# Bush and his theories... **URL:** \ **Category:** NYSpeed Off Topic\ **Created:** [December 4, 2007, 8:46am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bush-and-his-theories/39713 "2007-12-04T08:46:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 97
**Author:** ![JayS](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/jays/32/15375_2.png) [@JayS](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/JayS)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2007, 10:32am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bush-and-his-theories/39713/97 "2007-12-06T10:32:48Z")
[quote=“bing,post:89,topic:39713"”] How will US sanctions hurt Iran any further if the primary (85%) buyers of Iran’s oil are not American. [/quote] Because the sactions will be done through the UN. Germany is a member, and Iran’s #1 customer. [quote=“bing,post:89,topic:39713"”] How do you address going into Iran with ‘suspected’ nuclear technology, with the Iraq fiasco fresh at hand, versus not going into N.Korea despite their flamboyant exhibition of nuclear weapons? [/quote] #1 I never said go in militarily. I simply said that Iran shouldn’t be considered “safe” because they can’t make a bomb until at least 2010. I suggested we won’t have to go in militarily because sactions should be more than effective. As for N.Korea, do a search. I’ve always held the belief that NK would cave for simple economic incentives. And what do you know, that’s working. > **[BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | N Korea reactor disabling praised](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7079620.stm)** > > US nuclear experts say they have made a "good start" to disabling North Korea's main nuclear reactor. I’ve seen recently in the news that they’ve hit some snags but this will continue to be a political negotiation, as it should. --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/bush-and-his-theories/39713)._