After Iraq, where would be the next target for war against terrorism?

Answer 1

Crikey,

Have you guys ever heard of international law?

Given that the US was instrumental in the birth of the League of Nations, the current administration has done less for worldwide stability than Adolf Hitler.

Whilst we defend our right to democracy, it is not our right to force democracy on countries that do not want it. Attacking countries that harbour terrorists, only makes the problems worse. Yes Iraq has democracy, but at what price...?

It's funny that a couple of years ago the US was the main source of support for republican terrorists in Ireland. Why are Iran and Syria any different.

Answer 2

If in fact we take action against another country, it will almost surely be Iran. There's a lot tension between the U.S. and Iran over Iran's uranium enrichment program. Iran hasn't gone along with any negotiations to halt it's uranium enrichment program. On June 1st it was announced that a package of incentives will be offered to Iran to give up it's nuke program by the U.S., China, Russia, and three European nations. After we see what Iran's reaction is to that, it will become more clear as to whether any action will take place in Iran. The U.S. wants it to work on the negotiating track and the President has made that very clear. However, time will tell what may happen if Iran won't budge on it's program. There is an issue in the negotiatings, though. That would be the Cheney-Rumsfeld foreign policy setting that supported regime change rather than opening direct talks with any member of the "axis of evil" (which is the Iranian regime, North Korea, and Iraq). However, Condoleeza Rice shows willingless for a new diplomatic reach, which has included patching up relationships with Europe after a diplomatic nadir when the U.S. invaded Iraq and also Washington restored diplomatic ties with Libya. Quoting Condoleeza Rice: "President Bush wants a positive relationship between the American people and the people of Iran," then she added: "The nuclear issue, though, is not the only obstacle standing in the way of improved relations. The Iranian Government supports terror, it is involved in violence in Iraq - these policies are out of step with the international community and are barriers to a positive relationship." The Bush administration is now rewriting the rules of engagement on how the U.S. will help spread democracy in the Middle East. So, it's not entirely clear what will happen with the Iran situation. Time will tell.

Answer 3

The people that say Iran watch to much Liberal news. Iran though has a "fruit cake" in charge right now only harbor terrorist. Iranian born Muslims appear to be different than losers from Syria, Yemen, and other hick countries in the Middle East. Most of the terriost are nothing but USA sreet punks. We have the same amount of killins here everyday just in a different fashion. So quit giving the exposure to the cry baby Libs and realize after Iraq we will be seetling down for awhile for we are in Iraq for awhile.

Answer 4

Pressure on Iran to conform, particularly on the nukes issue. Look at a map: Afghanistan is (mostly) pacified, and moving in the right direction. Same for Iraq. What's in between? North Korea , while potentially dangerous, seems to be spending more time posturing than being an immediate problem. Also, China would not want to let a nuclear nutcake live on its front porch...

Answer 5

Iran! It's the next target but America doesn't know yet what strategy to use. Only because the baby (Iran) has a gun (Nuclear weapons) in his hand.

Answer 6

Iran. Should have been done in 1980. But a Democratically controlled Congress prevented it.

Answer 7

Democratic National Party HQ! Talk about people who support terrorists!

Answer 8

Only Zionist lobbies in America knows exactly.

Answer 9

It will be Iran, they will say they are a threat to democracy and a threat to the stability of the free world

Answer 10

The Whitehouse i hope.

Iran for sure.

Possibly Syria.