PDA

View Full Version : We need to attack Iran




jmunjr
09-06-2007, 02:35 AM
We not only need to attack Iran, but it needs to go into next year and be a real problem.

Of course you know why... This will only help Ron Paul's campaign.

Now, the one thing Paul needs to do better is make people aware he won't be a weakling on foreign policy, just non-interventionist. Obviously it will be really hard for a non-interventionist to inherit a serious problem in the Middle East, but certainly our enemies with recognize the change in power..

Do I really want to invade Iran? No. I would lose a lot of money in my investments. More of our troops will needlessly die. More innocent civilians will die.

Still, I can see it as something that would help the Paul campaign, unless of course it is VERY successful and Iran is found to really have nukes..

Madison
09-06-2007, 02:42 AM
I think RP can win without such circumstances. The messes we have made in Iraq and Afghanistan have sufficiently proven his arguments correct.

Still, an attack may be inevitable. I wish Congress had the cajones to impeach GWB, something I believe the majority of Americans do and would support. The current administraiton has 16 months left which is plenty of time to create a mess in Iran, put our economy and currency in further jeopardy, and for our sovereignty to collapse to make way for the North American Union, and eventually One World Government.

hard@work
09-06-2007, 02:44 AM
We need to attack Iran with an apology, a request to restore diplomatic ties, strong trade, cultural exchange (the young people who make up the majority of the population love Americans), stronger tourism, and maybe some of grandpa's chocolate chip cookies.

If we did that they'd send us a thank you letter and help us stabilize the region on our way out.

Abobo
09-06-2007, 02:48 AM
We need to attack Iran with an apology, a request to restore diplomatic ties, strong trade, cultural exchange (the young people who make up the majority of the population love Americans), stronger tourism, and maybe some of grandpa's chocolate chip cookies.

If we did that they'd send us a thank you letter and help us stabilize the region on our way out.

Fool! Don't you know the old saying that you get more flies with vinegar than honey?.... Wait... I feel like I might have gotten something wrong... Hmmm....

Kuldebar
09-06-2007, 02:51 AM
Fool! Don't you know the old saying that you get more flies with vinegar than honey?.... Wait... I feel like I might have gotten something wrong... Hmmm....


I thought flies liked crap, I was always confused about that expression.

john_anderson_ii
09-06-2007, 02:59 AM
Before I joined the Marines and all that I worked for the county hospital in Maricopa country AZ. All of our pathologists and radiologists were Iranian. Iran is suffering from some of the same problems we are.


This is my impression by talking to them back in 1999:

Their young leaders were all educated here. They have embraced the western ideal of liberty and democracy and they all have ideas on how to incorporate this with islamic law.

They believe their government has run away from them, and have begun pursuing their own agenda. The average Iranian citizen does not hate the U.S. They want to emulate what we should be.


The solution to Iran....make a japan out of them. Turn them into a producer/consumer nation through trade, negotiation, and setting the proper example and leading from the front.

Madison
09-06-2007, 03:00 AM
The solution to Iran....make a japan out of them. Turn them into a producer/consumer nation through trade, negotiation, and setting the proper example and leading from the front.

The two nukes sort of played a factor there.

Kuldebar
09-06-2007, 03:04 AM
The solution to Iran....make a japan out of them. Turn them into a producer/consumer nation through trade, negotiation, and setting the proper example and leading from the front.

By nuking them twice? And then maintain military bases there for 60+ years and make them into a client state of the U.S.?

The proposed cure is worse than the disease. And, it's exactly what the neo-conservatives believe our nation should do for Iran and the rest of the Middle East: remake it.

john_anderson_ii
09-06-2007, 03:07 AM
The two nukes sort of played a factor there.

I'm not sure if you're saying we saying we should nuke Iran, or that we can't make a friend of them without nukes. Or something else entirely. :)

I am saying there is huge potential to make a great friend out of Iran if we just stay out of their political process, and let the people of Iran decide. If we, once again, become a free and prosperous nation, and the Iranian people sees this through a fishbowl, maybe they will decide they want what we have.

Kuldebar
09-06-2007, 03:15 AM
I'm not sure if you're saying we saying we should nuke Iran, or that we can't make a friend of them without nukes. Or something else entirely. :)

I am saying there is huge potential to make a great friend out of Iran if we just stay out of their political process, and let the people of Iran decide. If we, once again, become a free and prosperous nation, and the Iranian people sees this through a fishbowl, maybe they will decide they want what we have.

We can make a great friend out of Iran by not invading or bombing it. Most (especially younger) Iranians like western culture and want to be on more friendly terms with the U.S. Obviously, the history between our two countries has been less than peaceful after we overthrew their government in the 50's. But, amazingly enough, many sins can be forgiven.

However, every time our mad king George rattles his saber and Ahmadinejad 's nationalism answers back, we get closer and closer to the brink. This hostile environment marginalizes moderates in Iran (same in the U.S. really, war footing does that) and we end up with reasonable people on both sides getting pushed into the background.

Madison
09-06-2007, 03:16 AM
We definitely can make a friend of them without nukes, and I agree with everything you just said...I just don't see how it could be compared to Japan. I defer to Kuldebar:


By nuking them twice? And then maintain military bases there for 60+ years and make them into a client state of the U.S.?

john_anderson_ii
09-06-2007, 03:20 AM
We can make a great friend out of Iran by not invading or bombing it. Most (especially younger) Iranians like western culture and want to be on more friendly terms with the U.S. Obviously, the history between our two countries has been less than peaceful after we overthrew their government in the 50's. But, amazingly enough, many sins can be forgiven.

However, every time our mad king George rattles his saber and Ahmadinejad 's nationalism answers back, we get closer and closer to the brink. This hostile environment marginalizes moderates in Iran (same in the U.S. really, war footing does that) and we end up with reasonable people on both sides getting pushed into the background.

Oh, I spent this entire time misunderstanding you, when I was the one who was misunderstood.


I don't want to NUKE, ATTACK or INVADE anyone who isn't a threat to the U.S. I'm not saying use military force of any kind. I'm saying we should let them see our culture, let them see and learn from the American process devised by our founders. Let them incorporate these ideals into their own culture.

The entire point of my posts was to say that military action is not required to make a friend of Iran. All we need to do is a set a good example for them, because I believe that if we don't they may end up setting the example for us.

By "making a japan out of them" I was referring to present japan, not 1945 japan. Look at them now, they are in some ways more pro-American experiment than we are.

Abobo
09-06-2007, 03:23 AM
Why don't we just be like Switzerland? Stay neutral. You don't see crazy people with beards jumping around talking about blowing up the great devil that is Switzerland.

Trassin
09-06-2007, 04:02 AM
I think one of the strongest arguments against attacking Iran is that their citizens have such a strong sense of national identity, one which could even rival our own. They are not like Iraq, where there are at least three distinct groups which have been forced together and thus they have trouble forming a cohesive front against a foreign invader. Whether you call them Persian or Iranian there is a strong sense of unity and history among them.

As a result if we were to attack them they will react in much the same way as we would. Just as we would be willing to put aside all our differences and sacrifice our last drop of blood to repel a foreign invader so will they. In no way would it resemble the speed at which we "officially" took Baghdad. It will be a long and extremely bloody conflict, such as what would have happened if we had attempted to invade the main island of Japan in WWII.

The number of American lives lost in Iraq would be nothing compared to the casualties an invading force would experience in Iran.

Even if we only used air strikes to attack strategic points there is the "blowback" that we would experience. Over night all the frustration the Iranian people currently directed towards their own government would be shifted to the United States.

Our government has enough trouble preventing terrorist attacks from the citizens of Saudi Arabia that hate it, I can only imagine how much worse it would be with Iran's entire population feeling the same way.

Plus the Iranians that I've talked to have been damn cool and I really detest the idea of having to go to war against people who I know I could just as easily be friends with.

susano
09-06-2007, 04:20 AM
We not only need to attack Iran, but it needs to go into next year and be a real problem.

Of course you know why... This will only help Ron Paul's campaign.

Now, the one thing Paul needs to do better is make people aware he won't be a weakling on foreign policy, just non-interventionist. Obviously it will be really hard for a non-interventionist to inherit a serious problem in the Middle East, but certainly our enemies with recognize the change in power..

Do I really want to invade Iran? No. I would lose a lot of money in my investments. More of our troops will needlessly die. More innocent civilians will die.

Still, I can see it as something that would help the Paul campaign, unless of course it is VERY successful and Iran is found to really have nukes..

Your investments? Who the fuck cares about your investments. That you would even suggest such a massive loss of life for any gain - financial, political, or otherwise, is absolutely sickening.

jmunjr
09-06-2007, 04:43 AM
Your investments? Who the fuck cares about your investments. That you would even suggest such a massive loss of life for any gain - financial, political, or otherwise, is absolutely sickening.

