Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm going to take the contrarian view here. If Iran had gotten to the point of enriching uranium to weapons-grade levels and Israel had done a pre-emptive strike, that would have gotten messy real fast. More messy than this. Disabling their centrifuges in a way where presumably no one died doesn't sound so bad to me considering the alternative. Again, just the contrarian viewpoint.



I don't think that's contrarian.

If your choices are between allowing Israel to start a new war in the middle east, or work with Israel on this risky new cyberweapon, I think most people would pick the cyberweapon.


What concerns me is the lack of evidence that all of their centrifuges were actually knocked. At the start of this they were enriching to 5%, now they are at 20%. That indicates to me that they have been progressing, not repairing knocked centrifuges. I realize it is still a LONG way from where they need to be for a workable weapon. I'm just wondering if stuxnet did nothing but a tiny bit of damage and a whole lot of 'show our hand'. A little like the whole drone debacle.


Judging by what I've read, this is far from contrarian.


Thats is because Obama is a pussy. He doesn't have the guts to put Osamas head on a stake, dipped in pigfat, and he doesn't have the guts to tell Israel no.

Just remind them that we are the reason you exist and we can and will withdraw that support when we want to.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: