hypochondriac

More likely than many other countries of course. Due to a number of factors some unrelated to Islam-but primarily because they are a brutal extremist regime who are led by people who believe in a hyper exteme version of Islam.

Of course it's preferable that no one has one. Being cool with literally any country in the world having one who fancies it is a frankly bizarre opinion and I'm not sure I believe you genuinely hold that opinion in a hypothetical scenario where that actually was a thing.

No. I never said more likely than not.

It's really not. Unfortunately you're unable to understand a very obvious point. I consider it more likely that some countries will use a nuclear weapon or that a nuclear weapon should fall into the hands of someone else than others. Nowhere have I ever said that Iran would definitely use a nuclear weapon as a cast iron certainty. That would be an insane thing to say.

Yeah my opinion of that view is it's batshit insane.

I've never said Iran WILL use a nuke if they have one. And you accuse me of failing to understand the points you make.

That's a valid concern but not likely to happen in my opinion. It would be a really bad idea abd woukd probably be stopped before it happened if it were attempted. I don't understand the logic of "they are a sovereign nation with every right to defend themselves." Using that, should every nation on Earth get a nuke if they fancy one in case they are attacked?

My preference is for America and indeed every country to not have nuclear weapons. Unfortunately that's unlikely to happen.

My preference would be that no one has nuclear weapons but I'd certainly not be advocating for anyone else to get more. In particular a brutal, unstable Islamist extremist regime who thinks nothing of murdering people in service of their ideology.

Can you quote where I said that?

It's an opinion that juche ideology differs greatly from suffi extremist interpretations from Islam? That the ideologies that drive them mean that their risk of using a nuclear weapon won't be different? That there isn't plenty of documented evidence of jihad is being willing to destroy themselves and their things in service of their ideology because they believe that their earthly body is temporary and they are going to end up in heaven? Which part of that is opinion?

But quite prepared to dismiss the iaea report and believe brutal Islamist dictatorships that murder children.

No serious attempt to engage on the clear differences I outlined then? Just blindly asserting that they can be compared despite the clear differences?

Because if you don't agree with Israel or the US striking to prevent nukes then that's de facto support for Iran developing nuclear weapons.

On this issue it's a clear binary choice between the two.

No. Extremist Islamism as practised by Sunnis is something entirely different from the political ideology of juche which is essentially about being left alone. Kin Jong Un has shown on many occasions that his priority is the continued survival of his regime. Not so for many extremist Islamic nutters where there will be some who would be quite happy to have their earthly body destroyed in order to destroy Israel because they are off to meet a bunch of virgins in heaven. It's absolutely insane that any sensible Westerners would advocate for a country like Iran to obtain nukes.

I trust the IAEA and their reporting. I'm also clearly going to take more seriously in general things coming from America and Israel over despotic religious death cults running countries like Iran. That doesn't mean blindly believing anyone clearly but some people hate certain characters or countries to such an extent that they will even side with the likes of Iran. A regime that has sent young boys to die running into minefields to glorify Allah.

Yes.

All of them have nuclear weapons which is obviously a consideration. Yet another reason to prevent Iran from gaining them.

Also an authoritarian religious fundamentalist regime who oppress and murder their own people particularly minorities and women, has been attacking Israel via proxies for years, funds terrorism around the world, refers to America as the great Satan and has declared their intention to destroy Israel if ever given the opportunity to do so. Oh and they breached their agreements around nuclear energy according to the IAEA and enriched uranium to really high levels. So seems like quite a lot of reasons to strike their nuclear sites and call for regime change then.

Form is temporary and all that. Has all the attributes to make the step up. He's one I'd like to see given a go.

Who knows. Maybe it's wrong

Fair enough if true. If not though not a chance are they getting that for him

I'm still holding out hope for Richard kone from Wycombe. Can score goals in English football, big strong and pacy and won't cost much at all. To my mind that's a much safer bet than some others mentioned.

Alfie house emphasising we are looking for someone with a bit of pace though and the koln forum and player profiles sort of confirm he doesn't have much of that so not sure it is him.