The US is fully prepared for war with Iran

[Nebor]

http://rawstory.com//news/2007...itary_attack_0828.html

Like I said before, "Iran is going to get pwned in the face."

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://rawstory.com//news/2007...itary_attack_0828.html

Like I said before, "Iran is going to get pwned in the face."

Yep.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://rawstory.com//news/2007...itary_attack_0828.html

Like I said before, "Iran is going to get pwned in the face."

Yep.

I like you. You're good people.

 

[Genx87]

None of this is surprising. We honestly probably have some contingency plan to erase Canadas govt as well should we feel the need arise.

Though I am sure more detail has been put into the Iranian situation. Unless those canucks start sharpening their blades en mass of course

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Genx87
None of this is surprising. We honestly probably have some contingency plan to erase Canadas govt as well should we feel the need arise.

Though I am sure more detail has been put into the Iranian situation. Unless those canucks start sharpening their blades en mass of course

And sadly Canadian civilians have better access to foreign made assault weapons, the semi-auto H&K G36s, Sig 552s, etc. We're hosed!

 

[Lemon law]

to Nebor---your idiocy is in assuming Iran will be easy or pwned just like Iraq.

The entire article is based on the US ability to bomb Iran. And any time I get into my car, I then gain the ability to run my car straight into a tree. Having the ability says nothing about the wisdom or aftermath of the policy. We have only had a few air craft carrier strike groups off the coast of Iran for six month or so. Over a year ago, Seymour Hersch reported the Israeli incursion into Lebanon was reported and supported to be a Dick Cheney inspired dress rehearsal for an Iranian invasion and that Dick Cheney wants to invade Iran.
And as GWB gets his neocons advisers amputated, more rational people replace them and Cheney's influence is on the decline.

The point being, military actions against Iran would be a bigger blunder than Iraq---and blunderwise----Iraq has proved to be a really really big blunder---military action against Iran would get GWB&co. very probably, impeached, convicted, and win GWB&co. an all expense paid trip to the Hague.

Do you still feel foggie Nebor?

 

[Nebor]

Bush and Cheney have already said they intend to deal with Iran before they leave office. The forces at ready could decimate Irans nuclear facilities, military and government in a matter of hours. No boots on the ground. We don't need to invade Iran (just like we shouldn't have invaded Iraq.) We just need to bomb them back to the stone age, a la Gulf War I.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Originally posted by: Nebor
http://rawstory.com//news/2007...itary_attack_0828.html

Like I said before, "Iran is going to get pwned in the face."

Yep.

I like you. You're good people.

Is this a joke for you two? :|

As for the article itself, are we going to take on another country without international support? Are we going to sit there and let the successful stratagem of terrorism bleed us AFTER we destroy the Iranian government/military/nuclear program?

I hope for our sake that we would have at least learned the most important lesson of Iraq. That is, if you're going to destroy an Islamic country - leave it in ruins and don?t let them bleed you to death. Frankly I do not trust Bush in any regard to lead us through a successful campaign. We?d destroy Iran?s government easily ? but then we?d repeat all our failures in rebuilding Iraq.

One additional thought I have is, would the liberals even allow us to attack Iran without civil unrest here at home? I would think with all the venomous rage over Iraq that the situation here at home would turn violent.

Final thought, this is no laughing matter.

 

[Lemon law]

Jackalas is at least a voice of rationality. With Iraq, GWB&co. was able to run the idea past both the US congress and the UN without getting a firm NO from either.

GWB&co would have to act without any support because the millisecond they even raised the idea of Iranian military action, would be followed by a universal deafening chorus of FIRM OH NO YOU DON'TS. Even our own military may refuse to follow any orders to bomb Iran without congressional support.

 

[Gneisenau]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
...
One additional thought I have is, would the liberals even allow us to attack Iran without civil unrest here at home? I would think with all the venomous rage over Iraq that the situation here at home would turn violent.

....

Iran no, Pakistan apperantly yes...

 

[Jaskalas]

Of course, Lemon just reminded me of something critical here, that I can?t believe I forgot to mention:

There must be a declaration of war from Congress

I cannot support it otherwise.

Yes, I believe Iran is due for a harsh response to its nuclear program and acts of aggression (if not acts of war) in supporting terrorists who fight us in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet that does not change our structure of government and the need for us to be united during a time of crisis.

I pretty much doubt we?ll get a declaration of war.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Even our own military may refuse to follow any orders to bomb Iran without congressional support.

I agree.

Unless Iran lobs a Nuke at Israel or somehow the U.S.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Jackalas is at least a voice of rationality. With Iraq, GWB&co. was able to run the idea past both the US congress and the UN without getting a firm NO from either.

GWB&co would have to act without any support because the millisecond they even raised the idea of Iranian military action, would be followed by a universal deafening chorus of FIRM OH NO YOU DON'TS. Even our own military may refuse to follow any orders to bomb Iran without congressional support.

