How much tolerance do you have for saber rattling?

Make of that question what you will.

:shrug:

I think the world would be a much better place under MY liberal (hey, compared to most emperors) iron boot.

that's how I feel.

I would rather it not come to even that, but will tolerate that to avoid bloodshed.

Will it bring about unwanted/unneeded bloodshed? :shrug:

:boring:

It sounds like the same shit that led up to Iraq. Total bullshit!

Haven't seen Sabre rattling like that in a long time...

A normal occurrence almost every time Buffalo plays in LA. :-(

If those fucking Iranians don't stop working on nuclear weapons, I'm going to go over there personally and kick OhMyGinIsBad's ass. If Pakistan doesn't kick Al-Queda across the border into Afghanistan, they're on my shit-list too. And the Taliban? I'd crush them with the heel of my Ropers.

Sabre rattling, what is that anyway?

Read below or watch the video segment of Scott Ritter, Former Weapons Inspector for the UN and then get back to us?

Bottom Line: The IAEA has stated that everything (all Uranium enrichment) has been accounted for.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/29/fmr_un_weapons_inspector_scott_ritter

Fmr. UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter Warns Against “Politically Motivated Hype” on Iran Nuke Program

SCOTT RITTER: Well, again, Iran is bound by its agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency. These agreements are between Iran and the IAEA. You cannot compare Iran’s arrangement with the IAEA with any other nation, so it’s an absurd argument to begin with.

Second of all, Iran’s agreements with the IAEA are—you know, the current agreements go back to 2003 period, where Iran, in exchange for Europe and the United States recognizing the legitimacy of Iran’s nuclear aspirations—that means to enrich uranium for peaceful energy uses—Iran would voluntarily agree to what’s called the additional protocol of inspections, as well as what’s known as the Subsidiary Agreement. The Subsidiary Agreement requires Iran to declare any facility at the time that it intends to produce it, create it, to build it, as opposed to the old agreement, which said Iran must declare this facility 180 days prior to the insertion of nuclear material. Iran said, “We will abide by this additional protocol of inspections and the Subsidiary Agreement on a voluntary basis, until which time the Parliament of Iran ratifies these new agreements.” These have never been ratified, so this was a voluntary submission on the part of Iran.

The key here isn’t the technicality of the legal documents; it’s about the diversion of nuclear material. And the IAEA has a 100 percent accounting for the totality of Iran’s nuclear material. So, even if Iran produces this new facility, which, by the way, is not in operation and won’t be in operation for over a year, no nuclear material has been diverted, there still is a full material balance, and the IAEA is in complete control of the situation. Iran is not in violation.

This is not a reason to panic. This is much ado about nothing. But again, we come back to the original premise: this is about political hype, the United States hyping up a capability in Iran which doesn’t exist, and that is the capability to produce nuclear weapons.

Interesting