Iran expands uranium enrichment

Go Iran! The world loves you! You aren't making the bomb because your penis is small, Ahmadinejad!

I think this is a tragedy... Not only is Ahmadinejad engaging in an ostentatious display of scurrilousness and egregious irreverence, he is now, unknowingly engaged in the systematic sterilization of his country, via gamma rays...

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

Iran has expanded its capacity to enrich uranium.

Well of course they have, what did we expect? Did anyone really think this madman would stop, just because the un asked them to? We should immediately start above ground nuclear/neutron bomb testing as a show of what we really can do. Before he is able to put together his low yield nuclear vest.

I think the new shia prophet president ahmadinejad is following allah’s orders, it is a shame allah forgot to tell him what our response will be. We realize france and russia will not stop you and will fight against any un resolution. That is not a problem we know where their loyalties lie. The only wild card is this is the USA and in a few days we will know which party will be in power and then allah will switch to our side, he likes winners.

From the article:

"China and Russia, which can veto Security Council resolutions, are reportedly pushing for continued dialogue with Iran instead of punishment."

Awesome. Good idea. Because, you know, that's worked out SO WELL in the past.

Mucking Forons.

Well, of course Iran is going to expand its uranium enrichment because the estimated number of unbelievers it will be able to kill with increased nuclear weapons capacity is going up all the time!!!!!

So why wouldn't Iran be expanding its uranium enrichment??? More nukes=more dead infidels!!

It's (past) time to detonate an electro magnetic pulse weapon over Iran's airspace and take its electronic-technological infrastructure out of the twenty-first century and returned it to ol' Mo's era (circa 600AD), where it belongs. The rest of the world (eg Russia and China) needs to shut up and let the western democracies (namely the evil, demonized US) save the world from Islam's loonies. The rest of the world may not believe it now, but there ARE worse fates than American "hegemony."

Much, much worse fates...

funny thing, the reactors are not working yet in iran so they don't need uranium enriched right now for energy purposes...but its a peaceful program, right, just like its a peaceful religion...the only peace i see is

pieces of bullshit and no one is yelling loud enough that it stinks!

Pythagoras

Excellent Idea!

I've been so focalized on either a diplomatic or a nuclear solution that I had forgotten about the Electro-Magnetic-Pulse weapons.

I like it!!!

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

Battle phase deaths in Iraq were 200. The time to fight wars is when they kill or even 2000 a shot of Americans, not when its 50,000 to 300,000 as in Vietnam, Korea and WWWII.

We don't know how good we've had it in Iraq, even allowing for the foolish occupation. We should not have waited for the UN but invaded Iraq in spring 2002, then hit Iran in fall 2002. We then would have had Pakistan surrounded and could have made them give up their nukes instead of spread them around.

Bush thought he had time after 9-11 when he didn't. You never have time in war when you can knock over a country at 200 killed. Then you have to hit them as fast as you can.

When our troops landed at Normandy and Anzio, FDR didn't tell the country we're going to stop here and stay the course. They went on to Germany. In the Pacific they Island hopped to get to Japan as fast as possible.

The Japan today is Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Its time to finish these 3 off while the cost is 200 or 2000 per war. Bush should restore the military to the 1991 level and get the job done.

The US had 10 million men at the end of WWII under arms with half the population. They went from weak to super strong in 4 years. In the last 2 years of Bush's presidency, he could build up the military and finish off Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and probably North Korea. Abolish religious law in all of them.

The time to fight wars is when we have 200 battle phase deaths. That is the signal to fight them all one after another, 2 or 3 a year until they're finished.

In a surprising, if not useless, bit of anti-dhimmi salute, Argentine government prosecutors have asked a judge to issue an arrest warrant for former Iranian president Hashemi Rafsanjani, for being implicated in the Jewish center bombing.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/10/25/argentina.iran.ap/index.html

Pythagoras wrote:

" The rest of the world may not believe it now, but there ARE worse fates than American "hegemony. Much, much worse fates..."

WELL SAID!!!

A lot of Western people are more fearful of Bush and Cheney than they are of the Ayatollah or Kim Jung Il. How ridiculous is that?!

Would the rest of the world prefer to live under Communist China or the DPRK or Saudi Arabia's Wahabbis?

I am surprised that Putin does not support sanctions considering the turmoil he faces with the Muslims in Chechnya. Then again, Russo-Persian friendship runs pretty deep.

I remember when the Kosovo war was about to commence and Boris Yeltsin said to America, "You will not touch Kosovo." It was an empty threat and everyone knew it. In fact, we also bopmbed the Chinese embassy as well! And this was under the Demo-rats and Slick Willy!

Why then, are we suddenly concerned about the Chinese and Russian vote and/or influence? We need to act unilaterally to stop Imanutjob. Failing that, the Israelis would be crazy not to take out their nuclear capabilities if we won't. Our resolve has weakened.

Then again, let's sleep easy, After all, we do have Condi as the point man on this one (sarcasm).

This whole Iran deal is a farce. Deadlines come and go. Threats are made. Sanctions are promised. Nothing happens. Let's face it-Iran WILL join the nuclear weapons club because all the threats and sanctions won't work. The Chinese and Russians will see to that. And we can't blame Iran's president because the Mahdi made him do it. Unless a military action of some sort takes place the world is going to be a much more dangerous place with A-Nut having nukes.

It's almost like the West has already said "Ok fine you can have the nukes but if something bad happens we are not going to stand for it" and then try some more harsh sanctions then mayby a regime change.. sheesh. Even if someone from the future came and told us that NYC would be nuked by terrorist because of Iran the West would prolly still act with the same PC'ness and do nothing.

This is a pretty interesting US Government link that explains the Uranium enrichment process from ore to yellowcake to UF4 (the chemical element on the Iranian stock video footage) to UF6 to centrifuges to U235. The link shows 3-5% U235 enrichment, which can generate power. Keep enriching, and you can make things blow up.

http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/guide/prodhand/sld006.cfm

The link posted takes you to page 6 of 43. You can scroll back and forth to see the whole process.

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful,

Despite threats from the US governemnt, threats of sanctions, threats of war, we will remain steadfast and determined, and we will pursue our path to the end. The truth of the matter is, the US knows that we are not seeking weapons, because such weapons are against the ethics of Islam, and of common sense. If we look, we will see that the killing of innocent people is strictly prohibited in Islam, and in the Quran, God says:

Whoever kills another one without justifiable cause, surely he is killing all of humanity. And whoever saves the life of another one, surely he saves the lives of all of humanity. [Sura Al Ma'aidah: Ayah 32]

Our supreme leader has issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons, our president has spoken out against them, and we, the Iranian people, reject them. A nation which has culture, civilisation and logic does not require such weapons. These weapons are for countries who wish to keep the world in a state of war and anarchy. These weapons are for countries who are warmongeres and who wish to rule the world through violence and threats.

Ask yourselves, who has the most nuclear weapons in the world? Who continues to build nuclear weapons?
Ask yourselves which is the only country in the world to have used a nuclear bomb? Is the answer to all of these questions not America, who slaughetered 120,000 innocent people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Look at the facts. Many of you call Dr Ahmadinejad a madman, a nutcase, or as Robert Spencer likes to call him the 'Thug in chief'. But if we look, we see that this man has not waged wars on other countries, he has not killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people under the banner of 'liberation', he has not done a million other things that George W Bush has done.

Just today, Dr Ahmadinejad opposed a bill which would force US visitors to Iran having to be fingerprinted. He said:

"We do not have a problem with American people. We oppose only the U.S. government's bullying and arrogance,"

"In spite of Washington's decision to fingerprint Iranian travelers who visit the United States, we have asked legislators to avoid a countermeasure,"

"If somebody, and that includes an American, is entitled to enter Iran, then he will be welcomed with respect,"

The Iranian nation has no problem with the American people. We, do, however, have a problem with the government of the US which is denying us the right to pursue peaceful nuclear energy. The IAEA inspectors have been in my country for some time now, and they have found no evidence that Iran is developing a bomb. Look at the facts. Look at what is really happening in the world today.

If Al Qaeda are terrorists, then so is the US government. If Hamas are terrorists then so is the Israeli government. IF Hezbollah are terrorists then so is Great Britain.

The warmongerers today, are not Ahmadinejad, or Hassan Nasrallah, they are Bush, and Blair, and Olmert who wish to attack those who do not follow their agenda and to reign supreme over this world using force and bullying tactics.

We reject this, and we will fight it until the last drop of our blood. We reject oppression, but we will not be oppressed. So long as American planes fly over Baghdad, and over Afghanistan, and so long as Israel strangles the State of Palestine, believe me, we will not rest. Until their is justice, there will be no peace. Open your eyes, and see the truth.

O unbelievers.
I do not worship what you worship.
Nor do you worship what I worship.
Nor will I ever worship what you worship.
Nor will you ever worship what I worship.
To you, your religion; and to me, my religion.

"China and Russia, which can veto Security Council resolutions, are reportedly pushing for continued dialogue with Iran instead of punishment."

That is because China and Russia have money invested in nuclear development in Iran. they just don't want to be embarrassed when they've been found out.

The US had 10 million men at the end of WWII under arms with half the population.

The difference, of course, is that then the US had a draft. Can you imagine trying to fight WW II with an all volunteer army? Never would have happened.

Essentially, we are facing the greatest threat to our security since 1941, but unlike in 1941, we have no draft and are relying on a small, over stretched band of volunteers. That is why, in WW II, we could take on Germany and Japan simultaneously, tackle country after country, and win, whereas today, we can't even subdue a bunch of arabs in one country running around in sandals. What a joke by comparision.

The only way to fight the wars we need to fight to slay these countries, is to have the men in uniform to do it. And we will never have those men without a draft.

Just policing Afghanistan, a small, underpopulated country, and Iraq, a mid-sized arab nation, has completely maxed out the military resources of the US. In that sense, the US has become a paper tiger.

The US population is 300 million people, but it only has 1.4 million men in uniform, and of those, only a small fraction are actually in a theater of battle, only about 140,000 troops are on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan. And to make matters worse, those 140,000 are forced to walk on eggshells. That is 0.042% of the population that is actually in this fight. And even those are not really fighting. Civil works and candy distribution is not helping to destroy our enemy.

By contrast, during WW II, the US had a population of only 132 million and yet put 10 million men into combat theaters. That is about 15% of the population fighting. Today it is .042%. To put those number in perspective, the combat forces of the US in 1945, per capita, were 357 times greater than today. That speaks of urgency.

So, in essense, the US, could, if it wanted to, using a benchmark already achieved in 1945, when our enemy was significantly less numerous, field an armed forces of 45 million men. Today, it could do that. Instead, it has only 1.4 millin in total, and only a portion of that is in a combat theater. That speaks of a lack of urgency.

That right there is the problem. That is the root of Bush's problem in winning this thing. The manpower is not there to bring Iraq to its knees and to threaten to bring Korea and Iran to its knees.

Consequentely, both North Korea and Iran have taken advantage of this manpower problem and have become beligerent nuclear states.

Manpower is everthing. And without a draft, America does not have the manpower to extend its power where it needs to. Ultimately, the problem, however, is that there is no desire for a draft. Why? Because unlike in 1941, after Pearl Harbor, there is no feeling that America is in a war.

All these hotspots are so far away, and the enemy so third worldish, that most people dismiss the idea that we are in a war for our very survival. And besides, after the lousy support the troops got in Iraq, and how there is no military thrust to win, who would want to join? Who wants to get shot in the back just for handing out candy? That is not fighting. Men want to fight and kill. They don't want to stand around and be nickled and dimed to death.

After 9/11, there would have been some spirit for draft, many would have gone without complaint, but you still need to drag the average man by the scruff of the neck and make him fight. The average Joe, just as in WW II, did not want to fight. Did not want to be there. They just wanted to go home. The catch was, to go home, you had to win the war. So they fought, and the instinct to fight when you come under fire is powerful, so even those that would never join of their own volition, fought like tigers when the time came.

To paraphrase, Some men are born to fight, some men go to fight, and some men have the fight thrust upon them.

I say we thrust the fight upon the men. Bring back the draft.

There is little doubt in my mind that the United States will stand by , abit with much hallabaloo, but none the less stand by and watch Iran acquire the nuclear bomb in much the same way North Korea did. Kim Jong Il has shown us to be the traditional paper tiger as Mao put it.

The question is how long will Israel stand around and just watch it happen? In the last few years we have pretty much let Israel do it's thing, which is a good thing. The other question is to what extent will we back up Israel on any Iran power play?

Old Atlantic has it right. If you are going to declare a War On Terror ( or states sponsoring terrorist to be more exact ). Then dammit you ought to fight it through to it's logical conclussion. Not just play not to get hurt.

Either we play to win now or we will be playing just to survive later.

----Nossy

So what happens when these crazies, in their effort to speed along the process, have an accident? The Russians should be delighted if the wind blows radioactivity their way. Same for the Chinese. And five gets you ten that the US offers to help with any cleanups.

Thanks UN, you’ve done your job as usual. And thanks International Atomic Energy Agency for being equally worthless.
The Germans want action but China and Russia have suicidal ties with Islamic Iran.

Even if some BS resolution passed, it forbids Iran from obtaining nuke technology. From what I have read….They already have it!

This is all a big joke. Let the superpower sit on its hands for a year then how about dealing with an Iran with a nuclear FRIGGIN BOMB!!

They hate us infidels and WILL help sneak one into the US, UK, Israel, Australia and the list goes on.

I know that I have read about the US presidential apology for taking too long to get into WII and how allies created the UN to make sure that it never happens again; Hey Washington…. IT’S HAPPENING AGAIN! The UN is out of date (And corrupt) and we are leaving our children major crap to deal with, if anyone is still alive once the # 12 Imam starts a nuclear war.

I’m watching a train wreck in slow motion.

The longer the American government delays its withdrawal from Iraq, the longer it keeps hostages to Iranian retaliation in vulnerable positions, the longer it delays the inevitable hostilities that will engage Sunnis and Shi'a both in Iraq, and draw in from outside aid -- money, "volunteers," war materiel -- from those outside intent on helping their co-religionists inside, the longer the delay that is in the panic that will cause even Sunni Arab states not merely to mute their opposition to an attack on Iran's nuclear project but even to pressure the Americans to get on with it, the longer the attention of official Washiington, with its childish incapacity to concentrate intelligently on more than one thing at a time, the less possiblity there will be of dealing correctly with Iran. Even now the Lobby of Good Shiites --Amir Taheri, Executive Director -- is urging the usual "regime change" as if, for one minute that would ensure the safety of Infidels. How could it? We had a different regime in 1978 -- the regime of the Shah - and had that regime, the very kind of thing, minus a monarchy, that the Amir Taheris of this world would have the American government work to achieve, instead of concentrating, as it must, on damaging as severely as it can, and setting back for as long as it can, Iran's nuclear project -- and forgetting about the Shi'a Lobby's insistence on "regime change." That lobby was successful in getting the American government to invade Iraq for its own, Shi'a purposes. Let the mistake not be repeated with Iran. Think only of Infidel interests, conceived as narrowly and as ruthlessly as possible. As for the "good Muslims" -- they are on their own, unless helping them clearly and permanently helps Infidels.

The US will do squat about Iran aquiring nukes. The US may as well stand up at the UN and state its a free for all, all nations may go for it. What will happen is we will wait until there is a massacre (be it Israel taking action or Iran starting something with Israel)in the region and then we will play mop up or big brother to the rescue. When we should stop it NOW. But then again if the Dems are in office down the road we may not even do that. I believe America's glory days may well be in the past. Our population has grown soft with extreme comforts, like someone said " Jihad ? what Jihad ? the malls are still open, I still got my SUV and pizza !" And to many those comforts are all that is important, hell with right or wrong or the greater good. It took 6 million Jews and other various victims to be suffed out in teh 40's and the world cried "never again" , BULL S*it ! How many will it take this time ? The cosmic watchers must be asounded at the total depravity and ignorant,assine actions of huaminty as they look down and watch it all happening ,again. I guess in the end, we will get what we deserve.

TEST YOUR IQ!

It's fun, and simple! :)

Answer this question:

What do Islamic theocracies and Communist dictatorships have in common?

a) They all hate America
b) Their women are mostly illerate and have no voice in politics
c) Their men are usually unwashed and do not use deoderant
d) Their food is generally pungent and inedible
e) They are all under the thumb of Satan
f) All of the above

If you answered "f" you pass the this simple IQ test! Congratulations!

Is the problem really manpower? Or is it trying to overlay the Geneva Convention-type ethics model on the realities of the Islamic method of total war?

The enemy hides among his family. He places arms in Mosques and homes. The dark reality is that the women and children in his presence are probably willing enablers of the combatants. The enemy knows that our compassion towards women and children is a strategic weakness.

The rule of four wives per man serves a military purpose. Three quarters of male combatants can be killed and the society will continue. For all of the Qu’ran’s faults, it does set up an effective method of propagating a belief system, especially against an ethical society.

Its time for a post-modern ethics model. The model should state that the Muslim combatant’s actions do not warrant Geneva Convention protections (they clearly don’t) and widely publicize sweeping, broad rules of engagement for our forces on the ground. The centrifuges are spinning and this ain’t going to get any easier.

It is sad that we probably won't have the guts to do this until a City is lost.

The Regulator,

Yes, you are correct about the United States doing, "squat" about Iran aquiring nuclear technology.

However, if they use those nukes, response would be puissant and expeditious! - A vote against Iran in the U.N...

http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com

In the name of God the Compassionate and the most Merciful,

Sorry i could not be around to blog more, it is the end of ramadan and i also had some university work anyhow i would like to comment here from a white house advisor Vali nasr speaking to spiegel and i agree with what he says:

VALI NASR ON THE CONFLICT BETWEEN SHIITES AND SUNNIS
"We Need Engagement with Iran"
American political scientist Vali Nasr discusses the bloody sectarian conflict between Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq as well as Tehran's rise as a regional power.

Martin H. Simon
Vali Nasr: "Violence in Iraq is producing more and more radical ideologies on both sides."
SPIEGEL: Mr. Nasr, in your book "The Shia Revival," you paint a dire picture of the future of the Middle East. You predict that the conflicts between Shiites and Sunnis will dramatically increase.

Nasr: Sectarian identity and sectarian tensions will be the backdrop of all the other issues in the Middle East. We saw this in Lebanon where a war that was initially an Arab-Israeli war -- a war that belongs to the old conflicts of the region -- very quickly became all about the Shiite-Sunni issue. Some Arab governments and radical Sunni clerics came out and characterized this as a Shiite power grab and said Hezbollah cannot legitimately fight for the Palestinian cause because it is Shiite and a heretical organization.

SPIEGEL: What caused the revival of the Shiites?

Nasr: First, there was Iraq, but also it's Iran's influence in the region. Everything has to do with what happened in the past few years -- the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran was contained by these two Sunni powers, but the United States removed the barrier. Now Iran was provided with elbow room to expand its power because the United States' own ability to contain Iran has been limited by its involvement in Iraq. It's an opportunity for Iran to expand, a sort of Prussian moment.

SPIEGEL: And Shiites all over the region feel emboldened?

Nasr: They represent about half the population in the countries of the Middle East. When President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt says that the Shiites are more loyal to Iran than their own countries, he is saying that the Shiites are not genuine Arabs, that they are somehow Iranian tools. They are not accepted as members of the nations, they don't have a share of the wealth. In Saudi Arabia, for example, there is no Shiite ambassador; in Lebanon, they are the largest community and the most they have is the speakership of the parliament.

SPIEGEL: Tensions between the two religious groups have existed for centuries.

Nasr: The relationship between these two sects is somewhat like those that existed earlier between the Protestants and Catholics. Germans must be able to identify with this since they were at the heart of the Thirty Years' War. It's never about theology alone, it's also about power. The Shiites don't want to split from the region, they want a seat at the table. But the real drama is the conflict is Iraq, which has ended up the worst way in which this could have happened.

SPIEGEL: Because of the open violence between the ethnic groups?

Nasr: It is the worst-case scenario for the region because you had a minority Sunni regime that ruled over a majority of Shiites. When the regime change came, the Sunnis refused to accept a change in power, and then things went particularly bloody and badly. In other words, the very first case of a transfer of power from Sunnis to Shiites has ended up becoming the worst nightmare, and the shadow of Iraq now will loom over the region. Iraq is so corrosive to politics there because it raised the Shiite-Sunni issue.

SPIEGEL: What are the consequences?

Nasr: The violence in Iraq is producing more and more radical ideologies on both sides, the kind of activities we haven't seen before: beheadings, large-scale executions, kidnappings. And ultimately that violence doesn't stay there, it is going to travel elsewhere in the Middle East. If Iraq really collapses, it will be difficult to assume that other countries in the region are not going to get involved. The Turks will look after the Kurdish issue, Iran and Hezbollah will be on the side of the Shiites, and other Sunni governments will be on the side of the Sunnis. So the potential to impact public opinion in the region along sectarian lines and to produce a sort of broader struggle of power and regional competition is there.

SPIEGEL: Isn't Iraq already in the midst of a civil war?

Nasr: By some definitions it is, like it was in India in 1947. At the end of the British rule the Hindus and Muslims got involved in a kind of communal violence. There was no civil war as such -- there were no armies, there were no battle lines, and yet millions of people died.

Nasr: Well, a split happens when one side cannot impose its will on the other, and it is at the same time not willing to submit to the other side's will. Then two things can happen: One is that the conflict will go on for many years to come, like in Lebanon where it took 15 years before they came to an agreement. Or they decide that neither side can win and neither side wants to live with the other side and they will separate.

SPIEGEL: According to US intelligence, Iran already supplies Shiite militia with advanced weapons.

Nasr: Yes. And the Shiites believe that the Saudis, Jordanians and Syrians are supplying the Sunnis with those kinds of things. The hundreds of millions of dollars going into the insurgency has to be coming from somewhere. There is all kinds of evidence that wealthy individuals in the Gulf have been subsidizing the insurgency.

SPIEGEL: Today, the Shiite militias are just as brutal and murderous as their Sunni counterparts.

Nasr: Oh, absolutely, it's a sort of degeneration of Shiite power into Shiite militia rule, driven by the inability of the central government to govern. When you are in a war, power shifts to those who carry the guns.

SPIEGEL: Grand Ayatollah Sistani is considered an influential man by all sides. Couldn't he serve as a voice of moderation?

Nasr: He is a very popular leader, like a John Paul II for the Shiites. But he is exactly like the Pope: He has no army divisions; and when there is a battle on the street, he cannot impose his will. His influence is purely moral.

SPIEGEL: President George W. Bush still hopes that democracy and not sectarian violence will shape his "New Middle East."

Nasr: Democracy is very important to the future, but right now, it is not what is shaping the Middle East. Task number one is to deescalate tensions in the region, create stability for Iraq, making sure that Lebanon does not flare up again, making progress on the Palestinian issue. The most popular Middle East leaders according to a recent poll in Egypt are Hassan Nasrallah, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hamas leader Khalid Meshal.

SPIEGEL: You are an influential voice in Washington, even the president asks for your advice. What do you propose?

Nasr: The two-ton elephant is the Iran issue. War is not an option, we need engagement with Iran. The strategic implications of Iran for the West are far broader than just the nuclear issue. We shouldn't only look at the Iranian government and it's theocracy and authoritarianism. Persian is now the third language of the Internet -- there are 85,000 Iranian blogs, and every Iranian cleric, every Ayatalloh and even Ahmadinejad has his own.

SPIEGEL: You have to cut a deal with the new regional power?

Nasr: Whether you like it or not, they are the new power. It's a matter of overlapping convergence of certain trends -- Iranian society, culture, economy, combined with a turning point in favor of Shiites in the region and America's traditional allies like Saudi Arabia and Jordan weakened. We need Iran. It's about the whole stability and future of the Middle East.

SPIEGEL: But the Iranians also have a tendency to overplay their hand.

Nasr: Absolutely. Now, the question is which way Iran will go. Will it be an India, or China, which would be good, or Germany of the inter-war period which ended up ultimately forcing an international alliance against itself. I would like to think that ultimately there is greater realism on the part of Washington, and greater realism means you need to engage Iran. Otherwise you had better be prepared to spend a lot of money on troops for the region for a long time.

ABOUT VALI NASR:
Vali Nasr, 46, is professor for Middle East studies at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He serves as a Middle East policy advisor to United States president George W. Bush and is the author of the book "The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future."

limes~

Have you read Oriana Fallaci's The Force of Reason? In it, she talks about Islamic conquest through the womb of their women. Very much in sync with your comment.

dr. bulldog~

If Iran used a nuclear device, one would hope the U.S. would respond independently of the U.N.

"In spite of Washington's decision to fingerprint Iranian travelers who visit the United States, we have asked legislators to avoid a countermeasure,"

"If somebody, and that includes an American, is entitled to enter Iran, then he will be welcomed with respect,"

Hey, we DON'T CARE if you want to fingerprint us. We don't want to go to Iran anyway. We're just grateful for the little bit these fools in Washington are actually doing to fight the fight against you fascists. You whine about fingerprinting.

If it were up to me there'd be NO traffic between US and any of the jehadist cuntries [sic]. haha.

Your text is a copy and paste job of some iranian propaganda I've read already. Trust me, shaytan, the people in this forum are keenly aware and cannot be fooled.

I also saw our little anti-Isreal dig at the end of your little "speech". You try to sound "reasonable" like - why can't we have nukes since the US has already used them? And we don't mean you harm as long as you don't mean harm to us.

But you then go on to say that we mean you harm because we are in Afghanistan and in Iraq. I won't get into Iraq here, but we DID ask the taleban to hand over bin Laden and they refused. We gave warnong what would happen if bin Laden wasn't handed over and we kept our word.

Too bad that nothing we have done since has been up to expectations really.

be glad, shaytan.. be very glad that I am not in charge of things. It could be a lot worse for y'all if the "Man from the American [or European] Street" were in charge of conducting this business.

You'd already have kissed Mecca good-bye long ago.

I remember when the Kosovo war was about to commence and Boris Yeltsin said to America, "You will not touch Kosovo." It was an empty threat and everyone knew it. In fact, we also bopmbed the Chinese embassy as well! And this was under the Demo-rats and Slick Willy!

Why then, are we suddenly concerned about the Chinese and Russian vote and/or influence? We need to act unilaterally to stop Imanutjob. Failing that, the Israelis would be crazy not to take out their nuclear capabilities if we won't. Our resolve has weakened.

Then again, let's sleep easy, After all, we do have Condi as the point man on this one (sarcasm).

Posted by: McCain2008

PLEASE - NO McCain in 2008!!! McQuisling!!
Are you happy about what we did in Kosovo and in Serbia??!! we bombed the WRONG people, folks!!! We bombed the people who were some of your closest allies in WW2. Now we have moslem states emerging at the doorstep of Europe! Great!! Good job!!

And we pissed off the Russians WITHOUT NEED!!

Great way to make friends that now we need!

O unbelievers.
I do not worship what you worship.
Nor do you worship what I worship.
Nor will I ever worship what you worship.
Nor will you ever worship what I worship.
To you, your religion; and to me, my religion.
Posted by: Jihad

O unthinking.
I do not worship what you worship. HELL NO!
I don't worship anything, but I LOVE LIFE!
Nor will I ever worship what you worship. FOOl!!
Nor will you ever worship and love life.
To you, your phony cult; and to me, my life.

