Iran Leader: Israel Will Be Annihilated

[nibls66]

Iran Leader: Israel Will Be Annihilated
AP - 1 hour, 48 minutes ago

TEHRAN, Iran - The president of Iran again lashed out at Israel on Friday and said it was "heading toward annihilation," just days after Tehran raised fears about its nuclear activities by saying it successfully enriched uranium for the first time. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called Israel a "permanent threat" to the Middle East that will "soon" be liberated. He also appeared to again question whether the Holocaust really happened.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060414/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_israel_3

***
no comment necessary

[DOGG]

edited in proper link. not sure if you guys wanna move it to the war forum or front page, i'll leave it here for now.

[DOGG]

"The three-day conference on Palestine is being attended by officials of Hamas, the ruling party in the Palestinian territories."

Perhaps he's just telling them what they wanna hear?

Even if that were the case he's still a moron.

[berserk]

Maybe he's adopting the Dubya Bush method of international diplomacy i.e. juvenile name calling.

[maccabean]

exactly the reason why something must be done about iran.

even if it involves unilateral bombing campaigns by the USA (reluctantly)

[Sutter]

exactly the reason why something must be done about iran.

even if it involves unilateral bombing campaigns by the USA (reluctantly)
An you don't think that would make them just as bad a Iran? You know, decideing to bomb a country they thing is a threat without UN support.

[Mr Bigglesworth]

Hes also categorically said that Iran has no intentions of attacking anybody at all and that he considered the Zionist regime (as he calls it) to be in terminal decline, not that he would attack it.

Theres as much crap about Iran being evil as there is about Israel being a good neighbour that obeys the rule of international law.

[Evil Dan]

This is why possession of nuclear weapons should have a mandatory I.Q test attached to it.

[IamSpartacus]

Since the Americans have been the only country mad enough to use a nuclear weapon against another nation (well 2 bombs really) I suggest that America should not allowed to have any nukes at all.

Besides the peaceful use of nuclear technology for power generation, I am all for Iran having not just one, but a whole clutchful of nuclear weapons. For a start it'd fuck off the USA and stop this girly sabre rattling the US is on about at the mo.

Iran with nukes will make for a much safer world.

[banga]

Since the Americans have been the only country mad enough to use a nuclear weapon against another nation (well 2 bombs really) I suggest that America should not allowed to have any nukes at all.

Besides the peaceful use of nuclear technology for power generation, I am all for Iran having not just one, but a whole clutchful of nuclear weapons. For a start it'd fuck off the USA and stop this girly sabre rattling the US is on about at the mo.

Iran with nukes will make for a much safer world.
your kidding right ?? have you seen the loony prick thats in charge now ?

[ezer]

yeah, im all for mad, just iran may be mad enough to start mad!

[Jimma]

Way to take this in a way that let's you make bombing Iran look good. He has stated before he does not suggest he will attack anyone, including Israel, but that they will destroy themselves.

As for wanting Iran to have Nuclear weapons, that is stupid. I want them to have Nuclear power because it's fairly renewable and will leave Iran free to force oil prices higher without hurting themselves. Hopefully all oil producing nations will do the same, reducing the time between now and a more sustainable energy source powering the rest of the world.

It'd be great if no nations had nuclear weapons, but unlikely to happen any time soon.

[darns]

NO nation deserves to have a nuclear arsenal. There is no compelling reason to continue developing nuclear arsenal, unless to threaten those that do not have them.

The problem is, to get out of this bullied position, countries like Iran have resorted to joining to nuclear club. The message since Iraq (and Korea) has been clear - Develop nuclear weapons, avoid Iraq's fate -

And oh, did I mention, NO nation deserves nuclear weapons?

[IamSpartacus]

I'm with Darns on this one and he has tabled a more elegant argument.

[IamSpartacus]

your kidding right ?? have you seen the loony prick thats in charge now ?

Can't be any worse than Joh Bjelke-Petersen & his cronies.

(n.b. I lived in Brissy for 15 years) :D

[IamSpartacus]

your kidding right ?? have you seen the loony prick thats in charge now ?

Can't be any worse than Joh Bjelke-Petersen & his cronies.

(n.b. I lived in Brissy for 15 years) :D

[maccabean]

Hes also categorically said that Iran has no intentions of attacking anybody at all and that he considered the Zionist regime (as he calls it) to be in terminal decline, not that he would attack it.

Theres as much crap about Iran being evil as there is about Israel being a good neighbour that obeys the rule of international law.

proof? can you find any articles on this?

conversly, i can find many many articles that link the terror hezbollah to iran...and hezbollah are STILL launching attacks on israel years after israel withdrew from south lebanon.

sutter: an attack on iran would make the USA just as bad i suppose but what i'm saying is that without intervention, the radical state of Iran is very dangerous.

as seen in the past UN boycotts are useless. you must agree with this.

[Mr Bigglesworth]

proof? can you find any articles on this?

Fucking look it up yourself you lazy git! Does mummy still spoon-feed you as well?


conversly, i can find many many articles that link the terror hezbollah to iran...and hezbollah are STILL launching attacks on israel years after israel withdrew from south lebanon.

I suppose Hezbollah also caused the genocide at Shatila and Sabra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre). Oh wait, thats not genocide. A cull, maybe.


as seen in the past UN boycotts are useless. you must agree with this.

Yeah, how many times has the UN told Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories!

The UN is useless, as you say.

[Skot]

Well done everyone for reacting to propaganda.

[royale]

your kidding right ?? have you seen the loony prick thats in charge now ?

Of iran or america?

[maccabean]

Fucking look it up yourself you lazy git! Does mummy still spoon-feed you as well?


I suppose Hezbollah also caused the genocide at Shatila and Sabra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre). Oh wait, thats not genocide. A cull, maybe.



Yeah, how many times has the UN told Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories!

The UN is useless, as you say.

your such an idiot, since when is it up to me to prove your bullshit? you make statments that you can't back up by a simple search on the internet.

what has sabra and shatila have to do with anything? what has that got to do with iran? its like me saying...yeh but the arabs massacred the israelis in hebron in 1938.

but yes, the UN is useless, all the more reason for unitlateral intervention.

[maccabean]

"Jimma - You want America to Bomb Iran because Iran said, without specifying in what capacity or how realistically, that Palestine would be freed?"

what? i don't understand what your talking about here.

Firstly I don't want the USA to bomb iran.
Secondly, I don't know what this has to do with the palestinians.
thirdly, If all else fails (sanctions, diplomacy etc) i believe a strike against Iran in imperative - but it doesn't necessarily have to be by the USA - and as i said, i don't think the UN has any power to do it.

[Mr Bigglesworth]

your such an idiot, since when is it up to me to prove your bullshit? you make statments that you can't back up by a simple search on the internet.


Straight from the horses mouth:
- Ahmadinejad advises western countries to open doors to Jews
(http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/10/30/index-e.htm#b2)
- Ahmadinejad: Iran wants peace, security, progress in region (http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/12/08/index-e.htm#b4)
- Iran ready to host 'human rights' conference between Islamic, European thinkers (http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/10/11/#b1), where he talks about Israel and how if Europe committed the Holocaust, why are the Palestinians paying for it today for an illegal occupation.

You also should be aware that Iran is the only Islamic state in the world that has a designated Jewish MP who is there to represent the 300,000 Jews who live in Iran.

what has sabra and shatila have to do with anything? what has that got to do with iran? its like me saying...yeh but the arabs massacred the israelis in hebron in 1938.


I wonder if the massacre in 1982 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra-Shatila_massacre) had any bearing on Hezbollah coming about in the same year, and Islamic Jihad forming in 1983 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Jihad)?

but yes, the UN is useless, all the more reason for unitlateral intervention.
So you acknowledge that Israel has violated scores of UN General Assembly motions, and has flaunted any Security Council proposed resolution because of the US veto?

Heres the deal, either Israel loses its nukes, or Iran get them as well. I will tell you with absolute certainty that if the US invades Iran because of this issue, not only will WW3 come about, but it will polarise the world so much that the US will never be in a position of authority ever again.

[Jimma]

"Jimma - You want America to Bomb Iran because Iran said, without specifying in what capacity or how realistically, that Palestine would be freed?"

what? i don't understand what your talking about here.

Firstly I don't want the USA to bomb iran.
Secondly, I don't know what this has to do with the palestinians.
thirdly, If all else fails (sanctions, diplomacy etc) i believe a strike against Iran in imperative - but it doesn't necessarily have to be by the USA - and as i said, i don't think the UN has any power to do it.
I suggest there is no justification for attacking Iran. I suggested that Iran haven't threatened Israel, even if you disagree. I suggest that Iran are no more dangerous than America are. They're less dangerous if anything, as they haven't started any wars recently and don't have nuclear weapons.

[gimpieman]

biggles has a point

if Israel is gonna bitch about their enemy then show some balls and get rid of your nukes. Or, better still they can both get nukes and destroy each other in any way they see fit. World is better off that way.

[IamSpartacus]

Iran lost over 400,000 combatants in the near ten year long Iran-Iraq war. Western governments and corporations fed Iraq with military hardware and the chemical weapons materials. No hard numbers to hand, but I have read of nearly 2 million injured too. Prez Moussaoui himself and his ministers regularly pay homage to the sacrifices than Iranian families have made during the war. So what does Iran have to fear from the West ?.

So .... put yourself in Iran's shoes. There I am in the Persian gulf and on my my eastern border Afghanistan muhajadeen put up a firm resistance to the Soviet Invasion; also post-911 the USA blew things up and are causing all sorts of shit. On my south eastern border is Pakistan, which is still a 'new' country and has developed nukes; and is also governmentally is so pro-US these days. To my north are Turkmenistan and other ex-USSR states which have a creeping US military presence. To my northwest is Turkey ... well a bit of Turkey with Kurdish issues. To my west is Iraq which we have had a big scrap with, two American led miltary conflicts and a large US occupying force in situ at the mo. Well to my southwest and south I have the holy cities and my very very oil rich neighbours.

Fucking hell, Iran isn't just a target on a map that you an throw darts at, Iran is a country surrounded by chaos, despots and an ever encroaching western presence led by the USA.

Israel bombed an Iraqi nuclear power station quite a few years ago .... so now the US is threatening to attack soverign Iranian soil. I see Prez Moussaoui's rhetoric to be quite astute, well placed & versed. So whilst Iran may be attacked by the US, Prez Moussaoui is preparing his country for a big kickoff with the US (and it's puppetmasters e.g. Israel).

[maccabean]

biggles has a point

if Israel is gonna bitch about their enemy then show some balls and get rid of your nukes. Or, better still they can both get nukes and destroy each other in any way they see fit. World is better off that way.

Israel is bitching about its enemy because Iran is calling for the destruction of Israel. Not because it is simply gaining nuclear weapons. If Iran was neutral towards Israel, Israel could not give a stuff if Iran obtained nuclear weapons - just take pakistan for example.

Question: Say Israel didn't have nuclear weapons (nevermind whether it actually does or not) and Iran got its hands on some nukes, and decided to nuke Israel - Israel would be finished - and that is exactly what Iran is calling
for at the moment.

So your telling me, the Israel should just accept the possibility of being nuked? are you serious?

Bigglesworth: Iran has 11,000 jews. not 300,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews
most of them left because of severe oppression. Thanks for pointing that out.

secondly: i'm impressed with the link to this President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad website. Seems like a pretty peaceful well meaning guy.

do you honestly, honestly trust him with comments like this:
"Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation," Ahmadinejad said at the opening of a conference in support of the Palestinians. "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."

i don't think any country should live with threats like that.

[IamSpartacus]

Whatever happened to Sticks and stones will break by bones but words will never hurt me ?.

Crikey Maccabean do you know how many nukes it will take to destroy a country ?. A nuke is just a big bomb with a radiological residue.There's no use doing all of that tons of TNT per head of population stuff as that is silly maths. Nukes are just big big bombs.

If (say) Iran nuked a nice juicy Israeli target, do you think Israel will sit on its arse whilst the world's nations mulled about what to do. No. The Israelis would unleash a pretty severe larger counterstike. Of course we'd also have an immediate Russian,American and the rest rising up on alert status in case of a bigger kickoff.


I'd frankly be more concerned about bioweapons rather than nukes. Bioweapons are far easier to develop, conceal and have a certain sinisterness about them.

[Jimma]

Hey maccabean, how come the only discussion you ever enter are the ones about Israel and Judaism?

[darns]

I think maccabean is a jew, possibly residing in Israel.. or the US.

I do have online Isreali friends in the online game i used to play. We played together for almost 5 years and at times he goes offline for months to serve in the Isreali military. If there is any indication of the jewish population, my friends do not harbor any ill will against the arabs (or Iran) and definately seems like a peaceful bunch.

Most of the times, it's the leaders of a country that does all the saber rattling and war mongering, and in the end it's the citizens of the countries that suffer.

[Jimma]

I'm pretty sure he's an Aussie actually. I know plenty of Israeli people and they're no different to anyone else - some are wankers and some are tops. I'm against the existence of Israel but not against the Israeli people.

[Mr Bigglesworth]

Question: Say Israel didn't have nuclear weapons (nevermind whether it actually does or not) and Iran got its hands on some nukes, and decided to nuke Israel - Israel would be finished - and that is exactly what Iran is calling for at the moment.

Love it when you question an Israeli about nukes ..... we dont confirm or deny having them. Maybe Iran should use the same approach, if their leader has done something wrong its talking too much.

Do you seriously think that Iran would unilaterally nuke Israel? Despite the fact that they hate Israel, I doubt very much that anyone would be crazy enough to nuke anyone else (including America).


So your telling me, the Israel should just accept the possibility of being nuked? are you serious?

Everyone else in the world does ..... even living in Australia, the USA's greatest arselicker, it could conceivably happen one day.


Bigglesworth: Iran has 11,000 jews. not 300,000. [url]

My bad ..... it was supposed to read 30,000, as stated in the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4705246.stm).

If anything, it goes to show that Iran is alot more progressive than other arab states, one MP for 30,000 people is pretty good representation. In Australia one MP represents 80,000 at a Federal level and 30,000 at a state level.


secondly: i'm impressed with the link to this President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad website. Seems like a pretty peaceful well meaning guy.

Much more peaceful than your former prime minister, who incldentally was wanted by a war crimes commission. Like Milosevic, it looks like he will also get away with it.


do you honestly, honestly trust him with comments like this:
"Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation," Ahmadinejad said at the opening of a conference in support of the Palestinians. "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."

With Israeli actions against Palestinians dont you think its a pressure-cooker situation. To be blunt I am suprised that the region hasnt decended into war already.

Israel, as the black sheep of the Middle East family, should be doing alot more to earn respect from its neighbours, than dictate terms and have its big brother (the US) stand behind them.

[Up_All_Night]

israel is stuffed and cant last by looking at population groth statistics.

i still maintain, the palestianians living under oppression of the israelies, should move for civial rights and just form one country where everyones equal. Its a better solution than living with guns pointed at them, even if a seperate country, they'll never be free.

[IamSpartacus]

As the Levellers sang a few years ago ....

No matter what country
Under the sun
You can't mete justice
From the barrel of a gun

[Nodbugger]

Whatever happened to Sticks and stones will break by bones but words will never hurt me ?.

Crikey Maccabean do you know how many nukes it will take to destroy a country ?. A nuke is just a big bomb with a radiological residue.There's no use doing all of that tons of TNT per head of population stuff as that is silly maths. Nukes are just big big bombs.

If (say) Iran nuked a nice juicy Israeli target, do you think Israel will sit on its arse whilst the world's nations mulled about what to do. No. The Israelis would unleash a pretty severe larger counterstike. Of course we'd also have an immediate Russian,American and the rest rising up on alert status in case of a bigger kickoff.


I'd frankly be more concerned about bioweapons rather than nukes. Bioweapons are far easier to develop, conceal and have a certain sinisterness about them.


You act like this guy actually cares for the well being of Iran.

He cares for only himself. He couldn't care less if everyone else in Iran died, as long as he got to be ruler of it.

If he really cared for his country he would step down and promote a full and peaceful democracy. He would remove terrorists. Come up with some sane laws and start working with other countries in the region to stabilize.

