Place your bets on the likeliness of the filibuster in this thread.

[Sparko]

That statement reminds me of a guy I worked for back in the 1990s. He would often rail on about how all liberals are evil and nothing but evil. One day when he got himself particularly worked up I reminded him that he had upon occasion said that both his wife and daughter were liberal and asked him if he thought they were evil. This shocked him and he stammered about how they were simply misinformed. I then asked him if it was possible that other liberals, perhaps even a majority, could likewise be simply misinformed. He agreed it was possible and from that point on I never heard him proclaim that all liberals were evil although he certainly would say it about certain liberals (mostly those who held political office).

Yep. basically both liberals and conservatives have the same goals, but have different philosophies on how to accomplish them. Take the poor for instance. Liberals look at the poor and say "We need to help them! They can't get jobs so we will give them enough money to live on and make the rich people pay for it!." Conservatives look at the poor and say, "We need to help them! We can help them get jobs and teach them how to bring themselves out of poverty and become richer. They just have to work at it! And we can save welfare for those who genuinely can't work because of severe disabilities"

[Sparko]

Well stated as usual Jim.

The Republican elected representatives seem to be generally aiming to set a new world record for corruption and destruction of their own country and for screwing over their own voters. They are way past being a normal political party that just has 'different values' - the elected Republican representatives have shown time and again that they are not there to represent the values of their voters - they are there to screw over their voters, destroy their own country, dismantle their own government, in order to serve the interests of the multinational corporate lobbyists who are their real masters. They are a force for evil, the likes of which I have rarely seen, and as Sam used to say they have become more analogous to a terrorist group than a political party.

The conservatives were not the ones who basically armed Iran with nuclear weapons and paid them to do it. derp. Thanks Obama!

[JimL]

The conservatives were not the ones who basically armed Iran with nuclear weapons and paid them to do it. derp. Thanks Obama!

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, thanks to Obama. But as far as arming Iran goes, I have two words for you. "Iran Contra"

[Sparko]

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, thanks to Obama. But as far as arming Iran goes, I have two words for you. "Iran Contra"

You believe that? If they don't already have them, they will very soon and we gave them the money to spend on it and have allowed the nuclear power plant that can lead to them making bombs too. And they have been strutting around claiming they will launch missiles at America at any provocation.

Iran Contra was indeed an idiotic thing to do, but that was 30 years ago and has no bearing on today's Iran or their weapon capabilities.

[Starlight]

If they don't already have them, they will very soon

They agreed not to get nuclear weapons and to let international nuclear inspection agencies do whatever checks they like of any facilities they like at any time to confirm they weren't getting nuclear weapons. Various intelligence agencies also concluded that the Iranians didn't want nuclear weapons, merely nuclear power plants for electricity.

and have allowed the nuclear power plant that can lead to them making bombs too.

So it turns out that the laws of physics are a thing, and as a result nuclear power plants and nuclear bombs are very different things. I know you don't have to change the words much to get from one to the other, but in practice they're very different and require a lot of effort to get from one to the other.

And they have been strutting around claiming they will launch missiles at America at any provocation.

Dude, calm your farm. America is on the other side of the world from Iran, if Iran were to create a nuclear weapon there's no way they could get the thing to America.

North Korea has had nuclear weapons for a decade now because George Bush was asleep at the helm and let them develop nuclear weapons under his watch, but they're no threat at all to any countries that aren't near them because they completely lack the advanced missile technology that would be required to fly a nuclear missile a long distance.

If Iran was feeling completely suicidal and had a nuke, they might try to use it on Israel (knowing that Israel has plenty of nukes of its own to use in retaliation) which is 500 miles away which is about the absolute upper limit of the range of their best missiles. Except Israel has the highly-effective anti-missile Iron Dome technology that can shoot down anything and everything. Whereas the distance to the US is an order of magnitude higher than that, so Iranian missiles simply can't go that far... and do you seriously think that the US which spends more on military tech than the next 10 nations put together couldn't shoot down a single inbound missile coming from half a world away thus giving them about an hour's warning when their Israelis allies can shoot down dozens of missiles at once with no warning at all?

[JimL]

You believe that?

Well now, there is a problem, you simply believe what you want to believe based on absolutely nothing but your belief.

If they don't already have them, they will very soon and we gave them the money to spend on it and have allowed the nuclear power plant that can lead to them making bombs too. And they have been strutting around claiming they will launch missiles at America at any provocation.

Sparko, the terms of the Iran nuclear agreement is for 10 years. So they won't soon have nuclear weapons and the lifted sanctions and return of their money as part of that agreement can't be used for making bombs because intense inspections, should they violate them, would nix the very treaty they signed on to. Without that agreement, they might well have nuclear weapons right now, but because of it, they do not.

Iran Contra was indeed an idiotic thing to do, but that was 30 years ago and has no bearing on today's Iran or their weapon capabilities.

Your argument was that Conservatives aren't the ones who do such things as arming enemies, but actually they do. The nuclear deal with Iran by Obama actually achieved the opposite, it kept nuclear arms out of their possession for at least 10 years.

[Starlight]

Well now, there is a problem, you simply believe what you want to believe based on absolutely nothing but your belief.

It's called faith.

[Sparko]

They agreed not to get nuclear weapons and to let international nuclear inspection agencies do whatever checks they like of any facilities they like at any time to confirm they weren't getting nuclear weapons. Various intelligence agencies also concluded that the Iranians didn't want nuclear weapons, merely nuclear power plants for electricity.

Pull the other one!

So it turns out that the laws of physics are a thing, and as a result nuclear power plants and nuclear bombs are very different things. I know you don't have to change the words much to get from one to the other, but in practice they're very different and require a lot of effort to get from one to the other.

You really are a dolt. You can used nuclear power plants to enrich uranium for making bombs.

Dude, calm your farm. America is on the other side of the world from Iran, if Iran were to create a nuclear weapon there's no way they could get the thing to America.

They are called missiles.

[JimL]

You really are a dolt. You can used nuclear power plants to enrich uranium for making bombs.

A nuclear power plant is not a uranium enrichment plant. Nuclear power plants use uranium as fuel, they don't produce weapons grade uranium.

[Sparko]

A nuclear power plant is not a uranium enrichment plant. Nuclear power plants use uranium as fuel, they don't produce weapons grade uranium.

Did you read the link?

[rogue06]

Dude, calm your farm. America is on the other side of the world from Iran, if Iran were to create a nuclear weapon there's no way they could get the thing to America.

Actually it would be pretty easy.

For instance, put it in a lead-lined container inside an oil tanker. You don't even need to dock it where we've got radiation detectors and other equipment to search for just such a thing but set it off inside the port as they approach the dock.

They also have submarines and have launched missiles from them.

[JimL]

Did you read the link?

Yes I did, you must have misunderstood. Uranium isn't produced by nuclear power plants, and nuclear power plants can't be used to enrich uranium, its the fuel that the plant needs to operate. But, enriched uranium, weapons grade uranium, is produced in centrifuges, not in nuclear power plants.

[One Bad Pig]

Yes I did, you must have misunderstood. Uranium isn't produced by nuclear power plants, and nuclear power plants can't be used to enrich uranium, its the fuel that the plant needs to operate. But, enriched uranium, weapons grade uranium, is produced in centrifuges, not in nuclear power plants.

Yes, Sparko misunderstood. The point of the article is that the very same equipment that is used to enrich uranium for nuclear power plants is also used to produce weapons grade uranium. Of course, there ARE so-called "breeder" reactors which produce polonium, another fissionable material which can be weaponized.

[Sparko]

Yes, Sparko misunderstood. The point of the article is that the very same equipment that is used to enrich uranium for nuclear power plants is also used to produce weapons grade uranium. Of course, there ARE so-called "breeder" reactors which produce polonium, another fissionable material which can be weaponized.

yes.