No consequences, their leader is insane........
2007-09-29 12:16:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by Brian 7
·
2⤊
7⤋
Simple: If any CIA operative ( there are some sponsoring ethnic-related terrorism to destabilise Iran) or US special forces soldier gets captured in Iran, they will be treated as "unlawful combatants" and denied the Geneva Convention protocol regarding the treatment of POWs. They may be tried as criminals and terrorists and face long prison sentences, confined in isolation.
On a lighter note, Iran will sanction all foreign companies that do business with the CIA and US Army.
Thanks for supporting the troops Congress.
2007-09-29 12:26:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Wrath of God 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
None at all. Did you miss the part where it said it is a largely symbolic response to a U.S. Senate resolution seeking a similar designation for Iran's Revolutionary Guards.
On the other hand, it probably got the war hawks salivating about another war.
2007-09-29 12:17:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by truth seeker 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
a lot, as more and more of the weapons Reagan gave terrorists turn up in the hands of militants killing coalition troops.
Going to lead to far more questions, than anyone in the Bush admin is prepared to answer. Maybe they'll get lucky and the UN will just let em call executive privilege on all of history.
2007-09-29 12:24:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by avail_skillz 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Hitler felt the US, Britain, France were terrorist many years ago. It's relative. If you're the bad guy and there is a group standing in your way, you might feel they are terrorist.
Keeping both of these organizations sharp will permit us all to keep our heads attached to our bodies down the road.
2007-09-29 12:18:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Nvr2soon 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
The US Military has bigger guns. There are no consequences.
Terrorist groups are not officially declared armies by nations. They may be sponsored, but they are not "Military". There is a difference.
Us labeling the Revo. Guard as terrorists probably brought this on.
Besides, Iranian leadership is a bit wonky. When a googly eyed crazy man tells you that your an alien, it doesn't actually make you one.
2007-09-29 12:38:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by TSSA! 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Conceivably, such a declaration could be utilized as a means of justifying engagement of U.S. forces (in Iraq) and the incarcaration of and torture of any prisoners taken in that/those engagement(s) ie, military personel, civilian contractors, etc..
2007-09-29 12:26:55
·
answer #7
·
answered by Doc 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It sanctions their soldiers engaging US soldiers in Iraq and their agents engaging US agents in Palestinian territories, Iran, or Lebanon (where they operate). It means if they capture an American agent (or anyone they call an agent and remember they hold a few people now under that claim) they can execute them as terrorists and suggest to the world its no different then what we do to those at Gitmo. It is political posturing nothing more.
2007-09-29 12:17:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by netjr 6
·
4⤊
2⤋
It could give war-mongers the excuse they need to start another war. Then again, if they really want one, any excuse will do. That's why Iran didn't hesitate to do this, since it doesn't really matter what it does anyway. It's more of a gesture of solidarity in the region.
You'll also notice the article states the U.S. started it.
2007-09-29 12:17:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
maybe the al Quds force and the CIA will shoot it out in multiple world locations.
On the other hand, if they attack the US military, I suggest that we respond ... by deposing their government.
:-)
2007-09-29 12:18:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by Spock (rhp) 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You didn't explain that this was in response to a senate proposal designating the revolutionary guards as such.
Typical...misleading propoganda....watch this then
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1oPEfa9Lws
2007-09-29 12:22:06
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