3 ms·

Bibi has repeatedly informed us the bomb would be ready in the next few months for 23 years or so. Saddam also had WMDs, we just don't know where. Etc

• nsingh2 1y ago
  He's been saying this since 1992, so 33 years so far.
  • econ 1y ago
    What is the term for political leaders who fill their speeches with a Boogeyman rather than doing their job? I feel there should be a term for it. Ideally one that describes them in pairs. Like a boogey marriage.
• jiggawatts 1y ago
  "Will be done in 'x' months" vs "Could be ready within 'x' months" are distinct statements. My project managers often ask how long a project would take. I might say something like "two weeks after we're approved to start". The PMs will wait a few months, approve the project, and then look flabbergasted when it is not instantaneously completed! "But you had all this time! Months ago you said it would take weeks!"
• krona 1y ago
  > Saddam also had WMDs, we just don't know where. Presumably if Saddam had built a large reinforced concrete bunker deep in the side of a mountain hours from the nearest city, that might be a place fairly high on your checklist?
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
• birn559 1y ago
  Israel has also been sabotaging their program and murdering scientists for the same time. Maybe it's an instance of the prevention paradox? Together with the fact that things sometimes naturally need MUCH more time than anticipated?
  • 8note 1y ago
    the biggest blocker remains - a religious rule set by the dictator banning all WMDs. not just nukes, but chemical and radiological weapons too. an iran with a bomb would have to not be the relogious dictatorship anymore, and whatever coup that allowed for the bomb might not have the same opinions about the west as the current one
• devcpp 1y ago
  Why bring him up? No one cares about him. He's been lying about it all those years until it became true, that doesn't mean it's still false. I can say the universe will be destroyed in a year, I'll eventually be right.