Re: Former commando Ahmadinejad: "threat of military action against Iran is a joke"


<vjp2.at@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e3k5co$gh7$4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm not convinced Iran actually exists: just as with the 1980
hostages, there seem to be roving bands of thugs, as soon as one of
them approaches compromise with us, another one pushes them over.
Iranians must realy be suicidal to allow the mudsucking masochists who
built Chernobyl to put reactors on top of their quake faults?

A 1979 NSC study by Huntington determined that in a hypothetical
all-out 1978 nuclear war 80-90% of soviet land as opposed to 35-65% of
USA would survive [Civil Defense, Sen. Bnkg. Comte.,08JAN79, p.30]

1978 is not 2006. Here in 2006 our targeting is many times better and more
accurate than the Russians. Both our missiles and warheads are far more
reliable. We can still range over Russia with bombers, they can no longer
do that too us. Today Russia relies entirely on ICBMs and submarines, they
long ago gave up any hope of actually flying bombers over the US. On top of
that, Russia controls far fewer ICBMs than it did during the Cold War, and
operates far fewer submarines as well. They are much, much, much weaker
today than they were during the Cold War. In fact, up until the
early-to-mid 1980's the Russians had always been vastly more powerful than
us. It was the US that relied on nuclear weapons for defense, without them
NATO would have stood little chance against the Soviets in Europe and taking
it back from them would be nearly impossible. But that all changed shortly
after the 1978 year of the study you are referring too, it turned completely
around through technology. The beginning of the collapse of the Soviet
Union was the early 1980's when we began to revolutionize our military
capabilities. By the end of the decade we had advanced about 30 years in
comparison too the Russians. This is why Reagan is credited with winning
the Cold War, he certainly didn't do it alone, but he approved most of the
"secret projects" of his day for full production which quickly became too
much for the Russians to keep up with. Today the Russians really are no
match for us. If anything, we could possibly win a nuclear war with them
today. But really, nobody really "wins" a nuclear war between global
superpowers, since at best it would plunge the world into a new dark age
that would probably last centuries and at worst would destroy all major
forms of life on the planet. It's a really bad idea.


The idea of nuclear overkill and nuclear winter is from the same
fools who bring you global warming. In fact the insanity behind
nuclear overkill dies away when you raise the kilotonnage multiplier
to the two thirds power because bombs don't multiply in the upwards
direction. The soviets always believed nuclear war was winnable.

Actually, I think Carl Sagan was the originator of the "Nuclear Winter"
theory. And it is entirely possible, multiple Volcanic eruptions could
potentially do essentially the same thing. In fact, there is evidence that
just a single volcano once cause "the year without summer" during our
recorded history. Nuclear Winter could definately happen, and if it does
happen it means that after a certain number of nuclear detonations almost
everything on the planet dies.

Some Russian generals beleived a nuclear war was winnable, some American
generals did too. Fortunately, the considered opinion of both sides is that
it was not winnable. Which is a good thing, because it really isn't. It
would certainly cause the collapse of civilization, which is enough to say
that everyone lost.


The problem is not Islam, it is Nasser, Aflaq, Uspesky, Nesselrode,
manifested as Putin's Persyrus Obshina criminal enterprise. The Cold
War never ended, it only paused.

The current problem is definately radical fundamentalist islam. Not all of
islam, just the crazy ones. Their versions of our "Neo-Nazis". You are
somewhat right about the Cold War, though. It did end, but the fact that
their are still two nations capable of destroying the planet has not
changed. It isn't ever going too, either, until nuclear weapons have been
rendered obsolete by some unforseen future technology. There is no such
thing as "disarming" until then, since other countries would simply build
arsenals in secret and all you would accomplish would be to play "musical
superpowers". It is far safer to leave them in the hands of the two nations
who have 60 years of expeirence with them, and in dealing with each other.
The US and Russia spent 50 years coiled and ready to strike and yet at the
same time not a single shot was ever fired between them. US and Russian
military have NEVER fought, not once in 50 years. These are definately the
countries you want holding the keys to your planet.


.