How stupid would it be to allow Iran to nuke Israel?

[Comprehend]

(obviously inspired by Sunstones similarly titled thread, and sponsored by the letter A, and the number 8)

Just how stupid would it be to allow Iran to develope nukes and then drop them on Israel? Why would it be stupid? Or, if you by chance think it would be smart, then why would it be smart?

 

[koan]

Iran has not got the capability to develop full nuclear weapons for at least 10 more years. Even then, the manufacture rate would be extremely low. Ameraca knows this, Europe, knows this. The continual beatup about Irans nuclear production is the same beatup about Iraqs weapons of mass destruction. They don't exist.

 

[koan]

your poll is stupid

 

[Comprehend]

Iran has not got the capability to develop full nuclear weapons for at least 10 more years. Even then, the manufacture rate would be extremely low. Ameraca knows this, Europe, knows this. The continual beatup about Irans nuclear production is the same beatup about Iraqs weapons of mass destruction. They don't exist.

The IAEA and the UN security council think differently.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/IaeaIran/unsc_res1737-2006.pdf

 

[Comprehend]

your poll is stupid

yes, it is called satire... (EDIT: you are supposed to laugh, and then think.)

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47878

 

[koan]

I read the report. It stated, about the posibitity that Iran may go ahead with development of nuclear weapons. Even if this is so, I repeat they yet do not have sufficient technology.
Are you a scare monger for the US Govt?

 

[Comprehend]

I read the report. It stated, about the posibitity that Iran may go ahead with development of nuclear weapons. Even if this is so, I repeat they yet do not have sufficient technology.
Are you a scare monger for the US Govt?

Yes, but my official title is "Confuser of the cognitively challenged"

um. maybe read the OP again. Everyone knows they don't have the technology yet. The question is "Just how stupid would it be to allow Iran to develope nukes?"

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

(obviously inspired by Sunstones similarly titled thread, and sponsored by the letter A, and the number 8)

Just how stupid would it be to allow Iran to develope nukes and then drop them on Israel? Why would it be stupid? Or, if you by chance think it would be smart, then why would it be smart?

The entire OP is a fallacy of interrogation. Regardless of our stereotyped opinions, how can we really prove that Iran will do this? That's not to say that they won't, however, but the former assertion is what the OP hangs on.

One other thing. No offense, but what is it with this trend of posting counterpolls to good questions? :sarcastic

 

[Comprehend]

The entire OP is a fallacy of interrogation. Regardless of our stereotyped opinions, how can we really prove that Iran will do this? That's not to say that they won't, however, but the former assertion is what the OP hangs on.

One other thing. No offense, but what is it with this trend of posting counterpolls to good questions? :sarcastic

huh? No it isn't. nobody is asking for you to prove that they will do it. The question is pretty simple. How stupid would it be to sit around and allow Iran to develop a nuke and use it on israel. It is a hypothetical question.

EDIT: No offense but I think this is a good question. Why do you have a problem with me responding to Sunstone's poll in this way? Surely you do not think that his poll was not biased? Satire has a long tradition of pointing out the absurdities of various things. See Jonathan Swift's A modest Proposal for a great example. Maybe instead of sitting there and criticizing, you could come up with a good response.... complaining about my method of argument is worthless.

 

[NoahideHiker]

Comprehend is fast becoming one of my favorite posters here! LOL! His biting witt and use of sarcasm serious stretch and challenge the average serious faced posters here. The fact he is a Zionist Christian is just frosting on the cake.

 

[Navigator]

I believe the question is apt. In the thirties the same non-chalant attitude was shared by many in regards to Hitler.

 

[Comprehend]

I believe the question is apt. In the thirties the same non-chalant attitude was shared by many in regards to Hitler.

yep. Neville Chamberlain was almost the other name to go with Pelosi.


Those who do not remember their history....

"peace in our time" eh folks?

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

huh? No it isn't. nobody is asking for you to prove that they will do it. The question is pretty simple. How stupid would it be to sit around and allow Iran to develop a nuke and use it on israel. It is a hypothetical question.

EDIT: No offense but I think this is a good question. Why do you have a problem with me responding to Sunstone's poll in this way? Surely you do not think that his poll was not biased? Satire has a long tradition of pointing out the absurdities of various things. See Jonathan Swift's A modest Proposal for a great example. Maybe instead of sitting there and criticizing, you could come up with a good response.... complaining about my method of argument is worthless.

Dude. A fallacy of interrogation is a logical fallacy. It'd be like asking a married man, "What is the last time that you beat your wife?" That implies that he has indeed beaten his wife, a shaky proposition at best. Likewise, your OP implies that Iran not only wants to nuke Israel but will actually carry out with this plan. While many of us who view the world through the blinders of Western Civilization think that this may well happen, we do not know for sure if this is true yet.

Sunstone's poll, by comparison, is based on the fact that the Pentagon has plans to attack Iran in the near future.

Now had your OP made it clear that it was purely a hypothetical situation, that would have changed the premise entirely. As such, it did not do that. Rather, it seems to me that this thread is not an honest discussion, but a baseless attack on the Big Bad Liberals.

 

[Comprehend]

Dude. A fallacy of interrogation is a logical fallacy. It'd be like asking a married man, "What is the last time that you beat your wife?" That implies that he has indeed beaten his wife, a shaky proposition at best. Likewise, your OP implies that Iran not only wants to nuke Israel but will actually carry out with this plan.

:cover: OK. I'll go slow. No, this is not a fallacy of interrogation. It is a hypothetical question. You can tell this because it starts like this: "Just how stupid would it be..."

I could have asked, "Just how stupid would it be for you to allow me to kick you in the shins?" This would not imply that I have kicked you in the shins before, nor would it imply that I was absolutely going to do it. It is......(drum roll) a hypothetical... A "what if" situation.

While many of us who view the world through the blinders of Western Civilization think that this may well happen, we do not know for sure if this is true yet.

EXACTLY, which is the reason why I made the question "hypothetical."

Sunstone's poll, by comparison, is based on the fact that the Pentagon has plans to attack Iran in the near future.

Now had your OP made it clear that it was purely a hypothetical situation, that would have changed the premise entirely. As such, it did not do that. Rather, it seems to me that this thread is not an honest discussion, but a baseless attack on the Big Bad Liberals.

I am sorry about that.

 

[Dr. Nosophoros]

I'd say that is a very simplistic one sided poll that ignores the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons and the ability to use them far beyond anything Iran would or could develop/possess anytime in the near future, it's been a "dirty little secret" for years.

I'd say you are being manipulated through training/grooming instead of objective thought, unfortunately you can probably vote as well- I'd expect more from a law student.

 

[Sunstone]

(obviously inspired by Sunstones similarly titled thread, and sponsored by the letter A, and the number 8)

Obviously, the one-sidedness of my own thread needs to be balanced. This is a good thread! Frubals!

 

[Comprehend]

I'd say that is a very simplistic one sided poll that ignores the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons and the ability to use them far beyond anything Iran would or could develop/possess anytime in the near future, it's been a "dirty little secret" for years.

I'd say you are being manipulated through training/grooming instead of objective thought, unfortunately you can probably vote as well- I'd expect more from a law student.

Dr. Nos,

I am going to go out on a limb and guess you don't have much of a funny-bone...

It is a satire of Sunstones thread. It was meant to be one-sided and simplistic.


PS. you shouldn't expect much from us law students, we grow up to be lawyers and everyone knows what useless scum they are.

 

[Sunstone]

**MOD POST**

By the way, cut out the personal attacks, folks. Remember there are people of good faith and intentions on both sides of this issue. And if that doesn't do it for you, then remember that personal attacks are forbidden by the rules of RF. If you cannot abide by the rules, get out of this thread now.
​

 

[Comprehend]

Obviously, the one-sidedness of my own thread needs to be balanced. This is a good thread! Frubals!

Well, I figured yours was only half serious so you wouldn't mind if I responded this way... Now that I have Sir Sunstones endorsement, ya'll can just relax and have fun with it. (while giving some serious thought to it as well).

 

[Dr. Nosophoros]

Joke or no joke on this board, it's no joke how the idea of leading us into another war under false pretenses manifests itself on our televisions through our media on a daily basis. The only reason Bush made concessions with Iran now is I believe he feels he had no choice, if our military was stronger and support at home was better I would bet we would be involved in Iran as well.

Now that's Funny!!!