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

Mr. president lead war into Iraq and killed the wrong man.
That wrong man may did killings agaist the kurdish people however, when Mr. president claims of w.of.mass d. Their was no sign of evidence of w.m.d.
Now a country name Iran has weapons and supplying weapons to She eyes Iraqis. Killed many marines and some troops of U.S..
Why doesn't U.S. not attack Iran why?
If so, would their be another draft?

2007-02-12 13:14:27 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

15 answers

Yo no creo que estoy listo por un guerrella con Iran. (I do not think that I am ready for a war with Iran) Soy mas mejor, y no quiero ver los ninos muerto. (I am old and do not want to watch the young die)

2007-02-12 13:27:40 · answer #1 · answered by Don 6 · 1 2

The President , the congress, a many other nations in the world used and shared the same information in regards to Iraq having WMD's. The use of force was voted on and ratified by the congress giving President Bush the authority to remove Saddam Hussein from power. The Iraqi president ignored 17 resolutions issued by the United nations. Violated the ceasefire agreement after the Gulf War. Saddam Hussein killed many of his own people using chemical weapons which are WMD's that he claimed he would use on our troops if we invaded Iraq. The real WMD in all of this war was Saddam Hussein. Now as for Iran Their president would like to totally destroy Israel and remove them from the face of the earth. That type of threat needs to be given serious consideration. Iran with nuclear weapons would be a disaster for the Middle East countries. They would be totally intimidated to comply with the Iranian demands or be destroyed.That situation would be unacceptable. I do not feel we would have to have a draft if we were to confront Iran. Remember Iran is surrounded by our forces on 2 fronts now.
The firepoweer and manpower are already in place. Just today the Iranian leader has softened his tone since we now have proof of the Iranian of supplying the Iraqis with weapons and training. Non of the MiddleEast countries truly understand the power the United States military. Saddam army was going to kill all of our troops and turn us out. He was wrong. Iran is bigger with many more people but that is a minor issue. If our military is allowed to fight without the chain of political correctness holding them back, these wars would be won in half the time.

2007-02-12 14:29:23 · answer #2 · answered by cujo_5645 1 · 1 0

You dont know too much do you? Bush relied on intelligence that was either plane wrong or too late. Intelligence from our allies. Why wait until someone strikes us? Better safe then sorry in my opinion, especially with someone as evil as Saddam was. Iran is a very dangerous country and we need more proof this time before an attack can happen. But also, diplomacy needs to be attempted and if you can see so far, you cant be diplomatic with Iran. They keep shrugging it off and for some reason keep getting more time to do what they are doing. Aiding the insurgents/terrorists in Iraq is enough in my opinion to do something a little more drastic than the weak sanctions we have done.We need to stop up harsher sanctions against them. We need to show the proof we have to the world that they are aiding terrorism (though I think its silly that we even need to do that because anyone with common sense that isnt Muslim can see that). Iran needs to be dealt with and fast. The longer we keep playing their game and letting them get away with this the worse it will be. Do you really want Iran, IRAN, with nuclear weapons? Honestly, does anyone besides Islamic terrorists want that? Because we all know just what they would do with them.

2007-02-12 13:26:27 · answer #3 · answered by Bucfan 2 · 0 0

When Bin Laden fled into Pakistan the U.S. would have attacked, but Pakistan has the bomb. After Afghanistan, Iraq was next on the list of terror threats and also unfinished business. Saddam should have been removed in the first Gulf War. WMD's was just a reason to try to get the UN to help in the war. The U.S. still might attack Iran if Iran continues to supply bomb making materiel.

2007-02-12 13:27:35 · answer #4 · answered by rusty_1491 5 · 1 0

Just a possible scenario.

FIRST. There were WMDs.

How do I know this?

When you give a man a year to get rid of his stuff. He is going to get rid of it. Not to mention the fact that he used it on his people. OH! And we do have pictures of trucks with questionable cargo which I believe headed to Syria, Iran, and Pakistan. (something like that)

(Let us not forget. When the U.N. inspectors were doing there thing. They were not allowed to go into certain areas. For whatever reason.)

SECOND. Yes. We are going to end up fighting Iran. This whole Iraq thing was just our entrance. I knew the day Bush said we were going to invade Iraq. He really ment Iran. This is the WW3 that we have all been waiting for.

My thought = China and Russia have had their hands dirty with Iran. And once we start dropping our bombs...

Draft? They will march our streets and pull every man and women with or against our will between the ages of 18 and 25 (or older) to fight this war.

I'm 20. I do not like the odds either.
Just a thought.
You never know...
Things might get better...
(right?)

2007-02-12 13:25:41 · answer #5 · answered by Noodles 4 · 3 0

Considering the fact that we're in Afghanistan and Iraq and neither country is stable yet and won't be for another decade or so plus the fact that we honestly don't have the personnel to invade Iran I'm not sure war is a good idea with Iran. I agree that Iran should have been priority of Iraq but I believe that the international community, UN, and NATO need to lock down Iran. But knowing Bush a war with Iran wouldn't surprise. He's too rash for it not to happen. I'm waiting for all hell to break loose with North Korea and then for China to start something.

2007-02-12 13:19:54 · answer #6 · answered by hobbitgonewild 3 · 1 1

Listen what do you think the 21.00 troop surge is about. the true reason is because iran has nuclear ability, and isreal will not allow that. What all the bleeding heart liberals don't understand is that if we don't attak iran and pull out of iraq we will, not might will be attaked on our soil. It is critical to destroy iran because if they get nukes where do u think they'll fire them to? By the way no there won't be a draft. We will use nukes before we draft. the reason is because of the liberals plain and simple. By the way we are not loosing the war because of our military it is because of politics. If anyone agrees please email me at. stockkiddan@yahoo.com

2007-02-12 13:27:13 · answer #7 · answered by stockkiddan 1 · 0 0

If the US were to attack Iran it would only strategic targets bombed by the air. The Iranian president, Amahndinehad, is a liar. He says one thing to the western public and another to his own people.

So no draft. Scary, but no draft.

2007-02-12 13:24:11 · answer #8 · answered by apple juice 6 · 2 0

Dumbass, there were and still are weapons of mass destruction from Iraq. What do you think killed thousands of Kurds and Iranians. They were move across the border into Syria and Lebanon shortly before we invaded. Unless we deliver a lethal pre-emptive strike against Iran, they'll explode a nuclear bomb someplace in the world and don't be surprised if it's not somewhere in the US.

2007-02-12 13:21:26 · answer #9 · answered by notadeadbeat 5 · 3 3

Iran should be dealt economically, we should get our butt buddy Saudi Arabia to live up to its defence agreements and push oil to a price where the Iranians can't afford to pay for its massive social programs and subsidized gas.

2007-02-12 13:24:37 · answer #10 · answered by trigunmarksman 6 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers