tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post4083706314860174776..comments2008-07-31T00:23:18.736-07:00bwhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07541279438184352860noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post-82040035385076611252008-07-30T23:38:00.000-07:002008-07-30T23:38:00.000-07:00<I>"Whether Israel attacks is in the end their choice."</I><BR/><BR/>If someone's intent to kill you and <I>all</I> you hold dear is implacable, <B>do</B> you really have a <I>choice</I>?<BR/><BR/><I>The US national interest would be against such an attack, as it will cost us dearly and decrease US security."</I> JPS<BR/><BR/>Beyond the immediate cost of an attack on Iran, please explain how Iran gaining nukes is not a <I>greater</I> decrease in US Security?<BR/>To do that, logically you must:<BR/><BR/>Explain upon what premise you postulate that should Iran gain nukes it will <B>not</B> provide them to a radical Islamic terrorist group(s)? <BR/><BR/>Also, upon what premise you postulate that if Iran did give nukes to terrorists, those terrorists would <B>not</B> use them against us?<BR/><BR/>If you cannot do so, then logic compels you to agree that you have no rational basis for your opinion and acknowledge that your position is based in either willful denial or wishful thinking (another form of denial).<BR/><BR/>If you cannot articulate <I>why</I> Iran is <I>not</I> a threat given their active support for terrorists and stated objectives and then Iran gains nukes, gives them to terrorists and they successfully use them, you are culpable in their use.<BR/><BR/>Opinions matter because nations act on them and we all bear the responsibility for what we advocate.Geoffrey Britainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01663224962346593872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post-25604422453637905382008-07-29T18:18:00.000-07:002008-07-29T18:18:00.000-07:00I wounder what would happen to all those Iranian centrifuges, if a bomb going off above gave them a sudden kinetic shock, even if the explosion itself doesn't penetrate? <BR/><BR/>Assuming they are storing a lot of kinetic energy, might they violently disintegrate? <BR/><BR/>Even if only a few of them were to disintegrate, they are in close proximity and probably not adequately shielded from each other. Might it not trigger a (non-nuclear) chain reaction as shrapnel from one triggers another to disintegrate, etc?<BR/><BR/>(Why do mouse-traps and ping-pong balls suddenly come to mind?)<BR/><BR/>Or am I over-estimating how much kinetic energy is stored in them, versus how strongly built they are? Probably...Tom Craverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13570100578983177926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post-89678085412005182872008-07-29T14:30:00.000-07:002008-07-29T14:30:00.000-07:00Whether Israel attacks is in the end their choice. The US national interest would be against such an attack, as it will cost us dearly and decrease US security. Israel is not the fifty-first state. <BR/><BR/>What to do?<BR/><BR/>JPSJ. Paigehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03451443587468778455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post-24933094678812386272008-07-29T13:01:00.000-07:002008-07-29T13:01:00.000-07:00I believe Stratfor is the most reliable and credible source on geopolitical issues, and they don't believe Israel will attack Iran.<BR/><BR/>Israel has completely blown any chance of maintaining the element of surprise for an attack on Iran. <BR/><BR/>Since the success of the Israeli attack on Iraq's reactor depended greatly on the element of surprise, and because Iran is much more fortified than Iraq was, the odds are pretty low that Israel will go through with it.Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06247905597206135113noreply@blogger.com