Massive retaliation against Iran if the government of Iran attacks Israel with nuclear weapons...

[Boojatta]

isn't that evidence of a double standard? After all, cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, were published in newspapers in Europe. Nevertheless, the government of Iran did not respond with massive retaliation against Israel.

[Ian David]

1. What strange fucking world do you live in, and what drugs do I need to avoid to stay out of it? n/t

[smiley_glad_hands]

2. So publishing cartoons is the same as nuking someone?

Not quite sure I understand what you are asking or saying.

[Lilith Velkor]

3. Massive retaliation against my ass if monkeys fly out of it

:woohoo:

[LSK]

8. you better draw up plans soon thou

You never know!

[Warren Stupidity]

4. I am trying to figure out if there is anything actually right about

your post.

Equating nukes and toons: obviously that dog won't hunt.

Denmark paper publishes nasty toons, Iran did not retaliate against Israel. Hmmm...wtf?

Self-medicated mishap?

[Boojatta]

6. "Denmark paper publishes nasty toons, Iran did not retaliate against Israel. Hmmm...wtf?"

Well, Israel certainly isn't KFC. You've got a point there.

[rug]

9. Welcome to GDP, where people are as touchy as burn victims.

[JoFerret]

5. Stop bringing up serious topics

This board is for calling people names and whining.

[LSK]

7. so, 1 Iran has no nuclear weapons, 2 Iran has not attacked anyone in 200 years

So 3 Hillary is a clueless warmonger.

[Lilith Velkor]

16. 4 she's just being prepared for flying ass-monkeys

Nothing wrong with that!

[Jed Dilligan]

10. You should let your cat do the posting,

he has a random chance of making sense higher than yours apparently is.

[Boojatta]

11. When a cat hits the keyboard and inputs an apostrophe...

we have a situation best described as a catastrophe.

[Bucky]

12. Remind me... was Iran attacked with conventional cartoons or nuclear cartoons?

But seriously, if they do launch a nuke at Israel, we should drop the big Marmaduke on them, then follow up with a ruthless barrage of Ziggy until they cry Uncle (Scrooge).

[40ozDonkey]

13. I actually can't argue, this kind of logic got us into Iraq.

Although I'd wager that the average Iranian is way fucking smarter than the best neocon, so it probably wouldn't work after all.

[Dr. Strange]

14. This needs to be a poll.

[joefargo]

15. The "attacks" need not be nuclear.

Senator Clinton did not say that the attacks had to be nuclear attacks against those covered under the security umbrella. Had she said "nuclear attacks" it would have changed her proposed policy somewhat, but she didn't. She begs us to take her seriously on foreign policy as she is so experienced in that regard, therefore, not saying "nuclear attack" and leaving it as unqualified attacks is what she meant.

If we were Mideast countries, we would get together and draw straws as to who is today's reckless nation. The reason is simple. Having a rogue increases the price of oil considerably while also depleting the super power economy and military. It's a two-fer in a huge way. Nothing beats conflict among oil nations in increasing the price of oil. They have found a stupendous strategy for milking the largest economy in the world and Senator Clinton is showing her willingness to play. Anyone who has strong ties to oil and gas would want to keep the this pricing machine cranking.