LoL, like some people here need an excuse to hate on Israel.
If Israel attacks Iran first on the premise that Israel is destroying Iran's nuclear-weapon potential, then Israel is a bully and a terrorist.
If Israel waits idly and watches Iran develop a nuclear program and then a mushroom cloud erupts in down-town Tel Aviv, then too bad, Israel still deserved it.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
I think the line about Iran's nuclear program being "purely" peaceful is a load of crap.I do think that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon, but not for the purpose of "wiping Israel off the map". I agree with Ron Paul on this, Iran is definitely getting a nuke because they feel threatened.
I don't think Israel needs American help if it actually comes to a nuclear conflict. There's no way that Iran can match Israel's nuclear arsenal (estimated at being between 50-300 warheads IIRC) within the foreseeable future.
If Iran attacks Israel with a nuke Israel will be the one to wipe Iran off the map, figuratively of course.
I agree to a point. The consequences of a nuclear exchange in the middle east is direr for the rest of the world. That is why it is important to do whatever is needed to make sure that never happens. Remember that nuclear fallout can encircle the Earth.
Originally posted by SamZED
You mean from economics point of view? Threat to US I mean.
No I mean from the view of they control our government now.the majority of congress is bought off and paid for.watch this video,clcik on at the bottom where it says OBAMAS BONDAGE TO BIBI.watch how obama lets the prime minister of israel rule the roost at the white house and how obama is clearly angry at it all 😆 and how at the end,everyone in congress stands up applauds israels prime minister.they are all bouth off and paid for by israel.we cannot be a free country again where the government serves us instead of us serving the government like we do now until we get rid of the zionest hold on congress.
Originally posted by Mr Parker
No I mean from the view of they control our government now.the majority of congress is bought off and paid for.watch this video,clcik on at the bottom where it says OBAMAS BONDAGE TO BIBI.watch how obama lets the prime minister of israel rule the roost at the white house and how obama is clearly angry at it all 😆 and how at the end,everyone in congress stands up applauds israels prime minister.they are all bouth off and paid for by israel.we cannot be a free country again where the government serves us instead of us serving the government like we do now until we get rid of the zionest hold on congress.
If American politicians are being "paid off" by Israel, then countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Indonesia and even Egypt could afford to pay them more to be anti-Israeli.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Remember that nuclear fallout can encircle the Earth.
Edit: According to a neighbor Netanyahu is chilling on the beach thirty minutes from my home right now.
I should wipe his sandcastle off the face of the Emerald Coast.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Sorry, but you wrong. Even the fallout from chernobyl circled around the Earth.Look it up, and prove me wrong.
Why don't you provide some evidence for your claim instead of trying to shunt the burden of negative proof on me?
Originally posted by Omega Vision
All I can find is that cesium was found in high quantities in Western European plants...that's hardly circling the Earth.Why don't you provide some evidence for your claim instead of trying to shunt the burden of negative proof on me?
I'm not the one hinting at "It's ok to drop a couple nukes here and there. It will not hurt the rest of us". I didn't think I needed to prove that nukes are bad and are a threat to all of us.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I'm not the one hinting at "It's ok to drop a couple nukes here and there. It will not hurt the rest of us". I didn't think I needed to prove that nukes are bad and are a threat to all of us.
And I'm not asking you to substantiate that nukes are or aren't bad, I'm asking you to substantiate a specific claim that fallout from a single nuclear weapon can "circle the Earth"
Chernobyl is hardly a good approximation anyway, meltdowns and atomic weapons are vastly different processes.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
I'm not saying that at all. Strawman much?And I'm not asking you to substantiate that nukes are or aren't bad, I'm asking you to substantiate a specific claim that fallout from a single nuclear weapon can "circle the Earth"
Chernobyl is hardly a good approximation anyway, meltdowns and atomic weapons are vastly different processes.
I don't need too, also there is no data. There have only been two nukes dropped onto cities ever in history. Those two were firer crackers compared to modern nukes. I use the closest analogy I can. Was chernobyl safe for the world? No. The fallout from a modern nuke is far more then chernobyl.
We are now back to were we started. If chernobyl's radiation went around the world, then a nuke in the middle east puts us all in danger.
"The spread of radioactive contaminates into the atmosphere from the Chernobyl accident was eventually detected all over the world"
http://users.owt.com/smsrpm/Chernobyl/glbrad.html
Just google it.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't need too, also there is no data. There have only been two nukes dropped onto cities ever in history. Those two were firer crackers compared to modern nukes. I use the closest analogy I can. Was chernobyl safe for the world? No. The fallout from a modern nuke is far more then chernobyl.We are now back to were we started. If chernobyl's radiation went around the world, then a nuke in the middle east puts us all in danger.
"The spread of radioactive contaminates into the atmosphere from the Chernobyl accident was eventually detected all over the world"
http://users.owt.com/smsrpm/Chernobyl/glbrad.html
Just google it.
And from what little I understand of nuclear weapons, larger bombs can actually have less fallout than smaller ones due to the high energy generating cleaner fusion reactions.
Detected over the world means what? Like...is that supposed to chill me? Does hearing a gunshot kill you?
Edit: From your article: "Within a few weeks the radioactive effluents had both diffused and decay to undetectable levels."
Originally posted by Omega Vision
There have been many bomb tests though, many of them much larger than Hiroshima and much larger than Chernobyl.And from what little I understand of nuclear weapons, larger bombs can actually have less fallout than smaller ones due to the high energy generating cleaner fusion reactions.
Detected over the world means what? Like...is that supposed to chill me? Does hearing a gunshot kill you?
Edit: From your article: "Within a few weeks the radioactive effluents had both diffused and decay to undetectable levels."
Then we should just bomb Iran into the ground?
Nukes are safe!
💃 💃 💃
Get real...
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then we should just bomb Iran into the ground?Nukes are safe!
💃 💃 💃
Get real...
Edit: has it ever occurred to you that I might oppose bombing Iran even if I thought that the bombings wouldn't adversely effect me personally in any real way?
Like, are you opposed to nuking Iran only because you're concerned that the radiation might contaminate your drinking water or lower your sperm count?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The fallout from a modern nuke is far more then chernobyl.
They really can't be compared given that they create very different sets of isotopes. Just for example nuclear bombs, IIRC, produce contaminants with much shorter half lives.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
a nuke in the middle east puts us all in danger.
Because it would probably be the opening shot of a war.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
"The spread of radioactive contaminates into the atmosphere from the Chernobyl accident was eventually detected all over the world"http://users.owt.com/smsrpm/Chernobyl/glbrad.html
Just google it.
Like a lot of people you vastly underestimate our ability to detect radiation. We can detect things like concentrations of uranium down to it naturally occurring levels in soil, only a few hundred parts per billion. The fact that scientists can detect something doesn't mean its present in a meaningful quantity.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Point to any place where I said that or admit that you're strawmanning me. Or just continue what you're doing.
Why?
I no longer understand your point. You seem to contradict yourself. You seem to be against nukes, but then say "And from what little I understand of nuclear weapons, larger bombs can actually have less fallout than smaller ones due to the high energy generating cleaner fusion reactions."
Make your self clear or I will end this conversation.