More bad news from Iran...

[LonghornRob]

Well, we would be hard pressed as close allies to NOT defend Israel if they are attacked first by Iran. Of course, I HATE the fact that we are allies with a nation that continues to oppress Palestine the way they do, but that's how politics work. And of course this war thing won't happen for another several years, as it has already been stated that Iran cannot make a nuclear for at least 2 to 3 years.

Mentallyawol, who have you heard say we can take on Iran? I haven't heard one person agree that fighting Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time is a good idea...

And Arch, do you think it would be a good idea to allow Iran access to WMDs, seeing how outwardly aggressive they are towards Israel?

[llad12]

ha I wish

God Almighty ...

This little spat isn’t about nukes. Iran doesn’t have any nukes ... nor are they likely to have any in the near future. According to CIA reports, It would take a minimum of 8-10 years for them to even create the enriched material. Eight to ten years ... and that’s assuming that they can come up with the rest of technology. Hell, there’s not any evidence they are even working on a bomb ... only conjecture. IAEA Director General Mohamed El Baradi has never reported any evidence of "undeclared" sources or special nuclear material in Iran, or any diversion of nuclear material. The charges made against Iran are unsubstantiated, and amazingly sound very similar to the false charges made against Iraq.

This isn’t about any threat to America. The nuclear threat is just an excuse ... another reason to bomb ... and another reason for a subsequent invasion of another Middle East nation.

This whole scenario is all about US military dominance and regime change.

Think about it. We’re seven thousand miles from home, telling the Iraqis and the Iranians what kind of government they will have, backed up by the use of our all-powerful military force. We call Iraq, Iran, and North Korea "evildoers"; name them as parties to the "axis of evil"; lie and exaggerate reasons to attack Iraq; invade and overthrow their government; subsequently set up permanent military bases and then accuse our next victim –> Iran as being "aggressors".

Damn audacious of us, ‘eh?

Welcome to the new and improved American Empire.

Have we learned nothing from our current debacle in Iraq? These arguments are almost exactly the same ones they used for that current god-awful quagmire. Incredibly, our gloriously inept leader fantasizes that Iran’s government will simply crumble away under a few hundred sorties.

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that "a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government." He added, "I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ "

Do you people want oil to reach $100.00/bbl? Do you want to see $6.00/gal gas at the pump? Do you know what that would do to our economy?

Hell, why do you want to make me rich?

Tell me people, do you wish to watch thousands of our young soldiers come home in body bags... and tens of thousands more limp in with broken bodies and tortured souls? Do you want to spend hundreds of billions of dollars (that we don’t have) on a war for weapons that don’t exist? Do you like inflation? Do you want the blood of 100,000+ innocent Iranian civilians on your hands? Do you want more guaranteed terrorism against our citizens ... more hatred ... along with endless war and immense destruction?

If so, then support the bombing of Iran.

You warmongers are nothing more than bloody savages. Too chicken**** to go fight yourselves, you call for this mayhem and horror which will spill the blood of countless others. Foolishly pandering to this administration’s propaganda, you pray that our dim-witted evangelical President will perpetrate a new war on Iran ... while all the time his imperialistic NeoCon buddies are quietly snickering under the table.


You want war? Get ready for far worse than this: Three years of war

---------



Too bad you weren’t born in 1890 Dondrei, you could have gone over the top and made that "heroic futile charge" of the Ottoman machine guns with your ancestors at Gallipoli. At the very least, one wouldn’t have to read this warmongering trash.

Is there little wonder why I rarely post on this board anymore?

Llad

[The Future now]

Honestly, it's hillarious that the American ppl think we can take on Iran. Look at what's going on in Iraq. We can barely handle the "insurgency" going on there. Around 2500 American soldiers have died, fighting an army of none.

IIRC roughly 500 soldiers have died from in Iraq from 'non-combat' related incidents. The fact that 'non-combat' deaths would represent such a large percentage of casualties demonstrates the ineffectiveness of the the insurgency. They've managed little more than to harry U.S forces, never disrupting our supplies or preventing troop movement.

I'd also like to remind everyone (again) that the model used in Iraq isn't the only one that exists to our military. We needn't invade and occupy the entire country, we have a very limited agenda. Namely to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons technology, we can use our air force for that.

Oh wait, I forgot the Insurgents will shoot down all of our jets. Scratch that.

[Drosselmeier]

How is this more bad news? Iran says they want to deter or defeat an invasion of their sovereign state. What insane monsters they are!

A pre-emptive war against Iran is not justified. Come up with evidence that they are breaking their treaty obligations and sanctions will be justified. That's about it.

And here's a dose of realism for all of you internet hawks:
http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_04_10/cover.html

It's a whopping five pages, but since you guys aren't going to join the military or anything you probably have the time to get through it.

[jmervyn]

I have a theory that if we attacked Iran instead of Iraq, Iraq would be doing what Iran is doing now... although I think that taking out Iran first would've been the better option.

I disagree - Iran hasn't been as brutal in subjugating their citizens, and present a far stronger military to take on. We were 100% right in acting the bully and taking down the weaker regime; war isn't some sort of elementary school playground. People die - and more would have if we had tried to "do" Iran first, particularly with far less cause (U.N. sanctions, war still being "on" in Saddam's view, & so forth).

[jmervyn]

OMG, the Okie's back!

Hell, there’s not any evidence they are even working on a bomb ... only conjecture. IAEA Director General Mohamed El Baradi has never reported any evidence of "undeclared" sources or special nuclear material in Iran, or any diversion of nuclear material. The charges made against Iran are unsubstantiated, and amazingly sound very similar to the false charges made against Iraq.

Well, unsubstantiated in that El Baradei said there's documentary evidence of a nuclear program, sure.

This isn’t about any threat to America. The nuclear threat is just an excuse ... another reason to bomb ... and another reason for a subsequent invasion of another Middle East nation.

This whole scenario is all about US military dominance and regime change.

Oh, yeah, I forgot, Ebil U.S. hegemony. No doubt the only real terrorists are the right-wingers who bombed the OK City building. Nice to have you around again...

Too bad you weren’t born in 1890 Dondrei, you could have gone over the top and made that "heroic futile charge" of the Ottoman machine guns with your ancestors at Gallipoli. At the very least, one wouldn’t have to read this warmongering trash.

Is there little wonder why I rarely post on this board anymore?

Llad

I just think it's a side-splitter that Ill is attacking his heir apparent to the "leftie nut job" title as teh warrrmonker.

[jmervyn]

Or well atleast some of thier country after the Israelis invaded.

Yeah, those durn meddling Jooz, you'd think they'd have the decency to be exterminated quietly. Oh, wait... :shocked:

[Drosselmeier]

Yeah, those durn meddling Jooz, you'd think they'd have the decency to be exterminated quietly. Oh, wait... :shocked:

The palestinians were not behind the holocaust. You know this jmerv.

[SaroDarksbane]

The palestinians were not behind the holocaust. You know this jmerv.

Though they seem to be pretty open about their desire to organize a repeat performance, if possible.

[Johnny]

Yeah, those durn meddling Jooz, you'd think they'd have the decency to be exterminated quietly. Oh, wait... :shocked:

Right I get it. "Hitler killed alot of **** so lets look the other way when they butcher the Palestinians and take thier land and dont you dare oppose it or you are an evil nazi"

We have already looked the other way for 50 years. Can we start treating Israel like any other aggressive nation attacking thier neighbor?

Though technicly they arent a neighbor as much as someone who set up camp on Palestines lawn followed by taking over half the house with weapons.