Nothing right now.
2006-07-14 14:11:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Guzzy 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well, its clear the Euroweasels are going to do anything other than whine. I can speculate as wildly as anyone, and my guess is we will do nothing in Lebanon, from what I can see the Lebonese are done. I suspect that if the Syrians continue to support the terrorist they will be attacked by both the Isreali's and US forces from Iraq. Syria and Iran are both major players in the continuing troubles in Iraq and I think we just need a good excuse to proceed with an attack on Syria. That's my best guess Syria is toast.
Now as for what we should do that's a different story. We've been allowing Syria and Iran to play games for far too long. I would imediately demand that Syria surrender unconditionally right now, and turn over all the terrorist and former Iraqi officials they now harbour or face a total war.
I don't know if our leaders have learned the folly of their decapitation, regime change policies. We have to leave their leaders in place otherwise we wind up running the place. It all very altruistic to liberate a people, but the only people who deserve freedom are those willing to die for it.
We should make it clear by our actions and policies that we don't intend to run their countries and our only concern is the protection of our interest. As long as they are not harboring or supporting terrorist what they do within their borders is none of our concern.
Sorry, I'm out of control. The next step would be to get a handle on the spread of nuclear weapons. Because of the way we have mishandled Korea, India, and Pakistan we have made getting nukes a good deal. N. Korea has gotten more aid and attention by building nukes than they would have with out them. A lesson not missed by the Iranians. The crazier the N. Korea leader acts the more aid he gets, small wonder the Iranian leader is starting to act just as crazy.
During the cold war we had nukes because we had no choice. Back then having nukes wasn't particularly a good deal. It meant that someone else had your cities, industrial sites, and military bases targeted for nuclear destruction. We were pretty sure the other guy might use them.
Now because of our policies we've made having nukes a good deal. Some say no one would use a nuke on us because we would wipe them out. I don't believe that. Our nuclear weapons are no longer a credible threat, I don't believe anyone actually thinks we would ever use them.
Iran provides a good opportunity to re-establish a credible nuclear threat. First they are attempting to obtain nukes and are supporting terroism. 2nd unlike N. Korea there is little chance of serious collateral damage. A nuclear attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities would end the Iranian nuclear threat and provide a clear and understandable detourant to any other would be nuclear powers.
The euroweenies would scream but who cares.
2006-07-14 22:05:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by Roadkill 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Do you think the Israeli military response inside Lebanon is justified?
Yes 45% 340049 votes
No 55% 409554 votes
Total: 749603 votes
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/16/mideast/index.html
2006-07-19 05:34:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by zaaterah 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
the US is going to quietly tamp down the energy on this latest uptick in the cycle of violence. i think W has learned his lesson in this regard. in the short term it may well be appealing to toss missiles at your enemies because it makes the republican base feel good. but in the long (and more enlightened) term it only adds energy to the cycle of violence. he might have learned that in history class, but we all knew that he probably hadn't and voted for him anyway. W has earned his popular disapproval. i will be suprised if these events turn out to be the pretext for widening american involvement in the middle east in order to give karl rove the opportunity to play his favorite card on democratic congressional opponents. intelligent democrats hate america???? even dittoheads should take pause.
2006-07-14 21:29:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by emptiedfull 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jon Bolton vetoed a UN resolution, that would have stopped this killing, so evidently the US condones these acts.
2006-07-14 21:23:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by jjissodamngreat 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
help out GOD's chosen people
then we know we're on the rite side
2006-07-14 21:13:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
ASK BUSH. HE JUST LIKES WAR.
2006-07-14 21:13:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by florida boy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
nothing. They don't have any oil
2006-07-14 21:15:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by jc1129_us 2
·
0⤊
0⤋