Big talk from Bush and Cheney. The 'surge' of 21,000 plus troops will proceed as planned. But we also hear rumblings about Iran. Both sides preparing for each other it appears.
Iran "meddling" the US accused. Iranian 'diplomats' detained in Iraq. Bush pushing as far as he can without any real resistance.
Iran must be stopped also.
And so we wait..and watch..
we are patient.
Soon there will be a call for another 'surge'.....another 21,00 or more.
BUSH's LAST STAND.
2007-01-15 09:15:55 · 8 answers · asked by rare2findd 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I love the way the U.S. plants information amongst its citizens, and how the citizensswallow and run with it. Iran talks big, but has done nothing.But it is us who should be careful.
Soon others may well be saying that the U.S. must be stopped.
God bless us all.
2007-01-15 09:34:28 · update #1
This is a forum/answers are based on ideas and opinions, which I welcome. But still retain MY right to the same.There is no need to insult questioners because of their beliefs. You merely insult yourself.
2007-01-15 10:42:39 · update #2
Iran has to be stopped from what? Has Iraq been attacked by Iran?
The Senators told him to forget Iran, and I don't think he will get any money or approval for any invasion of Iraq.
I am not sure mr Stupid doesn't plan to though as he has moved a whole Battle Group from Korean waters to off the coast of Iraq!
What is he planning to do with cruise missiles and f/A 18 Hornets and Super hornets and a nuclear sub??
2007-01-15 09:26:12 · answer #1 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the american war can prosecute a war for 90 days without the approval of congress.
not deploying our armored divisons!!! are u insane the 1st AD was just here and our other "heavy" divisons rotate out. the reason they use the guard and reserves is so the Active duty components dont get burned out. as well the Guard and reserves have there own heavy divisons.
plus i dont see us going to war with iran there is no way we could possibly hold down 3 countries at the same time in our present deployment situation to do it we would need to reinstute the draft which has to get approved by congress. and congress wont do that.
21000 more soldiers? that wouldnt be enough to attack iran even if we throw in a few brigades from around iraq. 21000 troops doesnt even constitute a divison. plus if we made the preperations nescary iran wont sit back and let us amass on the border. plus it would make us more hated in the region leading to bigger consequences
2007-01-15 17:36:25 · answer #2 · answered by trionspectre666 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Usually I at least peak at what others have said in response to a question before I respond so as not to repeat them. In this case I could not hit the "answer this question" button fast enough. I'm not supposed to insult people like you on this site I am told, or I will be in violation of the conduct code. Thankfully, you let your fingers do the pecking and managed to insult yourself so that I do not have to. You show such a lack of knowledge of the world you live in as to be a joke. Countries like Iran do not just "talk big" . What they do is build nuclear weapons, and then state publicly their intent to use them on other nations as soon as they possible can. One of the main targets they will put a large bulls' eye on is Israel, the other being the U.S. That is not propaganda, that is the stated purpose of the people of Iran as projected by the president of that nation. It does not matter that he states this one day and then whines to the U.N. the next that the nuclear program is for peaceful power uses. How can you be so gullible as to seperate the two statements and them choose to only believe the one that fits your agenda. You may be right, the push may be on for Iran next, but to anyone that has followed U.S. policy for any time this is not a new development but just the next logical step in cleaning up the middle east. You and others that feel as you are not the only ones that wait.. and watch...but I am not near so patient as you, think on that my friend. You think this will be Bush's last stand, I doubt any such thing. I hope it is but the first stand, in a long time, and that this great nation learns again how to stand tall. No more of this skulking in the shadows that those like yourself would have us believe we should do. No more apologizing for being right, doing right, when all others merely talk of right and wrong while great wrongs are done aroung this world. As far as big talk goes I can see who the big talkers are, the democrats will talk big, and then tax me some more for yet another class in how to give away your nation.
2007-01-15 18:01:45 · answer #3 · answered by avatar2068 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If he plans on war with Iran it will take a *LOT* more than 21,000 more troops. Watch not only the numbers but what kinds of troops and where they get put.
The US military has more than enough active duty troops to have handled over 90% of this mission without involving Reserve or Guard personnel. There's a reason that non-active duty troops are being given combat experience, while some of the most powerful active duty units (such as our armored divisions) are being kept in reserve.
2007-01-15 17:22:49 · answer #4 · answered by dukefenton 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why do we fight these wars with ground forces when we have developed weapons that can destroy continents at the push of a button ?
I'm guessing nobody in Washington ever took a course on efficiency.
2007-01-15 17:23:39 · answer #5 · answered by Razor 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obvious to me that Iran also needs some Shock & Awe
2007-01-15 17:19:31 · answer #6 · answered by PoliticallyIncorrect 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all about THIS evil secret!...
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=73518
2007-01-16 09:13:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you're special.
2007-01-15 17:31:23 · answer #8 · answered by The Tin Man 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