Hussein was a psychopath, Cheney is a psychopath, Shwe is a psychopath, and so was Amin. Ahmadinejad nor Khamenei are even close to qualifying as a psychopath.
Not terrorists, just psychopaths. A psychopath is "a person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse." (http://www.answers.com)
Except when Hussein actually backed down with the inspectors, dubbyah kept right on itching for a fight. See the July Ultimatum. He was more interested in a pretext to start a fight. My goal would be to get the desired outcome without one.
Looks like you are a supporter of preemptive war. I am sorry I can't subscribe to this crazy doctrine.
Why are switching topic now? This thread is supposedly about missile as oppose to nukes. But anyway, I will play along. If they do have nukes, then they violate NPT. It will be much easier to assemble a coalition to fight them. But if they only develop ballistic missiles, there is no way we can fight any legitimate war.
If slapping a label on me that doesn't match what I'm saying makes you happy, then more power to you.
The problem with this is that if they continue to enrich uranium and ignore our threat. Then we can't back down and we must attack them otherwise we will lose all credibility. They can't back down either because they don't think they do anything wrong. That's a sure way to war. I think you know it but then probably that's exactly what you want.
So if they build a nuke, you want to go to war with them? even if they don't threaten to attack us, though we often threaten to attack them? Isn't that a form of preemptive war?
Enriching uranium would not qualify as a causus belli. I’m talking about telling them that the moment they wheel out or test a nuclear weapon, it is on. I would actually back off a bit on the enrichment issue. And keep on painting me as someone who really wants a war with Iran. It’s kind of amusing. What other horrors am I eagerly working towards?
Where did I say that we would go to war with them? I mentioned a casus belli. I didn't mention what we would do with it.
The build up of the Nazi movment and what allowed had been going for ages before the 30's. The rampant antisemitism allowed the dehumanization of a group of people to happen to the point where people would buy the lies, and not really care about what was going on. To compare Iran to Nazi Germany though greatly minimizes the significance of the holocaust. Iran is no position to orchestrate any such thing. This is the kind of hype that makes it hard to take the talk about Iran seriously.
Thanks for your clarification then. What if they want to pursue a status like Japan which is to have the capability of making nukes at any time but without actually making one?
Yeah. I think Iran also doesn't want to confront the West. What they really want is to develop their economy such that when their country is powerful enough, they can just ignore us and build nukes. I really think it is possible by giving them carrots (e.g. free trade status and economic aid), they will back down from some of their current position on nukes.
Well, if they did it at the level of Japan, cool. More power to them. It would take Japan at least 6 months to 1 year to build a nuke if they tried. I'm sure we'd probably blanket them in satelite cameras, but fine. If they built a bunch of E-Z connect the dots pre-fab nuke kits where they could have a functional nuclear arsenal in 30 minutes, I think that would be a situation substantially the same as building the weapons, but matching Japan would be fine with me.
Well you said: causus belli tantamount to the use of that nuclear weapon on the continental USA. Then I'd plan on how I can kick them in the groin without getting my lights punched out in return. So it was not just casus belli by itself. I still maintain that it was not clear at all that you are against attacking them merely because they developed a nuclear arsenal.
