English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

1. Israel/US launch pre-emptive strikes against Iran, preventing their ability to develop WMDs, this leads to wide spread fighting in the Middle East lasting several years before the fighting slowly dwindles

Europe continues its appeasment of Muslim extreamists and predominates over US policy, Iran launches all out nuclear war against Israel, at which point, US/Europe joins the war resulting in unprecidented levels of violence lasting years before subsideing

2006-08-19 03:41:04 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

23 answers

they both are interesting, I do believe the outcome will be the same in either instance....BOOM.....

2006-08-19 03:45:38 · answer #1 · answered by lost&confused 5 · 2 1

I have to pick option (1) because the longer we let these Islamic Fascist run around like Hitler and Imperial Japan especially if we had the chance to stop them before they do any damage, the more bloodier and longer the war on Islamic Fascist will be. You can't appease or reason with a Fascist, these zealots want to take over the world. "Convert to Islam or DIE".

Time to wake up people, we can't avoid war but we can a least make as short as possible, people are going to die and we can't ovoid that.

Update:

Islamic Fascist A: Ha Ha Ha, we have the world on a silver platter. These guys really believe that we love peace we are the victim.

Islamic Fascist B: This plan actually works, hiding behind innocents so countries like Israel will fire at us and not only kill us but also the civilians, making the world thing that Israel is the bad guy. All is good because the dead will be rewarded in heaven for their great sacrifice. haa haa haa haaa!
Islamic Fascist A: Yesss, we have Europe by the balls.

Iran: Haa Haa Haa Haaaa, Europe's are bi%@&! and Amerika is hated and viewed as a monster. We have it way better then Hitler. This is too easy.

Israel: Nooooooo! We will win this war. Just wait Iran, we going to "F" your country up. If only Europe and the U.N. will stay the hell out of our way.

Europe and the UN: please Mr. Iran we want peace not war, we just want to take and give you half of our continent. No more blood and war.

France: WE ALREADY SURRENDER!

US: looks like we have to save the world again. Iran, BRING IT ON!

China: Everything is going according to plan.

Russia: I coudn't agree more. Those fools, the U.S. and Israel, Iran, E.U. and the U.N. They are all dancing our tune. Perfect!

China&Russia: We will rule the World Haaaa haaaa haaaaa haaaaaaa!

North Korea: Hey, you guys want about me, I'm evil too you know! I feel soo lonely.

2006-08-19 11:08:45 · answer #2 · answered by Lone solider 2 · 1 0

I am also a peace lover so would prefer the third and most sensible scenario.The whole world gets together to force Israel [politically & economically] to give up its nuclear arsenal,illegally taken territories and allows self determination for the Palestinians..Most countries in the middle east lived peacefully in multi denominational societies previous to the aggression shown by Israel continually since 1948.I think if the military threat posed by Israel were removed,most would happily return to the status quo and live in peace.It's an old sales trick never to offer open ended questions.It's fairly obvious that yours is a biased statement of your personal beliefs and not a true question..

2006-08-19 11:01:18 · answer #3 · answered by morasice17 3 · 0 1

Iran's Villageidiot wants war , wants to conquer the world for Islam and has deployed his forces for " WAR GAMES " .
This needs watching and I'm sure we are .
If Iran enters Iraq or anything other than "WAR GAMES " , we must turn the country into a parking lot as an example .
Yes , Europe will get pissed .
But that is preferable to the Villageidiot running loose without his keeper .

2006-08-19 11:06:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I see your line of thought. Problem is to eradicate all Muslims you have to look at Pakistan. They have the bomb. So in one you may get rid of Iran but Syria and the other Arab states would not leave it until the western world was destroyed. The problem is Governments not their people. The people want peace, a full belly, sanitation, a home and health care. Governments want power and power corrupts. Either way the world is heading for major war in the next 20 years.

2006-08-19 10:54:21 · answer #5 · answered by deadly 4 · 2 0

First off, I think we have alot of other, better options out there, but the question as you asked it, well, honestly, I'd pick the the second one.

According to your scenarios, either way there will be terrible fighting that ruins the middle east for years to come, both probably cause lots of fighting, etc. So the only difference between the two scenarios seems to be that in the first one the US and Israel are the aggressors, while in the second one the US is responding to an unprovoked and illegitimate attack on Israel. Therefore, our moral position is much better in the second scenario, since in the first one we are the bad guys starting a war that kills thousands if not millions, and in the second scenario, we are acting in self defense and punishing aggression.

2006-08-19 10:47:56 · answer #6 · answered by Charles D 5 · 1 2

If we launch against Iran, we launch against China, because at present they have oil interests there. That's a very powerful trigger that we haven't pulled in awhile. It wouldn't be a good idea given China's capabilities. The middle east is a losing game because fossil-fuels are a losing game. Iran won't launch against Israel if they aren't provoked. By the way, have you stopped to consider just how much of the current situation has been engineered through provocation?

2006-08-19 10:52:52 · answer #7 · answered by water boy 3 · 0 3

That's a no-brainer! I would chose paragraphy #1. But, with an eye on Russia and China, because those are the two country's we really needt to worry about. Russia pulls Iran's strings, the same way Iran pull's Hezbollah's strings, and China pulls N.Korea's strings the same way.

2006-08-19 11:06:16 · answer #8 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 1 0

The negotiations going on is not appeasment of Muslims. It is rather bourne out of the believe that negotiations would rather resolve the situation better than going into an all out war with Iran.

Launching an all out attack would definately annihilate the US in its own policies. Every Muslim with gots in his bloods would want a pond of US flesh for such an action.

2006-08-19 10:57:10 · answer #9 · answered by MAFOKOCHIZHI 2 · 0 1

I think is the US did anything it would probably be a third option and thats go in and invade iran then turn on israel and try for their land and stuff too for going against the UN cease fire *shrugs* personal opinion though

2006-08-19 18:19:50 · answer #10 · answered by Mortis 2 · 0 1

I say lets get rid of US/Israel and let Middle East rule over the world. Then everyone can live in the dirt and misery...like Afghanistan before the war.

2006-08-19 10:52:59 · answer #11 · answered by barbara_farley77450 2 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers