Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (886222)	9/8/2015 11:34:13 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575047

>> I think it's unlikely, and if they do, they'll get their asses handed to them. First rule of foreign policy. No one with nukes ever has their asses handed to them. Includes the U.S. and Israel. But those of who were around at the time remember the idiocy of MAD, and the international sense of relief when Reagan ended the Cold War.

To: SilentZ who wrote (886222)	9/9/2015 1:00:10 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575047

Beats me. That s the hilarious part of all of this. Well, only if you appreciate British humour, I suppose. We have had sanctions against Iran since their revolution. When Iran started enriching uranium, Netanyahu and his puppets here went ballstic. Iran maintained that they just wanted to use their own uranium deposits to buld reactors and make electricity. Despite the wingnut howls, this actually make sense. Oil is just about their only decent export outside of pistachios. And if you know about one of the traditional processing steps of Iranian pistachios, you understand their limited marketing appeal. If they have their own uranium deposits, why not maximize the amount of oil they market? Sure, they have incentives to developing nuclear weapons. But nuking the US and/or Israel wasn't high on their list. Giving their Sunni neighbors the ultimate incentive to play nice with them was. The average age in Iran is around 19. If you know anythng about demographics, this speaks volumes about the cost of the Iraq-Iran war. But developing useful nuclear weapons isn't cheap. Just ask the NorKs. They still haven't demonstrated they can buld one. I have little doubt they can do a gun-type U235 weapon. I suspect their latest test was one such weapon. Which wasn't a success, it just wasn't an abject failure like their first. It stll isn't a deliverable weapon, even if they can master some ICBM rocketry. A weapon of that size requires a lot more than they can produce. But still. We imposed additional sanctions in 2006. Note that this was during Dubya's administration. Because they were unilateral, they weren't particularly useful. With the imposition of the sanctions, Iran, understandably I might add, accelerated their capacity at enrichment. Regardless of what their goal was this was a ratonal action on their part. Uniateral sanctions by the US are only useful if the US is the only source of what Iran wants. But the Iranians wanted things like TVs, which the US didn't make, computers, which the US didn't make, US music and movies, which the US did make but China pirated, and tomatoes, whch the US doesn't export much of. So we were all hat and no cattle. Which summed up the Bush administration. Not only didn't they solve the problem, they made it worse. Yet they still instilled Bibi's meme of a nuclear armed Iran as being an existental threat to the world. Because, you know, the ayatollahs regularly strap on suicide vests to give their all to Allah... Obama made the mistake of trying to finish the job. Not being a symbolic gesture sort of guy, he actually convinced the important countries to go along with the US sanctions. Which really hurt Iran's economy. Eventually they cried "uncle" and came to the table. Which somehow, became a defeat. Reality flows so...