Todau GW Bush was talking about Iran and its Nuclear Weapons program.
In his speech he said "military action was a last resort"
To me, this says more than the rest of the speech because it says he's already got it in his head.....
2007-02-13 00:44:44 · 22 answers · asked by Michael H 7 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Thats what the extra troops were sent for.
2007-02-13 07:48:40 · answer #1 · answered by bigplops 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
ARE YOU SUGGESTING THE GUY CAN COUNT?!?
Two serious points to be made, however:
1. The only country to have ever used a nuclear weapon as an act of war is... the USA.
2. Iran was invaded in the mid-1980's by Iraq. Millions died; the Iraqis used chemical weapons and would very likely have used nuclear weapons had they got them. Iraq was at the time led by Saddam Hussein, then the USA's best buddy in the region despite, even back then, his appaling human rights record. The USA (Reagan,etc) supported the action against Iran as a means to oust the Ayathollahs in Iran and overturn the Iranian Islamic revolution, even though they knew of the illegal use of chemical weapons, etc. (they very likely supplied the raw materials and technology).
Given the track record of the USA in both these respects, plus their current political leadership,and is it any wonder that the Iranians are taking this stance??? From their point of view, I'm sure they can justify their nuclear programme on grounds of self-defence alone (without any need to resorting to nutcase ranting about Israel, etc).
2007-02-13 00:58:05 · answer #2 · answered by grpr1964 4 · 3⤊ 4⤋
They started closing Iraq's borders to Iran and Syria today. How else better can you say 'we are getting ready to bomb Iran' than that? The case has been made over and over again. Iran has tripped so many wires on this one and still no bombing. That tells me it is soon.
2007-02-13 03:41:02 · answer #3 · answered by Bob M 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This sounds a lot like his speeches before we invaded Iraq. If you read the Kissinger plan, he wrote about invading Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon. And this was years ago. Of course he called it protecting America's oil supply. We need to impeach him. And I think after we find out how Haliburton has fleeced the American taxpayer a lot more people will think along impeachment lines. The worse thing is the Bush people getting rich off the selling of rotten meat, expired food, contaminated water to our troops over in Iraq. The mess halls are filthy. We should not stand for this.
2007-02-13 00:56:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anne2 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
declaring that Iran isn't a threat is slightly faulty. keep in suggestions the Iranian Hostage disaster? they have suggested they want to "wipe Israel off the map". They for sure prefer to fireplace up s*** in the area and ultimately they are going to. they have been sending rifles and bombs into Iraq rebellion's fingers considering 2005.
2016-12-04 03:09:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is up to Iran.
Or do you think we should let Iran nuke anyone first before we go the UN to write Iran a nasty letter.
Than have 12 years of talks follow by 100 resolutions.
If they nuke someone else liberals will than get really really mad and get red in the face to show Iran than mean it this time.
2007-02-13 00:57:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
He wants to squeeze in as many failures and political and military defeats as possible in the time he has remaining as President.
2007-02-13 01:09:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
i think it's always been on the cards.
iran is 1 of the 5 countries on his hit-list.
he says they're habouring terrorism
& with that in mind, he can attack,
isn't that GWs aim?
2007-02-13 03:52:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes,another war ship on it's way as I write this answer.
2007-02-13 01:09:37 · answer #9 · answered by tom C 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Somebody must trust Bush? They voted him in.
2007-02-13 01:07:50 · answer #10 · answered by Barbara Doll to you 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