Umm, *I* care about my investments. What if I said I might lose my job if we invade Iran? Would you chastise me for that? It's the same thing.. Wait, I implied my investments would DROP if we attacked.

I ALSO mentioned the loss of life would be bad. Geez, I'm not freaking Ghandi..

If the financial future of you and your family is of so little concern to you why don't you give every extra penny you have to charity. Until then please have a little more respect.

Thank you.

john_anderson_ii
09-06-2007, 04:52 AM
Umm, *I* care about my investments. What if I said I might lose my job if we invade Iran? Would you chastise me for that? It's the same thing.. Wait, I implied my investments would DROP if we attacked.

I ALSO mentioned the loss of life would be bad. Geez, I'm not freaking Ghandi..

If the financial future of you and your family is of so little concern to you why don't you give every extra penny you have to charity. Until then please have a little more respect.

Thank you.

In this conflict, I'm going to have to support jmunjr. It's not about the means, it's about the end. Imagine if your arguments were about his owning a hunting rifle in order to feed and clothe his family. You would be the asshole in that respect.

The best thing we can do for RP is to get the rest of the nation to realize that the U.S. Dollar is what we now depend upon to feed and defend our families. Any attack on the Dollar is an attack on the people's ability to live a free and prosperous life.

Nefertiti
09-06-2007, 05:43 AM
We not only need to attack Iran, but it needs to go into next year and be a real problem.

Of course you know why... This will only help Ron Paul's campaign.

Now, the one thing Paul needs to do better is make people aware he won't be a weakling on foreign policy, just non-interventionist. Obviously it will be really hard for a non-interventionist to inherit a serious problem in the Middle East, but certainly our enemies with recognize the change in power..

Do I really want to invade Iran? No. I would lose a lot of money in my investments. More of our troops will needlessly die. More innocent civilians will die.

Still, I can see it as something that would help the Paul campaign, unless of course it is VERY successful and Iran is found to really have nukes..

You are sick. You want to kill innocent people (Iranians and probably Americans alike) in order to sway the US election. Sick sick sick. I'm so appalled I don't know what else to say. :mad:

Edit: I do know what to say-there are some who believe in using neocon tactics to get Ron Paul elected. Double sick.

Nefertiti
09-06-2007, 05:51 AM
I ALSO mentioned the loss of life would be bad. Geez, I'm not freaking Ghandi..

.

Will you promise us all here and now that you will join the branch of the military that is most likely to get you killed in Iran when this war starts? Because you think a little death is unavoidable, then certainly you would agree to die yourself at the first opportunity so that the rest of us can enjoy a Ron Paul presidency. :rolleyes:

PS-And think of the benefits, you won't have to worry about the harm it will bring to your investments anymore.

wgadget
09-06-2007, 05:58 AM
I wish RP would have said (during the Hannity interview) that by bringing home the troops from around the world, he would be building on Reagan's policy of a strong defense right here in America.

blazin_it_alwyz
09-06-2007, 06:02 AM
We don't need that. Ron Paul clearly has a larger support base than people tend to think.... He will win regardless.......... let's not hope for wars against other people to win elections, that is as bad as hoping for another 9/11 so Ron Paul can gain presidency

Revolution9
09-06-2007, 06:30 AM
Umm, *I* care about my investments. What if I said I might lose my job if we invade Iran? Would you chastise me for that? It's the same thing.. Wait, I implied my investments would DROP if we attacked.

I ALSO mentioned the loss of life would be bad. Geez, I'm not freaking Ghandi..

If the financial future of you and your family is of so little concern to you why don't you give every extra penny you have to charity. Until then please have a little more respect.

Thank you.

Yeah.. Well I hope your investments tank to the bottom of the scummy barrel they were bought out of. Maybe then when you are not surrounded by the illusions of your fake greatness as a human you will have to drop the idiot facade and actually have some goddamned gumption and respect for life. Your fucking pieces of paper and bank account mean shit. You are idle scum floating on the waters of humanity and causing oxygen to not be absorbed into the pool. Begone. Go vote for Rudy.. You suck ass.

Yeah pal.. You pissed me off with this one. Investments..I got an investment for ya.. A size ten boot up yer fundament. I am sick and fed up of your ignorant, fragile and frail moneygrubbing kind dragging the rest of humanity down. You are a nutless zinjanthopioid.

If you think you are going to relay an answer without an apology to humanity in it then beware. This was a mild warm-up above.

:cool:
Randy