Overwhelming evidence, Iran helping kill US servicemen...wouldn't this be an act of war?

Question

If we don't protect our troops from this type of behaviour, can
we really call ourselves "Home of the Free and the Land of
the Brave"? We may be on two fronts already...but we have
plenty Cruise missiles, Daisy-Cutters, and the means to
deliver on target..There's an old saying..."Let George do it..!"

OK....LET 'GEORGE' DO IT ....He is our President and he
has shown no fear so far....therefore, tell the wimpy liberals
to set back and watch real men and women in action!

Answer 1

I'm glad we leave policy making up to people who are more trained.

Answer 2

it is all hypocrisy, my pal. And all that American double-common that the U. S. observe to different international locations. what form of excellent judgment is it, that its called an act of war while different international locations do it, and yet while the U. S. does the comparable element, its no longer an act of war?. for the period of the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-1989), the U. S. presented palms and funds to the Afghan mujahedeens (that risk-free the Taliban and the team of Osama Bin weighted down) who have been combating against the Soviet troops on the time. isn't this an act of war?. for the period of the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988), the U. S. presented palms (that risk-free fighter aircrafts, floor-to-air missiles and chemical weapons) to Saddam Hussein, which he used against Iranian troops. isn't this an act of war?. for the period of the Arab-Israeli war (Yom Kippur war, 1973), the U. S. presented aircrafts, missiles, and weapons to Israel. This US help for Israel made Saudi Arabia impose an oil-embargo that brought about extreme gas rationing interior the U. S.. Wasn't this US action an act of war?. in case you hold an open techniques and evaluate what the Iranians are doing now and what the U. S. have been doing interior the previous, do you spot any difference?. Now, take a closer seem on the info, then ask the question back to your self. And to the poster above me who's attempting to justify US previous strikes by using pointing out that offering palms to international locations with a "status nationwide military" isn't an act of war, properly... his reasoning is warped and defies elementary experience. in case you keep in mind the "Iran-Contra Deal" of the previous due 80's, the place the U. S. offered weapons to Iran and use the money to finance the Contra rebels of Nicaragua. The Contras are rebels or insurgents (and not Nicaragua's status nationwide military). And the greater severe actuality is that the U. S. offered weapons to Iran (which the U. S. had already till now declared as a adversarial u . s . a . and u.s.'s sworn enemy). How could you justify such strikes?.

Answer 3

If it was then the US government financing the IRA for thirty years to kill British servicemen and civilians was an act of war. As was the CIA financed mercenaries fighting alongside the Argentines in the Falklands. If your government can do it against an 'ally' why cant theirs against an enemy??

Answer 4

Iran is not a threat to us. they are a little piece of sand that will wash away with the first big storm that goes their way. because of the fighters comming into Iraq from Iran does not mean that they are being funded by the goverment. Hire Merc's to close the boarders and then start cleaning house. When we stop the influx of people comming into a conflict area then we can get control and monitor the boarders for clowns trying to bring in fighters.

Answer 5

Having no intelligence and having no fear aren't the same thing.

Instead of trying to come up with bullcrap reasons to rob other nations of THEIR freedom, why not just pick up a globe and point at a random location for the next target in the great War on Common Sense?

Answer 6

So WHERE is this evidence then? And if you're talking about non-state sponsered nationals fighting in Iraq, then why are you ignoring the MASSIVE influence of Saudis in Iraq? Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. Many hundreds of Saudis attack US forces in Iraq every day. Why are you not bleating about attacking Saudi Arabia?

Plus, the US has done this sort of thing many times before and got away scot free. The US has backed coups, revolutions and insurgencies in South America for decades. It was one of your CIA sponsered coups that overthrow the democratic government in Iraq and installed Sadam Hussein, and another one who overthrew the democratic government in Iran and re-installed the hated Shah.

Pot calling kettle, come in kettle.

Answer 7

Thank you. We need some finialization for our troops in Iraq. So lets go an get em in Iran.

Answer 8

Self expose on who want to play the "Big Boys " game.
Ever wonder who is running down with the "King and I"
Luke 9.25
Decode "Die another day"

Answer 9

technically its not an act of war, it is a proxy war
the same thing happened in Vietnam and the American government did nothing to stop china from aiding the communists, but i guess that since Iran is weaker than china in this situation it makes the presidents balls grow a few sizes.

Answer 10

Of course not, you and I both know it would qualify as simply another 'conflict' (just can't suspend the Bill of Rights over nothing...)