Iran to release British Soldiers.

NCfan

mammasan wrote:

This is complete bullshit. We have no military options against Iran because our militray is completely overextended tied up in a war we had no business getting into. Blaming those oppossed to the war is a nice cop-out for those that are to foolish and proud to admit that our involvment in Iraq is a huge mistake and is leaving us vulnerable.

This administration has shown no regrad to public or world opinion. If the president had the resources he would attack Iran regardless of what the people say, he showed that with attacking Iraq. So keep fooling yourself thinking that Iraq was a noble venture and blaming the anti-war crowd for our failure to reign in Iran. The blame for both lies squarely on the shoulders of the people who led us into Iraq and got us stuck there, unable to use our military if any other situation where to arise.

Talk about complete bullshit... where do you get off claiming that the president would attack Iran if only he had the resources to do so? That is
a fine opinion, but it doesn't hold up to reality.

Bush DOES have the resources to attack Iran, and I'm sure if he were still in office a few years from now he would attack their nuclear capabilities. But there is no need for that now, and Bush has relied on diplomatic measures to settle this dispute.

In fact, the EU three was VERY close to negotiating a settlement in which Iran was allowed to have a nuclear reactor, but they had to give their spent fuel rods to the Russians for disposal. According to you, if that settlement had of worked, ole Georgie would have been pissed off and mad that he couldn't go bomb some innocent civilians. Give me a break...

RolandTD20Kdrummer

C'mon America let's keep dropping them Bush bombs round the world.
Yeeehaww....

mammasan

NCfan wrote:

Talk about complete bullshit... where do you get off claiming that the president would attack Iran if only he had the resources to do so? That is
a fine opinion, but it doesn't hold up to reality.

Bush DOES have the resources to attack Iran, and I'm sure if he were still in office a few years from now he would attack their nuclear capabilities. But there is no need for that now, and Bush has relied on diplomatic measures to settle this dispute.

In fact, the EU three was VERY close to negotiating a settlement in which Iran was allowed to have a nuclear reactor, but they had to give their spent fuel rods to the Russians for disposal. According to you, if that settlement had of worked, ole Georgie would have been pissed off and mad that he couldn't go bomb some innocent civilians. Give me a break...

Complete bullshit nothing. He invaded Iraq without support from many of our allies and with a large portion of the people of this country oppossed to the war. He would most definetgly do it again if he had the resources, but he doesn't. Hitting Iran's nuclear sites will only delay them in weaponizing their nuclear program, not put an end to it. To put an end to it you need regime change and for that you need ground forces, something we are short on these days.

As for your last comment, no I wouldn't think that Bush would be pissed that he couldn't bomb Iran, but I believe that we are not sdoing everything we can diplomatically because, like you said, we know that he will not give in and it will make us look weak. My point is so what if we look weak. We would have exausted all diplomatic measures and we would then have some leverage to put together a true coilition, not some Coilition of the Willing and easily bought off, and would then be able to apply some serious pressure on Iran instead of just barking without having any bite to back it up with.