PDA

View Full Version : Int'l Issues Power supply to Iran's 2 nuclear plants blowed up


BigRedChief
09-19-2012, 05:45 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/world/middleeast/iran-scientist-says-blasts-targeted-nuclear-sites.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/world/middleeast/iran-scientist-says-blasts-targeted-nuclear-sites.html?_r=0)

Since I've not seen this even posted or talked about on here and now its public knowledge. Here ya go.



WASHINGTON — Iran (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iran/index.html?inline=nyt-geo)’s most senior atomic energy official revealed on Monday that separate explosions, which he attributed to sabotage, had targeted power supplies to the country’s two main uranium enrichment facilities, including the deep underground site that American and Israeli officials say is the most invulnerable to bombing.

The official, Fereydoon Abbasi, a nuclear scientist who narrowly escaped an assassination (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/world/middleeast/30tehran.html) in his car nearly two years ago, just before he was appointed to lead the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said one of the attacks occurred on Aug. 17, a day before international inspectors arrived at the underground site.

The most recent report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/world/middleeast/nuclear-inspectors-confirm-iranian-progress.html), the United Nations arm that conducts the inspections, said nothing about power cutoffs. On Monday, a spokesman for the agency would not comment on whether power to the site had been disrupted.
There was no way to verify Mr. Abbasi’s assertions; he also contended that the I.A.E.A. had been infiltrated by “terrorists and saboteurs,” suggesting they were responsible for the attacks. But if they were acts of sabotage, as he claimed, they would raise the question of whether Israel, the United States or some groups within Iran had moved beyond cyberattacks to take other steps, short of a military attack, to disable Iran’s nuclear fuel plants.

Mr. Abbasi’s accusations, in a speech at an I.A.E.A. conference in Vienna, come as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel has been pressing the Obama administration to establish “red lines” (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/united-states-and-israel-engage-in-public-spat-over-iran-policy.html) of intolerance for Iran’s nuclear activities. Mr. Netanyahu said on Sunday (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/world/middleeast/netanyahu-says-iran-is-20-yards-from-nuclear-bomb.html) that Iran was only six or seven months away from having the fuel to make a quick dash for a nuclear weapon, a clear reference to the activity at Fordow, the underground site near the holy city of Qum.

That site was one of the two that Mr. Abbasi said had been struck.
Mr. Abbasi said that on Aug. 17, power lines from Qum to the Fordow site “were cut using explosives.” He also said a “power outage is a way of damaging centrifuge machines.” He said I.A.E.A. officials had requested “a snap inspection of the facility” early the next day.

He did not say what damage the attack might have done. Asked by reporters at the conference to elaborate, he was quoted by The Associated Press as saying backup batteries and diesel generators had prevented disruptions to the centrifuges, which are vulnerable to damage from abrupt changes in the power supply.

Fordow is the newest known plant in Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which Western countries suspect is a cloak for developing the capacity to make atomic bombs despite Iran’s repeated denials.
Mr. Abbasi said a similar attack had hit Natanz, an older plant where most of Iran’s enrichment has taken place. But he gave no date.
A number of years ago, power supplies installed under centrifuges at Natanz blew up, and Iran claimed American sabotage was the cause. Other components for the program have been tampered with, in at least one case at an American nuclear laboratory, before they were delivered.
In January 2009, The New York Times reported that President George W. Bush, at the end of his second term, authorized a program (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/washington/11iran.html) to undermine electrical and computer systems and other networks on which Iran relies. In June of this year it reported that program had turned into “Olympic Games,” a covert effort, focused on cyberattacks on the Natanz plant, that was expanded by President Obama (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/world/middleeast/obama-ordered-wave-of-cyberattacks-against-iran.html). That effort became apparent in the summer of 2010, when one of the computer worms, later called Stuxnet (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/computer_malware/stuxnet/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier), was replicated around the world because of a programming error. But the Fordow plant was apparently not a target of that effort.
Mr. Abbasi’s criticism of the I.A.E.A. came a few days after the agency chastised Iran for rejecting repeated demands to halt its centrifuges, as the United Nations Security Council has demanded, and to allay the agency’s concerns about evidence that Iran had done nuclear weapons (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/atomic_weapons/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) research.

<NYT_AUTHOR_ID>David E. Sanger reported from Washington, and Rick Gladstone from New York.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 05:48 PM
Bill Kristol was right "Obama is a born again NeoCon." Like I said Obama will work covertly via this sort of thing. It's not the first time.

RNR
09-19-2012, 05:53 PM
Disappointing body count~

Dick Bull
09-19-2012, 05:57 PM
Bill Kristol was right "Obama is a born again NeoCon." Like I said Obama will work covertly via this sort of thing. It's not the first time.

Because of you I'm banging my head because that makes no frigging sense.

RNR
09-19-2012, 06:01 PM
Because of you I'm banging my head because that makes no frigging sense.

It is simple, take her for what she is. I at one time took her seriously :banghead: once you realize she is a rambling dolt you can save yourself such efforts~

Dick Bull
09-19-2012, 06:08 PM
It is simple, take her for what she is. I at one time took her seriously :banghead: once you realize she is a rambling dolt you can save yourself such efforts~


I know. I enjoy her neg reps. :)

KC native
09-19-2012, 06:08 PM
Technically a Q

BigRedChief
09-19-2012, 06:13 PM
It is simple, take her for what she is. I at one time took her seriously :banghead: once you realize she is a rambling dolt you can save yourself such efforts~another article on who was possibly responsible.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/19/who-s-sabotaging-iran-s-nuclear-program.html

RNR
09-19-2012, 06:19 PM
another article on who was possibly responsible.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/19/who-s-sabotaging-iran-s-nuclear-program.html

If Barry was behind this I will feel a little better when he wins in November...do not get confused, even though I detest Mitt I will still vote for him :)

BigRedChief
09-19-2012, 06:24 PM
If Barry was behind this I will feel a little better when he wins in November...do not get confused, even though I detest Mitt I will still vote for him :)You think it was the Israeli's or internal sabotage?

cosmo20002
09-19-2012, 06:31 PM
Power supply to Iran's 2 nuclear plants blowed up



I said it before, and I'll say it again--Obama is a ninja assassin. Osama, al Queda leaders, nuclear plants--he's got this.

Bowser
09-19-2012, 06:38 PM
Bill Kristol was right "Obama is a born again NeoCon." Like I said Obama will work covertly via this sort of thing. It's not the first time.

I'm not all that upset about it. You shouldn't be either.

KC native
09-19-2012, 06:41 PM
Doesn't patty insist Obama is weak on foreign policy?

RNR
09-19-2012, 06:41 PM
You think it was the Israeli's or internal sabotage?

I think the effort was supported if not led by the White House~

Bowser
09-19-2012, 06:44 PM
You think it was the Israeli's or internal sabotage?

Combination of us working with both of those entities?

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 06:44 PM
Because of you I'm banging my head because that makes no frigging sense.

Tell that to Bill Kristol then.

One of Obama's first acts as president was to order cyberattacks using computer malware against Iran. This is nothing new, there was the US/Israeli Stuxnet worm, which was meant to target Iran's uranium enrichment. It just got altered by other groups and attacked Siemens computers ww. Obama ordered the continuation of this too.

It's just warfare by other means.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/nyt/20120601_Obama_order_set_off_wave_of_cyberattacks_against_Iran.html

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 06:48 PM
I'm not all that upset about it. You shouldn't be either.

Who said I was upset? You make a lot of assumptions.

Do I agree with it? No. Because Iran has a treaty allowing them to develop nuclear power and despite NeoConnized false reports they're in noncompliance. They issued a fatwa years ago to never have nuclear weapons too. It's still an act of war.

Do I think it's better than dropping bombs and killing their people? Yes.

So what was my point? That Obama would prefer covert warfare on Iran as opposed to the Republicans. So he's a Neo Con but stays in the closet.

Please read.

cosmo20002
09-19-2012, 06:50 PM
Doesn't patty insist Obama is weak on foreign policy?

It's the Karl Rove strategy--take a strength and just say it is a weakness. Doesn't need to be true, just keep saying it.

HonestChieffan
09-19-2012, 06:52 PM
So Obama did this?

cosmo20002
09-19-2012, 06:58 PM
It's just warfare by other means.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/nyt/20120601_Obama_order_set_off_wave_of_cyberattacks_against_Iran.html

I know Ron Paul wants to stick his head in the sand, but surely you can recognize there are some things out there that may need some attention. Warfare, if necessary, by means other than 100,000 troops on the ground is something that should be encouraged.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 07:15 PM
I know Ron Paul wants to stick his head in the sand, but surely you can recognize there are some things out there that may need some attention. Warfare, if necessary, by means other than 100,000 troops on the ground is something that should be encouraged.

That's called your personal opinion. Not one based on fact. Since, they aren't making a weapon. Don't forget, they can start cyberware on us too.

Besides, what does Ron Paul have to do with anything I've said? Just another snide jibe.

cosmo20002
09-19-2012, 07:17 PM
That's called your personal opinion. Not one based on fact. Since, they aren't making a weapon. Don't forget, they can start cyberware on us too.


Well, not now. Seriously though--yeah, right.



Besides, what does Ron Paul have to do with anything I've said? Just another snide jibe.

Because he has the same attitude and he is your spiritual leader.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 07:24 PM
Well, not now. Seriously though--yeah, right.

That's been alleged since 1992. You don't have any knowledge as to what they plan to do in the future. You sound like a NeoCon, now. I said both parties are not much different these days. Thanks for prooving my point.


Because he has the same attitude and he is your spiritual leader.

Wrong.

I'm not even a libertarian.

Meanwhile, Obama is yours, Mr. Pot Meet Kettle.

LiveSteam
09-19-2012, 07:27 PM
You are a cunt

ClevelandBronco
09-19-2012, 07:28 PM
So what was my point?

You lost it too, huh?

BigRedChief
09-19-2012, 07:33 PM
So Obama did this?welllll there are 3 obvious choices


USA via Seal Teams/CIA whatever
Israeli's
Local Iranians
#1) Obama has said on numerous occasions that no option is off the table, including military. To have got American soldiers into Iran, blowed up two different targets and got out without getting caught. Outfucking standing, if true.
#2) No fucking way on the face of the earth that the Israeli's do this without planning and authorization from the USA and Obama. The recent flare up of a line in the sand makes this option less likely unless the whole line in the sand was a cover story.
#3) Not a chance in hell this was a totally home grown operation. They acquired the explosives, have the inert explosive skills and got off scott free in a tolertarian state where the Iranian guard knows everything about its citzens, without help from the west?

Dick Bull
09-19-2012, 07:35 PM
That's called your personal opinion. Not one based on fact. Since, they aren't making a weapon. Don't forget, they can start cyberware on us too.

Besides, what does Ron Paul have to do with anything I've said? Just another snide jibe.

We are a land populated with computer nerds, they wouldn't stand a chance.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 07:36 PM
We are a land populated with computer nerds, they wouldn't stand a chance.

That wasn't directed to you.

Dick Bull
09-19-2012, 07:44 PM
We are a land populated with computer nerds, they wouldn't stand a chance.

ok and that makes a difference?

cosmo20002
09-19-2012, 07:49 PM
That's been alleged since 1992. You don't have any knowledge as to what they plan to do in the future. You sound like a NeoCon, now. I said both parties are not much different these days. Thanks for prooving my point.

Wrong. I'm not even a libertarian.

I have no interest in forcibly spreading US-style democracy on others. I am interested in not allowing radical religious nuts and sponsors of terrorism to develop those types of weapons.

I know, you're not a libertarian. You are some undeclared mystery sect. They are just labels anyway, but there's no question you liked what Paul was selling, including his silly foreign policy.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 07:56 PM
I have no interest in forcibly spreading US-style democracy on others. I am interested in not allowing radical religious nuts and sponsors of terrorism to develop those types of weapons.

You have no hard evidence if they are developing weapon is the point. Just the fact they are developing nuclear power for an energy source is what some people don't like or want—PERIOD. So it doesn't matter to them if they are compliant with their treaty or not. They just don't think Iran should not have that technology. This is what is driving the false PR campaign about them. Fear and for only one nation in the ME to have nukes—Israel and through that state for American dominance.

I know, you're not a libertarian. You are some undeclared mystery sect. They are just labels anyway, but there's no question you liked what Paul was selling, including his silly foreign policy.
It's still irrelevant since my stand on this precedes him ever running for office as a Republican. It's just a stupid illogical point.

BigRedChief
09-19-2012, 07:56 PM
Since, they aren't making a weapon. .You are too naive to think that the mullahs dont want to develop a nuclear weapon.

Don't forget, they can start cyberware on us too.Our electrical and water plants are vulnerable but they have been upgraded considerably. Our biggest weakness in USB's.


Those hackers that try to hack into military installations are really stupid. They have no idea how fast the world can come down on your head. And no one ever even knows thanks to the Patriot act.

The DOD/NSA/CIA etc have the best techs working for them in the whole world. No one can touch them. They are working for love of country and to give back. They can work with millions of lines of complicated code and keep it all straight.

If the gloves come off they are ready to put a bunch of cyperboots up their ass thats American made.;)

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 08:00 PM
You are too naive to think that the mullahs dont want to develop a nuclear weapon.
Yeah, well you don't know either. The evidence doesn't show it—it shows the opposite. This was being claimed by Bibi since 1992.

So what if they do get one? MADD works. I think I'll have to drag out Adept Havelock's posts making the same argument about MADD.

Those hackers that try to hack into military installations are really stupid. They have no idea how fast the world can come down on your head. And no one ever even knows thanks to the Patriot act.

The DOD/NSA/CIA etc have the best techs working for them in the whole world. No one can touch them. They are working for love of country and to give back. They can work with millions of lines of complicated code and keep it all straight.

If the gloves come off they are ready to put a bunch of cyperboots up their ass thats American made.;)

In other words — WAR if they retaliate. I think a first grader knows that.

cosmo20002
09-19-2012, 08:02 PM
You have no hard evidence if they are developing weapon is the point. Just the fact they are developing nuclear power for an energy source is what some people don't like or want—PERIOD. So it doesn't matter to them if they are compliant with their treaty or not. They just don't think Iran should not have that technology. This is what is driving the false PR campaign about them. Fear and for only one nation in the ME to have nukes—Israel and through that state for American dominance.


That's just BS. Iran's problem is that they have developed, for some odd reason :rolleyes:, a rep as a govt run by radical religious fanatics who sponsor terrorism. Guess they shouldn't have been so nutty if they want people to leave them alone to develop things that could be turned into a nuke.

BigRedChief
09-19-2012, 08:05 PM
Yeah, well you don't know either. The evidence doesn't show it—it shows the opposite. This was being claimed by Bibi since 1992.

So what if they do get one? MADD works. I think I'll have to drag out Adept Havelock's posts making the same argument about MADD.



In other words — WAR if they retaliate. I think a first grader knows that.Your rationale is from the cold war. It's based on an assumption that both sides want to live. That is not the case with religious zealots who firmly believe that they will be rewarded in heaven for killing the non-believers.

Bowser
09-19-2012, 08:09 PM
Who said I was upset? You make a lot of assumptions.

Do I agree with it? No. Because Iran has a treaty allowing them to develop nuclear power and despite NeoConnized false reports they're in noncompliance. They issued a fatwa years ago to never have nuclear weapons too. It's still an act of war.

Do I think it's better than dropping bombs and killing their people? Yes.

So what was my point? That Obama would prefer covert warfare on Iran as opposed to the Republicans. So he's a Neo Con but stays in the closet.

Please read.

I couldn't care less if he was labeled a Neo-Druid. This is the way to go after Iran in this instance, imo.

And I'm with BRC on this issue. If you don't believe Iran covets nuclear weapons, then why not let the inspectors in?

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 08:15 PM
I couldn't care less if he was labeled a Neo-Druid.

I didn't say it because I thought you cared. It's just my take on things.


And I'm with BRC on this issue. If you don't believe Iran covets nuclear weapons, then why not let the inspectors in?
It's still speculation. Plus there's no hard evidence. We've heard this for 20 years now...in just a few years. Blah, blah, blah.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 08:17 PM
Your rationale is from the cold war. It's based on an assumption that both sides want to live. That is not the case with religious zealots who firmly believe that they will be rewarded in heaven for killing the non-believers.

No, it's the same for them—especially the leaders. You don't see them volunteering for a suicide job. Besides, the ones that do that are also drugged. The leaders use their people as a bomb. Govt leaders always treat themselves differently than the rabble. Even here.

Bowser
09-19-2012, 08:36 PM
I didn't say it because I thought you cared. It's just my take on things.



It's still speculation. Plus there's no hard evidence. We've heard this for 20 years now...in just a few years. Blah, blah, blah.

I guess for me personally, I back actions such as these due to the fact that the Iranian government have made not so veiled threats about wanting to watch infidels in the west burn.

With an attitude like that, I'd just as soon they didn't even come close to having nukes, even if they say their intentions are "peaceful".

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 08:37 PM
I guess for me personally, I back actions such as these due to the fact that the Iranian government have made not so veiled threats about wanting to watch infidels in the west burn.

With an attitude like that, I'd just as soon they didn't even come close to having nukes, even if they say their intentions are "peaceful".
Talk is cheap. I don't punch people for words. They're a weak country which is why we're threatening to go after them.

Bowser
09-19-2012, 08:40 PM
No, it's the same for them—especially the leaders. You don't see them volunteering for a suicide job. Besides, the ones that do that are also drugged. The leaders use their people as a bomb. Govt leaders always treat themselves differently than the rabble. Even here.

Us- Universal Healthcare

Them - Suicide Bombers


While I understand and agree with your point (it's been that way throughout human history and likely always will be), we are not in the same class as they are by a LONG stretch.

(And I'm genuinely curious here - where did you hear that Iran was forcing/drugging its people to be suicide bombers?)

Bowser
09-19-2012, 08:41 PM
Talk is cheap. I don't punch people for words. They're a weak country which is why we're threatening to go after them.

They shouldn't openly talk about wanting to kill us then, weak or no.

Bowser
09-19-2012, 08:42 PM
And just an aside here - I just want the Iranian government out of power. I have nothing against the Iranian people as a country.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 08:43 PM
They shouldn't openly talk about wanting to kill us then, weak or no.

Link? and NO Farsi mistranslation either.

And which came first the chicken or the egg?

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 08:45 PM
And just an aside here - I just want the Iranian government out of power. I have nothing against the Iranian people as a country.

Well, there you go—what I have always said on this issue. It's about regime change—not nukes.
Welcome to NeoConservativism 101.

Look, I am not a Progressive. I don't believe in putting govts out of power unless they start a war with us. As I see, over the past ten years, we've become the aggressors. Iran is Israel's enemy and as such, it's not our fight. This stuff was all planned in the late 1990s to take down 7 govts in the ME. PNAC and Clean Break documents.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 08:50 PM
Us- Universal Healthcare

Them - Suicide Bombers


While I understand and agree with your point (it's been that way throughout human history and likely always will be), we are not in the same class as they are by a LONG stretch.

Oh you mean American Exceptionalism? Superiority and demonization of the other. Boy, does that sound familiar.

(And I'm genuinely curious here - where did you hear that Iran was forcing/drugging its people to be suicide bombers?)
I didn't say it was just Iran. I just know drugs get used in those terrorist training camps from reading about it years ago. Heck, even our AF has been getting drugs before bombing from what I recently heard.

Bowser
09-19-2012, 08:54 PM
Link? and NO Farsi mistranslation either.

And which came first the chicken or the egg?

An older link, but it's pretty straightforward dialouge from them...

http://www.inquisitr.com/196268/iran-threatens-preemptive-strike-against-israel-united-states/


And who is the chicken and who is the egg in this scenario? And when does it get to the point where it's irrelevant?

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 09:01 PM
An older link, but it's pretty straightforward dialouge from them...

http://www.inquisitr.com/196268/iran-threatens-preemptive-strike-against-israel-united-states/
LMAO Pot Meets the Kettle. Did you see the date on that?
We've been doing that to them for how many years now? Calling for a pre-emptive strike, waging covert attacks on them inside their own country, hiring MEK as a proxy, using terrorism with car bombs, denying medicine to cancer patients etc. You selective NeoCons crack me up. We can do it but if they respond using similar words it's not okay.

Also from your link:

Senior United States defense officials have said that while they believe that Iran would respond if attacked they do not believe that Iran will act first.

Don't believe the lies Bowser. You're better than that to be a sheep.

And who is the chicken and who is the egg in this scenario? And when does it get to the point where it's irrelevant?

Depends on who you ask I guess. It's not irrelevant to me. We started the hostilities with that nation back in the 1950s' for BP oil.

Bowser
09-19-2012, 09:13 PM
The date was February of this year, hence my "an older link" part.

You asked me to show a link where they threatened us, and I provided. You're welcome.

Personally, I can't believe that they would be so dumb, as they would lose their Russian and Chinese backing through those actions.

If they would just let the IAEA in, all of this could potentially go by the wayside. Agree?

-King-
09-19-2012, 10:06 PM
Blown.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 10:42 PM
The date was February of this year, hence my "an older link" part.

That it's old wasn't my point—but that it's relatively recent is my point. Those words follow ...after years of belligerent talk by us for a pre-emptive strike on them and committing acts of war inside their country already. I mean, we already have started the war.

You asked me to show a link where they threatened us, and I provided. You're welcome.

Yes, so I could analyze it and comment about it. I plan to look into further too. But your link also said those were the opinion of deputy head of the Islamic Republic’s armed forces. Does he decide these things?

Personally, I can't believe that they would be so dumb, as they would lose their Russian and Chinese backing through those actions.

I agree with this. Another of my argument is that it would result in their Annihilation. They haven't started a war in over 200 years and they've had ample opportunity in the past ten years to do so.

If they would just let the IAEA in, all of this could potentially go by the wayside. Agree?
They have. The new head of IAEA is a mouthpiece for the NeoCons though. You have to also understand that those inspections are not designed to allow access to just any area they want too. We do the same thing.

I don't understand why you can't see that this is a repeat of Iraq with the same false reports and verbal sleight of hand we got from the same people.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 11:10 PM
We are a land populated with computer nerds, they wouldn't stand a chance.


Wake up!

The Obama Administration is creating yet more new computer viruses, according to growing evidence collected by major anti-virus makers. Those viruses start out attacking sites in the Middle East but remember, they don’t stay that way.

The Stuxnet Worm started out targeting industrial computers in Iran. In the end it was attacking industrial computers in dozens of countries, including the United States. We get blowback from all kinds of wars, but this new “cyber warfare” nonsense inevitably ends with direct attacks on American targets by the US government.

Link (http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/09/17/cyber-warfare-is-warfare-against-all-of-us/)

scott free
09-19-2012, 11:11 PM
Nice work, Iran will make North Korea look like puppy dogs, when they get the bomb.

Dick Bull
09-19-2012, 11:23 PM
Wake up!



Link (http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/09/17/cyber-warfare-is-warfare-against-all-of-us/)

Ok I mean ****. IF you're going to provide a link as evidence please provide something that isn't the internet version of the national enquirer and please make sure it isn't a ****ing blog.

If I wanted to read some jerk offs opinion of some shit, I'll do it here.

KC native
09-19-2012, 11:24 PM
Wake up!



Link (http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/09/17/cyber-warfare-is-warfare-against-all-of-us/)

You are fucking beyond stupid if you still can't see that Iran wants the bomb.

I'm against armed conflict if possible but sometimes some people have to be shot. In the case of Iran, they can NOT be allowed to get the bomb. It's bad enough that North Korea and Pakistan have the bomb. We really don't need Iran to have the bomb too.

BucEyedPea
09-19-2012, 11:30 PM
Ok I mean ****. IF you're going to provide a link as evidence please provide something that isn't the internet version of the national enquirer and please make sure it isn't a ****ing blog.

If I wanted to read some jerk offs opinion of some shit, I'll do it here.

That shows what you know. Those guys were right about all the false reports on Iraq, including the bogus yellowcake from Nigeria. They've much more accurate than the MSN including on the Balkan intervention. All BEFORE going in. Look at who their contributers are—three former CIA including Michael Scheuer head of the BinLaden Unit in Counterrorism. He knows his stuff. They have right wing conservatives, libertarians and even progressives contributing. They only do war though.

Sorry I go by results—not officialdom or herd mentality since they all listened to the wrong people the last time.
So stay in your paddock with the other sheep.

Dick Bull
09-19-2012, 11:35 PM
That shows what you know. Those guys were right about all the false reports on Iraq, including the bogus yellowcake from Nigeria. They've much more accurate than the MSN including on the Balkan intervention. All BEFORE going in. Look at who their contributers are—three former CIA including Michael Scheuer head of the BinLaden Unit in Counterrorism. He knows his stuff. They have right wing conservatives, libertarians and even progressives contributing. They only do war though.

Sorry I go by results—not officialdom or herd mentality since they all listened to the wrong people the last time.
So stay in your paddock with the other sheep.

I hate to break this to you, but staying in a smaller herd of crazy sheep is still staying in a herd. They're just more of an annoyance than anything.

Personally I don't follow msn, fox news, etc. I usually hit cnn. Furthermore, even crazy blog posting clocks are right twice a day.

go bowe
09-20-2012, 10:55 AM
It is simple, take her for what she is. I at one time took her seriously :banghead: once you realize she is a rambling dolt you can save yourself such efforts~

amen, brother...

amen...

Donger
09-20-2012, 10:57 AM
Since, they aren't making a weapon.

You don't know that.

BucEyedPea
09-20-2012, 11:00 AM
I know enough to know it can't be said they are. Bibi said this in 1992 even. Yet, Iran issued a fatwa against such weapons.
Sorry, I'll stick with my sources since they have had better results than any of yours.


BTW has Pakistan used their nuke yet?

Donger
09-20-2012, 11:02 AM
I know enough to know it can't be said they are.

That isn't what you stated.

BucEyedPea
09-20-2012, 11:04 AM
It's kitty time.

Donger
09-20-2012, 11:06 AM
It's kitty time.

Of course it is. That's SOP when you get caught saying stupid shit. Have at it.

patteeu
09-20-2012, 11:35 AM
Doesn't patty insist Obama is weak on foreign policy?

Yes, extremely weak. The bad far outweighs the good, even if we are generous about the credit we give him for the good.

Mr. Plow
09-20-2012, 11:53 AM
It's kitty time.

LMAO


IGNORED!! lol

Bowser
09-20-2012, 02:51 PM
LMAO


IGNORED!! lol

BEATDOWN, BEP STYLE

http://britfa.gs/b/src/134601244137.gif

Garcia Bronco
09-20-2012, 03:08 PM
So it blew up one day before it was to be inspected by an international team of inspectors. Crazy luck....sure

Baby Lee
09-20-2012, 03:39 PM
Tell that to Bill Kristol then.

One of Obama's first acts as president was to order cyberattacks using computer malware against Iran. This is nothing new, there was the US/Israeli Stuxnet worm, which was meant to target Iran's uranium enrichment. It just got altered by other groups and attacked Siemens computers ww. Obama ordered the continuation of this too.

It's just warfare by other means.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/nyt/20120601_Obama_order_set_off_wave_of_cyberattacks_against_Iran.html

You DO realize that all the Paulite agony over all the 'bloodthirsty massacring' in our names expressed incessantly goes out the window when you opine that hacking computers is the same thing.

Mr. Plow
09-20-2012, 03:40 PM
BEATDOWN, BEP STYLE

http://britfa.gs/b/src/134601244137.gif

LMAO

Calcountry
09-20-2012, 04:28 PM
I couldn't care less if he was labeled a Neo-Druid. This is the way to go after Iran in this instance, imo.

And I'm with BRC on this issue. If you don't believe Iran covets nuclear weapons, then why not let the inspectors in?No no no, you guys have it all wrong, she WANTS Iran to HAVE nuclear weapons. She is just lying to us infidels.

|Zach|
09-20-2012, 04:34 PM
You DO realize that all the Paulite agony over all the 'bloodthirsty massacring' in our names expressed incessantly goes out the window when you opine that hacking computers is the same thing.

LMAO

stevieray
09-20-2012, 05:00 PM
blowed up?

.....does your company require a third frade spelling level?

:doh!:

PornChief
09-20-2012, 05:03 PM
bloweded up

PornChief
09-20-2012, 05:04 PM
blowed up?

.....does your company require a third frade spelling level?

:doh!:

whoopsy daisy

Baby Lee
09-20-2012, 05:07 PM
blowed up?

.....does your company require a third frade spelling level?

:doh!:

I'm afrade you cain't spell no better.

And, blowed -v- blown is more of a conjugation than spelling error.

stevieray
09-20-2012, 05:12 PM
I'm afrade you cain't spell no better.

And, blowed -v- blown is more of a conjugation than spelling error.

f,g ...sue me.

I don need no redding glasses.

BigRedChief
09-20-2012, 05:16 PM
blowed up?

.....does your company require a third frade spelling level?

:doh!:From Stripes. What happened to your seargent?

Blowed up sir! And I make so many grammitical and typos on a daily basis and you pick the one I meant to to lay smack down?:)

stevieray
09-20-2012, 05:17 PM
From Stripes. What happened to your seargent?

Blowed up sir! And I make so many grammitical and typos on a daily basis and you pick the one I meant to to lay smack down?:)

:)

BigRedChief
09-20-2012, 05:20 PM
Yes, extremely weak. The bad far outweighs the good, even if we are generous about the credit we give him for the good.Give some credit where credit is due. GEEEZZZ

Just for fun, who do you think blew up these power relay stations?

Baby Lee
09-20-2012, 05:20 PM
From Stripes. What happened to your seargent?

Blowed up sir! And I make so many grammitical and typos on a daily basis and you pick the one I meant to to lay smack down?:)

Don't you know by now?


There's something wrroooong with us, something veryvery wrrrooonnngg with us.

Donger
09-20-2012, 05:23 PM
Just for fun, who do you think blew up these power relay stations?

M.E.K.

BigRedChief
09-20-2012, 05:25 PM
M.E.K.Who not what. :harumph:

I kid.

Donger
09-20-2012, 05:26 PM
Who not what. :harumph:

LMAO

BigRedChief
09-20-2012, 05:27 PM
LMAOI thought it might be too geeky for people to get.

BigRedChief
09-20-2012, 05:32 PM
M.E.K.I've asked my Irainian friend about these guys before. They are not well thought of by the people in Iran. They are to obtuse in their beliefs. The people view them as almost a cult. They will never get popular support of the people.

The green party is still thriving but keeping their heads low until the next uprising. They are no real power though beyond some basic organization.


So you think the USA had nothing to do with blowing up both of these power stations at the same time?

Donger
09-20-2012, 05:53 PM
So you think the USA had nothing to do with blowing up both of these power stations at the same time?

Not directly, no.