patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,194,256 comments by 13,889 users - clambo, gabbar, Onvacation, RC2006 online now
Iwog is right about the crash of 2017
invite response
2015 Jan 28, 9:20am 22,702 views 82 comments
by Y ➕follow (4) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 20 - 59 of 82 Next » Last » Search these comments
Y
2015 Jan 29, 5:23am
Well if the neocons are wrong and youall are right, we are all still fucked as iran has had the wire ignition thingys since 2008, can spin up some potent shit in under 6 months while simple denying us access under false pretenses knowing we won't do jack about it other than sanction hummus imports, can deliver the package ( albeit not accurately ) to europe, soon to the north american continent... funds hezbollah and some other crazies, openly declares their intent to destroy another country...a nuclear middle east seems inevitable...hair triggers all around...something/somebody's gonna fuck up under those circumstances...and things are going to go kaboom.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 5:36am
somebodies gotta step up to the plate before the sand barrons all get nukes...
if that happens it won't be pretty...
remember those shipping containers that are ever so easy to move weapons into our ports?
Warmonger!
Y
2015 Jan 29, 5:40am
christianity...islam...they all preach a happy ending via rapture or virgins and encourage you to accelerate the timeline.
and you wanna sit back and let these freaks arm themselves with nukes?
Well if the neocons are wrong and youall are right, we are all still fucked as iran has had the wire ignition thingys since 2008, can spin up some potent shit in under 6 months while simple denying us access under false pretenses
Spin up some potent shit? What potent shit is that? It's like being pregnant. Either you have the fissionable materials or you don't. You don't "spin up" weapons grade material in 6 months.
christianity...islam...they all preach a happy ending via rapture or virgins and encourage you to accelerate the timeline.
and you wanna sit back and let these freaks arm themselves with nukes?
The only way to stop it is to invade. Iran is 10 times the size and 10 times the population of Iraq. What is your plan?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 5:49am
circa 9/14....
if Iran employed all of its installed IR-1 centrifuges—roughly 10,200—
and used its stockpile of nearly 7,800 kilograms of low-enriched uranium hexafluoride as feedstock, it would be able to produce 25 kilograms of weaponsgrade uranium hexafluoride in two to three months,
https://www.armscontrol.org/files/Iran_Brief_Breaking_Down_Irans_Breakout_Capacity.pdf
You don't "spin up" weapons grade material in 6 months.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 5:53am
no need to invade...
advanced bunker busters take out the known nuclear sites. give them 8 hours notice to remove the people from the blast area.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324582004578459170138890756
It's quick and effective with no planned loss of life unless they want to put some civilians in harms way to try to deter the strike, then that's too bad.
Yes, they probably have other undetected sites, but this would set them back at least a decade...
The only way to stop it is to invade. Iran is 10 times the size and 10 times the population of Iraq. What is your plan?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 5:54am
if the bunker busters are ineffective, use small yield nukes to make the sites uninhabitable.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 5:56am
why would you play cards with a known repetitive cheater, knowing they will cheat and you will pay the price...?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 6:00am
lucky for us, christian countries were affected by the enlightenment prior to becoming nuclear capable.
Islam has yet to reach this stage...
christianity...islam...they all preach a happy ending via rapture or virgins and encourage you to accelerate the timeline.
and you wanna sit back and let these freaks arm themselves with nukes?
circa 9/14....
if Iran employed all of its installed IR-1 centrifuges—roughly 10,200—
and used its stockpile of nearly 7,800 kilograms of low-enriched uranium hexafluoride as feedstock, it would be able to produce 25 kilograms of weaponsgrade uranium hexafluoride in two to three months,
https://www.armscontrol.org/files/Iran_Brief_Breaking_Down_Irans_Breakout_Capacity.pdf
You don't "spin up" weapons grade material in 6 months.
Perfect, thanks for making my point. If a country has the technology and materials then they have it, if they don't then they don't. Technical issues aren't stopping Iran. You 6 months concern is meaningless.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 6:19am
So what are you prepared to do about it?
I gave you the quick easy cheap solution..
or are you ready to let history repeat via Neville et al?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 6:32am
even the libby king sees the danger and is prepared to go directly against the principles he ran on and RAISE THE DEFENSE BUDGET 8%...
no need to invade...
advanced bunker busters take out the known nuclear sites. give them 8 hours notice to remove the people from the blast area.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324582004578459170138890756
It's quick and effective with no planned loss of life unless they want to put some civilians in harms way to try to deter the strike, then that's too bad.
Yes, they probably have other undetected sites, but this would set them back at least a decade...
The only way to stop it is to invade. Iran is 10 times the size and 10 times the population of Iraq. What is your plan?
LOL. If Iran wants to build a nuke, they might I really don't know and neither do you, then it can easily be done in secret. It's a huge country and they aren't stupid. Orbital mechanics are fixed so they know the satellite coverage and we don't do overflights. Since you, or anyone else, have no idea how much nuclear work might be secreted away if they were seriously pursuing a nuclear bomb then how could you possibly know it will set them back a year? Then what happens next year? Especially since you have pointed out they can have fuel in 2 months. Contradict yourself much?
Your (and the wsj) childlike neocon faith in military operations working perfectly flies in the face of 10000 years of real world experience in what military people call FUBAR and TARFU. Let no man say you are a quick learner.
Maybe if you weren't so wrapped up in your john wayne/rambo mode you might do some critical thinking about why the US has spent so much time and money pushing the idea of the iranian boogeyman onto it's population and the rest of the world. Hint, saudi arabia is sunni, iran is shia. Hint #2 saudi arabia wants to control the middle east, iran wants to control the middle east. Hint #3 saudi arabia leads the us around by the nose while financing 90% of the terrorism against the us with the money they get from the us. follow the money jerry mcguire.
So what are you prepared to do about it?
I gave you the quick easy cheap solution..
or are you ready to let history repeat via Neville et al?
Prepared to do? The situation is so fucked up at this point that it's not going to end well no matter what. There are too many drum beaters like you in power. What we should have done a long time ago, like when reagan was elected, was to open up to iran and repair the damage done with carter's mishandling of the situation. After 35 years of demonizing iran things probably aren't going to improve. Plus our saudi masters would freak about any kind of honest open dialog with iran.
A quick easy solution to what? By your own pull it out of your ass estimate bombing will "set them back a year". Gee a whole year. Really piss off the Iranians and they close the straits of hormuz and instantly crash the us economy. You do remember the us still imports over a million barrels a day through there don't you? Picture oil at 500 a barrel.
History repeat as neville? The iranians are planning on conquering europe, north africa, and russia? That's new news. Maybe. They tried it before though 550-330 BC. They didn't get past thrace (now bulgaria, greece, and western turkey), but they did get as far as libya and georgia.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 7:00am
Lol...so to you a year is like a decade...what are you, a methhead??
Yes, they probably have other undetected sites, but this would set them back at least a decade...
Y
2015 Jan 29, 7:17am
no. The civilized world sticking their collective heads in the sand with the threat of the trigger to world war 3 perched on their doorstep.
only this time, any future world war won't be as easy as the last one...
History repeat as neville? The iranians are planning on conquering europe, north africa, and russia?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 7:17am
That's not a reason to sit around and do nothing.
That is a strategy for losers.
Prepared to do? The situation is so fucked up at this point that it's not going to end well no matter what.
Lol...so to you a year is like a decade...what are you, a methhead??
Yes, they probably have other undetected sites, but this would set them back at least a decade...
Mea culpa, I misread it. No way a decade, I seriously doubt a year. If they are really producing a weapon, then everything is safely tucked away out of sight. If they aren't then it won't matter will it? Either way the us has committed an overt act of war. But hey what's one more time? How are you planning to deal with $30 dollar a gallon gas, huge shortages, and strict rationing when iran shuts down the straits? Hope you have natural gas, because it's going to be pretty damn cold in ohio without fuel oil.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 7:21am
That would be an invitation for us to take out their military via cruise missiles.
They would not take that step.
Really piss off the Iranians and they close the straits of hormuz and instantly crash the us economy.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 7:24am
see "fracking"...
the straits would only be shut down as long as it would take us to launch massive cruise missile attack taking out all their ships and land based launchers.
OTOH, a subtle threat to nuke mecca/medina would also stop them in their tracks while having the side benefit of decreasing fanatical islamist terrorism.
( at least the ones that believe )
But hey what's one more time? How are you planning to deal with $30 dollar a gallon gas, huge shortages, and strict rationing when iran shuts down the straits?
no. The civilized world sticking their collective heads in the sand with the threat of the trigger to world war 3 perched on their doorstep.
only this time, any future world war won't be as easy as the last one...
History repeat as neville? The iranians are planning on conquering europe, north africa, and russia?
World war 3? If you are really worried about WWIII then you should be looking to invade India and Pakistan to take away their nuclear toys. Along with North Korea. Real threats with real bombs first. Then worry about Iran maybe being able to make a bomb.
