Iran's President is a known Terrorist

H

Hamza123

New member
What I don't understand is that why such an Oil rich country would to enrich Uranium for "energy purposes"...
 
G

Gallytuck

New member
Hey, if they're making a nuclear device fairplay to them. You can't have a nuclear device with the intention of doing good with it. Considering America's history of getting itself into wars I don't feel the U.S. should be allowed to have nuclear devices either.

When you **** with such destructive technology there is no good and bad side in a conflict. If both sides have nuclear capability they're both equally as bad.

 
S

slip_knot

New member
I don't mind Iran having low grade uranium with which to produce cheap electricity.

The problem is that there is another objective - nuclear weapons.

Listening to the things the president of Iran has said convinces me that the world would be a more dangerous place, should they acquire these weapons.

 
builder

builder

New member
What I don't understand is that why such an Oil rich country would to enrich Uranium for "energy purposes"...
Click to expand...
It's called Peak Oil. Ten years time the country will have sold its own supplies of oil, which, btw, is a very poor product for power generation anyway.

Point to a country that is using oil to generate electricity for the national grid.

 
G

Gallytuck

New member
Read the link, Builder. I love how they try to justify potential military actions with "intelligence" which gives Iran a far better military-strength assessment than they could ever hope to live up to.

Remember how they puffed up Saddam in the '90's? That was hilarious. The way they were goin' on you'd think Iraq was one of the world's strongest military superpowers the planet had ever seen. Yeah, think they exaggerated just a wee bit there.

 
builder

builder

New member
Propoganda is one of the most useful weapons in a time of war.

Calling it intelligence is just another ace up the sleeve.

Despite the farcical propoganda behind Iraq's invasion and occupation, many believe it was a good kindly act, carried out by a liberating caring government.

Iraq is simply a staging point for PNAC's next move. The only reconstruction in Iraq is happening within the green zones, mostly improving infrastructure for US forces. ;)

 
builder

builder

New member
I hope you're right!
Click to expand...
We both know I'm right. US bases in Germany are also being upgraded to take on the casualties expected when Iran is taken.

What the military boffins are dimly aware of, but incapable of planning for, are the reprisals by Hezzbolah on US soil. Even Mossad fear them. They've taken a back seat in Iraq, but are watching closely nonetheless. The US forces are historically and currently hopeless in combatting geurilla forces who are well equipped and professionally directed.

My guess is that PNAC will use these attacks to force Congress to vote for conscription. Hurricane Katrina highlighted the lack of troops on the ground in the US. A panicked populace will almost certainly demand more protection.

Cultural and geographical isolation is what PNAC has in mind for the US plebs.

Fear of flying? No. Fear of leaving more like. Unless you are conscripted and shipped out for duty. The rest of the world is already wary of US foreign policy. It's about to become downright cynical and antagonistic.

What a pity PNAC forgot to plan for a revolutionary upheaval. ****, even the 911 architects had a contingency plan for that. ;)

 
hugo

hugo

New member
There will be no draft and no invasion. The short-lived era of the neocon is coming to an end.
 
builder

builder

New member
There will be no draft and no invasion. The short-lived era of the neocon is coming to an end.
Click to expand...
If you can qualify that quote with some form of guarantee, I would be most grateful. ;)

 
H

Hamza123

New member
This is nothing new, Americans have always been isolationists at heart and its getting a strong resurgence now.
Click to expand...
Well, I can obviously see how this statement is true, during WW2, and WW1, but not so much these days... Are you talking about the political aspect of America ?? Or Americans in general ?

And yet they just keep coming here in droves, because we are so evil, un-accepting and backwards.
Click to expand...
Well, you may want to take a look at this article my friend. It proves your point regarding the USA, not so much EU..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/685332.stm

Greying West 'needs immigrants'
Most developed countries will have to open their doors to millions of immigrants because their populations are ageing so fast, according to a United Nations report.

Declining birth rates mean increasing ranks of pensioners, with a diminishing work force to support them.

Japan would need 10 million immigrants every year until 2050 to maintain its 1995 ratio of workers to pensioners

Without mass immigration, the only alternative would be a big increase in the age of retirement, the UN report adds.

One country facing severe problems is Italy which is set to lose between a quarter and a third of its population within 50 years.

By the year 2050, the average Italian will be 53 years old compared to 41 now, and 41% of the country will be over 60.

"Governments are going to have to look at these numbers," said Joseph Chamie, director of the UN Population Division. "These are cold sobering statistics. There is nothing political about them."

"People have become accustomed to certain benefits and lifestyles. The sooner [governments] address these issues the easier the problem will be."

Click here for chart showing ageing populations

The report looks at the likely population trends over the next 50 years in eight countries with fertility rates below 2.1 children per woman, the level required to keep the population constant.

These are Italy, South Korea, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.

Japan's population has aged faster in the last 50 years than any other industrialised country due to low birth rates and long life expectancy.

To keep its work force steady Japan would need to bring in 647,000 immigrants a year until 2050.

But to maintain its current ratio of workers to pensioners, it would need 10 million a year.

This would mean an enormous change for a country where 99.3% of the population are native Japanese. The alternative would be to increase the retirement age to 77.

Retirement

In Italy, about four working people currently support each retired person, but this figure is set to drop to 1.5 by the year 2050.

The report suggests Italy would need to add 2.3 million immigrants a year to maintain the current ratio, or raise retirement to 77.

To keep its current support ratio without immigration, Britain would have to increase the age of retirement to 72.

South Korea, at the other end of the spectrum, would have to keep people working until 82.

Greying EU

The UN says these population trends pose crucial questions for governments about future immigration policies, what age they set for retirement and what benefits they provide for the elderly.

The problems appear more pressing in Europe than in the United States.

According to present trends, the US is expected to grow from just under 280 million people to nearly 350 million in the next 50 years.

By contrast, the 15 European Union countries will see their combined population fall from 375 million to 330 million.

The greying EU would need 674 million immigrants over the next 50 years to keep its ratio of workers to pensioners constant, or 79.4 million to maintain a steady workforce, according to the report.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom