PDA

View Full Version : U.S. says exercise by Israel seemed directed at Iran


Atlanta Dan
06-19-2008, 11:28 PM
Ruh-roh

Israel carried out a major military exercise earlier this month that American officials say appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Several American officials said the Israeli exercise appeared to be an effort to develop the military's capacity to carry out long-range strikes and to demonstrate the seriousness with which Israel views Iran's nuclear program.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/20/america/20iran.php

For better or worse, my bet is I wake up and switch on the news some morning between after the election & before January 20 to hear Israel and/or the U.S. have struck Iran.

Jeremy
06-19-2008, 11:30 PM
If Isreal is that stupid, they deserve what they get.

millwalldavey
06-19-2008, 11:33 PM
If Isreal is that stupid, they deserve what they get.

I agree.

SteelersMongol
06-19-2008, 11:47 PM
I think they did it before in Iraq & it was pretty successive. So maybe they R about 2 repeat it.

Preacher
06-19-2008, 11:52 PM
Ruh-roh

Israel carried out a major military exercise earlier this month that American officials say appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Several American officials said the Israeli exercise appeared to be an effort to develop the military's capacity to carry out long-range strikes and to demonstrate the seriousness with which Israel views Iran's nuclear program.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/20/america/20iran.php

For better or worse, my bet is I wake up and switch on the news some morning between after the election & before January 20 to hear Israel and/or the U.S. have struck Iran.

I don't quite agree with your timetable.... but I think you are right in your assessment.

_________________________

Hey...

Not meaning to cross threads, (but I am doing it), think back to our thread about Bush and war crimes...

Now think about what is being said here...

Now think about how often Israel is at odds with Europe in the UN and other places... and think about our support of Israel.

Think about what Iran has been doing...

Tie all that together...


Do you think the REAL undercurrent to ALL of this is actually a push against the US and Israel and their involvement with Iran? Don't forget both Russia and Frances ties to Iran.

Hmmmmm.....

Jeremy
06-19-2008, 11:55 PM
I don't quite agree with your timetable.... but I think you are right in your assessment.

_________________________

Hey...

Not meaning to cross threads, (but I am doing it), think back to our thread about Bush and war crimes...

Now think about what is being said here...

Now think about how often Israel is at odds with Europe in the UN and other places... and think about our support of Israel.

Think about what Iran has been doing...

Tie all that together...


Do you think the REAL undercurrent to ALL of this is actually a push against the US and Israel and their involvement with Iran? Don't forget both Russia and Frances ties to Iran.

Hmmmmm.....

That's a stretch. Personally I think the US should cut ties with Isreal yesterday. That country is bad juju in a big way.

Preacher
06-19-2008, 11:59 PM
That's a stretch. Personally I think the US should cut ties with Isreal yesterday. That country is bad juju in a big way.

Absolutely not.

Call it Holocaust guilt. Call it religious connection. Call it what you want.

We would be foolish to do anything but strengthen out ties to Israel.

Cut our ties completely.... and a major war erupts in the Mid East with Israel and one of her neihbors.

I fear tthat war, without the help of the west... cannot fail to go nuclear.

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 12:04 AM
Absolutely not.

Call it Holocaust guilt. Call it religious connection. Call it what you want.

We would be foolish to do anything but strengthen out ties to Israel.

Cut our ties completely.... and a major war erupts in the Mid East with Israel and one of her neihbors.

I fear tthat war, without the help of the west... cannot fail to go nuclear.

:rofl:

Preacher you're living in a fantasy world if you think Isreal would listen to us for one minute before firing off their nukes.

Preacher
06-20-2008, 01:19 AM
:rofl:

Preacher you're living in a fantasy world if you think Isreal would listen to us for one minute before firing off their nukes.

Really?

You mean like how they listened to us and didn't get involved in the first Iraq war... even though Saddam was firing scuds at them?

Trust me.

They listen to us when shipments of weapons, etc. get "held up for technical reasons."

Right now, we give them 2.5 billion a year... of that 2.3 is in military.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html


The entire Israeli military budget is 11.9 billion

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-08/13/content_6519694.htm

That is almost a 1/4 of their entire budget...

and you think they won't listen to us?

GBMelBlount
06-20-2008, 08:03 AM
Atlanta Dan

For better or worse, my bet is I wake up and switch on the news some morning between after the election & before January 20 to hear Israel and/or the U.S. have struck Iran.

I agree Dan. Maybe sooner even....

millwalldavey
06-20-2008, 09:54 AM
There is a lot going on inside of Isreal that we turn a blind eye to. Human rights abuses out the arse. Noone says a word about it.

I know they never listend to us when they unloaded the machine guns on kids throwing rocks.

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 10:19 AM
Really?

You mean like how they listened to us and didn't get involved in the first Iraq war... even though Saddam was firing scuds at them?

Trust me.

They listen to us when shipments of weapons, etc. get "held up for technical reasons."

Right now, we give them 2.5 billion a year... of that 2.3 is in military.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html


The entire Israeli military budget is 11.9 billion

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-08/13/content_6519694.htm

That is almost a 1/4 of their entire budget...

and you think they won't listen to us?

They're also the second largest arms supplier to China.

Maybe we should take a long hard look at who our "friends" really are.

revefsreleets
06-20-2008, 11:29 AM
And the US is a huge arms dealer to Taiwan. And China is a huge arms trade partner with Iran.

Israel can do whatever it needs to do to protect itself. Although our partnership with Israel does undermine our relations with Arab states, it's a calculated risk, and worth it. Very delicate balance of power in that region...

Dino 6 Rings
06-20-2008, 12:15 PM
I think its a good thing. Those folks in Power in Iran are raving lunatics. The people of Iran are not fans of the saber rattling. Syria shut its mouth up after Israel wiped out their secret nuke site. They haven't said a peep about crap since. And that was after they got "state of the art" anti aircraft technology from the Russians. Nice purchase morons.

The Russians are about one thing, making money, they will sell as much crap as possible to any buyer, never giving up their best stuff. T-72 battle tanks that they mass produced and sold en masse to the Mid East are really hunks of junk that have a nasty habit of loading the gunners arm into the breach with its "state of the art" auto loader system. Our M1s wiped them out and are still the 2nd best tank on the market. Israel has the best tank in the world.

Let the Israelis raid the Iranian nuke sites. Set them back a decade or so in their quest to "wipe Israel from the map". Iran flat out says they are going to destroy Israel as soon as they can. I'm a fan of Israel defending itself.

I don't mind being an ally with a democracy such as Israel. Don't mind one bit. I will not side with the Psychopath in Chief over in Iran who hopes for the 12th Imam to return so he can bring the entire world under Islam. Thanks but I'm good.

As for the Palestine fight, well, take a good look at the war of 48 and who told the Palestinians to leave their lands. It wasn't the Israelis, it was the other Arab nations that said "get out of the way and when we win the war you can move back in" yeah, that worked out huh?

As for unloading machine guns at rock throwing children. That's factually incorrect. The Israels were the first to start using Rubber Bullets. IF they really wanted to wipe out Palestine, they could, without hesitation, wipe them out. They try to live peacefully side by side with them, keep giving back land to them and Hamas uses that to say "see we are winning" when really, Israel is playing nice.

232,000 Muslims live in Jerusalem. How many Jews live in Muslim cities across the Mid East I wonder?

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 12:21 PM
I don't mind being an ally with a democracy such as Israel. Don't mind one bit.

You mean that spies on it's good friend the United States more than any other country?

Dino 6 Rings
06-20-2008, 12:24 PM
You mean that spies on it's good friend the United States more than any other country?

actually, they just get caught more than any other country. :flap:

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 12:27 PM
actually, they just get caught more than any other country. :flap:

That's actually worse.

But anyway. I have no problem with someone who thinks the US should support Isreal. I think it's stupid on our part, but we can disgree here in America.

All I really want is for people to be honest with themselves about the nature of the "friendship" between the two countries. It's not one that was born from cultural similarities or from some kind of guilt. But rather a strategic partnership based on having an incusrion point in to the Middle East and lots and lots of money.

Dino 6 Rings
06-20-2008, 12:32 PM
That's actually worse.

But anyway. I have no problem with someone who thinks the US should support Isreal. I think it's stupid on our part, but we can disgree here in America.

All I really want is for people to be honest with themselves about the nature of the "friendship" between the two countries. It's not one that was born from cultural similarities or from some kind of guilt. But rather a strategic partnership based on having an incusrion point in to the Middle East and lots and lots of money.

I agree, and them being a democracy is a very good thing. It is absolutely strategic now, maybe not when it was first formed, but now, yes. They act as our doorway against those psychos over there in power.

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 12:35 PM
I agree, and them being a democracy is a very good thing. It is absolutely strategic now, maybe not when it was first formed, but now, yes. They act as our doorway against those psychos over there in power.

Being a democracy has nothing to do with anything. Britain, our biggest ally, is a Constitutional Monarchy.

revefsreleets
06-20-2008, 12:41 PM
Break the alliance with Israel in the mideast, and the whole region collapses into complete chaos within a month.

Dino 6 Rings
06-20-2008, 12:41 PM
Being a democracy has nothing to do with anything. Britain, our biggest ally, is a Constitutional Monarchy.

Its more a Democracy than Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, or North Korea.

And I think you know what I mean. A nation that allows Freedom of Speech, fair voting for representation and freedom of religion.

revefsreleets
06-20-2008, 12:51 PM
This is very long, but it explains, with cited sources, the value of the Israeli/US alliance.

http://www.mythsandfacts.com/NOQ_OnlineEdition/Chapter17/unitedstatesisrael1.htm

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 01:05 PM
This is very long, but it explains, with cited sources, the value of the Israeli/US alliance.

http://www.mythsandfacts.com/NOQ_OnlineEdition/Chapter17/unitedstatesisrael1.htm

Some of that information is very good. Some of it is pure fantasy.

Isreal is a strategic ally, I'll agree with that 100%. But I will never agree that they're a cultural ally.

Preacher
06-20-2008, 02:46 PM
Some of that information is very good. Some of it is pure fantasy.

Isreal is a strategic ally, I'll agree with that 100%. But I will never agree that they're a cultural ally.


Actually (and I didn't read the link, so it may have said what I am about to say)...

But I think a lot of our relationship with Israel began from two specific things.

1. Holocaust guilt.

2. A friend in the region during the Cold war. As nations were increasinging turning to the Soviets for help, we were looking for friends. Ethiopia, Syria, iran after the Shah, among others were opening their arms to the USSR receiving shipments of MiG and other things.

We, on the other hand were shipping American and to a lesser extent NATO arms to Israel... why? One big reason is to find out how our weapons and tactics worked against soviet weapons and tactics in proxy wars.

Atlanta Dan
06-20-2008, 03:18 PM
Actually (and I didn't read the link, so it may have said what I am about to say)...

But I think a lot of our relationship with Israel began from two specific things.

1. Holocaust guilt.

2. A friend in the region during the Cold war. As nations were increasinging turning to the Soviets for help, we were looking for friends. Ethiopia, Syria, iran after the Shah, among others were opening their arms to the USSR receiving shipments of MiG and other things.

And it was an election year

It should not be forgotten that there was an epic struggle in Washington over how to respond to Israel's declaration of independence on May 14, 1948. It led to the most serious disagreement President Harry Truman ever had with his revered secretary of state, George C. Marshall -- and with most of the foreign policy establishment...

