|
Okay seriously, are we going to war with Iran yet? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Moongoose |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
The States are already neck deep in the e; they'd have problems unless they had some actual world support for that one... |
Which i really cant see happening. Its not that Iran having a nuke is a rosy thought as Opus nicely put it, but starting a war in Iran at this point would be like putting a sign on your back saying kick me. It just invites retaliation for the us and any of its supporters. Im not saying the situation doesnt need to be deal with, but waiting until they fix the country they screwed up last would be a good idea, otherwise you just have to many radical regimes mad at you, and no other country wishes that.
| quote: | | They're still finding documents that show what kind of connections the Saddam regime had (ie. the Russians?! and that they DID have connections to al Qaeda. |
If my memory serves me correctly (too much E messed with my mind :crazy: ) wasnt there an article a while back that acknowledged that Osama and Saddam have indeed met, but Saddam wanted nothing to do with Osama / Osama wanted to do nothing with Saddam becouse he wasnt really that much into allah, jihad and all that crap?
| quote: | | Osama is lucky to buy a bowl of rice and make it out from under his rock |
He should be playing lotery then becouse it sounds like he is the luckiest man alive if thats true.
| quote: | | and the civil war, well hell anybody could have guessed that after the power vaccuum was created with Saddam's exit. |
Yes anybody could have guessed it. But it still cought you by surprise.
| quote: | | Hey I hate to tell you, but if we, the s, wanted to. IRAN would become a ing glass table top. If we wanted to. We could do it with out losing one trooper. |
Well hooray for the s then. Are you by any chance threatening Iran with a nuclear strike? That would make you feel all proud woudnt it? For about a month, two at the most anyway becouse I estimate thats how long it would take before little nuclear device would start going off in every major us city. And how symphatetic do you think the rest of the world would be to your cries of help then? Do you think anyone would care that your civilians are dying when you merely months before you wiped out an entire country full of innocent people off the face of the earth?
Buy hey, congratulations, at least you havent lost a single trooper in the war with Iran :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Q5echo |
Oh man! We’re so f**ked!
| quote: | Iran said Tuesday it had tested what it called a "super-modern flying boat" capable of evading radar. State TV showed a brief clip of the boat's launch.
"Due to its advanced design, no radar at sea or in the air can detect it. It can lift out of the water," the television said. It said the boat was "all Iranian-made and can launch missiles with precise targeting while moving."
On Monday Iran said it tested a second new radar-avoiding missile during war games in the Persian Gulf that the military says are aimed at preparing the country's defenses against the United States.
The new surface-to-sea missile is equipped with remote-control and searching systems, the state-run television reported Tuesday. |
Link |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moongoose
Buy hey, congratulations, at least you havent lost a single trooper in the war with Iran :rolleyes: |
we have actually. lost hundreds to them in '83. |
|
|
| LazFX |
You know I really could care less what happens over in Iran. The U.S. needs to stop playing the cop of the planet and worry about its own people. every one else, especially some thrid world country that loves to talk big. Yeah, you are right, we would not use Nukes against Iran, even though alot of people would love to see it happen, IT WON't, due in part that America is not like that.
Personally, I hate the fact that the US is even in Iraq and Afganistan. Using and allowing our troops to die for those countries is stupid. Bush was an idiot for going to war, he is a liar and will have his time in office blemished in History. We should just become isolationists like the days of old. But you know what, jerk offs like all of you anti americans on this board still would be bitching about how bad America is.
have a good day |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moongoose
Well hooray for the s then. Are you by any chance threatening Iran with a nuclear strike? That would make you feel all proud woudnt it? |
Actually it would not make me feel proud. The loss of life, is sad.
But I would be proud if Iran struck first cause then all of you anti-american idiots on this board would be demanding America to do something about it,,,,, |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
i misstated. i took the word "just" out. maybe it makes a little more sense.
anyway, to end this between you and i. because, your last post has more less proven a point in my second post.
you...
 |
Hey, that's great! Nice catch!
| quote: | | have now replaced her... |
Oh she's not that bad......
Okay, yeah, she is that bad. I feel for Shakka.
| quote: | | who replaced him... |
I'll take "him" anyday of the week over any given GOP twit running the White House right now.
That was supposed to be an insult?
And are we actually going to hear some engagement from you on Iran, since you seemingly dodged every other point?
