Posted on 01/22/2006 10:35:24 AM PST by HHKrepublican_2
By 'easier targeting' it means that determing the target would be easier.
Besides, if Iran puts every one of their children into a nuke facility and we blow it up, it is still 100% their responsibility and we can not be afraid to act. We must limit collateral damage as much as possible but if we allow their actions to disuade us from our targets, guess what will be the terrorists new weapon?
Just like the Alito strip-search issue. If for some reason, 10 year old girls were off limits to strip searching, what do you think would happen to 10 year old girls within reach of a narco terrorist?
Looks like the KKK does a bombing run. Poor kid.
You'd have to ask Jim Robinson. I visited the home page to check out the name and saw it has banned/suspended on it, which is the extent of my information. I'm a newbie.
Do you know why?
That said. . .all of Europe is waiting, of course, for us to do it. . .and quickly.
----
Yep, Europe and Persia is going to get a big punch of "tough love," courtesy of the US Armed Forces.
Since they do not have effective means(yet) to strike at our bodies, they aim to strike at our souls
It's already WW3 there.
A Muslim is excused if he is too poor to finance the journey, or if his health would not permit it. Making the environment lethal would simply excuse all Muslims from the requirement.
Now, taking the area and saturating the ground with pig blood...
Me: Actually, the IRanian people are overwhelmingly pro USA.
You: Uh-huh....they said the same thing about the Iraqi people.
Iran is a completely different culture. You have to understand this, the Iranians are more like Europeans. They aren't Arab. And they aren't at all like Iraqis, the Iranians are an educated people. They were once westernized.
The Iranians had some freedom under the Shah. They were westernized then. By the way, we installed the Shah.
But absolute power corrupts absolutely and the Shah started restricting freedoms ect. What most of the Iranian people wanted was a full fledged democracy, so they overthrew the Shah in the 70s. Unfortunately, then the Mullahs came to power and freedom was restricted further.
The Iranian people are not at all like the small faction of religiouse fanatics who control them. If we invaded Iran, I guarantee Iranian people would be cheering in the streets.
Unlike Iraq, Iran is a more civilized society. And they're educated.
Calling Iraq a backwater country and it's citizens less civilized and uneducated would make you a racist in the eyes of an Iraqi.
Wouldn't it?
From this Freeper's point of view, any citizen that would allow this character to be elected president of Iran has to bear the responsibility...so, so much for education and being "more civilized".
You essentially are claiming that the great country of Iran has been taken over by their mafia. i don't buy it.
...that is, unless your last name is Nagin.
You really believe we're going to use nukes to stop them from getting nukes?
Get real.
Check out these articles about Barnes Wallis' earthquake bombs of WWII.
http://www.computing.dundee.ac.uk/staff/irmurray/bigbounc.asp
"...Tallboy's sleek shape enabled it to gain as much speed as possible during its fall, giving maximum penetration into the ground which was essential to maximise the earthquake effect. This speed also gave rise to a couple of problems with the design. Firstly, the ground impact at high speed meant that the casing had to be very strong to prevent it bursting open, and special metals were developed for this purpose; the weight of the case was thus a high proportion of the weight of the bomb so, despite its size, it was classed as a "medium capacity" weapon! Secondly, during trials, it was found to be inaccurate, and this was attributed to the bomb "toppling" off course as it passed through the sound barrier. Wallis solved this problem rather neatly by offsetting the bomb's tailfins; this made the bomb spin as it fell, and the gyroscopic effect prevented the toppling and thus maintained the accuracy...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunker_buster
In World War II the British designer Barnes Wallis of Bouncing bomb fame, designed two bombs that would nowadays be called bunker busters: the five ton Tallboy and the ten ton Grand Slam "Earthquake" bombs. The designs were very aerodynamic with a tail which caused them to spin. This allowed them to break the sound barrier as they fell from a height of 22,000 feet (6,700 m). They had a much stronger casings, made of high grade steels, than the typical World War II bomb so that they would survive the impact of hitting a hardened surface or penetrate deep into the ground.
Though these bombs might be thought of as 'bunker busters' today, in fact the original 'earthquake' theory was more complex and subtle than simply penetrating a hardened surface. The Earthquake bombs were designed not to strike a target directly, but to impact beside it, penetrate under it, and create a 'camoflet' or large buried cavern at the same time as delivering a shock wave through the target's foundations. The target then collapses into the hole, no matter how hardened it may be. The bombs had strong casings because they needed to travel through rock rather than re-inforced concrete, though of course they could perform equally well against hardened surfaces. In an attack on the U-Boat pens at Farge two Grand Slams went through the 23ft re-inforced concrete hardening - equalling or exceeding the best current penetration specifications.
Your response is a non-sequitur to what I said. Go back and reread.
No, if Israel is forced to do it the only option for them is nukes. Bunker buster bombs are heavy, Israel would be forced to deliver them at long range with great precision against a heavily defended target. Nukes would give them a much greater chance of success.
The US can deliver a greater payload and we have bases and carriers that can deliver strikes from a closer distance.
If Israel is forced to go it alone she will need to decide if she values Iranian or Israeli lives more. What the hell is with number of people whining about this, it feels like this must be DU or something. It is pathetic crap, like all the folks who whine about nuclear weapons when August Sixth rolls around.
I think the fear of Israel using nukes to get the job done may be what draws the US to act. A repeat of 1973.
You know, if we have to bomb those sites, and those kids, then we have to do it. But there's a difference between doing it out of necessity and doing it with abandon and glee. Some of the comments on this thread disturb me.
And according to the environmentalists - if we keep pumping CO2 into the atmosphere we will soon have a dim sun.
That's tagline quality right there....
If you foot note me. Use it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.