Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Old 07-15-15, 11:46 PM
  #276  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,031
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
33) The Obama administration helped Hamas obtain the construction materials that it used to dig its terror tunnels, which it used to attack Israel.

This one is completely on topic, and I am posting the entire article.

As it says in the article, in the past, Obama made a deal with people who promised to use the equipment only for peaceful purposes. But they lied, and ended up using the equipment for terrorism.

Now in this current deal, Iran is promising to use nuclear material only for peaceful purposes. Iran? Seriously? Why would anyone believe Iran? Especially when the inspections will be known in advance. If Iran was planning to keep its promise, why would it not allow surprise inspections any time and any place?


http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...els.htm?p=full

Israel Can Thank Hillary For Hamas Terror Tunnels

08/04/2014

Mideast: Finally, the president has scolded Hamas for using its tunnels to attack Israel. But he should also fault his former secretary of state. It was Hillary Clinton who aided their construction.

Rewind to 2012.

Then, as now, Hamas terrorists in Gaza were raining rockets on Israeli towns. Eight days of cross-border fighting claimed 166 Palestinian and six Israeli lives.

Just 48 hours before Israeli troops planned to invade Gaza, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton brokered a cease-fire. She flew to the region and met with Israeli and Palestinian leaders and announced a peace deal from Cairo.

The cease-fire held, and Washington headlines trumpeted the exiting secretary's parting feat.

"Hillary Clinton scores Gaza cease-fire success," Politico.com said.

"Clinton got a Gaza cease-fire right at the moment hope seemed dead for a rapid end to the violence — and next time, President Obama will probably have to do it without her," the news site gushed.

Only, the cease-fire didn't really hold.

That's because the deal Clinton brokered required Israel to ease its blockade of building materials and other dual-use goods bound for Gaza, which is ruled by the terrorist group Hamas.

Israel had banned construction goods because Hamas used them to build an underground network of weapons depots, bunkers and rocket-launching pads.

But Clinton naively believed Hamas leaders' pledge that such supplies would go to bridges, hospitals and schools. And so the successful five-year Israeli blockade was lifted.

In October 2013, Israel discovered Gaza had dug a 1.5-mile concrete tunnel under its border to carry out terrorist attacks inside its territory. Still, Israel allowed the transfer of some 1,000 tons of cement and steel into Gaza just months later, thanks to U.S. and U.N. pressure.

As Israel predicted, Hamas used the cease-fire to divert supplies and build the cross-border tunnels now terrorizing Israeli citizens.

Clinton should have known better.

After all, it was her husband who first declared Hamas a global terrorist group, a designation maintained by her own department.

She knew Hamas' history of diverting U.S. aid — including much of the $900 million she committed — to terrorist activities.

And she knew Hamas' track record of breaking every single cease-fire it ever said it would honor.

Clinton's naivete when it comes to security issues is breathtaking.

In Benghazi, she failed to beef up diplomatic security despite intelligence warnings about al-Qaida threats. Backing the Islamofascists in Egypt over a pro-U.S. ally was another strategic mistake.

Yet, laughably, Clinton is using her 2012 cease-fire deal to shore up her presidential bona fides. She boasts in her new biography that "my diplomatic intervention was the only thing standing in the way of a much more explosive confrontation."

Uh-huh, tell that to the more than 60 Israelis and 1,600 Palestinians who have lost their lives in what has now clearly become "a much more explosive confrontation."

You'd think that her successor would have learned from her mistakes. But John Kerry is imposing another cease-fire on Israel.

Within hours of proudly announcing it, Hamas sent a suicide bomber through one of its concrete tunnels to blow up several Israeli soldiers on the other side.

Obama swiftly cautioned against criticism.

"When I see John Kerry going out there and trying to broker a cease-fire, we should all be supporting him," he told the press Friday. "There shouldn't be a bunch of complaints and second-guessing," just because the outcome is "not perfect."

A perfect outcome for peace, Mr. President, would be the destruction of those tunnels, along with reinstatement of the blockade that's proved so vital to Israel's security. Let Israel's army go wherever they need to go in Gaza to dismantle Hamas' terror tunnel network. Then let the cease-fire talks resume.
grundle is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 11:55 PM
  #277  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,031
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by slop101 View Post
I swear to god, if Obama cured cancer tomorrow, you and the wing-nuts would say that he's putting oncologists out of work...

