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

16 answers

Those evil individuals along with Republican Neocons will lie thru their teeth and supply to American people misleading information in order to form negative public opinion against Iran so that they will be able to start another bloody war.

2007-10-24 13:38:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

When they come up with a winning military strategy, they'll decide whether or not to launch the attack with 3 weeks notice. They gave Bin Laden 3 weeks notice. They gave Saddam 3 weeks notice. They'll give Tehran 3 weeks notice.

They come up with a pretext when the time comes, or not. They now realize that the American people won't lift a finger to stop them.

2007-10-24 20:56:54 · answer #2 · answered by CaesarLives 5 · 2 0

Bush has never cared what people think of him, if he did he would have gotten out of Iraq as soon as his approval numbers started taking a dive...

I think he's genuinely afraid that Iran might actually do what they themselves have said they would do with nukes, strike US and Israel....

We must be willing to face this threat, thank God we have a president that will LEAD on issues like this. The pretext will be the threats that the leader of Iran has said combined with the fact that they are developing the weapons to carry out their threat.

2007-10-24 20:44:25 · answer #3 · answered by JD 2 · 0 2

Well that WMD thing has been used before and was a bit thin the first time...
I got it!! How about they say Osama bin Laden is in Iran (again) and they want to go after him (again)? When you think about it, didn't that dyed shorter beard look like an "Iranian" disguise? Yeah, that's the ticket!!

2007-10-24 20:58:57 · answer #4 · answered by sagacious_ness 7 · 2 0

this is an easy one

first: sadam caused many of his own problems in iraq when he did not want the UN to come and inspect for nuclear weapons (like many of the avatars on this site, he wanted people think he was more than he actually is)

so, iran will insist on having nuclear weapons, and don't have the balls that kim jong il has in north korea, giving the US the excuse it needs to use armed force.

final solution: nuclear war will occur, because not everyone, as demonstrated by north korea, will allow us to come to their country and dictate how they run their business.

2007-10-24 20:51:27 · answer #5 · answered by pəɹ noʎ uɐɥʇ ɹəʇɹɐɯs 5 · 1 0

I thought the Left said Bush was gonna invade Syria next .

Isn't that what they were saying back in 2003, 2004 and 2005 ?

Now they say Bush is gonna invade Iran.

I seem to remember, the Left swore that Bush was gonna start a draft, if he was reelected in 2004 also.

Unlike the previous president who attacked/invaded six countries on four separate continents, all without Congressional approval.

Bush only uses the military, when he has Congressional approval.

2007-10-24 20:48:56 · answer #6 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 0 3

Well, they no "weapons of mass destruction" won't work again......I'd guess they'll come up with some cockamanie story that Iran is somehow has invaded Iraq and tried to steal its oil (which is exactly what the U.S. has done).

2007-10-24 20:55:55 · answer #7 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 3 0

To spread 'freedom and democracy' ,or more likely to install parasitic capitalism and secure Zionist domination over the middle east and to get enrich Jorge Bush and his cronies off the petroleum lard as well.

2007-10-24 20:48:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

whatever it will probably be at least as honest and substantial as the excuses and proven lies they used in Iraq,,,,,for the sake of the world and our children impeach these mad fools before they bring on the rapture they profess to believe in,,, you impeached nixon for less and he at least did much good,,, bush and cronies have involved you in two wars you are losing and in the process their blatent dishonesty has managed to incite the dislike and contempt of much of the population of the world

2007-10-24 20:43:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Well the obvious one is nuclear weapons, a secondary one might be the notion that they are supplying Iraqi insurgents

2007-10-24 20:36:41 · answer #10 · answered by yo yo yo 3 · 4 0

fedest.com, questions and answers