Would you be in favor of taking military action against Iran before they get the bomb?

Question

Given the Iranian government is genocidal and a supporter of terrorism against the US and Israel?

Answer 1

I would strongly prefer that we recognize an independent Kurdistan and get out of Iraq, use our suddenly normal troop count to confront North Korea into backing down on it's nuke program, succeed, then use the same muscle on Pakistan and succeed, and then, having moved successfully toward non-proliferation, get the Russians on our side to jointly confront Iran.

That isn't the game plan. "W" wanted to brandish our nuclear weapons early this year and rattle them to scare the leadership in Teheran. The Joint Chiefs of Staff threatened to resign on "W" and he backed down.

"W" is now pouting and wondering how he can bluster again to regain his prestige. Don't count on him to be wise and judicious when dealing with Iran. Unlikely. It's be way out of character.

Answer 2

I pretty much look at all the political news and just recently came across a report by top Pentagon officials that said the military option by the U.S. against Iran was exremely bleak. The main reason is because our intelligence on where their sensitive sites are really hazy. Which means if what you thought was a nuke facility and it actually turns out you just bombed a school then you just lost the propaganda war. If you look at Bible prophesy you see in the end times that Isreal is despised by all nations. I believe that our hands are tied because of being bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan and so Iseral will drop several smaller nukes in strategic points in Iran. As you can imagine Iseral will not be looked upon as peacemakers and from the outrage by the muslim world, will fullfill Bible prophesy.

Answer 3

Absolutely. I feel it would be irresponsible to NOT take military action. Nobody wants war but as you pointed out, the Iranian government is genocidal and has made horrific threats. They have proved themselves a threat to peace by their own indignant and irrational behavior. Diplomacy will fail with Iran, one cannot reason with extremist of any cause.

Answer 4

i think of this grew out of subject by many those that get admission to into Iraq replaced into unlawful and would have been prevented if Bush had asked his AG. regrettably his AG replaced into Gonzales, a classic sure guy. formerly a president is going to conflict it does not harm to be sure what the legal steps are, ideally with an clever, self sustaining AG. Then as quickly as specific of his legal footing the president could pass to Congress. i do no longer think of he meant for a minute that he could look for suggestion from his own legal professionals. yet for many Republicans, any connection with an lawyer is like throwing pork to his warring parties. they actually like the thought a president could pass off a million/2 ****** first and pass back later to dot the I's and pass the T's. perhaps regulations are for human beings?

Answer 5

I'm more in favor of taking sanctions against Russia for even speaking of giving this weaponry to Iran...

N. Korea, China, Russia and the US have M.A.D. to constrain against using nuclear attack. This works because these countries in general value their own lives and have no virgins waiting in the hereafter...

Answer 6

I think losing two wars and running second in the war terror is enough accomplishment for one President. Why don't we use our brains next time and try to win one?

Answer 7

The iranians are a long way from having the bomb - if they are trying to make one. Saddam had WMD's too remember?

Answer 8

Yes, before they use it on us, or provide it to the Terrorists.

Answer 9

Only if YOU enlisted for it.

Answer 10

With what?