What is with the accusations now of Iran supplying insurgent fighters in Iraq. Seems like Bush is pushing this idea pretty hard in past couple of days. What do you think?
2007-02-14 19:18:57 · 23 answers · asked by Coco32 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
I think Bush is the most dangerous person on the planet.
2007-02-14 19:21:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Agreed, what with 50 ships in total soon to be gathered in the gulf, lead by two significant American aircraft carriers, and with the vocal arguments in the European union against the americans quarter, and with Russia supplying anti-aircraft missiles to the Iranians, the only thing that would stop a war occuring is the reluctance of the democratic led congress in the United states to fund a major military operation against Iran. Kuwait newspapers said it would happen in April if you recall, they had the UK newspaper say that from 06 onwards the US would have to face the decision of whether or not to fight Iran within 2 years. If the US hits Iran she may not destroy the Iranian nuclear technology collection, as it were, this is not neccessarily a case of the US leaving it too late, but simply an issue of terrain and geography, hence the factor of terrain means casualties will probably be hugh, given that the implied use of aircraft is prominent and the only option,.
2007-02-15 03:53:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Okay, look.
George Bush is about 18 months late on this idea. The rest of the world has known this for a long time, and Bush finally came around.
Ever heard of the Diyala Province? That's where Zarqawi used to operate out of. It's in a flat land in the foothills of Iran where the roads come down out of the mountains.
Ever hear of Muqtada al Sadr? He has been supplied by Iran likely since 2003, and we've known it since 2005 or 2006. Now al Sadr is in Iran in exile.
2007-02-15 04:08:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It seem possible, but I certainly hope not. Bush has to fnd some way to justify increase in funding and a troop surge and saying that another country is helping to harm our troops could be a good arguement to increase funding.
We can't afford another war. Iran is stronger than Iraq was and we can't afford to fight in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and fight a war on terrorism. Not considering the domestic issues. We just can't afford to fight Iran and it will be a very bad idea. The troops are tired, they're doing several tours of duty and they need to come home, not go fight another war.
2007-02-15 03:27:14 · answer #4 · answered by mmatthews000 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Recent events could certainly be interpreted as "laying the groundwork" but I seriously doubt it unless there is some extremely provocative development. Too much risk for too little gain. Lack of support again in world opinion as well as at home. It would be supremely stupid. So maybe, since Bush has a history of some supremely stupid decisions, but probably not.
2007-02-15 03:37:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Makes George seem like one of those revisionist historians. Oh no he will never be able to say publicly we did it too, prior to June 6, 1944, while the Germans occupied most of Europe. Imagine that, I do not ever recall the Germans whining about it like this fella did yesterday morning.
Yep we fiananced armed and trained insurgents back then, in several countries.
2007-02-15 03:30:03 · answer #6 · answered by eks_spurt 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think that he is totally pushing it and I think it's sad... I think it's sad that he thinks the people of his country are soo dumb they'll fall for the same thing again... "weapons of mass destruction" now "supplying dangerous weapons"; that's how it started last time and home many our young military people have to die before we end all this craziness... he is just trying to take down the Muslim world one country at a time... Live and Let Live Damn it!!! Bombing the crap out of a country is not the solution... I think we have determined that already!!
2007-02-15 03:27:00 · answer #7 · answered by ashi 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Cannot see it myself! Even George Dubya Bush is not so stupid as to involve the USA in what would effectively be THREE wars.
And ALL against Muslim countries. All at the same time! But, with that guy, who knows!
2007-02-15 03:26:16 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think Iran should attack Bush himself first, Bush cannot be getting away so easily from so many crimes!!!!
2007-02-15 11:43:18 · answer #9 · answered by ILSE 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Only if diplomacy fails. It failed in case of Iraq. But succeeded in N Korea. I am sure US will not wait for Iran to attack first.
2007-02-15 03:27:16 · answer #10 · answered by a1b2c3d4test 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