Why are our soldiers dying for this?

Iran doesn't have a NUKE and it is extremely unlikely to give one to terrorist to use on Israel.
Israel has a large number-50-300 depending on who you believe-some of them are H-bombs which can literally wipe out/level entire cities.
If Israel is struck by one or even two NUKES, it will still be able to retaliate.Israel has missles that can reach all Arab cities, and Tehran. The Iranian president without question would like to destroy Israel, but there is no reason to think he would accept the destruction of Tehran(and 10 other Iranian cities), and Jerusalem, in return. Besides, he has no reason to think that we-USA-wouldn't retaliate for Israel and kill 90% of the population, and destroy every city in Iran. The threat of 5-10 NUKES aimed at the USA isn't really much to deter us.In fact, it makes it more likely that we will strike them.
The USA is a huge country-roughly 2500x2000 miles-10 nukes-A-Bombs- could kill maybe 20 million people, but a smallish nuke probably doesn't destroy as much infrastructure as a single hurricane.We-USA- coud sustain that kind of damage and still rebound fairly quickly.Japan-a tiny country in terns of size-didn't have to quit because of 2 cities being wiped out.
Iran won't use Nukes against Israel, or "give away" their hard won Nukes in exchange for WHAT-Being wiped off the earth??Yeah, that makes sense!! Don't give me the "he is crazy and doesn't think like a normal person." If that is so, why isn't he sending huge numbers of Iranians to fight Israel in Lebanon???He is crazy, right??If so, he should fight Israel at every chance!! He doesn't because he isn't crazy, and he knows that a confrontation with Israel will kill most of Iran, and completely destroy it.He isn't crazy, he wants Israel destroyed, but not at the cost of Tehran, or Jerusalem. Charlie

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(phoebeisis @ Aug 7 2006, 01:20 PM) [snapback]299116[/snapback]</div>

I see - you would let iran go nuclear and trust a madman - so what if one or two nukes goes off in Israel - are you serious? dont you think the world would be better off without a nuclear iran governed by a nutjob who as REPEATEDLY threatened to wipe Israel off the map. And ridding them of the potential of going nuclear does NOT involve flattening their country or any of their cities - just a bunch of underground facilities in the desert.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Aug 7 2006, 11:19 AM) [snapback]299059[/snapback]</div>

Sorry to get off topic a bit here, but something needs to be set straight. The US has no troups in the Philippines (and dober-dude, check your spelling). The only time we have any troups there is for a maximum of 6 weeks per year for joint manuvers under the VFA (Visiting Forces Agreement) that has been in effect since 1992. In addition, under the VFA, US forces are not allowed to participate in any armed conflict. The successes the Philippines have had against terrorism have been soley the work of the AFP (Armed Forces of the Philippines) and president Gloria Arroyo (who drives a Prius by the way).

Of the two bases we used to have there, Clark air base was abandoned in 1991 after it was buried by the eruption of Mt Pinatubo. It has since been dug out and is being used for the UPS Asia Pacific hub and other comercial air traffic. Subic bay was given up in 1992 and is now the Subic Freeport. The ex military facilities there are now used by private business and business incubaters.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Aug 7 2006, 08:01 PM) [snapback]299140[/snapback]</div>

Ah, the Soviets and their nucleer warheads. I once believed that they threatened the world stability. Now, I start to believe that they are a key factor to the world stability.

I have seen people in this thread openly advocate the usage of nuclear weapons in Iraq. The fact that an independent country keeps thousands of nukes pointed at their cities may be the only way to make them think twice.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(vtie @ Aug 7 2006, 01:14 PM) [snapback]299148[/snapback]</div>

Yes, this is pretty telling about some of the citizens of this country is it not? Advocating mass murder against a country that we invaded for absolutely no realized reason. We invade for a reason that became nullified, screw things up so badly that we incite a near civil war and then want to drop nukes on them because things went awry to "get rid of the problem". You must not have too high an opinion of us. I would like to assure you that some of us have a little more logic and empathy than this and do not wish to kill those that we have already harmed so greatly.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Aug 7 2006, 09:01 AM) [snapback]299041[/snapback]</div>

I'm not so sure that N. Korea is more of a threat to us. Iraq was actively supporting global terrorism, and gloating about it, sending $25,000 checks to the families of suicide murderers who blew up innocents on busses. N. Korea may have a nuke, and they may be a threat to the region, but I don't see them using petrol dollars to finance stuff outside of their borders.

The other consideration is that if you look at Afghanistan and Iraq, having soldiers "spread out all over" those countries may actually help us if we have to bail out Europe again and fight a war for them with Iran. My personal opinion is that we should wait for diplomacy and "understanding" Iran's frustrations, as the Europeans suggest, and let them handle this one. Iran probably couldn't get a nuke to us, but probably could to Italy or France. (Of course its the Brits and British Petroleum they really hate).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Aug 8 2006, 12:31 AM) [snapback]299285[/snapback]</div>

I have a tremendous amount of respect for the U.S. and the people living there. In fact, I have a small company there, and I spent almost 10% of my time in the U.S in the last 10 years. The vast majority of people I met are very friendly, and open-minded. The only problem seems to be that this "global war on terrorism" thing seem to have brought a few people completely off-base.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Aug 8 2006, 06:26 AM) [snapback]299473[/snapback]</div>

I can live with Iran having nuclear weapons pointed at Belgium. Of course I would prefer it not to be the case, but it doesn't scare me to death. We have been living for many years with thousands of Soviet nuclear ballistic missiles pointed at our cities. At that time, the Soviets were generally thought of as the incarnation of the devil. And yet, nothing happened. It's an illusion to think that the world is a safe place anyway, and only cowards try to eliminate every potential threat at all cost, even at the cost of losing their own freedom and sanity.

As someone else said, for Iran using a single nuke would be committing suicide for the whole nation. They are not that silly.

We have been living with battlegrounds for our entire history. We have been living with terrorism for 50 years. Right now, we have cities where 10% of the people are muslim, but we manage to find a (delicate) equilibrium.

Life is too exciting to behave like a coward and cry for every thing that might sound a bit threatening.