Added in Edit: Oops, I see you did engage somewhat with your radar-dodging jet pick. Thank you for actually contributing. Hopefully we can continue to see more of this. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Thank you for actually contributing. Hopefully we can continue to see more of this. |
oh right, 'cause i never "engage" over Iraq and the standard anti-bush rhetoric:rolleyes: shut up. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Well you at least have the left-wing talking points down pat. |
They're more than mere "talking points." I'm more than willing to discuss each of those points in detail in other threads if necessary (I am really trying to keep this one focused). Then again, if memory serves I believe I have discussed those points ad nauseum in other threads.
| quote: | Lets not talk as if everything is a forgone conclusion on those points however.
They're still finding documents that show what kind of connections the Saddam regime had (ie. the Russians?! and that they DID have connections to al Qaeda. Osama is lucky to buy a bowl of rice and make it out from under his rock, the terrorists were there to begin with except the targets have come to them, the WMDs where there but were moved thanks to Georges Sada stepping up and the civil war, well hell anybody could have guessed that after the power vaccuum was created with Saddam's exit. |
Stephen Hayes over at Weekly Standard has beaten the connection drum for years, only to have it proven time and again how erroneous his OWN foregone conclusion has been. It's strange how someone in the GOP has such a pre-conceived notion on things, and then tries to find evidence to prove that pre-conceived notion.
Seems like it's a re-occurring theme with most in this White House. Gee, I always thought it kinda made more sense to draw safe conclusions based on the evidence given, rather than draw unsupported conclusions and then try and find the evidence to back those conclusions up.
They really aren't much different than Creationists in that regard.
But back to Hayes' article. Nothing about those papers actually helps his cause of a connection. If anything they demonstrate just the opposite. What's sad is that Bush released these documents not exactly knowing what they said, and actually hoped the Right Wing blogs would help translate them for him:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060316...sa_documents_dc
Did everyone catch that part? That's ing unbelievable to me. So since he released them out to the blogs for translation, I guess it's only appropriate to actually see some blogs translating it correctly for him:
| quote: | 1. Both of the Iraqi documents Hayes cites show that Iraq declined to support Abu Sayyaf, financially or otherwise, because of its terrorist activities.
2. Neither of the documents proves that Iraq ever supported Abu Sayyaf. According to Hayes, this is the key passage, from an Iraqi document describing their response to an Abu Sayyaf kidnapping: “We have all cooperated in the field of intelligence information with some of our friends to encourage the tourists and the investors in the Philippines…The kidnappers were formerly (from the previous year) receiving money and purchasing combat weapons. From now on we (IIS) are not giving them this opportunity and are not on speaking terms with them.” Hayes says this passage “seems to confirm” to that Iraq provided Abu Sayyaf with financial support. But the language (as Hayes implicitly acknowledges) is vague and could refer to financial support from another country.
3. Sporadic contact between Iraq and Abu Sayyaf is old news. As Hayes acknowledges, the State Department’s Matthew Daley publicly testified about some suspected contacts between Iraq and Abu Sayyaf in March 2003.
http://thinkprogress.org/?s=hayes+s...itButtom=Search |
See also:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/17/134552/862
And Juan Cole (who actually speaks some Arabic, strange concept for this Administration, I know):
http://www.juancole.com/2006/03/rig...d-by-bogus.html
And this is probably the best one:
http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/002447.html
In short, Stephen Hayes is once again completely and utterly full of .
| quote: | | Which ever way we look at the situation, it's FUBAR from Bush's original intent, but I find it interesting that because everything wasn't done in 5 months that everyone's writting the whole situation off...:conf: |
You think I'm writing it off simply because things have gone FUBAR and haven't corrected itself in a mere 1/2 year or so? Could it be because everyone but this Administration (actually there were some in this Administration) predicted exactly this kind of debacle in the first place? Could it also be because the pre-conceived notions were not strong notions and held very little if any evidence, and that in most accounts this Administration fully knew the lack of strong evidence to support their pre-conceived notions but sold a completely different story to the public anyway on Iraq?
Lest we not forget such minor details. |
|
|
| metalgearsolid |
| Iran=Death to America. |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| quote: | Originally posted by metalgearsolid
Iran=Death to America. |
i DARE them to try as i've been saying. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
Oh man! We’re so f**ked!
Link |
So what exactly is that mini tower structure on the top of the plane? |
|
|
| metalgearsolid |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
i DARE them to try as i've been saying. |
Well you what will happen is that Iran will win the ground war due solely to numbers and then Americans won't want to go so the US government will have to declassify some top secret airplanes. Send them to Iran and watch them pummel Iran into an inferno in less then an hour by using those aircrafts. So actually the war wouldn't be a bad thing since well know some new cool aircraft our gov has. |
|
|
|
|
