My point about millions of Iranians dying was made as a worst case scenerio. Let’s say Iran is allowed to go nuclear. Now they’ve got missiles and warheads.

Do they? The Iranians are building a reactor, true… but what would it produce once in operation?

[T]he Bushire (Bushehr) reactor — a "light water" reactor — does not produce weapons grade Plutonium. It produces Pu 240, Pu241 and Pu242. Although these isotopes could theoretically be weaponized, the process is extremely long and complicated, and also untried. To date no nuclear weapon has ever been produced with plutonium produced with the kind of reactor at Bushire. Moreover, the plant would have to be completely shut down to extract the fuel rods, making the process immediately open to detection and inspection.

Does building a nuclear reactor automatically mean that a state is intent on building a nuclear weapon? Does building a nuclear reactor even grant the automatic capability to build nuclear weapons?

And they use them. On Israel. On Saudi oilfields. On out troops in Iraq. On European capitals or arsenals. I don’t know, but let’s say they use them. Doing exactly what they’ve said they would do.

Whoa, cowboy. When did Iran express an intent to attack every one of the targets you named?

Is there any doubt in your mind that we shouldn’t take out any potential remaining nukes? And that is going to kill a lot of Iranians?

We aren’t discussing simply killing “a lot of Iranians”. Kit Jarrell wants the US to kill every Iranian—including all Iranian prisoners currently in US custody, many of whom have never been charged with anything.

I think trying to prevent the wackos in Iran from proceeding by threatning sanctions is futile. Even presupposing that we’re not going to get everything and will probably turn some of the population against us, military strikes seem to be the only card on the table.

Why is the threat of sanctions futile? You state this as though it were a given. Can you provide a factual basis for this claim?

I say strikes will kick the can down the road several years. Maybe our government could start a Radio Free Iran and plant some seeds. It sure worked in eastern Europe. I’ve read of a number of things we should have been doing in Iran but haven’t. Strikes will buy us some time.

Strikes will also ensure that the US is again seen purely as an aggressor state. Strikes will ensure fresh new crops of terrorist recruits for decades to come.

And as for ‘Radio Free Iran’... the idea is to kill all the Iranians, remember? Who will be the audience for ‘Radio Free Iran’ in that case?

My point about millions of Iranians dying was made as a worst case scenerio. Let’s say Iran is allowed to go nuclear. Now they’ve got missiles and warheads. And they use them. On Israel. On Saudi oilfields. On out troops in Iraq. On European capitals or arsenals. I don’t know, but let’s say they use them. Doing exactly what they’ve said they would do. Is there any doubt in your mind that we shouldn’t take out any potential remaining nukes? And that is going to kill a lot of Iranians?

I think trying to prevent the wackos in Iran from proceeding by threatning sanctions is futile. Even presupposing that we’re not going to get everything and will probably turn some of the population against us, military strikes seem to be the only card on the table. I say strikes will kick the can down the road several years. Maybe our government could start a Radio Free Iran and plant some seeds. It sure worked in eastern Europe. I’ve read of a number of things we should have been doing in Iran but haven’t. Strikes will buy us some time.

Am I even hoping the mullahs would just say eff it? That’d be nice but I think they will do every thing they can to cause us non-nuclear grief.

I’m loaded up on energy stocks,

You conduct your arguments with a civil tongue. Heidi, more than Kit is the worst of the two. She puts on a show that is expected of her…and Kit…by the regulars that frequent their blog.

And don’t let those two foul-mouthed women fool you into believing that they don’t come here…they are in here more than you know.

When I have something to say, to put it in Arnold’s words, “I’ll be back.”

It’s not religious bigotry, it’s self defense. Maybe not every German was a Nazi, but the entire populace paid for the government’s actions.

That’s true, and the Iranian people will pay a price for the actions of their government. The question is: What price? Kit proposes that every Iranian pay with their life. Was it ever proposed, during WWII, that the entire German populace should be executed for the actions of the Third Reich?

If it gets down to having to kill millions of Iranians or us, well it’s just too effing bad for them. There’s a reason we have the arsenal we have and if these nutjobs want to ignore that, they do so at their own peril.

By what logic have you concluded that we have to kill millions of Iranians to prevent their government from resuming uranium enrichment and eventually developing a nuclear weapon? I’m just wondering what argument you would make against lesser measures.

If it gets down to having to kill millions of Iranians or us, well it’s just too effing bad for them. There’s a reason we have the arsenal we have and if these nutjobs want to ignore that, they do so at their own peril.

Here we go again