It is sadly ironical that USA devastated Iraq which was the only Arab country that could have been a buffer against Iran.
2006-09-02 01:16:59 · 15 answers · asked by Kee 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
yes sad and true but don't voice your opinion to strongly there happens to be a miss sassikatz who strongly would disagree with you and she will become a pain with writing you emails and flood your e mail box she happens to be a supporter of MORON BUSH.
2006-09-02 01:40:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Iraq still IS a buffer against Iran. You don't think that part of the reason we went over there was to be in a strategically sound location? We have a good amount of soldiers and weapons there now, and most of them can go over to Iran in a moment's notice.
We also probably have a contingency left behind in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, that could be in Iran in a matter of hours. Not to mention the fact that if I'm not mistaken, we also have military posts in Turkey and Italy, who are on high alert.
Hell, here in Germany we're on high alert!
As to the idea that our behavior towards Iran is "impotent", no, it's called diplomacy. It's what we attempted to use with Hussein, and we won't treat Iran any different. The reason that we're walking on eggshells is simply because nuclear power is something to fear.
It's ALL of our worst fears.
Russia was one thing. During the Cold War, they never actually threatened us or our allies. The Iranian president has.
Anyway, your statement does make sense, but your sentiment is misguided. America is most certainly NOT impotent...though I imagine we would be if we prematurely pulled out of Iraq. It would be another Viet Nam.
2006-09-02 01:54:16 · answer #2 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Bush has his balls (the little that is left of what a man's balls usually are) in a vice. Not only his hands are tied. You are perfectly right that the war for oil has immobilized him for any (ever so just) actions against Iraq.
But that he would do anything against Iran isn't probable either, even if we wouldn't be in Iraq. China and Russia have their hand on Iran and Bush is not half the man to stand up against those powers.
2006-09-02 01:57:07 · answer #3 · answered by The answer man 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Ever study Grand Strategy ?
Iran finds itself with US and Nato forces to the West , East And South .
Can you spell , NUTCRACKER ?
Now , pull up a map of Iran , Rather vulnerable isn't it ?
The easiest way to defeat an enemy is to put him in an indefensible position .
2006-09-02 02:05:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
we are in iraq because of Iran u poor dumbass. u should really get informed before u speak. Know what your talking about. for the last 20 years the islamic fascist freaks have been killing Americans all over the world. I think 911 was the last straw they came here and killed thousands, what should we do just lay down and cry and say come get us its all yours. they want us dead. DEAD what part of that dont u understand. THis is a world wide holy war to them. if u dont convert to being a muslim u must die. thats there stance . why is it so hard for u to understand it is very simple. get your head out of your *** and hear the truth not the spin. Im ashamed to say we have an idiological war going on here at home and its the worst time for it whit all that is goning on in the world today . we are all Americans we need to all get on the same page and get informed with the truth its rite in front of you please wake up and se e it before we are fighting them here. we went to afganistan and Iraq to fight them there not here . we are on the boarder with Iran. they are the ones behind so much of the problems. And we have known it all along.6 years ago Bush said in his speech the Axis of evil. who do u think was at the top of that list Iran. Thats why we are in Iraq. come on really get informed for yourself, dont just listin to cnn or any of the others do some research listin to both sides. make an informed oppenion for yourself.
2006-09-02 01:38:11 · answer #5 · answered by zinnman1 1 · 3⤊ 3⤋
That's part. But more important is Russia's selling Iran and Syria anything they want -- including rockets and anti-tank missiles.
Not to forget Bush's refusal to do anything whatsoever about conserving petroleum use.
2006-09-02 01:20:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
nobody wants that USA gives her head in to any middleast issue.Totallty failure to solve.there is the world without USA is enough to solve the issues.
Better enough.
2006-09-02 02:59:12 · answer #7 · answered by Russel Mehedi 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Was it moronic or are the people who question the action politically motivated morons?
2006-09-02 01:56:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, pretty much. We've shown the world that our once great military is not that great at fighting small-scale insurgents, that we talk a good game but can't seem to finish the job, that we're beatable.
2006-09-02 01:34:55 · answer #9 · answered by kemchan2 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
the "impotence" strictly falls on the shoulders of the lying lefts no agenda rants
2006-09-02 01:55:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Impotence? America has viagra for that now
2006-09-02 01:47:03 · answer #11 · answered by itsallover 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