Do you think the U.S. might go after Iran first?

[HappyPuppy]

Iraq, with Hussein as its leader, is a danger because of its WMD research and development. Iran, on the other hand, has been a hotbed of anti-US sentiment (by its leadership) for many years and is known to support and harbor terrorists.

Whaddaya think? Is Bush faking Iran out with his rhetoric on Iraq while secretly planning on hitting Iran first instead?

It would be a brilliant ploy.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
Iraq, with Hussein as its leader, is a danger because of its WMD research and development. Iran, on the other hand, has been a hotbed of anti-US sentiment (by its leadership) for many years and is known to support and harbor terrorists.

Whaddaya think? Is Bush faking Iran out with his rhetoric on Iraq while secretly planning on hitting Iran first instead?

It would be a brilliant ploy.

Maybe just take over the entire middle east while we are at it?

 

[HappyPuppy]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
Iraq, with Hussein as its leader, is a danger because of its WMD research and development. Iran, on the other hand, has been a hotbed of anti-US sentiment (by its leadership) for many years and is known to support and harbor terrorists.

Whaddaya think? Is Bush faking Iran out with his rhetoric on Iraq while secretly planning on hitting Iran first instead?

It would be a brilliant ploy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Maybe just take over the entire middle east while we are at it?
___________________________________________________

Not a bad idea. It might take us more than a week though. The American people only have an attention span of 15 seconds.

 

[HombrePequeno]

Most of Iran doesn't hate America. We go in there guns ablazing, that's going to piss a lot of the Iranians off even if they hate Khomeini.

 

[HappyPuppy]

Isn't Khomeini dead?

 

[Yzzim]

There's another thread about Iran a couple threads down from this one.

Anyway, there's many supporters of the US already within Iran. Not sure if they support US policy exactly (doubtful) but they do support the idea of getting rid of Ayatollah Khamenei and the other radically islamic fundamentalists.

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
Isn't Khomeini dead?

I meant Khamenei.

 

[Moonbeam]

'Brilliant ploy' is not the descriptor I'd use.

 

[HappyPuppy]

'Brilliant ploy' is not the descriptor I'd use.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why not? Are you schooled in world political tactics?

 

[rickn]

No, US won't attack Iran.

 

[HappyPuppy]

No, US won't attack Iran.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

And why not?

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
No, US won't attack Iran.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

And why not?

Because, Iran is about to go thru another revolution in the not so distant future. The people there are absolutely sick of the strict Islamic system. They are not nearly the threat that Iraq is. The whole issue with their nuclear capability is not the reactors, which are completely controlled by the Russians and monitored by IEAE, but the training that the Iranians receive. We can't kill the messenger (Russia) The concern that the US has is that the Iranians will set up their own weapons programs, completely independent of their relationship with Russia - but with all the knowledge they have learned from the Russians.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Idiots grow on trees at ATOT . . .

Our President just lectured the UN on its relevance to maintaining world order and the need to face down a SPECIFIC tyrant based on SPECIFIC offenses. Why risk what little credibility we have on useless subterfuge? We should quietly support democratic reforms in Iran (including Khatami). Their progress is slow but many of the old ideas are being bred out by . . . let's just say rabbits WISH they could compete with Iranian procreative prowess.

 

[JellyBaby]

Conquering Iran first doesn't make as much sense as taking Iraq first. Look at this here map. If we take Iraq, Syria (our enemy) is surrounded by us (Iraq), Turkey and Israel. You say Syria can escape to the south? Well Jordon doesn't get along with Syria so no help there.

We (Iraq) now have strategically placed allies. Kuwait to the east, *cough* Saudia Arabi *cough* to the south, and Turkey to the north.

Ah but it gets better, look who else is surrounded: Iran! They're penned in by us (Iraq) to the west, us again (Afghanistan) to the east, us again (Navy in the Persian Gulf) and, if you count them, Russian republics to the north.

 

[LakerGod]

I hope the U.S. doesn't attack Iran, but from what I've seen with Bush saying that America would go at Iraq alone without world support, I couldn't positively say that this couldn't happen.

 

[sandorski]

You'd think the US had unlimited resources the way targets are being picked by some. Sure, it's likely that there are those who support the US in Iran, but most probably don't(hell, most Afghani's probably don't really support the US, beyond getting the Taliban out) and I'd wager that many Iranians would instantly become terrorists looking for a target.

 

[LH]

2/3'rds of Irans population is under 25, the majority of those do not like the strict Islamic Iranian Government. Iran will take care of itself in the next 5 or so years.

 

[Aquaman]

They would not attack Iran........... at least with Iraq they have a reason to attack them (i.e. weapons of mass destruction) besides I think Iran will take care of itself.......... give it 20 years or so

Cheers,
Aquaman

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

I wouldn't put it beneath Bush to do so... But it would be bloody stupid, even more so than placing them among the 'Axis of Evil'.

Iran has been gradually progressing towards a more and more moderate system, where the religious fundamentalists got less power. There wasn't all that much anti-American feeling among most of the population till the BS remarks from Bush. Still, after that Iran kicked out a bunch of Al Qaida followers that had sought refuge there, and send them to Saudi Arabia. So supporters of terrorism isn't all that true either. But Bush needs a victory to get people's minds off Osama getting away.

 

[Peetoeng]

Originally posted by: LH
2/3'rds of Irans population is under 25, the majority of those do not like the strict Islamic Iranian Government. Iran will take care of itself in the next 5 or so years.

I agree. You can attack any country you don't like, but unless the people within are committed to change, the effort would not just be futile but also dangerous (imagine being a foot soldier of an occupying army around angry populace).

 

[UltraQuiet]

Idiots grow on trees at ATOT . . .

You seem to have the British gift of understatement.

 

[Linflas]

I would not be at all surprised to see the Iranians bring about their own regime change. As others have pointed out in this thread there is not a lot of support for the theocracy there and there are a surprising number of Iranians that hold a positive view of the US and its citizens. There have been some intelligence reports that suggest that Iran today is in much the same state as it was in the years right before the ouster of the Shah.

 

[Nitemare]

We are on good terms with most of the youth and young adults in Iran, the only ones that still think we are the Great Satan is the small albeit ruling party, the Khameini's. Now if only the majority of Iran would realize their rulers were nothing more than a bunch of old hate mongerers preaching hatred of other peoples while stifling their own citizens, and revolt...then I am sure the US would be more than happy to assist..


Hint hint...any Iranian reading this...contact Dubya at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave

That being said, I think it is only a matter of time before they clean up shop anyways. The few Iranians I know disapprove of the Khameini's and would like to see a regime change. I would not have been surprised if the Iranian youth were ones of the first peoples to take up American colors after 9/11. They are very much westernized and pro US.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: LH
2/3'rds of Irans population is under 25, the majority of those do not like the strict Islamic Iranian Government. Iran will take care of itself in the next 5 or so years.

That's my feeling also but I put it in the 5 - 10 year bracket. In any case I think you're right, Iran will take care of itself.

 

[justint]

Originally posted by: Peetoeng

Originally posted by: LH
2/3'rds of Irans population is under 25, the majority of those do not like the strict Islamic Iranian Government. Iran will take care of itself in the next 5 or so years.

I agree. You can attack any country you don't like, but unless the people within are committed to change, the effort would not just be futile but also dangerous (imagine being a foot soldier of an occupying army around angry populace).

EX: Israel and the Palestinians