I was questioning that in my mind also gardenforge!

Being that I was never in the Navy or involved in any way with the nuke program, I have no way to be assured of Nukes being on the Subs in the Gulf!

They have been launching Tomahawks from those subs armed with conventional warheads and logically I had deducted those subs in the vicinity do not currently have nukes on board!

I also assumed that the Pentagon would keep "X" amount of Nukes on subs somewhere as a ready deterrent. (say off the coast of Russia, etc.) and would not want to move these subs from their strategic positions and send them to the Gulf. (No, I dont think they would do that)

I think if they wanted to nuke Iran, it would be logical to assume they would fly the nukes to a friendly yet discrete port and load them there, or put cruise missiles on Strategic Bombers, like the B-52, and fly non-stop from the states. Like they did when attacking Iraq!

Hey 'Serchin4MyRedWine',

Better keep that hush!!! That would be more than enough for Bush hitting Congress, and getting the green light to unilaterally declare war on Iran and Syria. That's way more then he had, when he got Congress's green light for Iraq.

I hear two for one deal on the cost benefit analysis!!!

Really, don't spread it...

Voil I'll keep it hush...no one reads my stuff anyway Besides..sounds like France is taking the lead now on the Iranian issue...probably just a front though..think Israel will take
em out before anyone else decides to do anything

:)

Whats uo redwine!!

Fanta hey bud Whats new?
Here I'll buy you a few

Again, this kind of incident just makes me question why/how we can declare war on another country supposedly because they have WMD... when we are the only ones to have used one and we can't even keep track of the ones we have...

Please refresh my memory- why am I supposed to be so afraid of foreign "terrorists" again?

I'm personally much more worried about my 89 year old neighbor running over me with his car... I find it to be a much more plausible scenario resulting in my death by violence...
~~~~~~~~

Hey Fanta, Voil, Searchin'.... hope you're all well and enjoying mixing it up as usual....

Hey anoasis,

You are the only one who got my title. Thats what I was insinuating. Our Government poses more of a threat to our internal security than any muslim group out there.

They are quick to pin the label, "terrorist," on anyone and everyone, and yet their actions at any time can be classified under the same heading.

The only difference is the labeler and the labelee. The media and Bush use 9-11 as a driveing force to chant America to war under the pretentions that we should have some great fear for our survival. Then they fly these Nukes over our heads while we sleep, and thats only 6, we have thousands.

SC has the largest stock-pile of chemical weapons in the world, and yet we condemn leaders of other countries for having them.

I was an NBC NCO for my unit in Germany, and if people dont believe we would use them they need a reality check! Not only would we but we would plan and practice to use them as an offensive weapon.

We have Nukes that can be fired with conventional artillery. They vary in size, but rarely are more than 1 kiloton. We would drill as if to lob them at a certain point on the front lines. While the Russians would be recovering we would rush thousand of troops through the hole we just blew in their lines.

These plans were real and complete, because we would even predict how long men could survive in that radioactive enviornment without permanant damage to their internal organs. The US of A is not the patron-saints they make out to be. We used to have a saying, the greatest most secretive evil in the world is the US Army!!

9-11, while a trajic event was at the worst 5000 casualties.
5000 out of 300 and some odd million is not such a travesty as the media and Bush make it out to be.

Where is the fear factor, other than in ones mind!!

Wow you're really hyped up on this aren't you. I'm sure you never made a mistake with a nuclear weapon so I guess its fair for you to complain.

I still think it is fair for the US to have them even though Iran and Syria do not. For one thing there is the Russia and china factor. It might not be too good of an idea to let only Russia have them and not us, or only China and not us, but to carry that through to every country in the world is absurd. I know with your own brand of equanimity you can't stand that thought, but, oh well, tough luck, you don't get to make the rules.

As for the reports of the Syrian explosion, where chemical weapons accidentally exploded killing Iranians and Syrians while they were loading them into scud missles, oh well. Those things can be dangerous, and they are illegal anyway. Speculation is that those are some of the Iraqi WMD supplies that came across the border just before the Iraq war. Maybe somebody didn't lie after all moveon.

It is said that Syria has one of the most active chemical and biological weapons programs anywhere presently.

There was a report of an Israeli attack on a nuclear weapons site in Syria which was being put together somehow with the help of North Korea. So fortunate that the negotiations have put North Korea' nuclear programs to rest.

Syria, Iran and North Korea are such good neighbors, I can see why people would prefer to criticize the United States.

Fanta your title didn't have anything to do with your post.

philosopher,

We have a saying here: What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I guess you never heard that.

Your posts are getting a bit paranoid man.

All I see is you chanting speculation. Ive been reading the news and none of what you just said was anything but speculation.

Oh well, I guess with your crystal ball you know more than anyone else.

As far as it being ok for us to have Nukes and the rest of the world not to would depend upon whether you are American or a citizen of an oil producing 3rd world country. Im sure they see it as a deterrent from the nuke-em-all fanatics in this country like you.

My greatest wish would be for nobody to posses Nukes, but Im sure with your self righteous egotistical attitude you are going to tell me how wrong that idea is!!!

Oops, I think there is a car at the drive through waiting on you to serve them.

Hurry back!!!

Fanta,

You wrote:
"... Oops, I think there is a car at the drive through waiting on you to serve them."

Is that legal what you just said there, 'cause it sure was funny!!!

Come on 'philosopher', got to admit that was funny!!!

Sorry 'anoasis',

I got distracted.

Always refreshing to read around.

And it is very missing that you do not appear on my very short list of friends. Let's fix that soon!

Whats up Voil?

Just think you're hosting great threads of late. The angle you come from is grounded and responsible.

You are one examplary proud US citizen if there is one, and with the sAme breadth, capable of ruthless auto-criticism.

That is the definition of true freedom to me. Freedoms with responsibilities as a direct correlate.

Charter of freedoms YES!!!
But equal charter of RESPONSIBILITIES!!!

Just to complete that thought:

When you come from that responsible, auto-critique way of being free, as you do Fanta, one has no time to fall down to the petty, opportunistic perversion of freedom, false freedom most practice: politicians and most of us citizens.

Tired!!!!

I have too many formulas and laws wrapping themselves around in my brain! Ampere, Volta, Coulomb, Ohm, Watt, Joule, Siemens, Temperature coefficients, and DeMorgan has a Boolean up his ass, and then....there is Physics!!!

I forgot where I lived earlier today!!!

Are you sure you'll be able to find your bed without any help?
I don't want you to take a right when it's on the left, you could fall into the toilet.

Oops, did I just say that?????

@ Andrea!!