Beneath the surface lay unspoken but real anti-Semitism on the part of some (but not all) policymakers. The position of those opposing recognition was simple -- oil, numbers and history. "There are thirty million Arabs on one side and about 600,000 Jews on the other," Defense Secretary Forrestal told Clifford. "Why don't you face up to the realities?"

On May 12, Truman held a meeting in the Oval Office to decide the issue. Marshall and his universally respected deputy, Robert Lovett, made the case for delaying recognition -- and "delay" really meant "deny." Truman asked his young aide, Clark Clifford, to present the case for immediate recognition. When Clifford finished, Marshall, uncharacteristically, exploded. "I don't even know why Clifford is here. He is a domestic adviser, and this is a foreign policy matter. The only reason Clifford is here is that he is pressing a political consideration."

Marshall then uttered what Clifford would later call "the most remarkable threat I ever heard anyone make directly to a President." In an unusual top-secret memorandum Marshall wrote for the historical files after the meeting, the great general recorded his own words: "I said bluntly that if the President were to follow Mr. Clifford's advice and if in the elections I were to vote, I would vote against the President."

To this day, many think that Marshall and Lovett were right on the merits and that domestic politics was the real reason for Truman's decision

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/06/AR2008050602447.html

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 03:21 PM
Actually (and I didn't read the link, so it may have said what I am about to say)...

But I think a lot of our relationship with Israel began from two specific things.

1. Holocaust guilt.

2. A friend in the region during the Cold war. As nations were increasinging turning to the Soviets for help, we were looking for friends. Ethiopia, Syria, iran after the Shah, among others were opening their arms to the USSR receiving shipments of MiG and other things.

We, on the other hand were shipping American and to a lesser extent NATO arms to Israel... why? One big reason is to find out how our weapons and tactics worked against soviet weapons and tactics in proxy wars.

I'll agree with you on point #2, but never on point #1.

I don't believe that the majority of the American people feel any guilt over the Holocaust. And if we do, why doesn't the country feel more guilt over the slave trade and treatment of Native Americans?

Preacher
06-20-2008, 03:34 PM
I'll agree with you on point #2, but never on point #1.

I don't believe that the majority of the American people feel any guilt over the Holocaust. And if we do, why doesn't the country feel more guilt over the slave trade and treatment of Native Americans?

I couched this in historical terms...

Those in the know had holocaust guilt....

Also... slave trade and american indians were what WE did... it is easier to deny because it is closer at hand... that seems inverse to how we would think, but it is easier to feel guilty about something we couldn't really do a lot about... then feel guilty about our own actions and admit our mistakes.

Furthermore, that generation is STILL alive.

Jeremy
06-20-2008, 03:52 PM
I couched this in historical terms...

Those in the know had holocaust guilt....

Also... slave trade and american indians were what WE did... it is easier to deny because it is closer at hand... that seems inverse to how we would think, but it is easier to feel guilty about something we couldn't really do a lot about... then feel guilty about our own actions and admit our mistakes.

Furthermore, that generation is STILL alive.

But not for much longer, and not many of them still hold places of power in Washington.

Look, if it weren't for the US, the Final Solution might well have happened. If the US doesn't come in to the war on the Western Front, Germany would have done no worse than force a stalemate with Russia in the East allowing the Reich to do whatever they wanted in the land they controlled. If anyone should have Holocaust guilt, it's Europe.

Until this country can come to terms with our own attrocities, I won't feel guilty about someone else's.

Preacher
06-20-2008, 04:07 PM
But not for much longer, and not many of them still hold places of power in Washington.

Look, if it weren't for the US, the Final Solution might well have happened. If the US doesn't come in to the war on the Western Front, Germany would have done no worse than force a stalemate with Russia in the East allowing the Reich to do whatever they wanted in the land they controlled. If anyone should have Holocaust guilt, it's Europe.

Until this country can come to terms with our own attrocities, I won't feel guilty about someone else's.

I agree with you that we pretty much stopped the final solution, and that Europe is the ones that should have holocaust guilt.

Matter of fact, one of my stock comebacks when some eurotrash liberal starts berating America for the death penalty is, "when we kill six million Jews in 6 years, then talk to us about the death penality." So yeah, I understand what you are saying.

My point was, one of the reasons in the 50's that we supported Israel was holocaust guilt.

Dino 6 Rings
06-20-2008, 04:56 PM
Until this country can come to terms with our own attrocities, I won't feel guilty about someone else's.

I've come to terms with our "attrocities"

Yep, they were bad.

moving on now to the future.

Atlanta Dan
06-22-2008, 09:55 PM
The right covers its bets - if Bush bombs Iran blame Obama:banging:

On Fox News Sunday this morning, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said that President Bush is more likely to attack Iran if he believes Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is going to be elected.

However, "if the president thought John McCain was going to be the next president, he would think it more appropriate to let the next president make that decision than do it on his way out," Kristol said.

Kristol also suggested that Obama’s election would tempt Saudi Arabia and Egypt to think, “maybe we can use nuclear weapons.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/22/kristol-bush-might-bomb-i_n_108510.html

Preacher
06-22-2008, 11:03 PM
The right covers its bets - if Bush bombs Iran blame Obama:banging:

On Fox News Sunday this morning, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said that President Bush is more likely to attack Iran if he believes Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is going to be elected.

However, "if the president thought John McCain was going to be the next president, he would think it more appropriate to let the next president make that decision than do it on his way out," Kristol said.

Kristol also suggested that Obama’s election would tempt Saudi Arabia and Egypt to think, “maybe we can use nuclear weapons.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/22/kristol-bush-might-bomb-i_n_108510.html


Um....

You can't make policy out of one reporter's thoughts...

Galax Steeler
06-23-2008, 04:49 AM
Um....

You can't make policy out of one reporter's thoughts...

Your exactly right preacher.

Atlanta Dan
06-23-2008, 08:39 AM
Um....

You can't make policy out of one reporter's thoughts...

I didn't say Bush was saying this - I was saying right wing pundits are laying the foundation for why what IMO will be a very unpopular action should somehow be spun as being the responsibility of someone who will have no say in the decision but will inherit the resulting consequences.

SteelersMongol
06-23-2008, 09:33 AM
Really?

You mean like how they listened to us and didn't get involved in the first Iraq war... even though Saddam was firing scuds at them?

Trust me.

They listen to us when shipments of weapons, etc. get "held up for technical reasons."

Right now, we give them 2.5 billion a year... of that 2.3 is in military.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html


The entire Israeli military budget is 11.9 billion

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-08/13/content_6519694.htm

That is almost a 1/4 of their entire budget...

and you think they won't listen to us?

Preacher is right on this one. Cuz my history teacher, who is a Jewish, said once that the solution to the Middle East vs. Israel problem could come only "If the US starts to threaten Israel on cutting down their money supplies." So yeah I think Israel would listen, it's just that lobby group in DC wouldn't ever allow it happen. :coffee:

Jeremy
06-23-2008, 10:39 AM
I'd like to think the President of the United States, despite his flaws and mistakes, is much more mature than that.

Atlanta Dan
06-23-2008, 11:32 AM
I'd like to think the President of the United States, despite his flaws and mistakes, is much more mature than that.


Since Kristol is a supporter who made the statement, maybe not

Jeremy
06-23-2008, 11:41 AM
Sooner or later this sort of fear mongering is going to stop working.

The neocons are getting desperate and it's not pretty to watch.

Dino 6 Rings
06-23-2008, 12:31 PM
Sooner or later this sort of fear mongering is going to stop working.

The neocons are getting desperate and it's not pretty to watch.

Great talking points...but what fear mongering are you actually talking about?

Is Calling Terrorists "Terrorists" bad?

Is calling Kim Jong IL a bad person, bad?

Is calling Chavez a horrible leader bad?

What fear mongering? Its truth. But you can take your little handbook of left wing talking points and keep on spouting out the same nonsense time and time again.

