| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you think the US will attack Iran? |
| Yes |
|
33% |
[ 8 ] |
| No |
|
66% |
[ 16 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 24 |
|
| Author |
Message |
TML1976
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Location: South Korea
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:15 pm Post subject: Do you think the US will attack Iran before November 2008. |
 |
|
| irrespective of your personal feelings about whether they should or should not. Do you think that the US will attack Iran before the presidential elections in November. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mole
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Act III
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose I live under a rock.
Why might that happen?
I vote no. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mole wrote: |
I suppose I live under a rock.
Why might that happen? |
Because the vast majority now want no more of Iraq. Gotta go somewhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TML1976
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, there is alot of debate as to whether the US should or should not attack Iran. Some argue that before Bush's second term is up that this may take place. Soem argue that the possibility of this happening are greater now that Admiral William Fox Fallon was relieved of his post as commander of CENTCOM. He was seen as opposing a war with Iran. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Without some major new provocation, I'd say the chances are zero. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
agentX
Joined: 12 Oct 2007
Location: Jeolla province
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:49 am Post subject: Re: Do you think the US will attack Iran before November 200 |
|
|
| TML1976 wrote: |
| irrespective of your personal feelings about whether they should or should not. Do you think that the US will attack Iran before the presidential elections in November. |
4 weeks ago, I would have clicked no.
Now, I've clicked yes.
Last week, and the week before, McCain kept saying that Al-Qaeda was being trained in Iran. At one point, his buddy Liebermann had to step in and correct him. Pundits have said it's a 'senior moment'. The bloggers aren't so certain; some have said he's doing it on purpose. He knows his voters are "low-info" and thus wouldn't catch any of the corrections.
He's doing this on purpose because those fundie-undies, the Christian Taliban led by Mullah Dobson, Mullah Hagee, and Mullah Parsley all want a war with Iran to trigger the Apocalypse.
Yes, I know that sounds like IGTG territory, but this is the nature of Christian fundamentalism in the the Untied States.
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/2/29/115039/049
Just yesterday, al-Maliki and Al-Sadr were in Iran negotiating a ceasefire. That's got the neo-cons and the fanatics in the Beltway all riled up. They've been looking for excuses to get after Iran for awhile. The NIE and the boat confrontation were enough to nix the idea. But now, things are different.
If starting a war with Iran would bring out the conservatives, then you can best believe that Bush would start one (or threaten to) 3 days before voting day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here is what Barack Hussein Obama said on Sept. 4, 2007:
| Quote: |
| "Hit Iran where it hurts." "Americans need to come together to confront the challenge posed by Iran. The war in Iraq has strengthened Iran which poses for us the greatest strategic challenge in the Middle East in a generation. Iran supports violent groups and sectarians in Iraq. Iran fuels terror and extremism in the Middle East. Iran is making progress on a nuclear program in defiance of the international community. Iran calls for Israel to be wiped off the map." He follows this up by calling for a pre-emptive military strike on Iran. |
So maybe it'll be after the election. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| No, what an absurd suggestion! So long as Iran stays on their side of the fence, they should be fine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bush does not have the political capital to launch any attack against Iran. The military would also refuse. Not going to happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
Here is what Barack Hussein Obama said on Sept. 4, 2007:
| Quote: |
| "Hit Iran where it hurts." "Americans need to come together to confront the challenge posed by Iran. The war in Iraq has strengthened Iran which poses for us the greatest strategic challenge in the Middle East in a generation. Iran supports violent groups and sectarians in Iraq. Iran fuels terror and extremism in the Middle East. Iran is making progress on a nuclear program in defiance of the international community. Iran calls for Israel to be wiped off the map." He follows this up by calling for a pre-emptive military strike on Iran. |
So maybe it'll be after the election. |
Yeah... pretty disgusting stuff, isn't it? I'm willing to give Obama a chance, but I admit that my belief that his true loyalties lie outside the circle of "acceptable discourse" is a bit... thinly sourced.
If he lets me down, it'll be time to go third-party. Jesus, being an anti-war American sucks. It's like being an anti-sacrifice Mayan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| bush does not have the political capital to launch any attack against Iran. The military would also refuse. Not going to happen. |
Your answer is incorrect. You did not use the words 'imperialist,' 'unilateral,' or 'pre-emptive' in your answer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stillnotking wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
Here is what Barack Hussein Obama said on Sept. 4, 2007:
| Quote: |
| "Hit Iran where it hurts." "Americans need to come together to confront the challenge posed by Iran. The war in Iraq has strengthened Iran which poses for us the greatest strategic challenge in the Middle East in a generation. Iran supports violent groups and sectarians in Iraq. Iran fuels terror and extremism in the Middle East. Iran is making progress on a nuclear program in defiance of the international community. Iran calls for Israel to be wiped off the map." He follows this up by calling for a pre-emptive military strike on Iran. |
So maybe it'll be after the election. |
Yeah... pretty disgusting stuff, isn't it? I'm willing to give Obama a chance, but I admit that my belief that his true loyalties lie outside the circle of "acceptable discourse" is a bit... thinly sourced.
If he lets me down, it'll be time to go third-party. Jesus, being an anti-war American sucks. It's like being an anti-sacrifice Mayan. |
Remember, regardless of the Demoblicans' nominees you can still send a message by voting for Ron Paul or any third party candidate. The Democrats give lip service to the antiwar movement just to keep their votes, and then proceed to vote for war funding and continue the same ol' same ol'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TML1976
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
| No, what an absurd suggestion! So long as Iran stays on their side of the fence, they should be fine. |
Not absurd at all. And in war, both sides can change where the fence is in order to legitimize their actions. We have seen the Americans do this on several occasions, and the Iranians are masters at pushing the envelope.
Last edited by TML1976 on Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TML1976
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| bush does not have the political capital to launch any attack against Iran. The military would also refuse. Not going to happen. |
Your answer is incorrect. You did not use the words 'imperialist,' 'unilateral,' or 'pre-emptive' in your answer. |
No point in stating the obvious I guess.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TML1976
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| stillnotking wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
Here is what Barack Hussein Obama said on Sept. 4, 2007:
| Quote: |
| "Hit Iran where it hurts." "Americans need to come together to confront the challenge posed by Iran. The war in Iraq has strengthened Iran which poses for us the greatest strategic challenge in the Middle East in a generation. Iran supports violent groups and sectarians in Iraq. Iran fuels terror and extremism in the Middle East. Iran is making progress on a nuclear program in defiance of the international community. Iran calls for Israel to be wiped off the map." He follows this up by calling for a pre-emptive military strike on Iran. |
So maybe it'll be after the election. |
Yeah... pretty disgusting stuff, isn't it? I'm willing to give Obama a chance, but I admit that my belief that his true loyalties lie outside the circle of "acceptable discourse" is a bit... thinly sourced.
If he lets me down, it'll be time to go third-party. Jesus, being an anti-war American sucks. It's like being an anti-sacrifice Mayan. |
Remember, regardless of the Demoblicans' nominees you can still send a message by voting for Ron Paul or any third party candidate. The Democrats give lip service to the antiwar movement just to keep their votes, and then proceed to vote for war funding and continue the same ol' same ol'. |
I agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