MisdemeanorRebel
2015 Jan 29, 7:27am
Obama decided to "make a stop" in Riyadh the other day on his way back from India, where he watched a military parade of Russian made and designed weapons.
He's probably begging the Sauds to continue the low oil price policy.
There's no way of destroying the whole Iranian military via cruise missiles. Not even all their air, sea, and land based missile systems. This stuff NEVER goes as easy as claimed. When an attack is pending, countries don't leave their systems out in their usual place, out in the open. They bury them, hide them, move them around.
You remember all the problems we had SCUD hunting - in a desert. Iran is very hilly.
"One Bomb, one Target" is a USAF baloney phrase they used back in 1965. It turned out to be more like "100 Bombs, one Target, then we have to come back in a few weeks anyway."
see "fracking"...
the straits would only be shut down as long as it would take us to launch massive cruise missile attack taking out all their ships and land based launchers.
OTOH, a subtle threat to nuke mecca/medina would also stop them in their tracks while having the side benefit of decreasing fanatical islamist terrorism.
( at least the ones that believe )
LOL times 3. You really read way way too much tom clancy. A massive cruise missile attack taking out all their ships and land based launchers? Do you still believe in santa clause and the easter bunny too? Too funny.
The first hint of a nation state threat, even a couple iranian navy guys on a zodiac with an rpg, the maritime insurers will drop coverage for the region instantly. No insurance, no ship movements.
Nuke medina/mecca? Wasn't that sum of all fears? Still laughing. Let me know when you want to talk real world discussion.
Obama decided to "make a stop" in Riyadh the other day on his way back from India, where he watched a military parade of Russian made and designed weapons.
It's good Obama has continued the presidential tradition of sucking saudi dick.
Of course Iran will attack the whole world with nuclear weapons
and Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction.
The warmongering TPTB have Americans where they want them,in a state of fear.
I guess TPTB will make more money thru the military industrial complex & confiscation of more oil territory funded by Rep/Con/Tea tax dollars. It cost a lot to run a scam so R/C/Ts need to work three jobs in order to pay more taxes.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 8:30am
Iraq had certified chemical weapons that most likely were transferred to syria prior to the war.
Iran is threatening to attack israel with or without nukes.
Iran funds terrorists, which, by proxy, are attacking the whole world at this point.
btw, did you have a valid point?
Of course Iran will attack the whole world with nuclear weapons
and Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction.
MisdemeanorRebel
2015 Jan 29, 8:32am
Iraq had certified chemical weapons that most likely were transferred to syria prior to the war.
Baloney. The Chems in Syria came from Saudi Arabia, which had previously used them in Yemen against the Egyptians.
Iran is threatening to attack israel with or without nukes.
Rubbish.
Iran funds terrorists, which, by proxy, are attacking the whole world at this point.
Not in Europe or the USA. How many Iranians involved with 9/11, Benghazi, Kenyan Embassy, WTC #1, etc. etc.?
How many Anti-US Foreign Fighters in Iraq were Iranian? How many were Saudi or Egyptian?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 8:33am
"Threaten" to nuke medina/mecca.
This would be the first option in my book.
See how that pans out.
We don't have to actually carry through with it.
After all, we have a president that has done a lot of threatening with no actual consequences. So we have experience in that department.
It would be like threatening to go for it on 4th and 1 with a lot of quarterback screaming and head bobbing trying to draw the defense offsides. It's done all the time.
Nuke medina/mecca? Wasn't that sum of all fears? Still laughing. Let me know when you want to talk real world discussion.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 8:35am
Iran funds terrorists.
I did not say they were iranian terrorists.
Iran funds terrorists, which, by proxy, are attacking the whole world at this point.
Not in Europe or the USA. How many Iranians involved with 9/11, Benghazi, Kenyan Embassy, WTC #1, etc. etc.?
How many Anti-US Foreign Fighters in Iraq were Iranian? How many were Saudi or Egyptian?
MisdemeanorRebel
2015 Jan 29, 8:35am
Iran funds terrorists.
I did not say they were iranian terrorists.
Or that they target the west.
Who funds Azov in Ukraine? Who funds Chechen Fundamentalists?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 8:38am
Most of Iraq's chemical WMD's are not accounted for.
Syria, an adjacent state, has/had a shitload.
Do the math.
The front page of today’s New York Times is dominated by a long article on chemical weapons in Iraq. It appears to be the result of a major investigation; bylined by C.J. Chivers, it credits six additional reporters and researchers as well as eight “producers.” The gist of the article is that there were far more chemical weapons in Iraq than were ever publicly reported, and between 2004 and 2011 there were “at least six” instances where American troops were exposed to chemical agents including mustard and sarin. The Times criticizes the military for understating the chemical weapons problem, and in some instances, for the medical treatment received by servicemen.
thunderlips11 says
Iraq had certified chemical weapons that most likely were transferred to syria prior to the war.
