Rsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2 Posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1627 times:
"The US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, yesterday tapped into deepening international concern about a clandestine nuclear programme in Iran, warning that Tehran was actively working to develop a bomb.
Mr Rumsfeld's remarks, delivered during a visit to Germany, appeared to be aimed at exerting pressure on Tehran and the UN's nuclear monitoring agency, which meets next week in Vienna to decide how to respond to Iran's failure to honour nuclear safeguards".
Delta767300ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2562 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1608 times:
Interesting. *IF* we did invade Iran I would think using Iraq as a launching pad would be a bad thing. Iraq has a Shia majority and we know Iran is the largest Shia populated country in the world. I think that would probably turn most of the Shia's against us. I am also not sure about Iran having a lot of oil, someone on here can probably verify this.
Delta767300ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2562 posts, RR: 12 Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1599 times:
On another note I would rather see the U.S. support an Iranian opposition group to overthrow the Fundamentalist than do a full scale invasion. I also think that over 80% of the Iranian population would like normal relations with the U.S.
Rsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1573 times:
"you'd think us kicking ass in Iraq would make Iran straighten up"
DeltaGuy........Wake Dah.F_ _ _ up
Those that oppose us in Iraq out number us 2.5 to one.......Wolfwitz told congress that the Iraqy people would greet us with ROSEs and Chocolate.....instead they have greeted us with CAR BOMBS and Beheadings. We have let them down....we have leveled their towns...killed their childern..many are still without water and electricity 20 months later.......But lets not forget we are protecting and improving the OIL WELLS sites.........
I think they would rather have Saddam back than us occupying their country somthing BUSH said we'd never do.
But hey....Haliburton has work for 20+years......thats all that really matters.
Yukimizake From Japan, joined Mar 2004, 529 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1567 times:
Try looking at this from Iran's point of view.
They get labeled as a member of the Axis of Evil.
They see the invasion of their neighbor, another member of that club.
They have every reason to fear American intentions in the region.
Their conventional armed forces are no match to the US.
If you were them wouldn't you be thinking about developing nuclear weapons as a deterrent to being invaded.
'Opfer müssen gebracht werden (Sacrifices must be made)' - Otto Lilienthal
Schoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 27 Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1565 times:
"On another note I would rather see the U.S. support an Iranian opposition group to overthrow the Fundamentalist than do a full scale invasion."
You mean like when the last dictator, the Shah took power of the country?
" I also think that over 80% of the Iranian population would like normal relations with the U.S."
The Iranian Revolution took place as a result of the former regime's relations with the U.S. I don't think many Iranians have forgotten about the US supported coup which brought decades of oppression by the Shah.
I can imagine you are trully concerned about the Iranian people, but I'd suggest you first study Iran's history a bit better, specially U.S. involvement with Iran over the past decades, to be able to assess how normal Iranians exactly feel about having that same U.S. again as their neighbour and telling them what to do. Given their bad experience with U.S. involvement in their country, I don't blame Iran at all for trying to acquire an A Bomb.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
Jalto27R From United States of America, joined May 2004, 857 posts, RR: 15 Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1526 times:
instead they have greeted us with CAR BOMBS and Beheadings.
Rsmith what are you smoking? What percentage of the Iraqi population met us with such actions? About, what 7-10% at the most, and even then, only 1% is actually resorting to beheadings and car bombings.
Rjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1509 times:
There is very, very little chance of us invading Iran. If we are ready to go to war with them over the nuclear weapons, it would likely be a combination of airstrikes and special forces operations, not a full invasion like we did in Iraq. I wouldn't be surprised to see us striking at Syria either, if they don't stop supporting the terrorists in Iraq.
Frankly, I think we should let Israel deal with Iran. They are virtually an extension of the US military anyway. We should let them refuel over Iraq and let them bomb the crap out of the Iranian sites that are producing the weapons. The fact that no such attack has occured leads me to believe that Iran is not as close to getting nukes as everyone thinks. Israel's survival is on the line and there is no way they will ever let Iran get nukes.
Mdsh00 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4119 posts, RR: 9 Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1502 times:
I could probably believe this one as we all know about AQ Khan selling secrets to Iran. I think the better way to deal with this problem is to encourange a revolution from the new generation of Iranians. An invasion would be the stupidest thing we could do.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."