[rsdefwgxvcfdts]

So let's hear it, what do you think of this so called war on terror that the US has waged. Justified? Or just a cover up for trillions of dollars worth of natural resources beneath the lands?

And what make you of the current threats of attacking Iran?

I personally think it's such a mess. They (allegedly) haven't found Bin Laden yet, Saddam didn't have any WMDs after all, and now the US/Israel are thinking of going to war with Iran too. And anyone who says at least those dictators are out of power, just go speak to some Iraqis and Afganis, their countries are just as ****ed up today as they were 7 years ago.

I just don't see this ending well.

[QwOpHGyZ]

A war for oil. Plus wars makes money for many companies that would have not benefit financially even if there was no war.

[ssupermegatone]

The War on Terror should have been limited to Afghanistan, at least at first. One thing at a time is something I personally feel works best. Go to Iraq after the nation is stable and the Taliban are rounded up.

In 2003 I, like many others, thought there were in fact WMD's in Iraq and Saddam was hellbent on going after the west.

Granted, it's good that he's not in power anymore but I wonder how different our world would be today if Osama Bin Laden had been captured just because there were an extra 150,000 troops in Afghanistan instead of being spread thin in Iraq.

[Nikitka]

Afghanistan was justified. At the start anyway. Now its just **** on top of **** and going nowhere. Hell, even the french were willing to go fight there.

Iraq as a target for the war on terror is and was an absolute ****ing joke. Lets take out the one government in the middle east (apart from Isreal obviously) that's hostile to the taliban/al quaeda/et al. Yeah. Sounds like a real winning plan there.

[QQ9ktYrV]

War on drugs....

War on poverty...

War on waste..

War on cancer...

War on Crime.....

War on terror...

Have we won any of these yet?

[famosetroie]

It looks like the west (incl. Israel) is going to p*ssy out about August 21st, kinda disappointing.

For those who haven't heard:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100817...20100817120240

[HRS1H7gO]

It looks like the west (incl. Israel) is going to p*ssy out about August 21st, kinda disappointing.

For those who haven't heard:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100817...20100817120240

Well if that's coming from John Bolton it must be true.

"We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material -- whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability -- it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year. It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, and VX. It actively maintains all key aspects of its offensive BW [biological weapons] program."

Anyway shouldn't this thread be in Religion and Politics?

[ssupermegatone]

That depends.. is the "War on Terror" more of a general discussion or a political discussion?

[overavantstandard]

I think we need a war on the war on terror [yes]

[ssupermegatone]

It looks like the west (incl. Israel) is going to p*ssy out about August 21st, kinda disappointing.

For those who haven't heard:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100817...20100817120240

Oh yeah I read about that. Believe me only Israel knows the best time to strike not John Bolton. And usually when it happens we hear about it a few days/weeks later, that's how precise they are.

Israeli intelligence is probably the best and most reliable in the world. I read somewhere that they knew Iraq had no WMD's but withheld that info from US for whatever reason (they probably wanted Saddam toppled as the endgame). Oh ya here's that article from 2004.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...04/iraq.israel

[famosetroie]

Well if that's coming from John Bolton it must be true.

"We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material -- whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability -- it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year. It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, and VX. It actively maintains all key aspects of its offensive BW [biological weapons] program."

Anyway shouldn't this thread be in Religion and Politics?

Thing is that this reactor's construction has began 2-3 decades ago and then slowed down, but it was initially only for non-military, energy purposes, and only recently (matter of few years) they rushed to finish building it. Now it may or may not suggest that changes of their plans have occurred, and I do mean adding the military aspect of it.
A reactor as such might be used for plutonium fabrication, and here lies the problem.

So, have they got WMD's or not(plutonium fabrication, once they fuel the reactor), what do you say? rings a bell tbh, how ironic.

[HRS1H7gO]

Thing is that this reactor's construction has began 2-3 decades ago and then slowed down.

No the thing is John Bolton couldn't get it right on IRAQ when was in office and had access to classified intelligence so how do you expect him to get it right on Iran now when he as none of that.

[overavantstandard]

we seriously don't want to be messing with Iran [no]

[famosetroie]

No the thing is John Bolton couldn't get it right on IRAQ when was in office and had access to classified intelligence so how do you expect him to get it right on Iran now when he as none of that.

Not saying it's because Mr. Bolton said it, but just the simple equation which shows that a 'civilian' reactor such as this one can potentially fabricate plutonium. You don't need to hear Bolton say this, it's just a nuclear fact, and Bolton just brought it up. That's just what I've concluded after reading about this matter several times, maybe things will roll differently, but it's a possibility, and I don't believe anyone wants to take any risks regarding a nuclear Iran. Unless the intelligence knows something else.
Guess we shall wait and see, which is the bottom line anyhow.

[HRS1H7gO]

Not saying it's because Mr. Bolton said it, but just the simple equation which shows that a 'civilian' reactor such as this one can potentially fabricate plutonium. You don't need to hear Bolton say this, it's just a nuclear fact,

I'm not sure where you got this fact from but it's not going to be fabricating plutonium it's a uranium reactor. Even if it was a plutonium reactor they wouldn't be fabricating the cores anyway Russia is supplying the fuel. That said it's this whole "Aaaah! August the 21st!" thing I object to.

[famosetroie]

I'm not sure where you got this fact from but it's not going to be fabricating plutonium it's a uranium reactor. Even if it was a plutonium reactor they wouldn't be fabricating the cores anyway Russia is supplying the fuel. That said it's this whole "Aaaah! August the 21st!" thing I object to.

You're absolutely right about it being a uranium reactor, but many places suggest that 'experts say' a uranium reactor can lead to potentially producing plutonium, I've no idea how, not a nuclear scientist here...[surrender] You can just google it, I'm sure you'll find an article or two about it.

I'm aware it all might be utter BS, I'm familiar with this world for 23, almost 24 years now...[yes]

[HRS1H7gO]

You're absolutely right about it being a uranium reactor, but many places suggest that 'experts say' a uranium reactor can lead to potentially producing plutonium, I've no idea how, not a nuclear scientist here...[surrender] You can just google it, I'm sure you'll find an article or two about it.

But why would you want plutonium when you have the ability to enrich uranium?

[famosetroie]

But why would you want plutonium when you have the ability to enrich uranium?

I'm totally shooting blanks here but maybe enriching uranium to the level of military uses is involved with certain technical difficulties, I don't know...

It sounds like producing plutonium is their walk around (around getting military uranium) in this particular case.

It all got too technical... [surrender]

[texprofi]

War is very profitable, pick a country to fight that will take years and years to win over (If ever possible) but poses a low overall risk to the lives of your own people = Big profit for justifiably low loss of life.

Maybe I'm just too cynical.

[overavantstandard]

War is very profitable, pick a country to fight that will take years and years to win over (If ever possible) but poses a low overall risk to the lives of your own people = Big profit for justifiably low loss of life.

Maybe I'm just too cynical.

well we must have picked a wrongun with Afghanistan [rolleyes]