[Nodbugger]

israel is stuffed and cant last by looking at population groth statistics.

i still maintain, the palestianians living under oppression of the israelies, should move for civial rights and just form one country where everyones equal. Its a better solution than living with guns pointed at them, even if a seperate country, they'll never be free.

Hah, thats so funny. Palestinians are living under oppression from the Arab countries around them. Not Israel. Israel would have no problem if they stopped allowing suicide bombers and terrorists to exist there.

[Scythe]

You act like this guy actually cares for the well being of Iran.

He cares for only himself. He couldn't care less if everyone else in Iran died, as long as he got to be ruler of it.

If he really cared for his country he would step down and promote a full and peaceful democracy. He would remove terrorists. Come up with some sane laws and start working with other countries in the region to stabilize.

That pretty much sums up Nodbugger's thinking and why it's idiotic to keep trying to argue with him.

All his thinking begins from the assumption that there is only one "right" way to operate, and it's the one he believes in, and therefore any differing opinions must by default be incorrect.

Please, people, for your own well-being, just ignore him and move on with your lives.

[Mr Bigglesworth]

Let me fix your post up a bit.

You act like this guy actually cares for the well being of America.

He cares for only himself. He couldn't care less if everyone else in America died, as long as he got to be ruler of it.

If he really cared for his country he would step down and promote a full and peaceful democracy. He would remove terrorists. Come up with some sane laws and start working with other countries in the region to stabilize.

Now thats better.

[maccabean]

Whatever happened to Sticks and stones will break by bones but words will never hurt me ?.

Crikey Maccabean do you know how many nukes it will take to destroy a country ?. A nuke is just a big bomb with a radiological residue.There's no use doing all of that tons of TNT per head of population stuff as that is silly maths. Nukes are just big big bombs.

If (say) Iran nuked a nice juicy Israeli target, do you think Israel will sit on its arse whilst the world's nations mulled about what to do. No. The Israelis would unleash a pretty severe larger counterstike. Of course we'd also have an immediate Russian,American and the rest rising up on alert status in case of a bigger kickoff.


I'd frankly be more concerned about bioweapons rather than nukes. Bioweapons are far easier to develop, conceal and have a certain sinisterness about them.

Ok, say Iran is about to attack, do you think Israel should just sit back until the first bomb drops or do you think it should take pre-emptive action?
At what point does the rhetoric become so hateful that something has to be done before the words are turned into action?
How can you predict when a country is about to attack after a certain buildup of arms? (or nukes in the case of Iran)
I think this is a valid question that does not just concern Israel.

Secondly, do you think Israel can afford to rely on any particlar country for assistance if it is attacked? As mentioned, the UN is useless and as it is, America is being critisized for its support of Israel. History tells us, that countries cannot rely on assistance from any other country in times of conflict. Your allies today are not necessarily the allies of tomorrow.

Ok, say Iran nukes israel and israel retaliates...this is not the most ideal situation...this must be prevented at all costs and so America bombing Iran now, COULD prevent a much bigger risk that would cost many more lives.

Jimma, I live in malaysia, most of my freinds here a muslim, i am jewish though rather disconnected at that but i do post in other threads, i'm just rather passionate about Israel because i think it regularly gets an unfair bashing.

[Ic3]

My bad ..... it was supposed to read 30,000, as stated in the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4705246.stm).

If anything, it goes to show that Iran is alot more progressive than other arab states, one MP for 30,000 people is pretty good representation. In Australia one MP represents 80,000 at a Federal level and 30,000 at a state level.

We do however have 1 Jewish MP that looks after 33,000 Jews I believe, in Melbourne Ports, however that also includes the other 50,000 who aren't Jewish. I think those numbers are correct, but i couldn't be bothered confirming them, just going on from memory...

[Up_All_Night]

Ok, say Iran nukes israel and israel retaliates...this is not the most ideal situation...this must be prevented at all costs and so America bombing Iran now, COULD prevent a much bigger risk that would cost many more lives.


so just in case Iran might bomb Israel, which there is no proof they will or have any intention to, we must bomb them....... right... no wonder they want some fucking protection...

the biggest certaintity is about Iran being attacked, not Iran attacking anyone.

[Nodbugger]

That pretty much sums up Nodbugger's thinking and why it's idiotic to keep trying to argue with him.

All his thinking begins from the assumption that there is only one "right" way to operate, and it's the one he believes in, and therefore any differing opinions must by default be incorrect.

Please, people, for your own well-being, just ignore him and move on with your lives.


I simply refuse to believe someone as stupid as you exists.

[nrejones]

Jeez religion is piss poor.

[Scythe]

Ok, say Iran is about to attack, do you think Israel should just sit back until the first bomb drops or do you think it should take pre-emptive action?
At what point does the rhetoric become so hateful that something has to be done before the words are turned into action?
How can you predict when a country is about to attack after a certain buildup of arms? (or nukes in the case of Iran)
I think this is a valid question that does not just concern Israel.

The problem is, a large part of Iranian defiance and questionable activities is that, should Israel decide to act preemptively and strike Iran, Iran would be in the exact same position that you assert Israel would be in if they were attacked by a nuclear Iran (i.e. forced to stand alone against a nuclear power, since they cannot rely on other nations to aid them).

All things being equal, i'd prefer Israel have a bomb, but not Iran, since Israel is less likely to deploy such a weapon in an ordinary war, except as a last resort.

The thing is, that's a situation that's never going to happen. The Muslim nations that surround Israel simply do not trust Jewish intentions, and the presence of an Israeli bomb will force them to attempt to develop weapons of their own, simply by virtue of its existence. Bombs breed bombs.

[maccabean]

good point scythe.

i believe this trust will only be forged when fundamentalism is eradicated from the region...

and this will only happen when the imams stop preaching hatred, recognition of israel's right to exist, and asssurances that israeli neighbors aren't going to invade ever again (unless provoked i suppose)

i will concede that israel needs to allow the palestinians to have their own state with proper borders and assure its neighbors that it is not looking to expand its borders (unless provoked, as in the case of the golan).

[Scythe]

i will concede that israel needs to allow the palestinians to have their own state with proper borders and assure its neighbors that it is not looking to expand its borders (unless provoked, as in the case of the golan).

Again, the problem is that every time Israel responds to provocation, as when it launches missiles into civilian housing after a suicide bombing in an effort to kill a terrorist, it's yet another excuse that can be used to continue the cycle, since they usually kill a few bystanders in the process.

The only way the peace process is truly going to find a foothold is if one side or the other simply refuses to rise to provocations, no matter how terrible the price. If they remain in a defensive posture, eventually that's going to prove that they are truly dedicated to peace, no matter the cost. That would be the only way to build trust to such a level that a peace process truly has a chance of success.

Sadly, I doubt either side has the political and public will to sustain the loss of as many innocent lives as such a strategy is likely to cost, even if it would save more in the long term.

[Up_All_Night]

.

i believe this trust will only be forged when fundamentalism is eradicated from the region...

and this will only happen when the imams stop preaching hatred, recognition of israel's right to exist, and asssurances that israeli neighbors aren't going to invade ever again (unless provoked i suppose)



you seem to always forget that Israel is a fundamentalist relgious country too. A country that is using religously justified policies to persecute a large population of people.



To have peace both sides have to comprimise, something israel has never been willing to do, and whys that?? because they have all the power. A more level playing field might be more inducive of peace.

[ezer]

yep, then give the palestinians nukes!


anyway i agree with scythe and up all night

[gimpieman]

"peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace, peace,"

doesn't anyone think that this might not be a possibility right now with Iran and Israel?

the best you are going to get (and im thinking optimistically) is stalemate based on military/outside govt.'s threats.

kind of like a cold war but in the desert. (not that it hasn't been happening since the early 40's and before)

[cranky]

visualise whirled peas

[nrejones]

I think we need to rapidly find a way of destroying nuclear arsenals before they can be deployed. Make a device to cause uranium and plutonium to decay so rapidly it cannot be stored for long as a weapon.

Go forth and make scientific discovery Zgeekers!

[Jimma]

You can destroy them with nuclear weapons. It's a vicious cycle.