NEVER THE TWAIN SHALL MEET, I WISH!!

s; Haven't read her work but look forward to one of these days. Thanks.

It took 6 million Jews and other various victims to be suffed out in teh 40's and the world cried "never again" , BULL S*it ! How many will it take this time ? The cosmic watchers must be asounded at the total depravity and ignorant,assine actions of huaminty as they look down and watch it all happening ,again. I guess in the end, we will get what we deserve.
Posted by: TheRegulator

That's how I feel too, Reg. Especially my countrymen should KNOW BETTER!! All this solemn lip service re. Holocaust and then it's off to Palestine to meet Arafat or whomever they have over there now! Hillary will have to get in line on her buttkissing trips to the ME when she gets elected.. the Germans and the French are there already.. while the SOWdis still come to Bush for a bit of hand-holding and money exchanging, of course!

Yes, never again has been thrown to the wayside.. the consequences are what noone wishes to face.

No doubt Vali Nasr, the son of a well-known Shi'ite writer and apologist, wishes to enroll the Americans in Iraq in order to dampen the Sunni-Shi'a clash. But his perspective is that of a Shi'a, loyal to Shi'a Islam, although not to the Islamic Republic of Iran, which he no doubt deplores. That is understandable. What is not understandable is why his views should be those of Infidels, or that his desire to "avoid radicalization" of "both sides" by, of course, having the Americans remain and sticking it out, not for their own good, but for the good of both Sunni and Shi'a Muslims, in Iraq.

Particularly piquant is Vali Nasr's inability to see that wherever Infidels are concerned, all the supposed assumptions about Sunni-Shi'a rivalry -- remember during Israel's attack on Hezbolah how we kept being assured that the Sunni Arab states were secretly delighted, and wanted Israel to keep going? -- tends to be muted, for the Infidels are the real enemy who will unite even warring sects of Islam.

This is how Vali Nasr put it:

"We saw this in Lebanon where a war that was initially an Arab-Israeli war -- a war that belongs to the old conflicts of the region -- very quickly became all about the Shiite-Sunni issue. Some Arab governments and radical Sunni clerics came out and characterized this as a Shiite power grab and said Hezbollah cannot legitimately fight for the Palestinian cause because it is Shiite and a heretical organization."

No, it is not true that the war became a Shiite-Sunni issue. Washington was quite disappointed, in fact, in dreamily assuming -- no doubt with Vali Nasr's prognostications and Shi'a-apologist advice in view -- that the Sunni Arabs would not denounce Israel. But of course they all did -- all of them. And while the Shi'a in Lebanon have managed to worry the Sunni Arabs in Lebanon, they have worried even more the Druse and, above all, the Christians.

And then there is Vali Nasr's ostentatious worry about "radicalization" (as if there could be even more) of both Sunnis and Shi'a in Iraq, and the implied corollary, which he never states outright, of the need to keep American troops there, in order to dampen those sectarian tensions and hostilities which, Nasr says, are so bad "for the region." Why yes, they are bad "for the region" -- that is, for the Muslims of the region. They aren't bad for us, the world's Infidels. For us Sunni-Shi'a tensions are a wonderful thing.

That is why Vali Nasr, and Fouad Ajami, just like the Shi'a apologists -- Chalabi and others -- who helped promote so cleverly the American invasion of Iraq in order to get the only power that could get rid of the Sunni despot Saddam Husein to do its work for it -- are to be listened to for some parts of their analysis, but with different conclusions drawn. They want a Muslim Middle East where the Shi'a are given their due. We, on the other hand, want something else: we want a world where the Camp of Islam, in and out of the Middle East, is weakened.

These are not the same thing. And no doubt the soft-spoken, personaly winning Vali Nasr is, for that very reason, an inhibiting influence at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, where some of his colleagues might not quite grasp that his point of view is that of a devout, though not violent, Muslim, and he would not like a policy based, as any intelligent policy by any Infidel state must now be based, on the goal of weakening Islam, the power of Muslim states and groups to inflict harm, the size of the Muslim presence in the West, and the appeal of Islam to the economically and psychically marginal populations that are likely, unless Islam is allowed to make a spectacle of itself as it will, even more than it has, in Iraq if the Americans leave.

And what is more, if the Americans leave, the intra-Muslim violence in Iraq will be a kind of vivid demonstration of what Muslims do when there are no longer any Infidels immediately present to unify them in hatred, or to draw their malevolent attention, and when Infidel support of all kinds is also withdrawn.

Just look, if you need to, at Gaza today. What a spectacle. Why any Infidels would wish to stop it is beyond me. Only fools or appeasers or collaborators or hopeless antisemites wishing the "Palestinians" well not because they like them but because they hate, pathologically, the Israelis -- for the obvious reasons.

Let Iraq be Iraq. Never again should those who make high policy allow themselves to be inveigled by the Shi'a Lobby, whether of Chalabi and Makiya and Fouad Ajami and Vali Nasr, or of others yet unknown, or by the Sunni Lobby, including our "allies" in Jordan and Egypt and "staunch ally" Saudi Arabia. Neither My Weekly Standard, with its pro-Shi'a lineup (with blame laid only at those "Wahhabis" and no attention paid to the doctrines, or behavior, of Shi'a Muslims, whose differences with Sunnis are not about treatment of Infidels), nor James Baker who likes to refer to "our friends in the Gulf" (and you know he's talking about "our Arab friends" on the western coast, not the Iranian enemy on the other side of what the east-coasters call, with justice, the Persian Gulf, and what the west-coasters renamed, as they do everything, the Arabian Gulf).

Neither the Shi'a nor the Sunni Lobby need be listened to. We are not Muslims, after all. We need to weaken the Camp of Islam, not to improve it for Muslims, not to make the "region" less alarmed. Let the region be alarmed. Let there be a squandering of resources, within the Camp of Islam. Let them channel their natural aggression -- natural because of the attitudes that naturally arise in societies suffused with Qur'an, Hadith, and the violent figure of that conquering warrior Muhammad -- against one another.

Let Wanda Ga'g (see "Millions of Cats") be your guide to policy in lieu of Vali Nasr.

"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday his country's nuclear capability had increased tenfold despite Western pressure to curb its atomic program".

I'm thinking that not only does Israel have a timeline now of when it will strike and de-capitate Iran; but that it is preparing for the Hezbollah/Hamas retaliation that is sure to ensue due to the weapons buildups by these two terrorist organization in the last couple of months via Iran and Egypt. I also believe that the Israeli's already have spoke to the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and now Russia about how serious it is about defending itself against an Iranian nuclear threat.

Thank God Iran is tipping its hand. Just because the U.S. and the rest of the world are morally paralyzed to act, Israel is not. The rest of the West can stay detached by means of mere geography. Israel can't. Israel is now being forced to enter into life or death foreign policy in which it can't merely keep the enemy at bay or behind an actual wall. So in the essence of Israel's self preservation (since no one else in the west will morally defend its existence, e.g. America's recent pandering to Palestinian "moderates" and urging Israel to give up more and more land) it must act soon, before it cannot act at all. Otherwise, it will be forced into the sea by either nuclear explosions or nuclear blackmail. Either way, Ahmadinejad with Nukes= Checkmate against Israel. Point Blank.

"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday his country's nuclear capability had increased tenfold despite Western pressure to curb its atomic program".

I'm thinking that not only does Israel have a timeline now of when it will strike and de-capitate Iran; but that it is preparing for the Hezbollah/Hamas retaliation that is sure to ensue due to the weapons buildups by these two terrorist organization in the last couple of months via Iran and Egypt. I also believe that the Israeli's already have spoke to the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and now Russia about how serious it is about defending itself against an Iranian nuclear threat.

Thank God Iran is tipping its hand. Just because the U.S. and the rest of the world are morally paralyzed to act, Israel is not.

Uhh.. There's a guy named Ehud Olmert in charge over there.. While I agree with your assessment I fear that what we know must be done may be mere wishful thinking. Let's hope they get Netanyahu in there before it's too late.

One will recall that the original deadline was June 29 for Iran to respond to the incentives package proposal, some of which it is apparently receiving anyway in spite of its lack of compliance. Western diplomats said they would expect that response in "weeks, not months." Nearly four months later, nothing has happened.

I am beginning to think these statements by our "leaders" are made for US to keep us thinking they are doing something. They want to keep the populations quite and docile. While they can keep going on a little longer as if nothing is happening.

The band plays on..

jihad/

Sorry, but you really are too ignorant for words.

From your post:
"These weapons are for countries who wish to keep the world in a state of war and anarchy. These weapons are for countries who are warmongeres [sic] and who wish to rule the world through violence and threats."

Precisely. That describes Iran today. How on earth you can believe that your government does not wish to rule the earth is beyond me and all rational human beings. Every statement that has been made by your so-called president over the last year has been supremacist and anti-european and anti-american and pro-jihadist and definitely in favour of world domination. You are a fool if you believe otherwise.

"...he has not killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people under the banner of 'liberation', ..."

Yes, he has. To my knowledge over 120,000 Christians; 14,300 Jews; 18,000 Bahai; 2,600 Hindu; 1,200 tribal animists; 10,050 Buddhists; and only God (but not allah) knows how many others on his way to the office he now holds. Your president's office floats on a sea of the blood of the innocents and, like all moslems, you cannot acknowledge that nor can you see what's wrong with it. You are an ammoral and immoral scourge on the body human and your only redeeming grace is that you are condemned to hell because you are moslem and your evil sets up the counterpoint by which we moral Christian and western people can be said to be good.

"Just today, Dr Ahmadinejad opposed a bill which would force US visitors to Iran having to be fingerprinted. He said: "We do not have a problem with American people. We oppose only the U.S. government's bullying and arrogance, ... "

Then, despite his own objections, he signed the bill into law and sent it to the mullahs for approval. This took him all of five seconds. Please, don't lie to us. You will only be found out, idiot.

"In spite of Washington's decision to fingerprint Iranian travelers who visit the United States, we have asked legislators to avoid a countermeasure, ... "

See above. Bear in mind that the USA has asked everybody of every nationality to provide biometric information - not just Irananians. This is a deliberately misleading statement by jihad, and also by many others across the world.

"If somebody, and that includes an American, is entitled to enter Iran, then he will be [allowed in]"

Not true. Visas (2), special visas (5), entry permits (3), travel permits (7), travel registrations (2), movement permits (unlimited), special tax permits (5), foreign national permits (18), holiday permits (6), currency permits (114), declarations of intent - holiday/business (112), confirmations of declaration (94), airport arrival identification document (5), airport departure identification documents (117) ... and on, and on, and on, and on.

Don't try lying to me, jihad, I've dealt with your system and your corrupt officials and your moslem, blatant, anti-Christian racism.

Go practice your deception and kitman elsewhere you lying little toe-rag.

Dominic.

jihad -

You have got to be kidding! You are either full of crap, or you're living in complete denial when you say that Ahmadinejhad is a peaceful president, and that he hasn't done anything WRONG.

Are you forgetting that Ahmadinejad has stated that he wants to "Wipe Israel off of the map", and that he feels it's his duty to usher in the Mahdi by creating a worldwide catastrophe!

Hello!!!!!

Ahhh -- poor Ahmadinejad -- how could we misjudge him like that. Shame on us!

It is not a clash of civilizations. I believe, as I hope all Americans would believe, that no matter where people live, no matter their history or religious beliefs or the size of their GDP, all people share the desire to be free; -John McCain at 2006 New School Commencement

http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=1735

McCain spoke out against fellow Naval Aviators during the Tailhook investigation.

Limes: Great link to that nuclear site. I spent a whole hour there, LOL.

BTW, there's nothing wrong with the Geneva Conventions except (1) our enemies don't follow them, and (2) we force ourselves to follow them when they should not apply.

The Conventions require combat forces to, among other things, carry arms openly, wear a distinctive uniform with insignia (i.e., rank, unit, branch, etc.), have a command structure (i.e., responsible leadership). This is all to distinguish the military forces from civilians, which is a protection for the civilians. If armed forces wear civilian clothing and conceal their weapons, for example, then the opposing army will have to treat all civilians as if they were military, putting those civilains at risk.

To enforce the provisions, military forces are prohibited from firing directly on civilians, and forces that fail to distinguish themselves from civilians lose the protection of the Conventions (humane treatment, medical care, food, correspondence). Soldiers out of uniform can be treated as spies, and shot.

Had we gone into combat with clear instructions that all opposing forces found out of uniform would be shot as spies immediately, and left unburied, that hard approach might well have been respected and obeyed. It would take a lot of resolve to tell the enemy that soldiers captured in uniform will be housed and fed, but that fighters found out of uniform would be shot, stripped, and thrown naked in the gutter as food for rats. Of course, we would have to actually shoot enough non-compliant fighters to convince the enemy that we mean business. This is the kind of brutal action that these jihadis know and understand.

Let them know that the first time they shoot at an American from a mosque, the mosque will be blown up and leveled. Survivors will be shot one at time. To appease the left-liberals, prohibit all smoking before the firing squad.

We now have two good American divisions within driving distance of Tehran. Boots and vehicles are on the ground in Iran's neighbor: Iraq. And we have some experienced combat troops. Iran's army (except for those who have infiltrated into Iraq, and recently into Lebanon) has not seen combat since the end of the Iran-Iraq War.

Oh, I'm getting worked up, and it's time for lights out.

To appease the left-liberals, prohibit all smoking before the firing squad.-That's funny.

This patriot has been finding it harder and harder to sleep and would like to close with one thought...

