2007-12-03 06:34:26 · 19 answers · asked by FRANsuFU 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think the ruling class has already decided to go ahead with war on Iran.
This will put us in the same position as the Ottoman Empire in 1915. Goodbye, America.
I can never recall a time in my life where only one or two candidates have expressed horror at the thought of using nuclear weapons, while the others act nonchalant about it.
I agree with AntiWar.com's assessment of both parties: The War Party (deliberately singular).
2007-12-03 11:44:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
One hand passes over to the other, i.e. The democrats have their time, possibly, screw up and then the Republicans move in and resume their bourgeois program for Eastern domination. Muslim theocracy is not bourgeois Christian democracy. Of course after tasting Muslim fanaticism I guess I can accept their fate, but unfortunately that means those oppressed women and children must die or suffer atrocities at the hands of the likes of al Qaeda, i.e. Muslims can't even treat their own as human beings, on the other hand a Christian KKK isn't better is it.
All Iraq needed was can of pesticide and they were pounded back into barbarism. Their only future now is perpetual civil war.
2007-12-03 11:12:45 · answer #2 · answered by Psyengine 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you are talking about Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the First Lady of The United States--Wife of President William Jefferson Clinton the 42nd President of The United States--I would say no. Hillary or the slim possibility of "another Democrat"--will not "declare war on Iran".
2007-12-03 06:54:21 · answer #3 · answered by GO HILLARY 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If democrats think that by electing a democrat for president, there will be no more war, then theyre only fooling themselves. The only difference is, if Hilary, Obama, or any other democrat gets into office and declares a war, then it'll be a GOOD idea. If a republican does the same thing, then we're war mongering neocons out for blood. Go figure.
2007-12-03 06:40:06 · answer #4 · answered by Dani 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That improve into the plan, yet Clinton did the comparable element two times, and have been given away with it, now this jerk is doing the comparable. Marko Polio: quote "The final time the U. S. declared conflict improve into Korea" incorrect ! The korean incident improve into called a UN police action, and we did no longer declare any conflict against Korea. The conflict improve into certainly between the North and South, and today it remains recognised as a stop fireplace.
2016-12-17 05:52:47 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iran would be 10 times more idiotic than Iraq.
2007-12-03 10:02:15 · answer #6 · answered by chemcook 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Haven't we learnt over the centuries wars don't work, the innocent die or murdered for that persons cause or beliefs. How selfish.It is for greed or money.One side has to lose how sad.Put the war mongers on an Island together and let them go for it the only person/people that they are going to hurt is themselves. NO MORE WARS
2007-12-03 09:59:58 · answer #7 · answered by Kaye B 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe conflict is virtually inevitable.
Unless Iran changes its course.
2007-12-03 06:51:46 · answer #8 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't see it I mean, we haven't even finished in Iraq yet, how can go to Iran.
2007-12-03 08:18:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We might if there is anything left of Iran when Israel gets through with them.
2007-12-03 06:45:27 · answer #10 · answered by Ronboy 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