Countdown to the War with Iran..

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: dthmstr254 what about the sacrifices of the World Wars? if the only reason you want out of this war is the loss of American life, then I am damn glad we didn't have people like you around for those.

The reason I want out of this war is because its illegal. I am in favor of self defense. Not agression.

[bugsbunny04]

Quote by: jose ok i googled it http://www.ldac.org/

Thats the wrong LDAC, try adding in "Army ROTC"

[bugsbunny04]

Quote by: dthmstr254 a war with Iran, said CNN, would be uneffective and useless. I say we don't go to war unless we have a more blatant act of war. that way nobody can say Bush did the wrong thing when he went to war with them.

I think if Iran comes out and says something to the general effect of "Guess what Americans, we have nuclear weapons and expect all the jews and infidels out of the middle east in 24 hours or we are turning Israel into a radioactive self-lit parking lot" they are PROBABLY (Im not in charge of planning or anything, this is just a guess based on previous models of whoopass) going to be seeing (or NOT seeing, wink, wink ) a lot of these:



and these:



and after those guys get done, well, I think you guys know where Im going with this. And yes, it would be a nasty fight. Just be glad, should it actually be necessary, that there are some men willing to fight it for a lower middle class salary and tuition money for college.

[Scribbler1]

The problem is, just like with Iraq, that a LOT of governments over there are good at talk and bluster and that's about it. Even without the obvious hypocricy of not attacking North Korea for doing the same thing you just CAN'T start attacking every country that makes a threat against another.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: bugsbunny04 And yes, it would be a nasty fight. Just be glad, should it actually be necessary, that there are some men willing to fight it for a lower middle class salary and tuition money for college.

I'm beginning to think you don't really care if a war is just or not, as long as you get to play shoot-em-up.

The operative part of your quote is "should it actually be necessary" but you never address WHY it is necessary. Just wind you up, yell "ENEMY" and point you in the right direction.

And I am NOT glad you and others are willing to follow Bush into this, even though I know that is a soldier's job, to follow orders without question. That willingness only emboldens Bush to start these adventures.

[bugsbunny04]

Quote by: Scribbler1 The operative part of your quote is "should it actually be necessary" but you never address WHY it is necessary.

Yes I did. reread the post. We arent going to allow those people to have nukes because of the things they have said they want to do to Israel, and because of the likely hood that they would try to get one in CONUS and set it off in a Major city like NY or Washington. Dont put attacking us on our soil past these people. We arent letting them have nukes. And if they think they can scare us by huffing and puffing and threatening to blow our house down, they need to sit down with Saddam and ask HIM how productive that shit is and how well it worked out for his regime.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: bugsbunny04 Yes I did. reread the post. We arent going to allow those people to have nukes because of the things they have said they want to do to Israel, and because of the likely hood that they would try to get one in CONUS and set it off in a Major city like NY or Washington. Dont put attacking us on our soil past these people. We arent letting them have nukes. And if they think they can scare us by huffing and puffing and threatening to blow our house down, they need to sit down with Saddam and ask HIM how productive that shit is and how well it worked out for his regime.

If the civilized world decides to deny nuclear weapons, nuclear power plants, or both, fine. But it should be an international effort and a lot of the heavy lifting should be done by THEM as well. Bush has proven he can't handle anything even resembling a coherent foreign policy and it is insanity to trust him to handle this properly.

And Israel HAS nukes! They have them just for THIS reason. Let THEM fight their own battles.

[Technosoul]

Today at
www.msn.com
they are running a headline news story called "are we heading for war with Iran".

I thought I would mention that just in case anyone in this devate wants to check out what they have to say about this topic.

[BobbyO]

Quote by: Scribbler1 If the civilized world decides to deny nuclear weapons, nuclear power plants, or both, fine. But it should be an international effort and a lot of the heavy lifting should be done by THEM as well. Bush has proven he can't handle anything even resembling a coherent foreign policy and it is insanity to trust him to handle this properly. And Israel HAS nukes! They have them just for THIS reason. Let THEM fight their own battles.

It has been Europe who has been setting the policy with regards to convincing Iran not to go nuclear. The USA has been backing Europe's proposals and letting Europe take the lead.

And yet, here we are, with the total failure of the the European plan plain and obvious to be seen by all...

And we are to be worried about Bush's incompetence???

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: BobbyO And we are to be worried about Bush's incompetence???

Yes, we ARE to be worried about him and his idiotic strategies. Thanks to him and his adventure in Iraq the world has a lower opinion of us than it ever had. No matter WHAT we do it will be seen as wrong and with Bush's performance it probably WILL be. If we hadn't screwed up so badly in Iraq at least the world would probably give us the benefit of the doubt on Iran.

Frankly, the people who used to back Bush and now don't support him should have been worrying about him YEARS ago.

[mlingley]

Quote by: Scribbler1 Quote by: BobbyO And we are to be worried about Bush's incompetence??? Yes, we ARE to be worried about him and his idiotic strategies. Thanks to him and his adventure in Iraq the world has a lower opinion of us than it ever had. No matter WHAT we do it will be seen as wrong and with Bush's performance it probably WILL be. If we hadn't screwed up so badly in Iraq at least the world would probably give us the benefit of the doubt on Iran. Frankly, the people who used to back Bush and now don't support him should have been worrying about him YEARS ago.

I'm not worried about Bush I'm worried about the people pulling his strings. Bush is just a mouthpeace for a much larger agenda. We have no choices anymore as far as politics is concerned. The Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans.. we just keep going round and round to keep us all distracted. We need grassroots type movements for things to really change in this country.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: mlingley I'm not worried about Bush I'm worried about the people pulling his strings. Bush is just a mouthpeace for a much larger agenda.

That could go either way. He might just be a front man but on the other hand, all the mistakes we have witnessed coming from his administration would indicate a master plan OR a bumbling fool at the switch. IMO, Bush is not an intelligent man and has made it through life on his name and family wealth.

We have no choices anymore as far as politics is concerned. The Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans.. we just keep going round and round to keep us all distracted. We need grassroots type movements for things to really change in this country.

I do so appreciate a realist.

[Technosoul]

According to the Washing Post as reported by NBC the CIA and military are only making plans but do not think they will really attack Iran in the near future. They said "we are only trying to scare Iran so they will know that we will not allow them to build nuclear weapons" - as a bluff?

The plans would include air strikes at nuclear sites, military sites, and political sites. No troops would be employed for occupation purposes, they reported.

A link to the words used in the real news story can be found at www.msn.com

[Technosoul]

I think this is all hogwash, you cannot tell me they are just now getting around to making plans about how to attack Iran or what targets to aim at. I am almost postitive they did that a long time ago, who are we kidding? Do they think they can scare Iran? Who are we kidding here?

Must be another reason for the latest "buzz" in the news and for those announcments about our "big bluff" to be aired.

[BobbyO]

Quote by: Scribbler1 Yes, we ARE to be worried about him and his idiotic strategies. Thanks to him and his adventure in Iraq the world has a lower opinion of us than it ever had. No matter WHAT we do it will be seen as wrong and with Bush's performance it probably WILL be. If we hadn't screwed up so badly in Iraq at least the world would probably give us the benefit of the doubt on Iran. Frankly, the people who used to back Bush and now don't support him should have been worrying about him YEARS ago.

I would rather doubt. the same arguments which were being used against the move into Iraq are being used regarding Iran.

[BobbyO]

Quote by: Technosoul I think this is all hogwash, you cannot tell me they are just now getting around to making plans about how to attack Iran or what targets to aim at. I am almost postitive they did that a long time ago, who are we kidding? Do they think they can scare Iran? Who are we kidding here? Must be another reason for the latest "buzz" in the news and for those announcments about our "big bluff" to be aired.

Of course they have such plans. Gee whiz, one of the complaints made against Bush for Iraq was that he allegedly had no plan there.

Can the USA scare Iran? Perhaps. The objective of Iran is too have nukes so they cannot be deterred by the USA, or at least make it very difficult to deter, in their mideast objectives.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: BobbyO I would rather doubt. the same arguments which were being used against the move into Iraq are being used regarding Iran.

And the arguments for Iraq were out and out lies. Why should anyone believe them when used against a different country?

[Boetie]

Whether we go to war with Iran or not isn't the point, the point is that it's election time. The Republicans game plan is to look strong on fighting terrorists. So the drumbeat is really another way of saying vote Republican.

Iran is talking no different from North Korea, you know the tough talk.

Chickenshit Bush Jr gets scared of tough talk, he even went AWOL. But putting a loaded gun into the hands of a chicken like Bush Jr is like putting a loaded gun into the hands of a five year old.

[Milton Bradley]

Here is a pretty informative link with a view from the inside. This guy was taking calls on C-SPAN this morning.


Can a Bush administration divided against itself stand?


http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/c...?story_id=3416


http://www.carnegieendowment.org/npp/

[Arawn-ap-Hywel]

EU and US strike different tonnes on Iran
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...AR-IRAN-EU.xml

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The United States and the European Union struck different tones on Saturday on how to respond to Iran's nuclear defiance while insisting they were in full agreement. Speaking at a transatlantic conference, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said no one was considering military action over Tehran's refusal to halt uranium enrichment and Europe did not want to join a "coalition of the willing" against Iran. Influential U.S. Senator John McCain told the Brussels Forum in a speech on Friday night: "There is only one thing worse than military action, and that is a nuclear-armed Iran."

"Iran is THE test case about whether we'll have effective transatlantic cooperation," Holbrooke said. The more divisions there were in the West and with China and Russia over Iran, the more likely it was that the United States would face the terrible choice painted by McCain, he said.

Will Blair convince the Brits to go in with Bush this time?