1oo years hence, schools would be teaching why the UN fenced it off to keep people that crossed in from shrivling up and dying and why the area is void of life.
2007-09-30 19:41:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Caninelegion 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
They would become a parking lot if they nuked Israel. If they nuked us, it would depend on who was president at the time.
Gabriel...my best friend is an Iranian immigrant. He would laugh at you. Ahmedine-jihad is no more elected than Saddam was. My friend would simply state that you want to believe what you are saying because the American mind cannot perceive the evil that is in Ahmedine - jihad. He is like Hitler, but worse. Like HItler, he has stated that not only should Israel be wiped off of the map, but that he would do it, and people like you did not believe HItler either. The reason that he is worse is because he seems more diplomatic, so he will keep the wool over your eyes until such time that he actually launches a nuke or gives it to someone else who will.
2007-10-01 02:20:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
Well thats unrealistic seeing how many nukes the US and Irsael has for a retaliation. BUt one Iran wont have the capability to hit the US with anything for a long time and thats even IF (which im sure they are not) building a nuclear weapon. But it would set a spiral one shoots a nuke then another then another country gets involved and another till theres othing left. I think nukes should be disantled put in a spacecraft and shot into the sun.
2007-10-01 02:49:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by SS4 Elby 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Their government would be destroyed and infrastructure destabilized. The United States is a staunch ally with Israel. Attacking a democratic nation without provocation would be grounds for war.
War itself is evil, and must only be justified as a last last last last last resort! I'd consider a nuclear attack more than enough justification for disbanding the government of the attacker.
I'm convinced that only someone in complete opposition to human rights would be willing to set off a nuclear weapon after what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That goes for every country in the world.
2007-10-01 02:26:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dalarus 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
We will obviously retaliate with a nuclear weapon. Meaning a lot of dead Iranians. Not to mention they cannot strike the U.S., unless they smuggle a Nuke into the United States. Though they could attack Israel. That would be foolhardy considering Israel has 100 nukes.
2007-10-01 02:22:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by asmith1022_2006 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
Iran would not launch an attack. It will give nuclear weapons to terrorists who will launch an attack. Which country do you retaliated against since Russia is missing nukes?
2007-10-01 02:29:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by a bush family member 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
The first question you should ask herself is: "Does Iran really have ANY nuclear weapons at all?"
Because so far, we haven't seen any evidence that they have such weapons.
But then again, we also THOUGHT that Iraq had WMDs and nuclear weapons too--back in 2002.
And look what happened as a result of our supposed "evidence"...?
2007-10-01 02:38:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
They don't have the bomb to nuke either of you. It is for peaceful purposes. The bomb bit is just one of the many fairy tales invented by your half-mad President to grab Iran's and other's resources and have a poodle ruling Tehran and other oil rich capitals..
2007-10-01 03:01:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
The sky will fall as it is almost impossible to nuke the US. Nukes require too many safegaurds. You can not simply lob one at some one. The detination sequence alone takes technology and special housing.
Iran nuking someone is a pipe dream.
2007-10-01 02:24:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Chi Guy 5
·
0⤊
4⤋
It seems that Israel and USA will nuke Iran first!
USA ~ 15000 nuclear bombs
Irsael ~ 400 nuclear bombs
Iran ~ less than 20 nuclear bombs
2007-10-01 02:21:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