Iran blames 'Satanic' West for terror attacks
Discussion
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle...
Edit: Ah, I hate typos!! Mods - can you edit the title please.
Article said:
Last night Islamabad’s Ambassador to Tehran was summoned to the Iranian Foreign Ministry, which protested against “the use of pakistani territory by the terrorists” against Iran. But the harshest words were reserved for the US and Britain, which Tehran accused of backing Jundallah in an attempt to overthrow the Islamic regime. The Guards blamed the bombing on “terrorists” backed by “the Great Satan America and its ally Britain”.
An official military statement added: “Not in the distant future we will take revenge. There is no doubt that this savage and inhuman act falls within the Satanic strategy of the foreigners and enemies of the regime, who are trying to break the unity among the Shias and Sunnis.”
Hmmm, there may be trouble ahead. The whole Iran situation seems to be escalating.An official military statement added: “Not in the distant future we will take revenge. There is no doubt that this savage and inhuman act falls within the Satanic strategy of the foreigners and enemies of the regime, who are trying to break the unity among the Shias and Sunnis.”
Edit: Ah, I hate typos!! Mods - can you edit the title please.
Edited by hornetrider on Monday 19th October 10:16
AndrewW-G said:
Anybody care to bet a Jaffa cake that Iran or Israel will use this (or a similar attack) as an excuse to try to nuke each other?
They'd both be stupider than a stupid thing if they did, but then again they are both staunch followers of imaginary friend based fairy stories so nothing would surprise me.The real shame if this happened would be the rest of the world would be drawn into their little "my imaginary friend is better than yours" based wargame.
Jasandjules said:
Is Obama dancing around singing "I can push the button".........
It amazes me that in this day and age we still have people fighting and killing over their imaginary friends. At least our Govt has moved onto Co2 to burn us at the stake..
Don't think these guys are killing anyone for their imaginary friend. It's all about control of central asia!It amazes me that in this day and age we still have people fighting and killing over their imaginary friends. At least our Govt has moved onto Co2 to burn us at the stake..
alfabadass said:
Jasandjules said:
Is Obama dancing around singing "I can push the button".........
It amazes me that in this day and age we still have people fighting and killing over their imaginary friends. At least our Govt has moved onto Co2 to burn us at the stake..
Don't think these guys are killing anyone for their imaginary friend. It's all about control of central asia!It amazes me that in this day and age we still have people fighting and killing over their imaginary friends. At least our Govt has moved onto Co2 to burn us at the stake..
(No different in the West, only we are supposed to follow Environmentalism...so we’re no better)
Pothole said:
can anyone tell me: what "unity among shias and sunnis"?
Is there any reason we only get one brand of muslim in the UK ? I've noticed that in Islamic countries there seem to be several brands of muslim who hate eachother and bomb the crap out of eachother yet over here they seem united as one view 
Monki said:
Pothole said:
can anyone tell me: what "unity among shias and sunnis"?
Is there any reason we only get one brand of muslim in the UK ? I've noticed that in Islamic countries there seem to be several brands of muslim who hate eachother and bomb the crap out of eachother yet over here they seem united as one view .
"The jury has been told the Kurdish Turk teenager was killed over her affair with Halil Unal, who she worked with, but who comes from a different sect of Islam."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8314315....
Edited by Pesty on Monday 19th October 13:02
Those advocating using nukes, do you realise the destructive power of these things now? Its not like Hiroshima and Nag. where they put they put 100,000 down, but others survived, buildings away from the epi-centre surived and 50yrs later we have thriving human cities again. Modern nukes are city killers. As in "wipe off the face of the planet" city killers. Its not 100k dead, but the possibility of 10million dead and where you hit wont be habitable again for the next 100yrs regardless of how many NEST teams you send in.
Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
DJC said:
Those advocating using nukes, do you realise the destructive power of these things now? Its not like Hiroshima and Nag. where they put they put 100,000 down, but others survived, buildings away from the epi-centre surived and 50yrs later we have thriving human cities again. Modern nukes are city killers. As in "wipe off the face of the planet" city killers. Its not 100k dead, but the possibility of 10million dead and where you hit wont be habitable again for the next 100yrs regardless of how many NEST teams you send in.
Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
Do we not have a selection of sizes? Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
...gently, thoughesselte said:
DJC said:
Those advocating using nukes, do you realise the destructive power of these things now? Its not like Hiroshima and Nag. where they put they put 100,000 down, but others survived, buildings away from the epi-centre surived and 50yrs later we have thriving human cities again. Modern nukes are city killers. As in "wipe off the face of the planet" city killers. Its not 100k dead, but the possibility of 10million dead and where you hit wont be habitable again for the next 100yrs regardless of how many NEST teams you send in.
Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
Do we not have a selection of sizes? Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
Mini Nukes, Bunker buster type weapons I think.. prob what Israel will use on Iran.
esselte said:
DJC said:
Those advocating using nukes, do you realise the destructive power of these things now? Its not like Hiroshima and Nag. where they put they put 100,000 down, but others survived, buildings away from the epi-centre surived and 50yrs later we have thriving human cities again. Modern nukes are city killers. As in "wipe off the face of the planet" city killers. Its not 100k dead, but the possibility of 10million dead and where you hit wont be habitable again for the next 100yrs regardless of how many NEST teams you send in.
Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
Do we not have a selection of sizes? Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
Pesty said:
Monki said:
Pothole said:
can anyone tell me: what "unity among shias and sunnis"?
Is there any reason we only get one brand of muslim in the UK ? I've noticed that in Islamic countries there seem to be several brands of muslim who hate eachother and bomb the crap out of eachother yet over here they seem united as one view .
"The jury has been told the Kurdish Turk teenager was killed over her affair with Halil Unal, who she worked with, but who comes from a different sect of Islam."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8314315....
Edited by Pesty on Monday 19th October 13:02
DJC said:
Those advocating using nukes, do you realise the destructive power of these things now? Its not like Hiroshima and Nag. where they put they put 100,000 down, but others survived, buildings away from the epi-centre surived and 50yrs later we have thriving human cities again. Modern nukes are city killers. As in "wipe off the face of the planet" city killers. Its not 100k dead, but the possibility of 10million dead and where you hit wont be habitable again for the next 100yrs regardless of how many NEST teams you send in.
Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
You are somewhat overstating the case. Nuclear weapons have moved on a great deal, but the advances have brought flexibility as well as more power. The city killer or 'rubble bouncers' of multi-megaton range are largely out of service now, because modern delivery systems are much more accurate. It is also more efficient to use several warheads in a pattern around a target than one big one on the middle of it (assuming you are trying to kill a city). Modern warheads also have selectable yield, so a strike of similar size to the WW2 drops is possible.Nukes have reached the stage where you do not EVER want them used on anybody. Now some of you might be blase about that, I prefer to take a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of such actions though.
Air-bursts are generally produce little fallout unless it rains immediately and local radiation hazard is limited, especially for smaller weapons. That is not to say that it doesn't have an effect, as can be seen from the aftermath of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but you won't end up with a nuclear wasteland from one warhead.
The main reason for not using them is the risk of escalation, where any subsequent nuclear exchange would result in catastrophic damage to infrastructure on all sides and enormous loss of life.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff