why do you think it will be ok for Iran to have nukes?
I never said it would be ok for Iran to have nukes and have stated several times that Iran possessing nukes is a troubling senerio. I just believe that military action is not the solution to the problem. I believe that this issue should be resolved via diplomacy and I'm very concerned because diplomacy is not this administrations strong suit.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I don't see in the next two weeks or even the next two months the US striking Iran's nuclear sites. The focus needs to stay on fixing the problems in Iraq.
If the Israelis want to launch missiles into Iran, I'm all for it, but as of right now it shouldn't be a US job.
dropping bombs on some nuke sites is alot different then a full out invasion.
...
Isn't that an 'Act of War'? I mean, we went to war with Japan because they dropped bombs on our Naval Base.
If you cannot accept someone dropping bombs on our soil... why should anyone else accept our dropping bombs on them? Speaking in logical terms here... not national.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
Isn't that an 'Act of War'? I mean, we went to war with Japan because they dropped bombs on our Naval Base.
If you cannot accept someone dropping bombs on our soil... why should anyone else accept our dropping bombs on them? Speaking in logical terms here... not national.
Logical terms!! That is laughable!! There is no logic in you statement. Accepting bombs is logical? No one "accepts" bombings. They are bombed for a reason. There is no accepting, there is only taking. If we bomb Iran, they will take it.
Logical terms!! That is laughable!! There is no logic in you statement. Accepting bombs is logical? No one "accepts" bombings. They are bombed for a reason. There is no accepting, there is only taking. If we bomb Iran, they will take it.
...
You really need to change your login name... you just perpetuate the stereotype that all of us Americans are idiots.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Alright....who wants popcorn??? I'm going to make some, and look for a good place to watch the end of the world!!!!
We're all going die!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May I have some lightly buttered with just a dash of salt?
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
can the united states just finish something they started. they go to iraq for no reason without finishing the job in afghanistan. now they're sabre rattling tehren. let's clean up iraq before we start another mess please.
have they come out and said they were gonna bomb iran if tehren didn't stop their nuclear programme? if so then that is an absolute act of aggression in my book, not to mention an act of war. are things going so great for the bush administration that there is nothing else they can occupy their minds with?
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Nicholas Burns, U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs, ruled out direct negotiations with Iran and said a rapprochement between Washington and Tehran was "not possible" until Iran halts uranium enrichment.
"The Middle East isn't a region to be dominated by Iran. The Gulf isn't a body of water to be controlled by Iran. That's why we've seen the United States station two carrier battle groups in the region," Burns said in an address to the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center, an influential think-tank.
no of course not. it's a region to be dominated by the united states for their own self interest and nothing more. how dare they.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Who else think we will be seeing some air strike on Iran within the next few weeks.
I don't, Bush is too weakened right now and the threat isn't imminent enough to do it. However, I think (and I'm just speculating), that we'll see John Edwards, Hillary, or McCain ordering airstrikes a few years from now.
no they cant its the american way, bomb the fuck out of a country and then leave. come one u should know the drill by now
not that i'd wish it upon anybody, but i wonder how different the reaction to such escapades from the american public and her friends would be if they were the targets of such destruction. just once. would they be so quick to stand behind the actions of their governments if their neighbourhoods looked like southern lebanon. if their infrastructure was bombed to the stone age. if the perpetrators didn't have to answer for their actions cause god damn it we are the defenders of freedom and democracy and all things good.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I don't, Bush is too weakened right now and the threat isn't imminent enough to do it. However, I think (and I'm just speculating), that we'll see John Edwards, Hillary, or McCain ordering airstrikes a few years from now.
...
It all depends upon how Iraq pans out.
Remember... Iraqi Shi'ites are in charge. Iran is a Shi'ite state. Our troops are in Iraq.
What happens to our troops if we take on the Shi'ia nation of Iran? How will that affect the Shi'ites living in Iraq? Will that place our troops in greater peril? Is that a good strategic move?
We've placed our military in a fucked up situation. I believe that we should place their safety as the highest priority... over domestic politics... over foriegn policy regarding Israel.
But... that's just my take.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
It all depends upon how Iraq pans out.
Remember... Iraqi Shi'ites are in charge. Iran is a Shi'ite state. Our troops are in Iraq.
What happens to our troops if we take on the Shi'ia nation of Iran? How will that affect the Shi'ites living in Iraq? Will that place our troops in greater peril? Is that a good strategic move?
We've placed our military in a fucked up situation. I believe that we should place their safety as the highest priority... over domestic politics... over foriegn policy regarding Israel.
But... that's just my take.
greater peril?
how could the troops in iraq be in any greater peril than they already are?
and i agree the safety of the soldiers should be the highest priority,along with the safety of civilians. a country's military if they have one, should be about defending their nation from imminent attack and threat. not putting the soldiers in harm's way and then bitching about it and wondering why they are being attacked when all they're trying to do is 'help'
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
greater peril?
how could the troops in iraq be in any greater peril than they already are?
and i agree the safety of the soldiers should be the highest priority,along with the safety of civilians. a country's military if they have one, should be about defending their nation from imminent attack and threat. not putting the soldiers in harm's way and then bitching about it and wondering why they are being attacked when all they're trying to do is 'help'
...
Greater peril... as in you start some shit next door and the people where you're staying don't like it... and you are trainning them... and arming them... and sleeping in the same barracks as them... that's greater peril. Greater peril because you are close enough to roll a grenade under your bed as you sleep.
...
The Middle East is a culture that Americans don't understand. They are aligned to their religion, not thier borders. The Shi'ia are Shi'ia and will bond with other Shi'ia... even if tet live inside of another border. We bomb Shi'ias in Iran... we should expect Shi'ia retaliation in Iraq.
...
And our soldiers are on the front lines... not me. I'm a fucking half a world away in the safety of my home. The Shi'ites in Iraq aren't going to come after me... they will go after the Americans sitting next to them in the mess hall in the Green Zone.
..
And I agree with you 100%. I want my voluenteer military here at home... protecting ME... MY COUNTRY... at our borders... at our airports... at our shipping ports... Not on the other side of the planet because some old men over here hated some old men over there.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
Greater peril... as in you start some shit next door and the people where you're staying don't like it... and you are trainning them... and arming them... and sleeping in the same barracks as them... that's greater peril. Greater peril because you are close enough to roll a grenade under your bed as you sleep.
...
The Middle East is a culture that Americans don't understand. They are aligned to their religion, not thier borders. The Shi'ia are Shi'ia and will bond with other Shi'ia... even if tet live inside of another border. We bomb Shi'ias in Iran... we should expect Shi'ia retaliation in Iraq.
...
And our soldiers are on the front lines... not me. I'm a fucking half a world away in the safety of my home. The Shi'ites in Iraq aren't going to come after me... they will go after the Americans sitting next to them in the mess hall in the Green Zone.
..
And I agree with you 100%. I want my voluenteer military here at home... protecting ME... MY COUNTRY... at our borders... at our airports... at our shipping ports... Not on the other side of the planet because some old men over here hated some old men over there.
let's remember who put those borders in place. they were drawn up purely for the convenience of the imperialists, not the local people and without any consideration for them.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I never said it would be ok for Iran to have nukes and have stated several times that Iran possessing nukes is a troubling senerio. I just believe that military action is not the solution to the problem. I believe that this issue should be resolved via diplomacy and I'm very concerned because diplomacy is not this administrations strong suit.
He says that Israel should be wiped off the earth and that the US will be destroyed. What do you say to him? Where do you start? Seriously.
To your point re: diplomacy, we absolutely should work with other nations and be a helluva lot less unilateral in these matters. We can talk to other people, but talking to the Iranians won't yield anything.
The US is too weak to do anything about it right now. I think it would be better if they at least tried to resolve this via diplomacy.
With two carrier battle groups sitting off the Iranian shore, and 175,000 American stroops on its border, id hardly call America weak vis a vis Iran, a chicken shit little country with a chicken shit little leader. One Carrier and one US sub can handle the entire infratructure of Iran. And they know it. Why do you think they are so boisterous. They are scared shitless and with good reason.
I don't lose sleep about Iran having nukes. If Israel wants to take care of them, let them fight their own fight. I know I don't want my friends going to war for something that poses no threat to our country.
Don't bring up terrorism too, because I would just then remind you that the vast majority of terrorists on 9/11 were Saudis and you don't see us going after them.
Hezbollah murdered over 250 US MARINES on a peacekeeping mission. Iran is doing everything it can to get Hezbollah its long range missiles. But for Israels dispruption of the supply line to Lebanon they would have them. Now do you think its no biggy? Should we just say its cool and trust them? Brilliant idea
The result would be causing more tension in an already highly explosive region. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has strong ties with several high ranking and influential Iraqi officials. They can make a whole lot of trouble for us on many fronts and that is the last think we need right now.
The IRG would go the way of the Republican Guard in short order if they actively confronted the US...
With two carrier battle groups sitting off the Iranian shore, and 175,000 American stroops on its border, id hardly call America weak vis a vis Iran, a chicken shit little country with a chicken shit little leader. One Carrier and one US sub can handle the entire infratructure of Iran. And they know it. Why do you think they are so boisterous. They are scared shitless and with good reason.
I don't think America is weak or doesn't have the possibility to attack Iran. I just think (and really hope) America is smart enough to not do that. I'm sorry for the 250 marines (peacekeeping is a dangerous task) but that does not call for an attack.
And one more thing : when you attack a country not only does it affect the country it also affects the neighbours, the consequences would be a little more dramatic than just "kicking Iranian asses **ck yeah, woohoo!".
I don't think America is weak or doesn't have the possibility to attack Iran. I just think (and really hope) America is smart enough to not do that. I'm sorry for the 250 marines (peacekeeping is a dangerous task) but that does not call for an attack.
And one more thing : when you attack a country not only does it affect the country it also affects the neighbours, the consequences would be a little more dramatic than just "kicking Iranian asses **ck yeah, woohoo!".
Im not for that either. But the Iranian intention through deed and word is clear. An Islamic bomb already exists and it's not fantasy that Iran could and would have plenty of desire to use one on the West or Israel. I hate to agree with our President, but to leave this task to another generation would be a disaster. Regimes who have no accoutability to the international community and defy it at every turn have to be treated as hostile. If we err on the side of trusting them, many people could lose their lives. Not to mention the economic side of selling nuke technology. We have to stop it now even if it means short term hard to the regime. we all stand to lose if we dont. while the Iraq thing backfired, we do need to stay after rogue regimes actively seeking these weapons. it is a matter of life and death
With two carrier battle groups sitting off the Iranian shore, and 175,000 American stroops on its border, id hardly call America weak vis a vis Iran, a chicken shit little country with a chicken shit little leader. One Carrier and one US sub can handle the entire infratructure of Iran. And they know it. Why do you think they are so boisterous. They are scared shitless and with good reason.
I you have more faith in the US military than I do. Sure, it may be able to 'handle the entire infrastructure of Iran' but somehow, considering the opinion of Americans about Iraq, I doubt the American people want the US to be involved in yet another war.
He says that Israel should be wiped off the earth and that the US will be destroyed. What do you say to him? Where do you start? Seriously.
To your point re: diplomacy, we absolutely should work with other nations and be a helluva lot less unilateral in these matters. We can talk to other people, but talking to the Iranians won't yield anything.
I understand what you are saying. Ahmadinejad is a nut and there is probably no reasoning with him, but he is also loosing support with in his own government. I believe that now would be the time to engage, diplomatically, certain people within Iran's government. Maybe we task the EU, UN, or Arab League to initiate the talks. Bring about a resolution that would be favorable to all parties and at the same time increase the power of the opposition to Ahmadinejad in Iran. I'm not saying that it's the best solution or that it will work, but military strikes will not work. Ahmadinejad can then fire up his ant-American and anti-Israeli rhetoric and point to the strikes as proof that we mean to destroy them.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Comments
Well I will have to disagree with you.
I never said it would be ok for Iran to have nukes and have stated several times that Iran possessing nukes is a troubling senerio. I just believe that military action is not the solution to the problem. I believe that this issue should be resolved via diplomacy and I'm very concerned because diplomacy is not this administrations strong suit.
If the Israelis want to launch missiles into Iran, I'm all for it, but as of right now it shouldn't be a US job.
We're all going die!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Isn't that an 'Act of War'? I mean, we went to war with Japan because they dropped bombs on our Naval Base.
If you cannot accept someone dropping bombs on our soil... why should anyone else accept our dropping bombs on them? Speaking in logical terms here... not national.
Hail, Hail!!!
You really need to change your login name... you just perpetuate the stereotype that all of us Americans are idiots.
Hail, Hail!!!
May I have some lightly buttered with just a dash of salt?
have they come out and said they were gonna bomb iran if tehren didn't stop their nuclear programme? if so then that is an absolute act of aggression in my book, not to mention an act of war. are things going so great for the bush administration that there is nothing else they can occupy their minds with?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"The Middle East isn't a region to be dominated by Iran. The Gulf isn't a body of water to be controlled by Iran. That's why we've seen the United States station two carrier battle groups in the region," Burns said in an address to the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center, an influential think-tank.
no of course not. it's a region to be dominated by the united states for their own self interest and nothing more. how dare they.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
I don't, Bush is too weakened right now and the threat isn't imminent enough to do it. However, I think (and I'm just speculating), that we'll see John Edwards, Hillary, or McCain ordering airstrikes a few years from now.
not that i'd wish it upon anybody, but i wonder how different the reaction to such escapades from the american public and her friends would be if they were the targets of such destruction. just once. would they be so quick to stand behind the actions of their governments if their neighbourhoods looked like southern lebanon. if their infrastructure was bombed to the stone age. if the perpetrators didn't have to answer for their actions cause god damn it we are the defenders of freedom and democracy and all things good.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It all depends upon how Iraq pans out.
Remember... Iraqi Shi'ites are in charge. Iran is a Shi'ite state. Our troops are in Iraq.
What happens to our troops if we take on the Shi'ia nation of Iran? How will that affect the Shi'ites living in Iraq? Will that place our troops in greater peril? Is that a good strategic move?
We've placed our military in a fucked up situation. I believe that we should place their safety as the highest priority... over domestic politics... over foriegn policy regarding Israel.
But... that's just my take.
Hail, Hail!!!
greater peril?
how could the troops in iraq be in any greater peril than they already are?
and i agree the safety of the soldiers should be the highest priority,along with the safety of civilians. a country's military if they have one, should be about defending their nation from imminent attack and threat. not putting the soldiers in harm's way and then bitching about it and wondering why they are being attacked when all they're trying to do is 'help'
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Greater peril... as in you start some shit next door and the people where you're staying don't like it... and you are trainning them... and arming them... and sleeping in the same barracks as them... that's greater peril. Greater peril because you are close enough to roll a grenade under your bed as you sleep.
...
The Middle East is a culture that Americans don't understand. They are aligned to their religion, not thier borders. The Shi'ia are Shi'ia and will bond with other Shi'ia... even if tet live inside of another border. We bomb Shi'ias in Iran... we should expect Shi'ia retaliation in Iraq.
...
And our soldiers are on the front lines... not me. I'm a fucking half a world away in the safety of my home. The Shi'ites in Iraq aren't going to come after me... they will go after the Americans sitting next to them in the mess hall in the Green Zone.
..
And I agree with you 100%. I want my voluenteer military here at home... protecting ME... MY COUNTRY... at our borders... at our airports... at our shipping ports... Not on the other side of the planet because some old men over here hated some old men over there.
Hail, Hail!!!
let's remember who put those borders in place. they were drawn up purely for the convenience of the imperialists, not the local people and without any consideration for them.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I don't see this link anywhere:
Iran: Israel, US will soon die
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3356154,00.htm
He says that Israel should be wiped off the earth and that the US will be destroyed. What do you say to him? Where do you start? Seriously.
To your point re: diplomacy, we absolutely should work with other nations and be a helluva lot less unilateral in these matters. We can talk to other people, but talking to the Iranians won't yield anything.
The US is too weak to do anything about it right now. I think it would be better if they at least tried to resolve this via diplomacy.
naděje umírá poslední
I don't think America is weak or doesn't have the possibility to attack Iran. I just think (and really hope) America is smart enough to not do that. I'm sorry for the 250 marines (peacekeeping is a dangerous task) but that does not call for an attack.
And one more thing : when you attack a country not only does it affect the country it also affects the neighbours, the consequences would be a little more dramatic than just "kicking Iranian asses **ck yeah, woohoo!".
I you have more faith in the US military than I do. Sure, it may be able to 'handle the entire infrastructure of Iran' but somehow, considering the opinion of Americans about Iraq, I doubt the American people want the US to be involved in yet another war.
naděje umírá poslední
old music: http://www.myspace.com/slowloader
I understand what you are saying. Ahmadinejad is a nut and there is probably no reasoning with him, but he is also loosing support with in his own government. I believe that now would be the time to engage, diplomatically, certain people within Iran's government. Maybe we task the EU, UN, or Arab League to initiate the talks. Bring about a resolution that would be favorable to all parties and at the same time increase the power of the opposition to Ahmadinejad in Iran. I'm not saying that it's the best solution or that it will work, but military strikes will not work. Ahmadinejad can then fire up his ant-American and anti-Israeli rhetoric and point to the strikes as proof that we mean to destroy them.