How sad it must be for these people to walk through life every day knowing that Obama is president and Hillary will probably be the next President. And just imagine, no matter how many comments and articles they write about it online, it does nothing. No effect at all.

In a thread titled "Obama Requests Police Body Cameras, Training," I said:

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/religion-po...l#post12321682

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
Hooray for Obama for doing this!
I am perfectly willing to praise Obama when he does something that I agree with.
grundle is offline  
Old 07-16-15, 12:09 AM
  #278  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by eXcentris View Post
Considering that Bibi has tried to embarrass the US admin every chance he got that's hilarious. It's like US conservatives believe Bibi is their President and they want him to run US foreign policy in the Middle East...

You woudn't tolerate such behavior from any other head of state, but because it's Israel, oh well... it's fine! It's fascinating, and not in a good way...
No, it's not fine. But I'm pretty sure you'd rather see Iran making deals which are very questionable, versus outright dealing with Israel at all, correct? In your opinion, Israel is a terrorist nation, so any pressure on them from any country, especially Iran, is welcome.

However, I'd like both of us to stand back, and take several steps back to when Benji became so irritated with the US. And then why did he behave in such a way. Who was he responding to. And what were the comments to his country. Did the US tell Israel, like we always do, that we know better than they do about their own geographic area? I'd be curious to know.

Israel has far more intelligence about who is a threat in their area than the US, so why is Israel continually not being listened to. This is why you get Benji acting like he does. And I don't blame him. It's not our ass who will get the first hit...it's Israel.

So, can you forgive Benjamin for acting so very protective of his country and of his citizens who rely on him for this protection.

I wish we had a President like that.

Instead, we have somebody who thinks making deals and doing investigations...is a solution/alternative to direct confrontation with a serious threat (foreign or domestic).

Look at Mexico and the border.

You think Obama would want a more solidified protection for US citizens from illegals that cross the border and commit violent crimes? Israel decided to build strategic borders and walls to prevent this from happening.

When citizens ask for protection from illegals that come from Mexico (and travel through Mexico) we get absolutely no help from Washington. Nothing. Nada. No ideas. No solutions. Silence.

And then you want to tell me Israeli's PM has a bad attitude and thus, a reason to disregard and invalidate his arguments before the Obama Administration.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 07-16-15, 01:26 AM
  #279  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 11,747
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster View Post
What are the long-term implications of this deal?
A possible nuclear arms race in the Middle East; Iranian hegemony, with all it implies (increased terrorism, misery for Syria).

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster View Post
What is the likelihood that your prediction will be correct?
63.7%
dork is offline  
Old 07-16-15, 07:27 AM
  #280  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,726
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by classicman2 View Post
I don't care who crafted it - it's a bad deal.

I suspect the GOP controlled Senate will take up the matter.
Oh, you've read it? Did you confer with Secretary Moniz on the scientific merits of the agreement?

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster View Post
What are the long-term implications of this deal? What is the likelihood that your prediction will be correct?
The long term implication is that Iran builds a nuclear bomb. That's the point, it pushes the nearly inevitable outcome further out and gives more time for moderate voices to gain more power in Iran.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 07-16-15, 01:30 PM
  #281  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 29,177
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei View Post

Israel has far more intelligence about who is a threat in their area than the US, so why is Israel continually not being listened to. This is why you get Benji acting like he does. And I don't blame him. It's not our ass who will get the first hit...it's Israel.

So, can you forgive Benjamin for acting so very protective of his country and of his citizens who rely on him for this protection.
Bibi has been saying Iran is one year away from getting the bomb for how long now? 5? 10 years? That certainly doesn't come from Israeli intelligence. Nor does his giving Obama a lecture on history on US national tv, calling the 1967 borders "indefensible" (while conveniently omitting the "land swaps" part). To which, a couple of days later, former IDF/Shin Bet chiefs responded: "Say what"? Nonsense."

Sorry but I can't I forgive Bibi for being a clown who is only interested in his political survival. His obsession with Iran exists for two reasons:

- Fear of an outside threat. The oldest trick in the book to manipulate populations (and to keep him in office).

- A convenient tool to derail peace negotiations whenever he sees fit. Example, he shows up at the UN with a cartoonish drawing of a bomb. Panic! they are only 1 year away! Based on what? A whole lot of nothing.

As an Israeli analyst put it, Bibi is pissed because this deal takes away his favorite toy, his security blanket, the Iranian bomb. Another analyst jokingly offered a solution: "We have roughly 200 bombs, Iran has none. So Bibi should find a way to give them one. I mean, we have a lot, and we're not going to miss one. That way everybody is happy, and Bibi can resume predicting the apocalypse."

And I'm sorry but none of that is on Obama, who, you might be surprised to hear, I'm far from being a big fan of.
eXcentris is offline  
Old 07-16-15, 01:58 PM
  #282  
DVD Talk Hero
 
inri222's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 45,373
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by eXcentris View Post
"We have roughly 200 bombs, Iran has none. So Bibi should find a way to give them one. I mean, we have a lot, and we're not going to miss one. That way everybody is happy, and Bibi can resume predicting the apocalypse."
inri222 is offline  
Old 07-16-15, 03:00 PM
  #283  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

How do you know how many nuclear weapons that Iran has? We don't know.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 07-16-15, 03:42 PM
  #284  
DVD Talk Hero
 
slop101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 38,846
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by classicman2 View Post
How do you know how many nuclear weapons that Iran has? We don't know.
They have exactly zero. If they had any, they would flaunt it - they're not exactly gun-shy about hiding their intent and capabilities.
slop101 is online now  
Old 07-16-15, 07:52 PM
  #285  
Moderator
 
TheBigDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,336
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

TheBigDave is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 01:01 AM
  #286  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,031
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

This highly reliable source says the deal gives Iran as much as 24 days advance notice before inspections, and that even then, the inspection might not happen at all. It also says that Iran must agree to any inspection before it can take place.

In other words, the deal allows for "inspections" that aren't real inspections.

Way to go, Obama. (sarcasm)


http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=32437227

Iran Nuclear Deal: A Look at the Winners and Losers

July 14, 2015

The history books will show that both sides got their fair share of wins and both made major concessions.

WINS FOR THE WORLD POWERS:

Dismantling

Most importantly for the United States, Iran has agreed to dismantle most of its nuclear program, guaranteeing they would not be able to make a bomb for at least one year, over the course of 10 years.

Centrifuges

Iran’s 19,000 installed centrifuges will have to be cut to no more than 6,104 for the next 10 years. The 13,000 decommissioned centrifuges will be sent to monitored storage by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

tockpile

Iran has also agreed to reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium (the material needed to make a bomb) by 98 percent and agreed to halt further enrichment. That material would either be diluted to sold.

Arak

The heavy water nuclear reactor in Arak will be redesigned, preventing Iran from producing weapons grade plutonium there. Iran will ship the spent fuel from Arak and over the next 15 years Iran will not build any new heavy water reactors.

Fordow

Iran will convert its deeply buried Fordow nuclear facility into a nuclear, physics and technology center.

Snap Back

If Iran breaks its commitments, all sanctions could be quickly snapped back into place, according to the terms of the agreement.

Iran Agrees to Halt Nuclear Program in Historic Deal With World Powers

WINS FOR IRAN:

The selling points in Tehran could be the points of derailment in Washington. While Congress has 60 days to review the agreement, it has no authority to amend it. If Congress were to create legislation to stifle the agreement it would need a two-thirds majority vote to avoid a presidential veto. Secretary of State John Kerry said in Vienna today he doesn’t think they’ll try it, but look for Congressional Republicans to use each one of the following points to argue this is a bad deal.

Sanctions

Iran is most pleased with the impending relief of economic sanctions. Once it has been verified that Iran has committed to dismantling its centrifuges and diluting or selling its stockpile of enriched uranium, all economic sanctions will be lifted, effectively releasing over $100 billion in frozen Iranian assets. Economic relief was the driving incentive for Iran.

Inspections Military Sites

Most observers are likely to interpret the inspection, as it applies specifically to military sites, as a victory for Iran. UN inspectors can demand access to nuclear facilities on Iran military sites, but they aren’t immediate or even guaranteed. Any inspections at those sites would need to be approved by a joint commission composed of one member from each of the negotiating parties. The process for approving those inspections could take as many as 24 days, which critics will claim is enough time for Iran to cover up any non-compliance.

Arms Embargo

The final win for Iran is the gradual lifting of an international arms embargo. The accord states that Iran will be permitted to buy and sell conventional arms on the international market in five years; and in eight years they’ll be able to do the same with ballistic missiles. The embargo was a major sticking point throughout the talks, with Iran demanding it be lifted.

Research and Development

Iran gets to continue to conduct research and development related to its nuclear program. There will be certain limitations, but essentially they will be allowed research enrichment activities, as long as it is for peaceful purposes.

Last edited by grundle; 07-17-15 at 01:15 AM.
grundle is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 12:34 PM
  #287  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,177
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I thought this was a little strange.. The administration has taken heat for not including the freeing of American captives in Iran as part the nuclear deal.

When Obama spoke about it the other day he said including the captives in the discussion would have given Iran another bargaining chip they would have used to make the deal even tougher..

Originally Posted by Obama during a press conference
If the question is why we did not tie the negotiations to their release, think about the logic that that creates.

Suddenly Iran realizes, you know what? Maybe we can get additional concessions out of the Americans by holding these individuals. Makes it much more difficult for us to walk away if Iran somehow thinks that a nuclear deal is dependent in some fashion on the nuclear deal, and, by the way, if we had walked away from the nuclear deal, we’d still be pushing them just as hard to get these folks out. That’s why those issues are not connected, but we are working every single day to try to get them out and won’t stop until they are out and rejoined with their families.
and now Kerry says this today..

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Secretary of State John Kerry says there was "not one meeting that took place" during the recent Iranian nuclear talks at which the U.S. didn't raise the issue of four Americans still held captive by Tehran.
So which is it?
General Zod is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 01:37 PM
  #288  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I'm not ruling out a few hostages being released in the next 6 months so Iran can take full credit for a secret deal--at least I'm hoping somebody made a deal like this. I can see a probability where Iran will, at their kind gesture, release a few hostages, and then Obama will say what a great partner Iran is...give them shitloads of money because of their niceness, thereby justifying his deal.

Either way, Kerry needs to shut the fuck up. He's a fucking idiot, and an embarrassment to US Foreign relations.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 01:40 PM
  #289  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,726
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Yeah, a Silver Star recipient who comes back and says "fuck you" has no initiative.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 03:26 PM
  #290  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Now if he had been awarded the Distinguish Service Cross or The Congressional Medal of Honor - I would be more inclined to believe what he said.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 05:20 PM
  #291  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,031
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by General Zod View Post
I thought this was a little strange.. The administration has taken heat for not including the freeing of American captives in Iran as part the nuclear deal.

When Obama spoke about it the other day he said including the captives in the discussion would have given Iran another bargaining chip they would have used to make the deal even tougher..



and now Kerry says this today..



So which is it?


It's not "strange" if you put it in the same context as all that stuff that I listed.

If these American hostages in Iran had instead been the "Taliban five," or a terrorist who had been convicted of murdering 270 people, then perhaps Obama would have tried to get them freed.

The more I think about this, the more I think that my list was entirely on topic.
grundle is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 05:34 PM
  #292  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,031
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by Pharoh View Post
Mod Note:

I am inclined to remove the off topic, and offensive, posts to their own thread, but will refrain for now.

In the meantime, please stop from the really off topic discussion of President Obama lies and his potential happiness with the extermination of Israel.

grundle,

If you want to continue to line of "discussion", (and I use that word as lightly as possible), do so in another thread. However, discontinue taking things wholly out of context, especially when used to validate something as disgusting as the suggestion that the President of the United States would be happy with another nation being attacked with nuclear weapons. Stop it.


OK. Great. Let's talk about something else.

Let's talk about the real reason why Obama signed a deal with Iran whose "inspections" are so full of loopholes that they are not "inspections" in any true sense of the word.

The deal gives Iran as much as 24 days advance notice before inspections, and even then, the inspection might not happen at all. Also, Iran must agree to any inspection before it can take place.

In other words, the deal allows for "inspections" that aren't real inspections.

Since you are so sure that Obama does not want Iran to destory Israel, and since you think my even suggesting such a thing is "offensive," then please suggest an alternative reason for why Obama signed a deal for these bogus, falsely named "inspections."

I've said this here before, and I'll say it again: it's perfectly OK with me for people to say my claims are wrong. But if you do say my claims are wrong, then please present a different idea which is correct. Please explain why Obama signed this bogus "inspection" deal.



http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=32437227

Iran Nuclear Deal: A Look at the Winners and Losers

July 14, 2015

Most observers are likely to interpret the inspection, as it applies specifically to military sites, as a victory for Iran. UN inspectors can demand access to nuclear facilities on Iran military sites, but they aren’t immediate or even guaranteed. Any inspections at those sites would need to be approved by a joint commission composed of one member from each of the negotiating parties. The process for approving those inspections could take as many as 24 days, which critics will claim is enough time for Iran to cover up any non-compliance.
grundle is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 06:12 PM
  #293  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by CRM114 View Post
Yeah, a Silver Star recipient who comes back and says "fuck you" has no initiative.
Well, I guess if you define initiative as the act of tossing their patriotic awards in protest, then ok, you got me there, sir!

Kerry on with your logic.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 06:41 PM
  #294  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 29,177
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
It's not "strange" if you put it in the same context as all that stuff that I listed.

If these American hostages in Iran had instead been the "Taliban five," or a terrorist who had been convicted of murdering 270 people, then perhaps Obama would have tried to get them freed.

The more I think about this, the more I think that my list was entirely on topic.
Thinking doesn't seem to help because you still sound completely nuts.


And FYI, your article is titled: Iran Nuclear Deal: A Look at the Winners and Losers

It's a deal, you win some you lose some. You just chose to obsessively focus on one of the "loser" points.
eXcentris is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 07:12 PM
  #295  
DVD Talk Hero
 
slop101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 38,846
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

The 6 Biggest Myths About The Iran Nuclear Deal


Just click and read the article, it's really good (and true!) - and unlike grundle's articles, this one is way too in-depth, too well-researched with too many nice clear graphics to simply copy/paste here. And no, it doesn't paint a completely rosy picture of the deal either.
slop101 is online now  
Old 07-18-15, 05:19 PM
  #296  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,031
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by slop101 View Post
The 6 Biggest Myths About The Iran Nuclear Deal


Just click and read the article, it's really good (and true!) - and unlike grundle's articles, this one is way too in-depth, too well-researched with too many nice clear graphics to simply copy/paste here. And no, it doesn't paint a completely rosy picture of the deal either.

When did ABC News become an unreliable source?
grundle is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 10:11 PM
  #297  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Ghostbuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,703
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

In the real world, decisions always involve trade-offs, and deals require compromises. Nuclear experts seem to be saying that this deal is as good as could reasonably be expected. Unfortunately, few Republicans are reasonable. Once again, the "party of no" is trying to sabotage an imperfect, but worthwhile program. Once again, it has no viable alternative to offer. Once again, Obama plays the role of the adult while Republicans play the role of whining children.

P.S. As others have pointed out, many prominent Republicans were criticizing the deal before they even could have read it. Clearly, they were going to criticize it no matter what. In the future they should probably wait a bit longer to start whining so that they can at least pretend to have examined something. Dimwitted Amazon reviewers make this same mistake.
Ghostbuster is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 11:00 PM
  #298  
Psi
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,942
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
When did ABC News become an unreliable source?
When you quote it.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=32437227

Iran Nuclear Deal: A Look at the Winners and Losers

July 14, 2015

Most observers are likely to interpret the inspection, as it applies specifically to military sites, as a victory for Iran. UN inspectors can demand access to nuclear facilities on Iran military sites, but they aren’t immediate or even guaranteed. Any inspections at those sites would need to be approved by a joint commission composed of one member from each of the negotiating parties. The process for approving those inspections could take as many as 24 days, which critics will claim is enough time for Iran to cover up any non-compliance.
They are centrifuges, and they are bigger and harder to move around than a microwave oven or some people's brains.
Psi is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 11:35 PM
  #299  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 20,974
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I take no sides. But, for reference, the centrifuges in question are not THAT big. But it does take a lot of them. They also have no resemblance to the "industrial centrifuges" that I have sold in the past.

I'm guessing there are very few manufacturers out there, and they are made-to-order. Still, it's nothing that a machine shop couldn't build.

Troy Stiffler is offline  
Old 07-19-15, 11:50 AM
  #300  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Sean O'Hara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vichy America
Posts: 13,535
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Is it time we change the thread title? Maybe something like, "Obama Approves Plan for Iran to Nuke Israel". I mean, as much as I like the way the original title makes eXentris sound stupid, it's really time to let someone else have a turn.
Sean O'Hara is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.