Studio8 - Uniting the Arts

i don't think it will ever get to the point where iran has the capability, frankly...there is precedence, although the US was mighty pissed the last time...not too sure israel really cares, though, nor am i too sure the current administration would be all that pissed, at least behind closed doors

singlemalt, you're pretty fucking snippy, today, aintcha? i know you're talking about iran. i didnt mean to say that the us used nukes on iran. i meant on iraq, just as a sidebar to the question.

i know for a fact we've used chemical weapons in iraq already. i'm pretty sure i read that we've used nukes, too. i'll try to find something about it.

get the got dam peanut butter out of your ears

Depleted Uranium Shells.

http://www.bushflash.com/pl_lo.html

Doreen do not watch this one, the music is kick ass but the graphics will ruin your day.

cotton mouth soldier had a Karmic Dice link on his profile at litkicks that is where I found it.

yep thats it.

so, what should the international response be to the US using weapons of mass chemical and nuclear-related destruction?

forget about iran, dude. the US should not be using these weapons, our reporters are too pussy to tell the story, and so why are you focusing on the remote possibility that iran will use a nuclear weapon on one of the US allies? what about discussing the FACT that we're using ILLEGAL weapons on a battlefield in a nation upon which we never declared war?

stilltrucking said:

I did not even see your answer. You dam right you answered him. BUt he keeps pulling on your skirt saying Mommy mommy I am scared

truckin' -- if i was pulling on a skirt, it ain't because i'm scared.

That's what I was saying, firsty. You said it better, tho.

LOL! .. i just saw your skirt comment, scotch..

firsty said:

singlemalt, you're pretty fucking snippy, today, aintcha?

sorry man. must be my priapism kicking in again.

so, what should the international response be to the US using weapons of mass chemical and nuclear-related destruction?

how did i know that was next?

Quote:

so, what should the international response be to the US using weapons of mass chemical and nuclear-related destruction?

i think they should draw a bunch of cartoons


So you think Israel is an ally of the United States?

.

it's a unique relationship

It is that.

I think that first of all, America would rise to the occasion and fall on Iran like a ton of bricks.

Here's why. This might be slightly off-topic and redundant but founding solid bases could be useful.

Here's the first reason.


This is a map which represents US bases around Iran.

(below is a link to a clearer map but without american bases)
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_e ... y_2004.jpg

As you can see, Iran is practically surrounded. The only side the US doesn't have access to is the North side and caspian sea, which brings us to the second reason.

Iran uses it's free side to communicate Northwards with russia, which they easily have access to (here's a map: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/commonwe ... l_2003.jpg)
Russia suplied Iran with
*nuclear technology: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4301889.stm
and
*weaponry: http://www.acronym.org.uk/dd/dd55/55iran.htm

So the second reason is that Iran seems to get on well with Russia, and as you know, the cold war isn't over, it's just "over".

The third reason is that Iran is also becoming a more-than-unsignificant competitor the US is losing it's grip on. For example, 13.6% of Chinese importations came from Iran in 2005.

The forth reason is black, tastes wierd, and is going to cause a world crisis in the next decade.

Therefore, if Iran decides to use an A-bomb, I think the US will rush in, godspeed. But it's main motive will be political, and judging it's current geopolitical position in the Middle-East, it seems very well prepared to do so anyway.

As for the international community, those who support the US (or are pressured into supporting the US) will get along as usual. Those who "oppose", from a GW p.o.v (either with us or against us), will hastily be ridiculed or heavily criticised for being heartless and lacking fear of terrorists. In other words, the US won't leave other countries the time or freedom to do much about it. If it didn't waste it's time in asking other countries for Iraq, why wouldn't it do the same for Iran?

And last but not least, more terrorism, more America hating, more people dying abroad or in prison camps when they belong at home with their families.

The forth reason is black, tastes wierd, and is going to cause a world crisis in the next decade.

I think you are onto something there.

The shortest distance between two points is an axis of evil.

Off topic?

What topic?

I thought it was a joke.

singlemalt
that was a dam good comeback about the skirt
of course you ain't scared
that was projection on my part
it is I who am scared.

I bought a 375 ml bottle of eight year old Jim Beam December second and it is all gone.
TIme for another one. I am hoping to live long enough to become an alchoholic

just curious

Why do you think the europeans have got so brave all of a sudden. Such staunch defenders of free speech. After all these years of sucking up to those middle east oilwells.

Speaking of Iran, Maybe they are looking to the policy of Mutual Assured Destruction. It was good enough for US why not for them?