ISIS has Uranium seized supposedly from Mosul University. Other reports say it is from Syria or Libya, the only thing that seems to be in agreement is that they have uranium from some place.

 

Some reports say it's not enough to worry about while others say it make an Ideal "Dirty Bomb".

 

I was told that Homeland Security is on High Pucker Factor right now over this.

 

Exclusive: Iraq tells U.N. that 'terrorist groups' seized nuclear materials | Reuters

 

Exclusive: Iraq tells U.N. that 'terrorist groups' seized nuclear materials | Reuters

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iraq-turmoil/nuclear-experts-play-down-threat-uranium-stolen-isis-n152926

How would a dirty bomb in a smaller city like Louisville, Nashville or Lexington impact the country?

 

I think it would have a bigger impact on the country than if it was a bigger city, from a fear factor.

I think it would have a bigger impact on the country than if it was a bigger city' date=' from a fear factor.[/quote']

Agreed!

Not bad for a JV team

This was reported on a month and a half ago. We're still here.

This was reported on a month and a half ago. We're still here.

 

And your point is?

 

The US knew Bin Laden was a threat on Sept. 10th, but "We were still here" on that day also.

 

I am not assigning blame to anyone, just posting relevant information to something I heard from someone in Homeland Security this week.

This was reported on a month and a half ago. We're still here.

 

JV team, right?

 

 

I truly believe that the majority of this country has no clue about how dangerous ISIS is.

JV team' date=' right? I truly believe that the majority of this country has no clue about how dangerous ISIS is.[/quote']

Agreed! You see it all the time, everywhere! One one hand people say we need to be more secure, but most of those same people complain about pat downs and X-ray body scanners at the airport. Hey here is an idea for those people, DON'T FLY!

 

Before I went out last night I was flipping through the channels and stopped on FoxNews as they had Dick Chaney on. He brought up some good points, yes he did say that Obama is partially to blame, but there are other factors. But he believes that within the next 10 years we will have something bigger than 9/11 in the US. But in typical American style most people won't worry or want the US to do anything until after something happens.

 

Also, it says a lot when Syria wants to work with the US to stop ISIS! And isn't Iran fighting ISIS too?

Obama said they were a jv team didn't he?

I saw the following and thought it would be interesting to post:

 

Are you confused by what is going on in the Middle East?

 

Let me explain.

 

We support the Iraqi government in the fight against ISIS.

 

We don’t like ISIS, but ISIS is supported by Saudi Arabia who we do like.

 

We don’t like Assad in Syria. We support the fight against him, but ISIS is also fighting against him.

 

We don’t like Iran, but Iran supports the Iraqi government in its fight against ISIS.

 

So some of our friends support our enemies, some enemies are now our friends,

and some of our enemies are fighting against our other enemies, who we want to lose,

but we don’t want our enemies who are fighting our enemies to win.

 

If the people we want to defeat are defeated, they could be replaced by people we like even less.

 

And all this was started by us invading a country to drive out terrorists

who were not actually there until we went in to drive them out.

 

It's quite simple, really.

I saw the following and thought it would be interesting to post:

 

Are you confused by what is going on in the Middle East?

 

Let me explain.

 

We support the Iraqi government in the fight against ISIS.

 

We don’t like ISIS, but ISIS is supported by Saudi Arabia who we do like.

 

We don’t like Assad in Syria. We support the fight against him, but ISIS is also fighting against him.

 

We don’t like Iran, but Iran supports the Iraqi government in its fight against ISIS.

 

So some of our friends support our enemies, some enemies are now our friends,

and some of our enemies are fighting against our other enemies, who we want to lose,

but we don’t want our enemies who are fighting our enemies to win.

 

If the people we want to defeat are defeated, they could be replaced by people we like even less.

 

And all this was started by us invading a country to drive out terrorists

who were not actually there until we went in to drive them out.

It's quite simple, really.

 

I was with you until the bolded statement. I don't see how you or anyone can make that claim....it is not even in the same universe as truthful.

I was with you until the bolded statement. I don't see how you or anyone can make that claim....it is not even in the same universe as truthful.

 

Unfortunately, I missed that paragraph in my copy and paste. I don't agree with it either. I guess I needed to read through it better. I apologize.

I was with you until the bolded statement. I don't see how you or anyone can make that claim....it is not even in the same universe as truthful.

 

I agree it is not truthful.

 

But we did invade a nation on the presupposition that they had and would use WMD's against us.

 

The result was destabilizing an enemy that we knew very well and replacing that enemy with chaos and destabilizing the region even further.

 

We will probably disagree on that point doomer but the truth is we agree on the other 90 percent of it.

I agree it is not truthful.

 

But we did invade a nation on the presupposition that they had and would use WMD's against us.

 

The result was destabilizing an enemy that we knew very well and replacing that enemy with chaos and destabilizing the region even further.

 

We will probably disagree on that point doomer but the truth is we agree on the other 90 percent of it.

 

Only, it is questionable what is meant by stable. People forget that Sadaam Hussein's regime was as bad as or worse than any going on now. He was a brutal dictator. His regime is accountable for hundreds of thousands of murders (>750,000) including the attempt to annihilate the Curds. It seems this little fact has been widely forgotten in the political fervor since to crucify G. W. Only thing is that Sadaam, as far as we know, did not attack US soil.

I agree it is not truthful.

 

But we did invade a nation on the presupposition that they had and would use WMD's against us.

 

The result was destabilizing an enemy that we knew very well and replacing that enemy with chaos and destabilizing the region even further.

 

We will probably disagree on that point doomer but the truth is we agree on the other 90 percent of it.

 

Let's not forget that the Dictator that was in charge of Iraq had used WMDs on his own countrymen. This same Dictator stated in public that he would destroy the US if given the chance. We were not the only country (including the UN) that thought he had WMDs. We tried to do things by the book but Iraq would not allow the UN inspectors to do there jobs.

 

The same people who are chanting the battle cry of no WMDs in Iraq are the same folks that say we knew Bin Laden was a threat and we did nothing about it. Laden was just in charge of an organization Hussein was the Dictator of a country. Do you honestly think he would not have done something by now if he was still in power?

 

ISIS would not be in Iraq today if we would not have left the country. Before you say that we shouldn't have occupying forces in Iraq please take a look at Europe, Asia, and the globe for that matter.