Iran has never attacked us, never threatened to attack us, and in fact never attacked anyone in 250 years. But if you listen to Bush, they are some imminent threat, Ahmaninejad is the next Hitler, etc. Where have you heard this before?
Meanwhile bin Laden sits in a hotel in Pakistan and laughs at the whole thing.
2007-02-02 14:54:07 · 13 answers · asked by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No oil in Pakhistan.No point in invading it
2007-02-02 14:59:17 · answer #1 · answered by Pauline 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Some errors in your statement:
Why can we tolerate Pakistan's nuclear weapons...
When they first came out, we didn't. "On several occasions, under the authority of amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act, the U.S. has imposed sanctions on Pakistan, cutting off economic and military aid as a result of its pursuit of nuclear weapons. However, the U.S. suspended sanctions each time developments in Afghanistan made Pakistan a strategically important "frontline state," such as the 1981 Soviet occupation and in the war on terrorism." (www.fas.com)
"Iran has never attacked us."
You seem to conveniently forget when they held our embassy workers hostage for 444 days.
"But if you listen to Bush...Ahmaninejad is the next Hitler."
You got that one right. He termed Zionists "the most detested people in all humanity" amongst other things. Someone once asked a Holocaust survivor what they learned from their experience, and that person said, "If someone says they want to wipe you out, believe them."
"Meanwhile bin Laden sits in a hotel in Pakistan and laughs at the whole thing"
I don't think he's laughing too loud, assuming he's alive. He knows he's probably got about 1,000 black-ops squads looking for him. He may be alive, but he's pretty quiet.
2007-02-02 15:15:17 · answer #2 · answered by Pythagoras 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because Pakistan is an ally (at the moment) and Iran isn't and Iran says it wants to wipe Israel off the map. However, if Musvoff, President of Pakistan loses power and the radicals in Pakistan take over Bin Laden might be launch their nukes at just about anyone including the US so Pakistan might be invaded the US as well in the near future.
2007-02-02 15:00:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
they're going to tolerate Iran purely superb too. They make quite a number of noise about it now because they decide on an excuse to save a good number of protection rigidity forces all around the completed oil wealthy area. It provides the U. S. quite a number of effect on the international oil market, it truly is of serious fee to u . s . a .'s relatives oil market, which has far better effect in our supposedly democratic authorities than you or I do.
2016-12-03 09:28:50 · answer #4 · answered by Erika 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We can tolerate Pakistan's nuclear weapons, to put it simply, because they already have them. It wouldn't be a good idea to attack a country that already has them, now, would it? Don't you believe in prevention rather than cure?
The idea behind preventing Iran and other rogue nations from getting the bomb is to stop something called "N-U-C-L-E-A-R P-R-O-L-I-F-E-R-A-T-I-O-N" which many coherent people believe increases the chance that the bomb will fall into the hands of a truly maniacal person who will wreak havoc on the world's more sane countries.
That's ONE of the reasons that Hussein had to be taken out. He was, we believed by his evasive behavior with the UN weapons inspectors, on the CUSP of developing nuclear weapons and perfecting delivery methods for other weapons like gas and biological weapons. Now we are being criticized for taking "pre-emptive" action against them, but it's funny; as soon as it became apparent that North Korea had the bomb several months ago, it was "all Bush's fault for not invading North Korea" before they got it. Never mind that Clinton, for his entire presidency, continued to appease and attempt to negotiate with the madman in charge of N.K. Kim Jong Il, who never had ANY intention of honoring ANY treaties signed to prevent nuclear proliferation. Clinton even GAVE N.K. nuclear technologies as a "carrot", which only succeeded in advancing their nuclear weapons program even more quickly.
The UN and the liberal appeasers in this country are the worst hypocrites of all time.
2007-02-02 15:00:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well the president of Iran openly said he was going to wipe Isreal off the map. and Pakistan has helped us on many times before the war on terror.
Also Iran is sending fighters to help the Shiites fight against the Sunnies and Americans
2007-02-02 14:59:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
A. Bin Laden is dead.
B. Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. FACT. Pakistan merely harbors terrorists. Big difference.
2007-02-02 14:58:26 · answer #7 · answered by vabraces 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Pakistan's nukes are only as safe as far as their leader remains alive, he has had more than 4 attempts on his life and after he's gone, the radical Islamists will have the nukes. Just a matter of time.
2007-02-02 15:01:04 · answer #8 · answered by jeffpsd 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i partly agree with emo and want to add a little, Pakistan supports bush activities directly but Iran does not. so how can Iran be tolerate....
2007-02-02 15:33:36 · answer #9 · answered by Difi 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Iran has oil. If they can be a big nuclear threat we have a reason to go into there.
2007-02-02 14:58:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Pakistan don have oil.
2ND Americans cant see a Muslim country to develop. they jealousy
2007-02-02 21:49:48 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