3 days later............

geoffk · Post by **geoffk** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 01:37 am

apz wrote:OK, so if Iran develops nuclear weapons you guys aren't concerned?

Quite frankly, I'm more concerned that are spending so much money on the military that people won't be able to afford simple healthcare especially children.

apz · Post by **apz** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 01:47 am

geoffk wrote:
apz wrote:OK, so if Iran develops nuclear weapons you guys aren't concerned?
Quite frankly, I'm more concerned that are spending so much money on the military that people won't be able to afford simple healthcare especially children.

Healthcare isn't nor should it be the responsibility of the federal government.

user54321 · Post by **user54321** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 02:03 am

apz wrote:responsibility of the federal government.

..... (semi)joking pictures aside, the burning issue here isn't healthcare, it's the ridiculous defence of such a strike. It's a massacre, and surely through our own history we should all be painfully aware of the repurcussions of such action. Non?

user54321 · Post by **user54321** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 02:10 am

If such a strike went ahead, I'd be completely disgusted with the British government, if this type of technique is backed by the bigwigs and war chiefs in London then I'll hang my head in shame and try to take some kind comfort in the fact that scotland's ruling party wants nothing to do with the entire "campaign" .... but Londinium still calls the shots... frankly though, I think our forces would have the smarts not to back such blatant show of brutal force.

cattales1960 · Post by **cattales1960** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 03:06 am

NEWS ALERT! This is FOX NEWS. In the US, fox is well known for its right wing propaganda and the only true believers of anything they report are right wing nutjobs who also believe in ANN COULTER <the bitch, I might add>. SO when I see a reliable source on this I will believe it, until then, I wouldnt worry too much.

user54321 · Post by **user54321** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 03:11 am

Catt - if you look there's a link to the original article on that fox page

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 369001.ece

Take from it what you will, but it seems very real... it made the guardian here too but I'm struggling to find linkage for ya, sowwy...

user54321 · Post by **user54321** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 03:13 am

Check out the guy from Luxembourg's comments... haha, reminds me of this:

cattales1960 · Post by **cattales1960** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 03:49 am

well now that resource maybe more reliable, but still would not EVER believe something FOX NEWS said until it was backed up by a reliable source. Somehow I missed that link, sorry. It wouldnt surprise me, afterall we do have Hitler's reincarnation at our helm right now. 2008 can't come quick enough.

apz · Post by **apz** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 04:03 am

cattales1960 wrote:well now that resource maybe more reliable, but still would not EVER believe something FOX NEWS said until it was backed up by a reliable source. Somehow I missed that link, sorry. It wouldnt surprise me, afterall we do have Hitler's reincarnation at our helm right now. 2008 can't come quick enough.

Let me guess. You won't be voting Republican and you just love Keith Olberman?

user54321 · Post by **user54321** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 04:21 am

4 is a bit of a no brainer, don'tcha think?

Civil rights act? You mean the ones the republicans will gladly stomp all over to keep your citizens "safe"?

That's a laughable statistic.

geoffk · Post by **geoffk** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 05:47 am

Protest Warrior huh? I wonder if they look like this guy:

Seriously, there was a Republican campaign to "inform" black voters that Democrats weren't the ones who "gave" them civil rights. I heard one of the ads it was just as ridiculous as that Protestwarrior jibberish. This ain't the Civil war era anymore people. The question is what have you done for me lately? Which is why I brought up healthcare.

geoffk · Post by **geoffk** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 05:55 am

apz wrote:Healthcare isn't nor should it be the responsibility of the federal government.

Why not? If the Feds want to have the responsibility of banning medical marijuana, why the fuck shouldn't they regulate how much prescription meds cost. They won't help make prescriptions affordable and they won't let me medicate myself, my way.
Sorry to go off on the healthcare tangent, just had it on my mind lately.

Post by **Lemming** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 11:41 am

Just stumbled across this thread and can’t resist stating my opinion on the subject.

I would love to see the world run by a tribe of Gandhi clones but, unfortunately, states need nuclear weapons in order to be taken seriously these days. The only way that Iran, or anywhere else that has oil and/or strategic value, can reduce its chances of being attacked is to have its own doomsday weapons.

Iran has every reason to be paranoid; America put Saddam Hussein into power in Iraq, armed him and encouraged him to attack Iran. Huge numbers of people died in that war. Iraq was expected to win easily with the backing of America, Russia and Britain but the Iranian people defended their homeland against all of the odds. Eventually the West supplied Iraq with chemical weapons to defeat Iran but they fought to a stalemate and in the end both sides lost as happens in all wars.

Incidentally, most people, including those of us against the more recent war, assumed that Iraq would have retained some of those chemical weapons (also used against the Kurds, of course) and that they would be found and used to justify the invasion. I think everyone was genuinely surprised that Saddam had secretly destroyed them.

Israel is thought to have one of the biggest nuclear arsenals in the world. Whilst Iran may argue against the existence of Israel, they would not be able to simply annihilate it. A future nuclear war between Iran and Israel would be in nobody’s interest so, hopefully, the principle of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) that deterred the USA and USSR from a hot war would discourage them.

chopitup · Post by **chopitup** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 12:32 pm

Obviously a complex issue, still history shows that it's all about leverage.

The Iranians will "unleash hell" on themselves if they ever deploy a nuke, period.

The USA (free-world?) need to deny Iran that extra bargaining chip 'else risk their unwelcome interference in serious world affairs.

Still, it's not outside the realms of possibility that Mr Ahmadinejad, Mr Kim or some other unelected autocrat with his finger on the trigger will choose to make his own history.

IMO, diplomacy can win this one, it's not time to panic just yet.

apz · Post by **apz** » Tue 4th Sep 2007 01:00 pm

geoffk wrote:
apz wrote:Healthcare isn't nor should it be the responsibility of the federal government.
Why not? If the Feds want to have the responsibility of banning medical marijuana, why the fuck shouldn't they regulate how much prescription meds cost. They won't help make prescriptions affordable and they won't let me medicate myself, my way.
Sorry to go off on the healthcare tangent, just had it on my mind lately.

So since they did the wrong thing in banning medical marijuana you want them to regulate the cost of meds? I'd prefer them out of my business as much as possible. Regulating the cost of meds = less money for the drug making companies = less research = fewer drugs.