60% of Republicans in favour of bombing Iran...
Discussion
...according to Sky News. And 40% of Democrats are also in favour.
What on earth will bombing a country, with an elected leader, actually achieve? Apart from making the leader a Middle East hero. I regard this as extremely "lazy Government". It requires a lot more creative thinking and solution finding to resolve such issues. My job involves negotiating the sale and purchase of companies, and the last thing you do in negotiation is get involved in "public ultimatums", because "pride" (loss of face saving) is an absolute deal killer. This is kindergarden stuff. American politicians seem to be so "gung ho" it beggars belief at times.
What on earth will bombing a country, with an elected leader, actually achieve? Apart from making the leader a Middle East hero. I regard this as extremely "lazy Government". It requires a lot more creative thinking and solution finding to resolve such issues. My job involves negotiating the sale and purchase of companies, and the last thing you do in negotiation is get involved in "public ultimatums", because "pride" (loss of face saving) is an absolute deal killer. This is kindergarden stuff. American politicians seem to be so "gung ho" it beggars belief at times.
srebbe64 said:
...according to Sky News. And 40% of Democrats are also in favour.
What on earth will bombing a country, with an elected leader, actually achieve?
its to do with removing the equipment used to enrich uraniam i think. apparently its not just stock stuff you buy at b&q, so the destruction of the equipment will set them back a decent length of time.
focusonme said:
60% of Republicans and 40% of Democrats. Does this mean Fox is claiming 100% of people are in favour of "nooking the towelheads".
read the figures again....then read the "of" again, now 60% republicans leaving how much? thats right 40%, now how about those naughty democrats, 40% of them voted so that leaves how many? thats right! 60% good boy!
srebbe64 said:
...according to Sky News. And 40% of Democrats are also in favour.
What on earth will bombing a country, with an elected leader, actually achieve? Apart from making the leader a Middle East hero. I regard this as extremely "lazy Government". It requires a lot more creative thinking and solution finding to resolve such issues. My job involves negotiating the sale and purchase of companies, and the last thing you do in negotiation is get involved in "public ultimatums", because "pride" (loss of face saving) is an absolute deal killer. This is kindergarden stuff. American politicians seem to be so "gung ho" it beggars belief at times.
I'm not going to have an argument with you tonight Srebbe, you'll find me quite evasive.
I'm not commiting to either the "bomb" or "not to bomb" camp, but what it achieves is simple. As I understand it Iran has one reactor, and that is a breeder. That reactor could be destroyed with one strike, before it becomes operable, with little environmental damage.
After it has been used, the environmental damage associated with it's destruction would be considerable.
Without it, the HEU, which they wish to make will only make weapons of moderate power in relation to physical size. With the breeder reactor, they will be in a position to make big weapons of small physical size (the briefcase bomb).
>> Edited by dilbert on Saturday 4th February 22:50
srebbe64 said:
...according to Sky News. And 40% of Democrats are also in favour.
What on earth will bombing a country, with an elected leader, actually achieve? Apart from making the leader a Middle East hero. I regard this as extremely "lazy Government". It requires a lot more creative thinking and solution finding to resolve such issues. My job involves negotiating the sale and purchase of companies, and the last thing you do in negotiation is get involved in "public ultimatums", because "pride" (loss of face saving) is an absolute deal killer. This is kindergarden stuff. American politicians seem to be so "gung ho" it beggars belief at times.
Interesting. Plese link the article from Sky; I can't seem to find it.
jimbeaux said:
...according to Sky News. And 40% of Democrats are also in favour.
What on earth will bombing a country, with an elected leader, actually achieve? Apart from making the leader a Middle East hero. I regard this as extremely "lazy Government". It requires a lot more creative thinking and solution finding to resolve such issues. My job involves negotiating the sale and purchase of companies, and the last thing you do in negotiation is get involved in "public ultimatums", because "pride" (loss of face saving) is an absolute deal killer. This is kindergarden stuff. American politicians seem to be so "gung ho" it beggars belief at times.
Interesting. Plese link the article from Sky; I can't seem to find it.
It was on the 10 oclock Sky news on the telly - haven't looked on the web.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff