Ahmedinejad Threatens U.S. With War 'Without Boundaries"

[Osprey 199]

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad warned the Obama administration today that if Iran's nuclear facilities are attacked, the U.S. will face a war that "would know no boundaries."

 

 

The Iranian president, who is in New York for the annual meetings of the United Nations General Assembly, spoke at a breakfast meeting with reporters and editors at Manhattan's Warwick Hotel.

 

He said that Iran is on the brink of becoming a nuclear power, and warned Israel and the U.S. against attacking its nuclear facilities.

 

Asked about the possibility of a U.S.-supported Israeli air strike against Iran, the fiery Iranian leader said an attack would be considered an act of war, and suggested the U.S. is unprepared for the consequences. Such a war "would know no boundaries," Ahmedinejad said. "War is not just bombs."

 

Iran claims it has no plans to make a nuclear weapon, but the country is faced with United Nations sanctions, spearheaded by the U.S., meant to convince Iran to comply with international regulations and abandon its nuclear program.

 

In a wide-ranging question-and-answer session, Ahmedinejad said he was prepared to meet with the Obama administration, but that "the whole outlook has to shift." Sanctions in particular, he said, had damaged the chances for an improvement in U.S.-Iranian relations.

 

 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/ira ... d=11689305

 

So.... if Iran gets nuclear capabilities, which are against what the UN allows, and we go in, is this justified? Shouldn't the UN be in on this as well? Why are Israel and the US the only ones putting the sticks to Iran?

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

The obvious, not all that fun, answer is "Well, it depends."

 

This isn't a knock on you, Osprey, since we've discussed things before intelligently, but I have a real problem with the American political machine's propensity to turn everything into a yes/no, black/white issue.

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

I am confused by the following statements:

 

He said that Iran is on the brink of becoming a nuclear power, and warned Israel and the U.S. against attacking its nuclear facilities.

 

Iran claims it has no plans to make a nuclear weapon

[Osprey 199]

The obvious, not all that fun, answer is "Well, it depends."

 

This isn't a knock on you, Osprey, since we've discussed things before intelligently, but I have a real problem with the American political machine's propensity to turn everything into a yes/no, black/white issue.

 

So, in your opinion, what would it depend on? Serious question.

 

And Echo, it seems to me it is classic Ahmedinejad double-speak.

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

So, in your opinion, what would it depend on? Serious question.

 

 

What kind of nuclear fuel do they have, Plutonium or Uranium? How much of it do they have? Is it weapons grade Uranium/Plutonium, or just fuel grade? Is such an attack a US attack? Is it an Israeli attack that we're backing? Is it a "UN military task force" that is basically just the US? Is it a UN military task force in which we are merely A member? Are there other UN nations devoting troops and resources to this attack? Are there Middle Eastern Nations dedicating resources to the attack? Middle Eastern troops involved in the attack? Will Muslim leaders in nations that typically support Islamic regimes come out in support of the attack?

 

The US government has been repeatedly guilty of short-sightedness in its dealings with Middle Eastern nations and governments. I'd like to see them approach something from every angle for a change.

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

If Iran is even building the enrichment facilities than Israel is going to strategic strike the **** out of them. We probably don't need to get involved unless Iran starts to screw with Israel.

 

I'm cool with the U.S. militarily intervening if Iran, North Korea, or terrorists in Pakistan (well, really terrorists in any country, and not just the terrorists that are a threat to the US. I'd be against the Tamil Tigers getting a nuke and threatening the bottom half of Sri Lanka too) having Nuclear capabilities.

 

Certain steps need to happen prior to an attack depending on where they're at in forming a weapon.

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

What kind of nuclear fuel do they have, Plutonium or Uranium? How much of it do they have? Is it weapons grade Uranium/Plutonium, or just fuel grade? Is such an attack a US attack? Is it an Israeli attack that we're backing? Is it a "UN military task force" that is basically just the US? Is it a UN military task force in which we are merely A member? Are there other UN nations devoting troops and resources to this attack? Are there Middle Eastern Nations dedicating resources to the attack? Middle Eastern troops involved in the attack? Will Muslim leaders in nations that typically support Islamic regimes come out in support of the attack?

 

The US government has been repeatedly guilty of short-sightedness in its dealings with Middle Eastern nations and governments. I'd like to see them approach something from every angle for a change.

 

I'd argue fuel grade nuclear material is pretty bad too. I'm pretty sure that's enough to create a "dirty bomb" though I'd need to consult with my weapons guy. That still wouldn't be enough for war though.

 

EDIT: In this type of scenario it'd really be nice if China was on board. We'd always be able to count on support from UK, Isreal, and generally Australia (they seem to have our back whenever).

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

and who voted "no". If Iran gets a nuke an attack is absolutely justified 100%.

[VCplusD12 91]

Not being an american has its good sides

[iTs JUST zo 29]

Well the answer is obvious. Its either we destroy their nuclear facilities OR sit back and wait for them to build nuclear weapons and use it on us.

 

Iran getting nuclear weapons is like giving a 5 year old a gun and putting everyones life in danger...you gotta take the damn gun away or else someone will die.

[TheREALBrooksThompson 157]

and who voted "no". If Iran gets a nuke an attack is absolutely justified 100%.

 

I'm sure this will ignite a s***storm in which I have no intention of getting involved, but is possession of a nuclear weapon justification for war against only a certain few countries, or does that apply equally to all countries? Why or why not?

[Secretly Space Jesus 670]

Well the answer is obvious. Its either we destroy their nuclear facilities OR sit back and wait for them to build nuclear weapons and use it on us.

 

So it's your belief that Iran has both ICBMs and the self-preservation instincts of a rather stupid lemming?