You indirectly concede Bush alone is the most intelligent person in WADC. Afterall...he convinced EVERYONE to allow Iraq. I mean, how could an idiot convince not only congress, the UN, and the majority of the US? You dont think he could do it again? How do you know all this anti-Iran crap isnt being fabricated by BushCo in a backroom somewhere?

 

[rpanic]

We already driving the country into bankruptcy something like this would just make it faster. We are already driving the world against us. How many more burdens are we going to lay on the backs of the future children of the US before something breaks.

The US is being played like a fool just like its enemies internal and external would like.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Prepared for war does not mean going to war.

Strikes against Iran will not happen without serious provication.

I expect that Iran realizes that and if they are planning trouble, will wait until a new administration show up.

 

[The Green Bean]

I don't think any attack on Iran will do much good for the USA. How much fun the USA would have to lose 3 wars at once

 

[Nebor]

Sounds like a lot of you guys didn't read the article. Actions against Iran enjoys bi-partisan support, and public opinion polls show moderate support for action against Iran. The UK also may back us, and Israel definitely will, so this won't be a unilateral action.

It's coming. Just a matter of time.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Nebor
Sounds like a lot of you guys didn't read the article. Actions against Iran enjoys bi-partisan support, and public opinion polls show moderate support for action against Iran. The UK also may back us, and Israel definitely will, so this won't be a unilateral action.

It's coming. Just a matter of time.

Tell us how this is any different than Iraq.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Nebor
Sounds like a lot of you guys didn't read the article. Actions against Iran enjoys bi-partisan support, and public opinion polls show moderate support for action against Iran. The UK also may back us, and Israel definitely will, so this won't be a unilateral action.

It's coming. Just a matter of time.

You are going to sign-up if they decide to attack Iran, right?

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Before anyone speaks of attacking Iran, they should try to be detached enough to see the following truth:

Soon we'll mark the 6th anniversary of 9/11.
I have never seen such a huge amount of goodwill and sympathy - gained by the U.S. throughout the entire world in the first days following the September event - being squandered so completely, to the point at which it has reached a negative value. You have the president with the lowest popularity in history, you're engaged in a war with no purposes, and no end in sight, the world is really scared and angry at you, yet somehow there are persistent rumours that your leaders will attack yet another country?

Even if you'd be 100% right in doing so, you're still going to lose the propaganda war by default, and the rest of the world will be even more turned off by your attitude.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Even if you'd be 100% right in doing so, you're still going to lose the propaganda war by default, and the rest of the world will be even more turned off by your attitude.

Yes and I hope they do a bit more than just be "turned off"

 

[The Green Bean]

"My opinion is that [nuclear weapons] wouldn't be used unless there was definite evidence that Iran has them too or is about to acquire them in a matter of days/weeks," notes Butcher. "However, the Natanz facility has been so hardened that to destroy it MAY require nuclear weapons, and once an attack had started it may simply be a matter of following military logic and doctrine to full extent, which would call for the use of nukes if all other means failed."

Hypocrisy at its finest. The US can use nukes but Iran can't even have them. :roll:

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Even if you'd be 100% right in doing so, you're still going to lose the propaganda war by default, and the rest of the world will be even more turned off by your attitude.

Yes and I hope they do a bit more than just be "turned off"

You know they won't. What, you think the French are going to send troops and equipment to defend Iran? We're the only country with the balls to project our viewpoint across the world.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

"My opinion is that [nuclear weapons] wouldn't be used unless there was definite evidence that Iran has them too or is about to acquire them in a matter of days/weeks," notes Butcher. "However, the Natanz facility has been so hardened that to destroy it MAY require nuclear weapons, and once an attack had started it may simply be a matter of following military logic and doctrine to full extent, which would call for the use of nukes if all other means failed."

Hypocrisy at its finest. The US can use nukes but Iran can't even have them. :roll:

Right vs. wrong.
Good vs. evil.
Righteous vs. erroneous.
USA vs. Iran

 

[NaughtyGeek]

It's coming. Just a matter of time.

You've got that right. Those Iranians made Daddy Bush look bad back in 78 when they threw the CIA installed Shah out of the country. I've stated before and I'll state it again, Iran has been the target from the get go.

For those who think that the US population will "rise up and resist," get a clue. The population will do and support what The Media tells them to. And don't think for a second the media wont be on board with this. Gotta get people to tune in and watch the talking heads somehow and what better way to do it than with another war.

Also, have no fear, something will transpire to convince us all how evil Iran is. Shit, they convinced us all that a bunch of people in caves where a threat to our national security, how hard will it be to convince us that a country having "nuclear capabilities" is the next big threat.

And to the naive individual who wants to see how the US will respond to losing 3 wars at once, wake up and look at a map. The other 2 "wars" are nothing more than staging for the coming war. We have "the enemy" flanked and a couple natives striking from a house in Baghdad aren't going to change that. Just because the media has convinced you we're "losing" in Afghanistan and Iraq does not make it so.

By the time China and Russia(the only real threats to our plans) realize what's going on, we'll be so far entrenched in the region, routing us out isn't going to be any easy task. Mark my words ladies and gentlemen, the stage is set and the props are in place, we only await the starting bell to watch this "game" play out.