Good for them, Build a bomb. Now build a way to deliver it. Now wait for the world to retaliate. Only the Naive would think that some backwards 3RD world country would try some sort of misguided attack on a Superpower or its Allies.

If I had to chose between the two I would chose the US. I don't trust Iran as far as I can throw it. Does that mean I agree with everything we, the US, do? No, but in the end we ARE the "Good guys." Iran doesn't have a very good record overall as opposed to the US overall.

ethonal costs about 12$ a barrel to produce. America is the only country in the world that uses their food as fuel. Millions are starving in africa because of ethanol. SOLAR POWER

WIllythemailboy: Why would Shi'a Iran give Sunni Al-Qaeda a nuclear weapon? Following FOX News a little too closely?

Opinions of Ahmadinejad aside, he's not an idiot, and he's not suicidal. Despite his attempts at distancing himself from Sunni secularist Saddam, they're vastly less nuts than Osama. Ahmadinejad and co want to see an Islamic world, sure, but I'm sure they understand that launching a nuclear terrorist attack on the U.S. would quickly lead to no world

Really, I think relations between Iran and any terrorist group, leftist or rightist, with possible exception of FARC, are strained enough without adding millennium-old religious rivalries to it. Al-Qaeda has a better shot waltzing into the multiple rusty-chain-fence decommissioned nuclear reactors in Russia and walking out with some weapons-grade uranium/plutonium than asking Iran for assistance.

Citation please.

For your information, he didn't even call for the destruction of Israel, which was essentially a misquote. You can read more about that here:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14733.htm

I find it rather odd that every time this is mentioned, what he is supposed to have said becomes even more outrageous than the last erroneous claim. Now he wants to destroy the world, apparently... ohnoes!... it would almost be funny if this kind of BS weren't being used as a justification to murder millions of Iranians, many of whom would agree with you that their president is an idiot (as do I, for that matter).

I mean, yeah, it's probably true that he has some stupid opinions about the Holocaust--like many people in that part of the world--but that's hardly reason to bomb his country to smithereens.

What? are you nuts? that has got to be the most insane thing I have ever heard!!! you sir, I am sure have never even seen a golf ball!  

someday I will be able to stop laughing at that... Oh God my sides hurt

You are both wrong. Most of both Christians and Muslims are good, law abiding, unfanatical people. However i am confused about you saying that western countries are talking about talking about "destroying the east" (except Hilary Clinton rofl). You guys both sound all pissed, so just chillax.

Okay, you all need to take a deep breath. I mean a very deep breath

The world is no longer divided into countries my friends. Nation-state globalization has pretty much ensured that a nation state now has to operate on multiple levels, including ngo's and ingo's, not to mention such far-fetched concepts as global justice and global citizenship. Therefore, talking about which country is stronger, is completely and utterly ridiculous. You can never, ever prove that one country IS stronger than another. I will of course, give you an example.

Let us presume that the United States is currently the most powerful military force on this planet. In terms of military spending, its budget is about ten times higher than that of the next high-spending military nation (China). Does that mean that the United States is stronger than everyone else? Not at all. The US economy (the very same economy that funds the military) is highly dependent on overseas imports and exports. Even more detailed, the US is highly dependent on foreign investment. If you want me to put it bluntly - the United States would go under if it were not for rich mini-states. You all seem to forget that the United States was recently 'rescued' by foreign sovereign-wealth funds. For those of you who don't know - America was pretty buggered late 07, early 08. The credit crunch affected major US based investment banks, and here I'm thinking of Citi-group and Merrill Lynch. Their debt to private US-based investors came to around 21 billion dollars. Who provided the money that rescued those banks? Singapore. Kuwait. South Korea.

If foreign states did not provide that money, the US would have easily faced another great depression - but of course, it didn't. Because it is in no one's interest to see the US go under - it has too much financial promise and gain for it to be allowed to sink.

Now take that concept and apply it to the middle east. No, Iran isnt about to go and do something really stupid, because it would lose international support, and would be completely buggered. The same applies for the rest of the middle east.

In fact, I like to think that the people in charge of middle eastern states are a WHOLE lot smarter than most of us. Which is why of course, they're not just going to sit by and wait for the oil to die out. Instead, they have began investing the money obtained from oil into creating alternative sources of money. Best example is Dubai of course - most rapidly developing city in the world, with the highest rise in living standards and business potential. You just open up any issue of The Economist, and check out some of the employment ads. About half of them are for high-ranking managerial positions in universities, banks, and corporations being founded in the middle east. By the time the oil dies out, it won't matter anymore - because they will have switched their income sources to more 'renewable' ones.