Bush: Nuclear Iran Could Start WWIII

[Admiral Valdemar]

Bush: Threat of World War III if Iran goes nuclear

Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:30pm EDT

By Matt Spetalnick

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush warned on Wednesday a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to World War III as he tried to shore up international opposition to Tehran amid Russian skepticism over its nuclear ambitions.

Bush was speaking a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has resisted Western pressure to toughen his stance over Iran's nuclear program, made clear on a visit to Tehran that Russia would not accept any military action against Iran.

At a White House news conference, Bush expressed hope Putin would brief him on his talks in Tehran and said he would ask him to clarify recent remarks on Iran's nuclear activities.

Putin said last week that Russia, which is building Iran's first atomic power plant, would "proceed from the position" that Tehran had no plans to develop nuclear weapons but he shared international concerns that its nuclear programs "should be as transparent as possible."

"The thing I'm interested in is whether or not he continues to harbor the same concerns that I do," Bush said. "When we were in Australia (in September), he reconfirmed to me that he recognizes it's not in the world's interest for Iran to have the capacity to make a nuclear weapon."

Bush, who has insisted he wants a diplomatic solution to the Iranian issue, is pushing for a third round of U.N. sanctions against Iran.

Russia, a veto-holding member of the Security Council, backed two sets of limited U.N. sanctions against Iran but has resisted any tough new measures.

Stepping up his rhetoric, Bush said a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a "dangerous threat to world peace."

"We've got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel," he said. "So I've told people that, if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

PUTIN'S "SPECIAL MESSAGE"

Iran rejects accusations it is seeking to develop a nuclear bomb, saying it wants nuclear technology for peaceful civilian purposes such as power generation, and has refused to heed U.N. Security Council demands to halt sensitive uranium enrichment.

Chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani was quoted by Iran's official IRNA news agency on Wednesday as saying that Putin had delivered a "special message" on its atomic program and other issues. No other details were given.

Putin's visit on Tuesday was watched closely because of Moscow's possible leverage in the Islamic Republic's nuclear standoff with the West. It was the first time a Kremlin chief went to Iran since Josef Stalin in 1943.

Asked about Putin's "special message," U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said he was not aware of any deal or offer put forward by Moscow to Tehran over the nuclear program.

On Russian opposition to Caspian Sea states being used to launch attacks against Iran, Casey reiterated that Bush kept all his options on the table but that the United States was committed to the diplomatic path with Tehran.

(Additional reporting by Frederick Dahl in Tehran and Sue Pleming in Washington)

He's going to strike at them, sooner or later. I can't see this not ending badly before he's left the White House.

[Chardok]

Wait, wait wait....Logic check.

Iran Wants to kill Israel... Iran wants nukes

THEREFORE

Iran wants to nuke Israel

So....

The US wants to kill not democracy...The US has nukes.

THEREFORE

the US will nuke China, All of Africa, Cuba, etc. etc. etc.


Makes perfect sense, especially given that both countries' leaders are equally dogmatic and insane.

[Chardok]

*GHETTO EDIT*

Agreed. When Shrubby says a country is a threat to the region and the world, it's pretty much guaranteed that that country is going to be "liberated" very soon.

[Coriolis]

What the fuck. Bush's fear mongering is getting fucking old.

[DrMckay]

*GHETTO EDIT*

Agreed. When Shrubby says a country is a threat to the region and the world, it's pretty much guaranteed that that country is going to be "liberated" very soon.

Would this definition of liberation happen to include high explosive bombs and White Phosphorous dropped on civilian populations as the beginning to yet another jingoistic, destructive war enthusiastically started by armchair-general Chickenhawks who have never been on the wrong end of a Kalashnikov in their entire lives, and yet appear to derive a near-sexual gratification from sending yet another generation of young men and women to fight and die war to give "Democracy to the fuzzy-wuzzies" while said Chickenshits simultaneously gaining wealth from oil that will only run out in twenty years anyway in a war that I may be drafted to fight in due to an incredible lack of manpower and successful recruitment?

on the upside, if there is any chance of a draft, it might motivate my generation to put down their ipods, cellphones, and celebrity gossip magazines long enough to take to the streets in protest.

*Sarcasm* oh. wait. American Idol's on on FOX. the hell with all this marching and protesting stuff...*sarcasm*

hoo, boy, am I pissed.

I just don't want to die just so the cowardly scumsucking backbirthed whores in power can get a little bit richer, another page in a history textbook written by the lowest bidder, and satisfaction that they are "killling brown peepul for Jeebus."

[K. A. Pital]

That's a primitive apocalyptic belief...

[Adrian Laguna]

I say our reaction to nuclear Iran should be as follows. We paint a gigantic bullseye in the National Mall, and take a picture of it from very high in the air. Then we send that picture to Iran, along with the inscription "WE FUCKING DARE YOU!" written in pig's blood and signed "Love, the United States of America".

If they want nukes fine by me, so long as they understand that using them gives the US the right to turn their country into a radioactive skating rink.

[Starglider]

If they want nukes fine by me, so long as they understand that using them gives the US the right to turn their country into a radioactive skating rink.

That assumes that the Iranian government, now and for as long as they have nukes in their possession, is both;
a) rational enough for deterence to work - remember that it almost failed for the US vs USSR over Cuba and the Middle East has incidents like that on a regular basis.
b) competent enough to prevent rogue generals from firing off missiles or terrorists (with co-operation from sympathisers within the government) from stealing warheads.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

If they want nukes fine by me, so long as they understand that using them gives the US the right to turn their country into a radioactive skating rink.

That assumes that the Iranian government, now and for as long as they have nukes in their possession, is both;
a) rational enough for deterence to work - remember that it almost failed for the US vs USSR over Cuba and the Middle East has incidents like that on a regular basis.
b) competent enough to prevent rogue generals from firing off missiles or terrorists (with co-operation from sympathisers within the government) from stealing warheads.

I think, many of the said generals look up to the Ayatollahs too much to do anything too rash that will have themselves strung up or something.

[Darth Wong]

It seems to me that the first step toward authorizing an atrocity has always been to declare that the intended victims of that atrocity are irrational savages who can't be reasoned with.

[Darth Servo]

Its completely unbelievable that Bush still thinks people are going to fall for the whole WMD line AGAIN.

[Coriolis]

Its completely unbelievable that Bush still thinks people are going to fall for the whole WMD line AGAIN.

I wouldn't be that skeptical. Remember that 36% of Americans still follow Shrubby around.

[Stuart Mackey]

It seems to me that the first step toward authorizing an atrocity has always been to declare that the intended victims of that atrocity are irrational savages who can't be reasoned with.

First rule of picking a fight: dehumanize your enemy, for then matters becomes so much easier to justify your own subsequent inhumanity.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

It seems to me that the first step toward authorizing an atrocity has always been to declare that the intended victims of that atrocity are irrational savages who can't be reasoned with.

First rule of picking a fight: dehumanize your enemy, for then matters becomes so much easier to justify your own subsequent inhumanity.

Something Hitler mastered to perfection.

[Adrian Laguna]

If they want nukes fine by me, so long as they understand that using them gives the US the right to turn their country into a radioactive skating rink.

That assumes that the Iranian government, now and for as long as they have nukes in their possession, is both;
a) rational enough for deterence to work - remember that it almost failed for the US vs USSR over Cuba and the Middle East has incidents like that on a regular basis.

Deterrence almost failed regarding Cuba because Kennedy, despite all the praise he gets, couldn't do foreign relations worth shit. He convinced the Soviets that he was a bully who talked big but never backed it up. The poor bastards shit their pants when they suddenly realized that Kennedy was serious about Cuba and wouldn't back down.

Can such a misunderstanding happen between Iran and the US? It could, but quite frankly the Persians have never struck me as being stupid. Nor do I not see grounds for just dismissing them as irrational loons.

b) competent enough to prevent rogue generals from firing off missiles or terrorists (with co-operation from sympathisers within the government) from stealing warheads.

Have terrorists ever stolen Iranian military materials? As for giving them to terrorists, not only do I find it unlikely, even if it happened it's not much of a threat. Transporting nuclear materials isn't easy, and bombs tend to be rather bulky.

Even the absolute worst case scenario is just the heart of a city and several hundreds of thousands of people, that's survivable, PissedOff!America isn't.

[K. A. Pital]

The poor bastards shit their pants when they suddenly realized that Kennedy was serious about Cuba and wouldn't back down.

Levelling demands to remove missiles out of Turkey and grant Cuba immunity to invasion is "shitting their pants"? Pfft. Why would Iran behave any different? Immunity from invasion demands are fairly reasonable and a nuclear club Iran could easily level them against the US.

[PeZook]

Heh...

You know, five years ago I thought America had little chance of going the way of empires of old.

Now I know better. If Shrubby goes through with it, then say hello to even more national debt, more dead soldiers, a military broken beyond repair and an economic collapse.

Woo! Woo! All aboard the train to oblivion Though paradoxally, this may benefit the world in the long run.

[Adrian Laguna]

The poor bastards shit their pants when they suddenly realized that Kennedy was serious about Cuba and wouldn't back down.

Levelling demands to remove missiles out of Turkey and grant Cuba immunity to invasion is "shitting their pants"? Pfft.

Bah, I was exaggerating. It did give them pause though, as it wasn't what they were expecting.

Why would Iran behave any different? Immunity from invasion demands are fairly reasonable and a nuclear club Iran could easily level them against the US.

So? I don't think we should invade them if they don't have nukes, there's national sovereignty to respect. Why would we suddenly want to do so if they do have them?

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Its completely unbelievable that Bush still thinks people are going to fall for the whole WMD line AGAIN.

I wouldn't be that skeptical. Remember that 36% of Americans still follow Shrubby around.

Twenty-four percent now, and Dave the Gay Gun-Toting Contry-Bumpkin Republican isn't one of 'em anymore. S-CHIP decided it, and he just confessed to me that not only is he voting for a Democrat to abolish Louisiana's income tax, but he's not a social-conservative at all anymore. He's against abortion, but he wants science, adoption reform, and heavy spamming of contraceptives to fill the hole. He's also for legalization of marijuana and the redefinition of marriage into across-the-board civil unions as a legal term for everyone, redefining the word 'marriage' to be a very private and very optional religious affair with no meaning whatsoever in the eyes of the law.

He still has a rather simplistic worldview re: foreign policy, but I have him sold on Maximal Realism as depicted in TBO, supplemented with a 'Trade With All, Alliance With None' philosophy.

[Crown]

I know this is bordering on the redundant and stupid question point, but; has anyone told Bush that he is a threat to World Peace? Anyone?

[MKSheppard]

Deterrence almost failed regarding Cuba because Kennedy, despite all the praise he gets, couldn't do foreign relations worth shit. He convinced the Soviets that he was a bully who talked big but never backed it up. The poor bastards shit their pants when they suddenly realized that Kennedy was serious about Cuba and wouldn't back down..

I've always liked the following passages from Resurrection Day, even if the book was quite marginal.

He thought of mother Russia, that destroyed and shattered country, where starvation and madness still reigned, and the only people who had a chance to live were those who could make it to a UN refugee camp along the borders of the old country. No more industry, no more large cities, no more government. Just tribes of people, trying to survive in muddy villages that could have existed in the Middle Ages, a decade after an entity called SAC—the Strategic Air Command—had obliterated their nation from the earth.

and

There were pictures of General Curtis when he was in the Army Air Force in World War II. both in England and in the Pacific, and there were photos of him at the controls of B-17 and B-29 bombers. Another showed him on an airfield in South Korea. Later photos showed him at SAC Headquarters in Omaha and at the controls of B-47 and B-52 jet bombers. And there were formal, color photographs, as well: General Curtis with President Eisenhower, General Curtis with President Dillon, General Curtis with President Romney.

But there were no photos of General Curtis with President Kennedy.

One corner of the room had been blocked off by a waist-high wooden railing. Inside the railing and near the wall was a stand, and on top of the stand was a small chunk of what looked like brick, embedded in a cube of heavy glass. Small plaques set every eight inches or so along the railing said DO NOT CROSS. In the center of the railing was a larger plaque:

PRESENTED IN GRATEFUL APPRECIATION
TO GENERAL RAMSEY "THE RAMMER" CURTIS
FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE TO HIS NATION
UPON HIS RETIREMENT, AUGUST 1, 1971

A PIECE OF RED SQUARE, MOSCOW, USSR

RETRIEVED MAY DAY, 1971, BY THE 177th RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY SQUADRON

STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND
"PEACE IS OUR PROFESSION"

[wautd]

That's a primitive apocalyptic belief...

Which one? The one from Bush who believes Jesus will come after armageddon, or from Ahmadinejad who believes Allah's profet will come after armageddon? Both seem eager to start an armageddon anyway

[mingo]

It seems to me that the first step toward authorizing an atrocity has always been to declare that the intended victims of that atrocity are irrational savages who can't be reasoned with.

Good point. Ever notice how everybody that we disagree with is a "madman?"
Saddam was crazy, Im-a-dinner-jacket or whatever his name is is crazy, Kim Jong Il is crazy, haven't heard it in a while, but Mommar Kadaffi was said to be crazy, and of course poor helpless Hugo Chavez is crazy.

Seems none of these people is ever crazy enough to attack the number one possesser of weapons (us) though. Now Osama, he did, he could be crazy. Hitler, in spite of my history major wife's insistence to the contrary, I believe was crazy. Bush jr is either crazy, or just incredibly stupid.

[CJvR]

How would Iran, even with a few nukes, be able to start WWIII?

As long as no major power is willing to support them they are nothing more than a vicious pest. Sure Allah might send Amadjihadii a vision to nuke the jews but so what? It will be the shortest and smallest WW yet. (Though the butchers bill will likely rival the two previous ones combined...)

It is harder to start a WW than history might indicate.

[Androsphinx]

The irony being that one of the best ways to prevent an invasion would be to have nuclear weapons. Having watched Ahmadinejad's show at Columbia, he doesn't seem to be insane enough to, say, nuke Tel Aviv for the hell of it. But what do I know?[/i]