcase nukes or some shit that disappeared after the Cold War. Or somewhere. Even North Korea for all we know.
The point is the motivation to use them is there, and now the public knows from this article.
[QUOTE=Xystus234;46162510]That's not the point I'm trying to make.
Do you recall the reason why we used nukes on the Japanese? Because they were fanatically devoted to their god emperor and surrender was considered ultimate dishonor and worthy of suicide/death. [/QUOTE]
first of all, this is a ridiculous reinterpretation of history
second of all, nothing in this rambling insane post actually addresses why the US would try to nuke terrorism
[QUOTE=Sector 7;46162545]first of all, this is a ridiculous reinterpretation of history
second of all, nothing in this rambling insane post actually addresses why the US would try to nuke terrorism[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I forgot the radical-leftist WWII history book at my local Michael Moore book signing.
But yeah, we're not going to use them unless they [U]actually[/U] get to the point where they're actually capable of utilizing nukes.
But we will use them if we get to that point. Why? Because they will. Because they're that crazy. It's that simple. But if you could read between the lines of my last post, you might get what I'm alluding to rather than what clearly reads to you as "NUK DER TERROIRSTS".
But that's not for another ten years down the road at least.
[QUOTE=Xystus234;46162570]Sorry, I forgot the radical-leftist WWII history book at my local Michael Moore book signing.
But yeah, we're not going to use them unless they [U]actually[/U] get to the point where they're actually capable of utilizing nukes.
But we will use them if we get to that point. Why? Because they will. It's that simple. If they drop a suitcase nuke or get Iraqi or Syrian missile launchers to do their dirty work then yeah, we probably will. Hell they captured a bunch of Syrian fighter jets. But if you could read between the lines of my last post, you might get what I'm alluding to rather than what clearly reads to you as "NUK DER TERROIRSTS".
But that's not for another ten years down the road at least.[/QUOTE]
Your complete lack of knowledge on the actual situation or its dynamics is staggering
ISIS is an ideological movement, not a strategic national force. Deploying nuclear weapons on cities in Iraq to fight ISIS makes about as much sense as using nuclear weapons to fight crime in Detroit, unless you think indiscriminate genocide will finally solve the instability of the middle east. Thankfully, the US' nuclear arsenal is managed by people who know what they're doing.
Also, you're fucking nuts. The United States didn't use nuclear weapons against Japan because they were fanatics, but because it was a sound strategic plan of attack and a political gamble that would intimidate the Imperial leadership.
[QUOTE=Sector 7;46162626]Your complete lack of knowledge on the actual situation or its dynamics is staggering
ISIS is an ideological movement, not a strategic national force. Deploying nuclear weapons on cities in Iraq to fight ISIS makes about as much sense as using nuclear weapons to fight crime in Detroit, unless you think indiscriminate genocide will finally solve the instability of the middle east. Thankfully, the US' nuclear arsenal is managed by people who know what they're doing.
Also, you're fucking nuts. The United States didn't use nuclear weapons against Japan because they were fanatics (what?), but because it was a sound strategic plan of attack and a political gamble that would intimidate the Imperial leadership.[/QUOTE]
Jesus. It's literally in the name. Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Japanese_Army#Fanaticism_and_war_crimes[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Debate_over_bombings[/url]
[QUOTE]Supporters of the bombings generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing casualties on both sides during Operation Downfall. One figure of speech, "One hundred million [subjects of the Japanese Empire] will die for the Emperor and Nation,"[256] served as a unifying slogan, although that phrase was intended as a figure of speech along the lines of the "ten thousand years" phrase.[257] In Truman's 1955 Memoirs, "he states that the atomic bomb probably saved half a million U.S. lives— anticipated casualties in an Allied invasion of Japan planned for November. Stimson subsequently talked of saving one million U.S. casualties, and Churchill of saving one million American and half that number of British lives."[258] Scholars have pointed out various alternatives that could have ended the war without an invasion, but these alternatives could have resulted in the deaths of many more Japanese.[259] Supporters also point to an order given by the Japanese War Ministry on August 1, 1944, ordering the execution of Allied prisoners of war when the POW camp was in the combat zone.[260][/QUOTE]
See that red circle?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War[/url]
[IMG]http://s29.postimg.org/5ko7imh6v/airbase.png[/IMG]
That's a Syrian Airbase owned by ISIS. Guess what they have stored there, unfueled, without pilots, without a means to use them because of the logistics.
I've done the fucking research. Eat your ignorance.
[editline]6th October 2014[/editline]
For the record - no, I don't support the use of Nukes against ISIS. Sure, we'd all like to turn them into dust.
But literally? Not while they're still just a bunch of terrorists.
When the us used nukes in ww2 it was then testing their new weapon on human beings. The bombs we have now are more powerful and we know the consequences, more importantly lots of people have got them.
Is don't have the resources or facilities to build nukes and even when/if they ever do making a missile to launch a nuke it's a big job and Israel will have unleashed literal hordes of mossad and whatever other spys they use to find the bomb which realistically would only be used against them.
It's inconsequential though, is won't get a nuke. This is just scare mongering against is and less directly against Iran 'huh! If Iran can't be trusted to keep their nuclear secrets under wrap they shouldn't be trusted to have them at all!'
Dirty bomb is a different matter but if they wanted one of those they would already have one.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.