An Ohio-class SSBN (Submarine, Ballistic Missile, Nuclear Powered) carries 24 ballistic missiles. Each of the missiles carries up to 8 independently targeted re-entry vehicles. W88 warheads have a reported yield of 475 kilotons each. For perspective, the North Korean test was estimated to be one kiloton. Pakistan is up to twelve. With the flip of a switch somewhere underneath the world’s oceans, the W88’s can be sent to football fields of the President’s choice from thousands of miles away. The United States has fourteen of these boats (down from eighteen; four have been re-fitted with TLAMs to kill people with more politically-expedient conventional explosives). Submarines can launch, come back to port, and re-load. Then there’s the ICBMs and B-2s. All and all, six thousand warheads, more or less.

Here’s to the moderate Muslims. May they be successful.

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W88.html

http://www.fas.org/main/content.jsp?formAction=297&contentId=367

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/slbm/ssbn-726.htm

Why is there so much hate in the world? Why? I don't think it's possible to understand how stupid all this bullshit is. I am so sick of all of this garbage. Why can't there be love? Why must we kill in order to achieve peace? Because that's the only way we could ever stop this stupidity from spreading. The only way to stop this Muslim extremism is to scare the Allah out of them, make yourself appear crazier than they are, essentially. Beware of wolves dressed as sheep.

Muhammad truly was a terrible human being. I never fully understood what he taught before tonight. When you read of someone wrongfully killing someone, it is hard to comprehend the implications of it.

I'm not saying none of this would have happened had Islam never existed - the Middle East would have picked up extreme Jedism or something like that. No, these people never take responsibility for their actions, and thus that is why the west will never mix with the Middle East. At least not until they can take responsibility for knocking Ur Gab'r up, for beating a man half senseless and for mocking other peoples beliefs, until then, I will wait. And hopefully stiffen Immigration laws at the same time.

I am getting world weary. After the Fundamental Islam essay I'm writing, I think I will log off for a few months, and focus on building more loving relationships with my family. Life is too short to waste it on these people.

With Love,

VoiceofTruth

Are we in the stage now where our leaders are playing down the gravity of the international crisis in order to tamp down the popular irrationality that can emerge in such crises?

Iran is building nukes and repeatedly talking about the end of Israel and of the U.S. Yet neither the media nor governments seem to be treating this problem with the seriousness it deserves. Maybe some media- and government decision-makers fear that if they draw too much attention to the huge dangers looming, volatile mass emotion could surge up and rashly dictate chain reactions of international events born of no strategy and leading to uncontrollable chain-reactions of cataclysms that could suck major powers into a growing vortex of destruction.

Then again, maybe another reason so little public concern is evident over soon-to-be-nuclear Iran is that the elites themselves -- not just the rest of us -- don't want to see the dangers. In general people don't realize -- how could they? -- how asleep they are. We are creatures of habit. We tend to anesthetize ourselves with familiarity, and with any comforts available, bodily and psychological. We so often want to assume things tomorrow will be as they are today. With every repeated breath and heartbeat, with the body's rhythms and cycles striving for homeostasis, with the mind's tendency to seek equilibrium, we monotonously build into ourselves the assumption of continuity. But despite all that, we secretly know tomorrow won't be the same.

What's that sound downriver? The boat had been floating along rather smoothly, rather slowly. What is that growing roar ahead?

limes:
A bit more perspective on 475 kiloton weapons: the explosion at Hiroshima was what? About 15 to 20 kilotons, right? And instantly killed 50,000 people?

475 kilotons means the equivalent of 475 thousand tons of dynamite. That's about a billion pounds of dynamite. Warheads of such power would seem to have limited uses. The cloud of radioactive fallout they would create would presumably affect Israel, Europe and the U.S. The "solution" is to create nuclear warheads of far less power, but then those have their own grave risks, for example, ever-increasing knowledge of how best to make mini-nukes would presumably trickle down gradually to terrorists and the rest of the world.

The largest man-made nuclear explosion ever was apparently set off by the Soviet Union. As I recall, it was 50 megatons -- the equivalent of 50 million tons of dynamite, or about 100 billion pounds of dynamite. That's like every single person on earth holding about 20 pounds of dynamite, except you have to imagine all that power packed into the small space of a single bomb. To get an idea of how HUGE that 50 megatons was, the volcanic eruption of Krakatoa toward the end of the 19th century was only four times as large, according to an estimate I recall: 200 megatons.

To: Treah
When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the heaven is red. 3And in the morning, It will be foul weather to-day: for the heaven is red and lowering. Ye know how to discern the face of the heaven; but ye cannot discern the signs of the times. Matthew 16

Read this and apply this to your statements:
We so often want to assume things tomorrow will be as they are today.But despite all that, we secretly know tomorrow won't be the same.

This verse has always puzzled me for some reason but after reading your statements, it hit me perfectly. In a round about way, thank you.
Seaside702

Voice of truth...despotism is what happens when greed, and gross materialism replace love in a human.
The motto, 'I can get all I need, is replaced with, 'I need all I can get'.
Many of those in such need will resort to violence, or threat of violence, to get the absolute authority they need, to get 'all' they need. (North Korea/Iran come to mind.) Because Islam is hegemonic in nature, it needs despotism to accomplish Allahs goal of world domination. Above all, Allah is a despot. Why would Allah the creator of everything 'need' all he can get? This is simply because Allah is not God and has created nothing. Allah is a loveless god because he was created by a loveless man and other loveless men, who were afflicted by the demon of gross materialism.
And he is a helpless god. He needs jihadists to do his dirty work for him. Muslims/jihadists are the most grossly materialized people in the world. This is because their greatest materialistic reward is Allahs Paradise, and they dont mind killing you to get there. This is the apex of selfisness. This is Allahs home, this is where he lives , this is Islam, and there is NO love there...

l would like to ask one question of Hugh, how do you
de-nuke Iran? I agree with your position of allowing or just standing by while all the sects of muslims fight with each other. but those tactics are all defensive ones, and does not apply to actually neutralizing Iran. l do not think by having them fight each other will take out iran's nukes. but what do l know.

"but you still need to drag the average man by the scruff of the neck and make him fight." Posted by: August22

Not me dammit, I'm up for crusade. Only when I go I don't want to leave not one man standing because I know they are ALL against us and if I leave just one he will sucker punch me later.

"I feel they would deserve being nuked, damnit, for calling Islam "the religion of peace"" Posted by Go Spencer!

I agree, survival of the fittest. They will win not because they are superior but because they simply have the will. America had a good run, but I think her time is up due to wishfull thinking.

Wow traeh, that was great!

jihad says: "Look at the facts. Many of you call Dr Ahmadinejad a madman, a nutcase, or as Robert Spencer likes to call him the 'Thug in chief'. But if we look, we see that this man has not waged wars on other countries, he has not killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people under the banner of 'liberation', he has not done a million other things that George W Bush has done."

jihad, then why did Ahmadinejad call for wiping Israel off the map?

You speak with forked tongue.

GoSpencer: did it ever occur to you that if Iran gets the bomb (Lord forbid such a thing!), you might not survive when it attacks using it (which it is sure to do)?

Think about it.

It's easy for you to type away, saying let's get rid of London and Washington, DC. But you have forgotten the real consequences of a thermonuclear attack. They won't be limited to just these two cities and they could affect YOU. So watch it.

There has to be another way to deal with our political problems (like voting, maybe). Call the White House COmment Line and tell our government what idiots they have been and still are.

Whatever you do, don't prescibe a nuclear exchange. At least not for the reasons you have mentioned.

memo to Sounder:

Evidently you are unaware that the Islamic nations have waged a global jihad in the 1980s to force the non-Muslim nations (including America)to Islamize by military force. Since the 1980s more than 4 million people around the world have been murdered by Islamic militants (many of them in African countries such as Sudan and Algeria but also hundreds of thousands in the former Yugoslavian states). America is a prime target for Islamization; so are all democratic societies including India. Do you find this appealing? Are you willing to kiss freedom goodbye for a brutal totalitarianian world where human life means nothing? If so, Saudi Arabia is waiting for you.

What Bush did was declare a counter-jihad. Saddam Hussein was a jihadist sponsoring Islamic terrorism everywhere, although there were bigger fish in the terrorism pond to catch than he. Hussein's government massacred over three million people and the number is likely to go considerably higher as mass graves that his regime dug are constantly being unearthed.

From a historical perspecive, the only thing that has ever stopped the onslaught of Islam's jihads has been FORCE. France in 732 stopped invading Muslims armies, and in 1683 Jan SObieski's armies stopped the Islamic destruction of Vienna. Read up on this, if you didn't about know these jihad attacks. There's plenty more where theycame from.

There is nothing dishonest going on here. Nobody likes what is going down world wide. But without counter-jihad efforts the attacks on non-Muslims would be accelerating even worse than they are now. Taking islamic militant networks out of circulation is the only way we have at present we have to defend freedom and it is going to cost lives. But not doing anything will get more people killed,as I have said.

You clearly lacked sufficient information to make an perceptive analysis of the situation. You probably still won't put one together, but you'll have to find new arguments against counter-jihad as the ones you gave didn't hold any water.

Most people have no idea of the real power of noclear weppons. Indeed, just one U.S. super carrier has the firepower of all weppons used in WW2. Even nuclear for energy is not without risk.
See what it can do here..

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chernobyl-revisited/chapter1.html

The point is the launching of a nuclear attack, just one, will greatly affect all. Iran is like a child in a room full of gas playing with matches. It's leader is no more mad than the countless other leaders have been, he is just being misguided by the great lie, islam.

In the name of God, the compassionate, the merciful,

First of all I would like to thank the champion of freedom of speech, Robert Spencer, for closing my previous accounts. It seems you will not allow the other side to voice their opinions because you are scared of letting your readers hear the truth. While you claim and boast of supposed freedoms in the west, in your own site you observe the custom of banning accounts and deleting comments which you do not agree with. You are a liar Robert Spencer, and you are a hypocrite. You make false claims on Islam, such as your claims of abrogation in the Quran which is held by only a minute number of Muslims, but yet you describe it as though the majority of Muslims accept it.

sounder, and many others before you have asked why has Dr Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be wiped off the map. The answer is simple, if, if you go past CNN and your typical news agencies and look further for the truth of the matter. Israel has no right to exist. There is no logic behind this state, and there is no reasoning for its existence. Palestinians have been deprived of their homes, their land, and their dignity for 50 years now. Before the catastrophe that is Israel came to being, Muslims and Jews were living, in relative peace in Palestine. Why should the Palestinian people have to suffer? What have they done to deserve this? The State of Israel must be wiped off the map because this state is a cancer in the body of mankind. This state is doing to the Palestinians what the Nazis did to its people, and this so called Israel must pay the price for what is has done, and what it is doing. Dr Ahmadinejad has every right to say that they should be wiped off the map. Of course his reference is to the Zionist regime and not to the Jews living there. The government must be dismantled, and Palestine restored. This is not something that may or may not happen, this is something that WILL happen, and we await the day...

Azzam Tamimi:

It is just a matter of time. You count my words and you remember these words. It is a matter of time, as they were removed from south Lebanon because of the great jihad of Hezbollah. [Crowd: Allah–u-Akbar] And as they are removed from Gaza because of the great jihad of Hamas and Islamic jihad. [Crowd: Allah –u-Akbar] This black chapter in the history of humanity will eventually come to an end and we say, we say we are willing to bring it to an end peacefully. But if they don’t want peace, we have another language, we have another language, and we have every right to use that language and time will tell and history will tell. [crowd: Allah –u-Akbar]

JihadJihad you do not know all your history, remember that before arab muslims killed Christians and Jews, the sites of Israel belonged to the Jews. Jews have more rights to be in Israel than any arab muslim. in fact arab muslims should be driven back to saudia arabia! as for iran, it was Persian before the muslim horde killed thousands of the Persians. so you see muslim are the most recent and the most illegimate in the middle east. they have no rights to Israel, or Lebanon. So if the little man from iran tries anything, you can count on mecca medina and other holy muslim places to look like a parking lot. ps l am using your own logic to who was there before.

To VileInfidelNeocon: Thanks!

To Seaside702: You're welcome!

"You make false claims on Islam, such as your claims of abrogation in the Quran which is held by only a minute number of Muslims, but yet you describe it as though the majority of Muslims accept it." Posted by JihadJihad;

The fruit of the tree, by that you know if it's good or bad..

jihad says: "Look at the facts. Many of you call Dr a madman, a nutcase, or as Robert Spencer likes to call him the 'Thug in chief'. But if we look, we see that this man has not waged wars on other countries, he has not killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people under the banner of 'liberation', he has not done a million other things that George W Bush has done."

oh jihad like all muslims and muslims countries, Ahmadinejad is a coward, he does take his army but uses the brainwahsed zombies the Hez boys and Hammas
they are his henchement, iran is a terrorist sponsoring state, and you cannot hide that fact, but when does a musim use facts, otherwise if he did, he would toss the koran down the toilet where it belongs.

jihadjihad:

If you believe Israel should be wiped off the map because it has no right to exist then I have some news for you. Persia (now Iran) was stolen from the Persians by the Islamic Arabs in 643 AD. Therefore, in all fairness, the Muslims have no right to Iran, by your logic.

Again you speak with forked tongue.

Even the U.N. can sometimes see , and gave (leagal) Israel a state. It is a member of the U.N., it is not going anywhere.

I've concluded that any country that is a threat to us should be bombed for 78 days straight..no breaks for religious holidays, either...bomb 'em---hospitals, apartments, bridges, water treatment facilities, fuel storage, market places, bomb em....and let's not forget to leave a goodly amoutn of those little cluster bomblets lying around as well, just as a parting gift. If it was what was required for Yugoslavia, a country which was NO threat to us, it certainly is in order for those countries that ARE a threat to us...wait..perhaps we should double it for the threat factor...