Maybe you should start talking about how the Republicans are going to take food away from children, and force old people to decide between medicine and groceries, or maybe start running ads with women talking about their babies not going to war for McCain's hundred years in Iraq. Oh wait, Move.org already has that ad rolling.

Jeremy
06-23-2008, 12:57 PM
Great talking points...but what fear mongering are you actually talking about?

Is Calling Terrorists "Terrorists" bad?

Is calling Kim Jong IL a bad person, bad?

Is calling Chavez a horrible leader bad?

What fear mongering? Its truth. But you can take your little handbook of left wing talking points and keep on spouting out the same nonsense time and time again.

Maybe you should start talking about how the Republicans are going to take food away from children, and force old people to decide between medicine and groceries, or maybe start running ads with women talking about their babies not going to war for McCain's hundred years in Iraq. Oh wait, Move.org already has that ad rolling.


Fear mongering is making people believe that the president will start a war with Iran if the American people don't elect McCain President.

Truth.....something politicians of every flavor have a lot of trouble with.

Dino 6 Rings
06-23-2008, 01:26 PM
I didn't realize that the Bush people were putting out the "If Obama is going to win we will bomb Iran" line. I'll have to dig into that and read up on it. If that is their feeling then I am disturbed, which wouldn't be the first time with this administration.

Personally, I think the Iran issue should be put on hold until after a new Prez, (whoever it is) is sworn in. The Israelis have flexed their muscles, the EU just put Iranian banks on "freeze" the sanctions will take some time to be felt.

The people of Iran are Persians, not Arabs, and are more than likely to take back their country and do things their own way. They have a long solid history and are pretty good people when you get to know them. Shiite Islam is just the means the Mullahs used to take over the government over there. I'm a fan of letting them work out their own issues in Iran and not so much as being involved in bombing them. If they build nukes and threaten Israel, then the Israelis can take care of it. We should simply sit back, and watch for the 2nd Revolution in Iran that is long overdue.

Preacher
06-23-2008, 03:08 PM
I didn't realize that the Bush people were putting out the "If Obama is going to win we will bomb Iran" line. I'll have to dig into that and read up on it. If that is their feeling then I am disturbed, which wouldn't be the first time with this administration.

Personally, I think the Iran issue should be put on hold until after a new Prez, (whoever it is) is sworn in. The Israelis have flexed their muscles, the EU just put Iranian banks on "freeze" the sanctions will take some time to be felt.

The people of Iran are Persians, not Arabs, and are more than likely to take back their country and do things their own way. They have a long solid history and are pretty good people when you get to know them. Shiite Islam is just the means the Mullahs used to take over the government over there. I'm a fan of letting them work out their own issues in Iran and not so much as being involved in bombing them. If they build nukes and threaten Israel, then the Israelis can take care of it. We should simply sit back, and watch for the 2nd Revolution in Iran that is long overdue.

That is the funniest statement I have heard in a long time.

After the oil for food debacle, I trust the UN to be

1. Duplicit in all their dealings
2. Work against American interests
3. Coddle despots and mass murders.

Jeremy
06-23-2008, 03:28 PM
Iran is the perfect place for a Civil War to happen and for the people to overthrow their leadership. The vast majority of the people hate their leaders, but they're afraid to rise up and do anything about them.

That's why you see large Iranian populations in the US and Canada. Those who have the means to get out often do.

Dino 6 Rings
06-23-2008, 04:21 PM
Iran is the perfect place for a Civil War to happen and for the people to overthrow their leadership. The vast majority of the people hate their leaders, but they're afraid to rise up and do anything about them.

That's why you see large Iranian populations in the US and Canada. Those who have the means to get out often do.

Agreed, hands off approach with sanctions will move the people against their own government.

There are some theories about revolutions that apply in Iran. One being the "youth" out number the "old" in that country almost 2 -1.

The current Regime cracks down hard on all and any that try to talk against it. From students to teachers to opposition candidates. Its insane. The people don't want to be at war with the US. They need a spiritual awakening over there. something to get them out from the arm of Shiitism and focus them on being a world leader once again like in the days of old.

The Persians are a very strong people. They should step up and take off the shackles of the arabs.

MasterOfPuppets
06-23-2008, 04:39 PM
Agreed, hands off approach with sanctions will move the people against their own government.

There are some theories about revolutions that apply in Iran. One being the "youth" out number the "old" in that country almost 2 -1.

The current Regime cracks down hard on all and any that try to talk against it. From students to teachers to opposition candidates. Its insane. The people don't want to be at war with the US. They need a spiritual awakening over there. something to get them out from the arm of Shiitism and focus them on being a world leader once again like in the days of old.

The Persians are a very strong people. They should step up and take off the shackles of the arabs.
one word......IRAQ

how did those sanctions work out there? all it did was cause the common man more hardship.radical governments don't give a shit about the people or thier well being. infact, they have no problem with killing thier own citizens.

Jeremy
06-23-2008, 04:43 PM
one word......IRAQ

how did those sanctions work out there? all it did was cause the common man more hardship.radical governments don't give a shit about the people or thier well being. infact, they have no problem with killing thier own citizens.

Apples and oranges.

Iraq was, and still is, an Arab nation. Iran is only about 3% Arab.

Those in power are losing their grip very quickly. The hard liners will lose control of that country rather soon.

MasterOfPuppets
06-23-2008, 04:46 PM
Apples and oranges.

Iraq was, and still is, an Arab nation. Iran is only about 3% Arab.

Those in power are losing their grip very quickly. The hard liners will lose control of that country rather soon.
weren't the sunni's the minority in iraq?

Jeremy
06-23-2008, 04:53 PM
weren't the sunni's the minority in iraq?

Doesn't matter. Iraq is in the condition it's in because of religious fighting.

Remove the hard liners from Iran and there would be a much more peaceful transition.

Atlanta Dan
06-24-2008, 10:59 PM
Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen leaves Tuesday night on an overseas trip that will take him to Israel, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin. The trip has been scheduled for some time but U.S. officials say it comes just as the Israelis are mounting a full court press to get the Bush administration to strike Iran's nuclear complex.

CBS consultant Michael Oren says Israel doesn't want to wait for a new administration.

"The Israelis have been assured by the Bush administration that the Bush administration will not allow Iran to nuclearize," Oren said. "Israelis are uncertain about what would be the policies of the next administration vis-ŕ-vis Iran."

Israel's message is simple: If you don't, we will

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/24/eveningnews/main4206201.shtml

I guess the over/under on the bombing is whether it happens before or after the election - yikes

revefsreleets
06-25-2008, 08:56 AM
Israel struck a Syrian nuke plant last September, supposedly with cooperation or maybe even under coordination from the US, so this won't be without precedent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/washington/14weapons.html?ex=1350014400&en=efd410838b06389b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Atlanta Dan
06-25-2008, 09:08 AM
Israel struck a Syrian nuke plant last September, supposedly with cooperation or maybe even under coordination from the US, so this won't be without precedent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/washington/14weapons.html?ex=1350014400&en=efd410838b06389b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss


Yep - of course Iran has the potential to bring a lot more blowback after it is hit than Syria could

revefsreleets
06-25-2008, 09:16 AM
This is why it'd be nice to have a strong mid-East ally like Iraq could potentially be (obviously in the long run). If we bomb Iran, it creates nothing but additional tension and hard line radicals can point out that "Great Satan" is bombing Arab countries again. If Israel does it, Christ, that's even worse. But if an Arab country did it, they could say it was for regional stability (which is what this is ultimately all about) and be able to pull it off.

Dino 6 Rings
06-25-2008, 11:20 AM
We weren't much of a "great Satan" when we were bombing the Orothodox Christians in Serbia while defending the muslims in Croatia and Albania...