Over the past few years there have been hundreds of news articles talking about iran developing nuclear weapons.
The question I have, why hasn't obama done something about iran?
The answer I have arrived at, obama does not want to harm the muslim community because of obamas ties to muslims.
Obama was supposed to have come from a muslim family. But obama was supposed to have renounced islam and became a christian.
The next question I have is, how long will obama let iran work in its nuclear program?
The answer I have come up with, obama has no intentions of doing anything about iran.
Where does this leave israel? If israel attacks iran, what then?
I figure obama is going to try and appease israel by giving them defensive weapons, such as patriot missiles.
obama is going to do everything in his power to make sure israel does not attack iran.
Its the same story over and over, give sanctions time to work. More like obama hopes the sanction story will last long enough for him to get out of office.
It appears to me that obama does not want to do anything about iran. He is going to sit on the fence for as long as he can, then pass the problem to the next president.
This fence sitting gives iran much needed time to develop its nuclear program.
If obama favors islam, why did he have bin laden killed? To win favor with israel and the american public.
With bin laden dead, it "appears" that obama is taking a strong stance against radical islam.
In reality, a nuclear iran is a worse threat then bin laden could have ever hoped to be.
How can obama have bin laden killed, but say that he is taking a stance against radical islam? Iran is about as radical as you can get.
Someone will rise and replace bin laden.
What would have happened if hitler never rose to power? Some people estimate stalin would have caused world war II.
With bin laden dead, this leaves a vacuum for someone to rise up and fill his shoes.
Bin laden should have been left alive
It is better that our enemy is led by a frail old man, then a young energetic man.
It appears to me that obama does not want to do anything about iran. He is going to sit on the fence for as long as he can, then pass the problem to the next president.
The next president will probably be Obama.
Originally Posted by Kevin
In reality, a nuclear iran is a worse threat then bin laden could have ever hoped to be.
AQ and Iran are related but separate problems, requiring coordinated but distinct responses.
Originally Posted by Kevin
What would have happened if hitler never rose to power? Some people estimate stalin would have caused world war II.
That is completely untrue. Read about "socialism in one country." Stalin believed another war with the west was inevitable, but wanted to forestall it as long as possible because the Soviet Union needed an indefinite amount of time to catch up to the west's war industry capabilities.
Originally Posted by Kevin
With bin laden dead, this leaves a vacuum for someone to rise up and fill his shoes.
Long before Bin Laden was killed, AQ became decentralized, of necessity. It had already happened in the Arabian Peninsula and east Africa. Now an AQ spin-off is wreaking havoc in northern Mali, even. And the Philippine and Indonesian branches probably never really were under the direct control of Bin Laden. Bin Laden directed operations up to 9-11. Once he had to go into deep hiding, his role changed to that of the founder of the terrorist organization that did a great deal of harm to the US and provoked a massively costly war. A larger than life symbol to violent Islamic extremists. In that, his death changed nothing.
Over the past few years there have been hundreds of news articles talking about iran developing nuclear weapons....
That's the problem, the overwhelming majority of them are just conjecture and cause even more confusion over the issue. I'd have to suspect a number of them are being put forth by groups with ulterior motives who would love nothing more than to see the US take out Iran.
The US needs to take it slow on this one to make sure we get things right, we don't need an even bigger mess than Bush JR got us into in Iraq when he acted on faulty intel. In the meantime if Iran does get close to having a nuke it will become readily apparent, Israel (who probably has better intel on this than the US that they won't share with us) will strike them, US blessing or not.
I did not say obama was muslim, I said he has connections to islam.
At one time, obamas father was a muslim.
To renounce is to give up or repudiate something or a belief or held position one already has. That's why I thought you were suggesting that he had been a Muslim at one time.
What connection to Islam is there, other than the religion of his father?
I don't understand how you arrived at the conclusion that Obama "favors" the religion of his father, a father who abandoned his family,
Originally Posted by Kevin
Then iran will have 4 more years to advance their nuclear technology.
Again, why do you believe the Obama administration has been doing nothing to counter Iran's nuclear program during this term? Should this country dive straight into war, without first applying diplomatic and economic pressure?
Originally Posted by Kevin
In my opinion, obama has no intentions on doing anything about a nuclear iran, nor is he going to let israel do anything.
This leaves only one answer, obama is not worried about iran having nuclear technology or nuclear weapons.
How does that leave only one answer?
Originally Posted by Kevin
The next questions is "why" isn't obama worried?
How far will iran be allowed to advance their nuclear technology before someone takes action?
Lets say that no action is taken against iran, then what? They develop a nuclear weapon.
Is israel going to live in fear of a nuclear iran?
Or worse yet, a nuclear device is put on an iranian oil tanker and sent to new york or london.
Pakistan already has nuclear devices. There are many possible bad future scenarios.
I have yet to see a reason to believe the Obama administration is doing nothing to counter Iran's intention to develop nuclear weapons. These suspicions do raise one drawback of secret diplomacy and covert operations: The public doesn't become aware of them until long after the fact.
I don't understand how you arrived at the conclusion that Obama "favors" the religion of his father, a father who abandoned his family,
Remember shortly after obama was elected president, he addressed a crowd of muslims, was it at the UN, or egypt?
He made it a point to address the group as someone whos past is connected to islam.
Originally Posted by freesw
Again, why do you believe the Obama administration has been doing nothing to counter Iran's nuclear program during this term? Should this country dive straight into war, without first applying diplomatic and economic pressure?
As iran marches towards nuclear development, obama does nothign to stop him.
I see iran today, as germany in the 1930s. It is clear what is happening, and nobody is doing anything about it.
The US needs to take it slow on this one to make sure we get things right, we don't need an even bigger mess than Bush JR got us into in Iraq when he acted on faulty intel. In the meantime if Iran does get close to having a nuke it will become readily apparent, Israel (who probably has better intel on this than the US that they won't share with us) will strike them, US blessing or not.
I fully agree that attacking iran would be opening a can of worms, but what is the world supposed to do?
What did germany do before it waged war in europe? Germany developed its weapons technology.
Radical mindset + advanced weapons of war = bad outcome.
I see iran today, as germany in the 1930s. It is clear what is happening, and nobody is doing anything about it.
Iran isn't governed by a charismatic ideologue like Hitler. Iran is governed by a religious oligarchy. It's a theocracy. There's no evidence or even reason to think Iran's rulers are willing to risk their own power on an all-out attack on Israel, much less the US.
Ahmadinejad was voted in for a second term in 2009 in a hotly disputed election with the backing of the clerical establishment.
But he has seen his political fortunes decline sharply after he was perceived to have defied Khamenei in April 2011 over the appointment of an intelligence chief and tried to expand the authority of the presidency.
Khamesian said Ahmadinejad was gradually fading from Iran's political scene, but could still stir up conflict with parliament.
"Ahmadinejad is the losing party. So, he will try to create tensions in the hope of getting concessions," he said.
I think Iran's intention towards Israel is to continue waging a low-level, proxy war of attrition. They definitely want a nuclear weapon, but not to attack Israel. They believe having a nuclear arsenal would reduce the risk of attack from Israel and the US. Nuclear materials have "fingerprints." They can't proliferate nuclear materials, much less a bomb, without great risk to themselves. They know that if their materials fall into the wrong hands, and are used against Israel or the US, their entire country is likely to be destroyed.
Does that mean a nuclear armed Iran is no threat to Israel or the US? No -- and the Obama administration has made that clear, and is working with other nations through diplomacy and sanctions to dissuade Iran from attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has a nuclear program, but not a nuclear weapons program -- that is what has been made public. There could always be more going on than is public, but many of the articles about the Iranian nuclear threat are exaggerated or even false in their essentials.
Kevin
Linear Mode