Baloney. The Chems in Syria came from Saudi Arabia, which had previously used them in Yemen against the Egyptians.
Y
2015 Jan 29, 8:44am
Why are you throwing softballs??
http://www.timesofisrael.com/times-of-israel-live-updates-january-20-2015/
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Iran-nuclear-weapons-sanctions-uranium/2014/11/17/id/607839/
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iranian-general-threatens-surprise-attack-on-israel/
http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/iran-threatens-to-unleash-hezbollah-on-israel/
Even the libby bible backs me up....
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/21/world/middleeast/iranian-commander-threatens-thunderbolt-against-israel-after-generals-death-in-airstrike.html
Iran is threatening to attack israel with or without nukes.
Rubbish.
HydroCabron
2015 Jan 29, 8:50am
I believe three "l"'s indicate 90% enrichment achieved.
Thanks for supporting me!
Yelllow cake!
The metallic neocon braying of your cadre never leads anywhere good.
Maybe you should wake up? Or at least own that the "record" - such as it is - of foreign-policy analysis from your ilk is right less than twice a day?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 8:50am
Ukraine's interior ministry.
Who funds Azov in Ukraine
I don't know. Why don't we ask the Tsarnaev brothers?
Who funds Chechen Fundamentalists?
Y
2015 Jan 29, 8:59am
Well, I have to agree with you that libby neocons helped to push the bush battalions into the unnecessary Iraq debacle...
That's twice we have come to agreement in the same thread!
The metallic braying of neocon cadre of morons never leads anywhere good.
Maybe you should wake up? Or at least own that the "record" - such as it is - of foreign-policy analysis from your ilk is right less than twice a day?
HydroCabron
2015 Jan 29, 9:01am
libby neocons helped to push the bush battalions into the unnecessary Iraq debacle
Yes: No true Scotsman would have invaded Iraq.
« First « Previous Comments 20 - 59 of 82 Next » Last » Search these comments
but not for the reasons he gives..
D-dayII: June 30, 2015
It is fitting and proper–indeed essential for our very security–that Speaker John Boehner has extended an invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu to address Congress on Iran and its efforts to develop nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them anywhere in the world. The invitation has bipartisan support because many members on both sides of the aisle recognize the fundamental threat to world peace that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose. Like Winston Churchill in the 1930s with Nazi Germany, Netanyahu has been sounding the alarm about Iran’s ominous nuclear and terrorist activities.
The President has made clear his intense dislike of Israel’s prime minister and his refusal to keep quiet about Obama’s desire to conclude a Neville Chamberlain-like deal with Teheran.
The mullahs agreed to sit down with the US and Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany to come up with an agreement ostensibly to get Iran to back off its nuclear ambitions. Iran’s agenda was simple: get the sanctions eased, and then with a loophole-ridden treaty, get them removed altogether.
Appeasers argue that containment will work with a nuclear-armed Iran just as it did with the old Soviet Union during the Cold War and thus there is nothing to really worry about. Israel and other Mideast nations know better.
The Iranian government, despite the immense corruption of many of its leaders, is a revolutionary regime. Its actions over the years demonstrate that the rhetoric of its officials is more than just hot air. Iran is terror central. It bankrolls and provides arms to Hamas, Hezbollah and all sorts of Islamic terrorists organizations.
If the US tacitly concedes its resignation to Iran becoming a nuclear power, then other countries will follow suite in creating their own nukes, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
With nukes in so many unstable hands, a disaster is almost a certainty. Moreover, the widespread knowledge of how to make the Bomb will certainly fall into terrorist hands, which is why the US must prevent this nuclear proliferation in the first place.
Ominously Iran has apparently developed an intercontinental ballistic missile that can reach not only Israel but also Europe. It won’t be many years before the mullahs can aim nuclear tipped missiles against the US. No surprise, the current negotiations don’t cover Iranian missile development.
Obama has trampled on the Constitution time and again–making laws and changing laws at will–and wants no Congressional involvement precisely because the resultant debate would glaringly show what a dangerously miserable deal he had cut. The ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Menendez, recently declared: “The more I hear from the Administration and its quotes, the more it sounds like talking points that come straight out of Teheran.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2015/01/28/why-netanyahu-the-churchill-of-our-time-must-speak-before-congress/
#politics