Why not attack them for this very reason? Would it be too "offensive"? Too politically incorrect ? What do you think ?
2007-02-09 05:46:38 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
anoldmick- LOL...Loved your response. Haa hahahhahhahaha...
2007-02-09 06:12:29 · update #1
kris- Do you have any core values ? Are you what other people think you are or are you who YOU think you are ?.....You need to stop giving others so much power over you. Stand up !
2007-02-09 06:17:13 · update #2
The Liberals and Democrats want us to first take the "global test" on Iran. It starts out with several worthless unenforceable UN resolutions being hurled at them followed by some hand wringing for a few years in the hopes Iran will leave us alone. Libs and Dems will only act when they see the Iranian mushroom clouds hanging over New York city.
2007-02-09 08:22:33 · answer #1 · answered by mr_methane_gasman 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Iran throughout the time of the puppet controlled Shaw out. He replaced right into a usa puppet chief.The CIA helped saddam get into potential and that they needed him to attack Iran. The after years of obeying Saddam tried taking Kuwait's oil and had to grow to be a superpower interior the middle east. Then after the Gulf conflict he did no longer adjust to the powers that be in Europe's plan to take over the middle east.
2016-11-03 00:04:41 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, for all the people who are SOOO anxious to broaden the war-- you can most definately sleep alot easier because the attack of Iran is coming and it is being built up for that very thing as we speak !!
The increase in troops for Iraq after all this time of refusing to go that route by the current administration-- didn't come as a result of the democratic success in the last elections--- AND for no other purpose than to poise our readiness for the inevedible !!
There is a build up on all fronts and there is no other explanation for it --- So --- Now we cross over into the unknown--- a MUCH broader war and the unleashing of full scale regional conflict !
The people at 3M and Honeywell are going to be seeing some really fat checks before long !!!!
2007-02-09 06:02:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
If our cars can suddenly run on air, I am all for attacking Iran. Assuming we can take the tax hike, or just borrowing more money from China & Eurproe like we keep on doing, being able to pay $10/gal of gas, sudeenly doubling the size of our military force, I really don't see why can't we attack Iran now.
XR
2007-02-09 13:52:31 · answer #4 · answered by XReader 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What the h e l l, why not just go ahead and start World War Three? That's what attacking Iran will do. And don't be so stupid as to think the world can't decide to destroy us: only the most deranged fool would think they'd try it militarily. All the rest of the world has to do is stop using the American dollar, and our economy would collapse into a worse state than during the Great Depression (look it up; you'll learn something for a change) - and this time there'd be no way out but for America to fellate the rest of the world. Get on your knees and open wide...
2007-02-09 05:54:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
Anyone remember WWII? Germany had to fight a 2 front war and got their butt kicked. Although it was the rest of the world against Germany and Japan during WWII. Who's fighting with the US in Iraq again?
2007-02-09 08:53:48 · answer #6 · answered by InDyBuD2002 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why are you so quick to pull the trigger? You are attacking Iran for something that MOST of you, at least it seems, answering this question are ready to do to Iran which is to drop a nuke on them. Do you think it is right attacking a country without provocation? I distinctly remember a letter that the leader of Iran sent to Bush (first one in years) and Bush did nothing more than throw it away. Do you think it is right to throw the first stone after dissing someone? Do you think it is right to nuke a country without provocation? If you do then you are no better than they are.
2007-02-09 07:43:32 · answer #7 · answered by hera 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I'm afraid the only way to really get a message out to Iran (and the rest of the loony Islamic fascists) is to drop a couple of nukes in the middle of Tehran but with Dems in power, we'll wait until they have nukes aimed at every major US city.
2007-02-09 05:53:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Why can't we stop the insurgents from crossing the Iraqi border. With all the sophisticated equipment and satellite imaging we can not do this simple thing? Because we do not want to, simple. To attack Iran we need a reason. So may be we are helping them to cross and do whatever the insurgents are doing so the case against Iran gets more stronger.
2007-02-09 05:53:26 · answer #9 · answered by Mastang 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Doing that would just make things worse than they already are. Most of the middle east distrusts the US because they think we're trying to take over. If we invade Iran, they'll think that even more, and even more of the middle east will hate us. This might make the middle east unite in a war against us, which would probably end up being World War III. Also, Iran is much more capable of fighting back than Iraq ever was. Iraq was an easy target, and even so we've managed to bungle it up!
2007-02-09 05:57:27 · answer #10 · answered by kris 6 · 0⤊ 6⤋