2006-11-02 14:46:52 · 24 answers · asked by Chief Slapaho 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Book of life or death? LMAO - I dont recall Ahmadinejad making any war threats against the USA. Maybe he did. Is it because we put the Shah into power in his country. Because we put a maniac like Saddam into power next door and supplied him with weapons? Because we support Israel without question?
2006-11-02 15:20:57 · update #1
We have them! The USA has no right to tell any country what they can and can't do.
2006-11-02 14:50:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
This is why they cannot have weapons.
" Israel must be wiped off from the map of the world."- President Ahmadinejad of Iran.
Islamic Facism + Insane threatening despot + Nukes = ?
A. peace
B. better relations with Iran
C. Israeli security.
D. American safety.
E. Terrorism and nuclear war.
Most Democrats will always pick either A or B, but that is because they follow every whim and heartfelt emotion of their bias hearts, instead of the facts and common sense.
Vote Democrat just like Osama would.
2006-11-02 15:52:02 · answer #2 · answered by Mr. Agappae 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
When any country's leader makes bald statements that he intends to see the complete destruction of another country - Israel in this case - then yes, the whole world has a stake in making sure they don't acquire nuclear weapons. Now it's Israel, who will it be next? When megalomaniacs have a nuke button close to their overinflated egos then it becomes a problem for all nations.
2006-11-02 15:34:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, No. Lets say you were walking down the street and you have a "loaded gun". A man is walking toward you he has a gun in one hand and bullets in the other. He says I'm going to load this gun and blow your head off.
What do you do? Call for others on the street to point their fingers at him and say no? Or point your loaded gun at him and say don't do that.
What if he starts loading the gun, how long do you wait to pull the trigger. I'd say if you could wait until he loads the gun but at that point you have to pull the trigger. At least before he can take aim and fire. Otherwise your options are out.
In the specific case of Iran they have already said they are going to load the gun and kill us. They are in the process of loading the gun. I say we shoot first. If you're playing with Nukes you can't afford to wait until the other guy shoots first. I say turn Iran into a nuclear wasteland and let it be an example to other would be Nuke powers. Its a dangerous game and maybe it would be best not to play.
2006-11-02 15:02:35 · answer #4 · answered by Roadkill 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No. For the following reasons:
I believe that human society is headed toward a culminating battle of good vs. evil. It's important to consider this as a viable take on reality, and to consider which "side" one might want be
on. To take it a step further, I also believe that Islam is a religion
created by Satan unto himself (aka "Allah"). Whether it's politically correct or not, this may be truth. If it is, then it is imperative that our leaders be in tune with the Creator of our Universe; our existence as we know it may be more threatened than we realize.... At the risk of sounding like a Bible-thumper, please consider the claims of Christ; He is either telling the truth or the biggest liar that ever lived. You decide....
2006-11-02 15:53:10 · answer #5 · answered by PETER 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i think sorry if you happen to actual are atheist because those human beings have certainly at a loss for words the equipment with the consumer, the equipment being evolution, the so-referred to as huge bang, planetary accretion, and all something of technology. technology in basic terms tells us _how_ something takes position and not in any respect _who_ instituted the act. technology is unaware of each and every thing yet actual gadgets even if those gadgets be human being sub-atomic debris or stars found in area. There are those who declare atheism yet who quite at the instantaneous are not atheist. a real atheist does not _care_ if someone believes in "a god" because the authentic atheist "is conventional with" that there are none. it really is why, IMO, the so-referred to as atheists that we stumble on trolling the following on solutions at the instantaneous are not authentic atheists, they in all likelihood are in basic terms those who want to communicate, argue, and "cuss at" faith frequently.
2016-12-05 11:54:48 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. And rightly so. And Mr. Inquisitive .. . . Would you LIKE IT if Iran had nuclear weapons? Remember that your answer will be written in the book of life. Or death.
2006-11-02 14:53:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, because we need to keep any more countries from aquiring WMDs. The world is tense enough with the few countries that do have them, and I for one don't want madmen like the ones that rule Iran to have them. And to the person whining about us using the bombs on Japan, thanks for wishing my Grandfather had died storming the beaches of Japan.
2006-11-02 14:59:13 · answer #8 · answered by letitcountry 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Arrogance & hypocracy may be in the eye of the beholder. I think it is in our best interest to keep Iran from obtaining nukes.
2006-11-02 16:37:48 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The 6 billion people who are not a member of the Jihadist Iranian government would disagree with you.
2006-11-02 14:50:48 · answer #10 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The issue is not arrogance, but responsablity. World super powers are like parrents. You can't let the children have candy just because they want it really bad!
2006-11-02 15:02:15 · answer #11 · answered by cotton6string 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