• John McCain: USA needs to "pull the trigger" on Iran
    126 replies, posted
[url]http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/04/14/2269430.aspx[/url] [release]Pentagon and military officials told a congressional hearing today that Iran is at least one year away from enriching enough uranium to build a nuclear weapon -- and three to five years away from producing the actual weapons itself. Nevertheless, Democratic and Republican senators today expressed growing concern -- if not impatience -- in failed attempts by the U.S. and international community to force Iran to halt its efforts to develop a nuclear weapon. In a testy exchange, Sen. John McCain led the charge in questioning both Pentagon and State Department officials, saying the U.S. should act unilaterally in an effort to cutoff refined oil and gas shipments to Iran and no longer wait for the United Nations to enact stiffer sanctions. When the State Department's Bill Burns countered that it would be "very difficult" to get Russia and China to sign onto those kinds of tougher sanctions, McCain shot back that all the international communities efforts have failed so far to change Iran's behavior. When the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy waded in to say that Iran has in fact altered its behavior and Russia and China will sign on to new sanctions, McCain bristled saying there's "no justification" in her belief that Russia will play along since the Russians have been playing "rope a dope" with the US on this issue. All members of the panel, when asked, gave the usual "all options are on the table" when asked if the U.S. has a military plan to strike at Iran's nuclear facilities but deferred any details to a closed session. [/release] He's gone senile.
lol bumb the middle east.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iKuMVqht4U[/media]
totally a good idea........
And people wanted to vote this man into office...
If we ever do find out they have nukes they're willing to shoot at us, by all means turn them into a crater, but not now, no.
Yes lets start another war for no real reason.
[QUOTE=Mudbone;21358939]Yes lets start another war for no real reason.[/QUOTE] War keeps the US economy alive.
This is absolutely the last thing this country needs.
reminds me of the way winston churchill went mad
[QUOTE=PariahKing;21358971]This is absolutely the last thing this country needs.[/QUOTE] Darn shame too. Something makes me think they'll consider it. :tinfoil:
[QUOTE=radioactive;21358966]War keeps the US economy alive.[/QUOTE] Not as much anymore since we don't have as much factory work going on.
I say we pull the trigger when things get really out of hand, it's really calm right now.
Ye nuk those bitches
[QUOTE=radioactive;21358966]War keeps the US economy alive.[/QUOTE] He's right actually, we have counters in our super markets that tell us how many insurgents we kill, the government gets $10 per insurgent.
Thank god he didn't become president.
The U.S thinks that if any other country manages to make a nuclear bomb that they would be nuked the second they have a chance to nuke them. So what if they have nukes, they don't have any reason to use them.
More like the US needs to "pull the trigger" on John McCain.
Bah, he's just senile.
[QUOTE=Mudbone;21358939]Yes lets start another war for no real reason.[/QUOTE] How the hell did you get war out of that? He said we need to cut off natural gas and such, but nothing was said about war. All options on the table means that if it comes to it, war is an option. That would be reserved for if they actually got their hands on nukes. The fact is that we need to do something more about Iran, McCain is right on that. What we are doing obviously isn't working, we need to step it up. I think we should try to avoid a war, but we are talking about a country led by a man who wants to wipe Israel off of the map, and is not exactly friendly towards the west as a whole. Don't make this about John McCain being senile, or about partisan-ship. This is an actual real-world issue that has consequences outside of government, and can save many lives or take many, and probably will end up doing both. A call to action is not a call to war, and McCain is right in his urge for the US to take action. Something needs to be done. Something besides the same old sanctions. I'm not saying attack, I'm just saying that we need to do more than the UN is doing, or pressure the UN to do more. War should be avoided, but if we have no choice(imminent attack, for instance) then go ahead. But McCain seems to be calling for more peaceful actions, not urging us to make war.
No, don't invade Iran. It was a fucking bad idea invading Iraq, it's a bad idea invading Afghanistan, and it's certainly a bad idea invading Iran.
[QUOTE=1337;21359258]The U.S thinks that if any other country manages to make a nuclear bomb that they would be nuked the second they have a chance to nuke them. So what if they have nukes, they don't have any reason to use them.[/QUOTE] Have you heard any of what the Iranian "President" has to say about the West and Israel?
I'm not too much of a fan of John McCain but I do like his chips. [img]http://www.mysupermarket.co.uk/Images/ExternalImages/ProductsDetailed/5/003405.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=w 1 z;21359354]More like the US needs to "pull the [b]plug[/b]" on John McCain.[/QUOTE] ftfy
-Sanctions don't work; they won't curb Iran's nuclear program and they will only hurt the Iranian populace -Iran's nuclear program dates back to the Shah, and there are a lot of incentives for Iran to develop nuclear power plants. They import a lot of their oil/fuel, and if they shifted more towards nuclear energy, they would free up more of their own oil resources. They are completely entitled to nuclear power if you ask me. -The UN's own weapon inspectors said that Iran is nowhere near being nuclear weapons-capable and is making no effort to try to make weapons. -Basically the only reason Iran is an issue is because Israel has deeply wormed itself into Washington and because we don't like Iran's government. Pakistan is more of a threat to global stability than Iran, given that Pakistan already has nuclear weapons, and it's generally accepted that the Taliban/Islamic extremists operate in Pakistan's border areas. Iran getting nuclear weapons would be better for world peace, in a way. Western/American aggression is predicated on the degree of danger carrying out a war would entail. There was very little danger Iraq posed to America, and therefor it was a better "target". That's why you will never see the US or South Korea strike first on the Korean peninsula: North Korea has nuclear landmines buried on the border and if South Korea got nuked the global economy would be thrown into chaos. If Iran has nukes, then it's safe to say that the US won't touch them. Iran would dare not sell/give nukes to any of its proxies either (like Hezbollah), because if a nuke went off in Israel, then the world would pretty much be forced to respond in some way. In short, Iran just wants nukes (if, of course, that's the route they are going, which is still totally up in the air given all the facts) for their own protection. Iran is entitled to developing nuclear power, because of how much it would help their energy economy. That's just how I see it, given my really amateurish knowledge and research into the subject.
McCain is a zionist piece of shit who wants the USA to fight Israels wars. Why do people listen to people like him?
I saw we pull the trigger on McCain's house.
I trust Iran with nukes more than I trust the US.
:milk:
lol it's even funnier how this man was so close to becoming president too
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.