will we ?
POSTED BY: NewOldBrownCoat
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 19:04
VIEWED: 2548
PAGE 2 of 3
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
We're not going to Iran.
Never say never. While I doubt the ability of the US to invade Iran in a similar fashion to our actions in Iraq, I doubt we would hesitate to make every effort to take the fight to them if the situation warranted it.
H
I didn't SAY 'never'. If the situation mirrors what led us to Iraq, who can say? Still, I think we'll be less likely to head into Iran unless we have the full force and backing of the world community.
I dont' expect to see to see either to happen.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:Please don't make me come up with a LIST of places that have done nothing near to what Iraq did prior to the invasion that we went into (and
Originally posted by AURaptor:
To date, nothing Iran has done comes anywhere remotely near what led up to the war in Iraq.ed up) anyway.
Incredulous Chrisisall
Go and knock yourself out. The U.N. and the U.S. Congress see things differently. It's a moot point now anyway.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Auraptor wrote:
"Go and knock yourself out. The U.N. and the U.S. Congress see things differently."
2 points, one satirical and one serious:
1. " She's been in Congress?"
2. the original quote from Gen. Casey also says,
" AFTER the elections" ( emphasis mine.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
2. the original quote from Gen. Casey also says,
" AFTER the elections"
Point being?
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
We'll be going into Iran with humanitarian aid after Israel bombs them into oblivion. Hopefully OUR governments are doing everything they can to prevent this from happening.
If ANYONE believe Israel will sit by and let Iran get a nuke LOL-
"Here's your sign"
What we need to keep doing is moving this down the diplomatic path (and keep Israel from moving militarily) and let Iran's youth and reformist movement continue to press forward. Only they can prevent a radical insane person from gaining power and actually "USING" a nuke. As long as sanity remains, NOONE will ever use a nuke again. All I see nukes as, are tools for keeping your hineys safe from other folks with nukes. Nothing but deterrents. Also I would bet my life on the fact that Iran would NEVER sell nukes to an extremist group. It would mean the end of Iran. Period.
The days of non-proliferation are over.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Connorflynn:
As long as sanity remains, NOONE will ever use a nuke again.
Well, there is your first mistake. We're talking about Iranian mullahs here. Sanity is not in their version of the Koran.
Quote:
All I see nukes as, are tools for keeping your hineys safe from other folks with nukes. Nothing but deterrents.
I thought you liberals disliked the whole Mutual Assurred Destruction idea. I agree in prinicipal, especially in the political dynamic practiced between East and West, but the Iranians have spent a generation practicing their own dynamic, one that breeds a different set of foundational assumptions. While the Iranian people would likely agree with our traditional view of MAD, the people aren't the ones in charge. The Mullahs proceed from a foundational value of destroying Isreal, gathering power, and seizing control of the worlds oil and muslim Holy places. Iranian nukes would serve those ends rather then the more sensible ones you describe.
Quote:
Also I would bet my life on the fact that Iran would NEVER sell nukes to an extremist group.
You already are. The whole reason why Bush adopted the new American policies demonstrated so effectively in Iraq is that nukes are so destructive, we simply cannot afford to make that bet with potentially millions of American lives. So bet your life if you choose, that ok, but your not betting my life on your faith in the Iranian goverment.
Quote:
The days of non-proliferation are over.
I suggest that the new US policy means the days of voluntary non-proliferation are over. Then again there is Libya, Ukraine, and South Africa three states that in the last decade have voluntarily abandoned their nuclear programs.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
2. the original quote from Gen. Casey also says,
" AFTER the elections"
Point being?
Sounds like a campaign promise to me. Ya know-- Re-elect one ot us-- a good neo-con Republican, maybe another Bush-- and we'll wrap up the war real quick. But then we'll be in the White House for 4 more years.
right up there with we know where those WMDs are, Iraqis will throw flowers at the troops, Mission Accomplished, gotta fight those terrorists there or we'll have to fight 'em here
" This is why we lost, you know... Superior numbers."NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
2. the original quote from Gen. Casey also says,
" AFTER the elections"
Point being?
And to be honest and nitpick myself, the original quote sez " after the election". Not sure if that changes the meaning of what he said, but if I'm gonna quote him, I gotta get it right.
NewOld
"this is why we lost, you know... Superior numbers."NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
I thought you liberals disliked the whole Mutual Assurred Destruction idea. I agree in prinicipal, especially in the political dynamic practiced between East and West, but the Iranians have spent a generation practicing their own dynamic, one that breeds a different set of foundational assumptions. While the Iranian people would likely agree with our traditional view of MAD, the people aren't the ones in charge. The Mullahs proceed from a foundational value of destroying Isreal, gathering power, and seizing control of the worlds oil and muslim Holy places. Iranian nukes would serve those ends rather then the more sensible ones you describe.
Wow..so I'm a "Liberal" now because I stated an opinion that differs from the norm on this board. LOL OKies. Whatever.
I'm sure Signym and a few others would disagree of your assessment of me LOL.
I'm more of a "Libertarian" or Moderate Conservative. You have to have read some of my posts Hero LOL. I'm also far from a pacifist. However, there comes a point when you have to say enoughs enough.
No I don't think the Iranians are insane, anymore then I think the Russians are insane or the French. I'm a realist. NO PERSON in power will RISK losing that power by shooting off a nuke today. Period. It's similar to the whole argument on gun control.
Can you name on one hand the number of countries other then The US of A, that have launched a single nuclear device in an act of aggression? Nope, I can't think of any. That's because it would be the end of who ever did it, pure and simple. The only reason these countries want nukes, is to have them as a form of deterrent. This of course is to prevent more powerful countries from waging wars of aggression.
I don't fear Nuclear Proliferation. If one goes off, so be it. There's nothing you or I can do about it, ever. To believe that going to war with yet ANOTHER Islamic nation (whose youth support western ideals to an extent) is going to solve the problem of Nuclear Proliferation is naive at best.
After the deceptions that were the leadup to the latest Iraq war, I'd be hesitant to agree with or vote for MORE military action, when our troops are woefully spread thin and exhausted.
No I say, firm up our borders. Improve our intelligence and reign in the hawks. It's time for some diplomacy and peace.
Just my 2cents
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Connorflynn:
Wow..so I'm a "Liberal" now because I stated an opinion that differs from the norm on this board. LOL OKies. Whatever.
It's called guilt by association. By disagreeing with Hero, he sees you as part of the "them" that opposes his "us."
Excellent post by the way (hope that won't get you in trouble
).HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME