I know for sure alcohol is illegal in Iran, not sure about other middle eastern countries.

Perhaps, the solution, is to deny them the nukes in the first place.

I have a friend who left Iran about 10 years ago.

To have a party with alcohol in Iran, the first thing you do is pay the police off. This way the police won't bother your party. As an added bonus you can get the alcohol from the police that they confiscated from others.

Apparently Muslims in Iran can be imprisoned or lashed if caught with alcohol, but Jews and Christians are allowed to drink as long as it is in private.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3697652.stm

War has never solved anything besides ending slavery, nazism, facistism, and islamic militants

it's impossible to dissect someone's reason why they wouldn't go to war because sincere pacifists and cowards both use the same excuses. no cowards admit they are one to others (and probably rarely to themselves), so they invariably think of some face-saving reason they'd never fight.

i don't know anyone on here well enough to make a judgement between a moral objectionist and a coward... so i won't.

There will be no draft. Wouldn't it be great if more worthless youth actually stepped up so we wouldn't need more troops?

Let me make sure I understand this. There is NO employer who's deemed you a suitable person to hire, and you consider that a great situation? And we're supposed to be impressed with your perspicacity?

Just tell me that you're not living off the tax dollars of people who actually work. Especially people who are proud that they work.


I can assure you that people can be brainwashed at a later age. I saw plenty of older college students who intended to vote for Kerry. Hook them up with a rock star, and they're lemmings.


So you believe that women in the military are all infantry, and that they never work in such jobs as supply, medical, communications, or as pilots?

If every woman in the military were suddenly gone right now, the services would be unable to function.

posted by UsTwo
Perhaps, the solution, is to deny them the nukes in the first place.
Hope you aren't suggesting more events like the misplaced attack on Iraq. We have failed to deny Nuclear bombs to many of the least stable countries in the world (Pakistan, N. Korea, Soviet Union, China) even when that was our position. What can you possibly suggest that will allow us to accomplish this?

Yes, yes I am.

They currently are not shouting 'death to America' in their ruling bodies.

Day one: They shout death to America with the possibility of nuclear weapons.

Day two:
http://w1.132.telia.com/~u13206896/images/f117.jpg

Day Three: They shout death to America without the possibility of nuclear weapons.

"Failed to deny" is inaccurate. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton GAVE nuclear material to North Korea, because they believed their promise to "use it only for generating power." How idiotic was that?

Don't forget that if it's ever winging its way toward us in a missile, that missile will be guided by our own technology, which Loral sold to the Chinese.

Documents verify that ".. the president [Clinton] was informed that Loral may have contributed technology to China's ballistic missile program before he decided to grant Loral a waiver on February 18th of this year [1998] to permit them to export yet another satellite to China."

Can you say, "big fat campaign contribution from Loral?"

First if you know your history Carter really didn't have much choice. China needed electricity and to be brought into the modern age. Plus, don't be so naive as to believe that without our help the Chinese would never have developed it on their own. What Carter did was provide SAFE plans to develop power plants. Otherwise China would have had disasters worse than 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl... but I'm sure to some of you who don't give a damn about the world and people you would say that was what China deserved.

Clinton helped China because China offered to turn over any illegal sales from the ex-USSR's "missing" arsenal. Again, in order to protect yourself you sometimes must help your enemy to believe he is on equal footing. Do you trulky believe that ANY president would give information out that the Chinese would not be able to get either elsewhere or on their own? Well, I'm sure some of you are so f-ing partisan and hate filled that you would believe that.

Does the article you quote from talk about how Rev. Moon (owner of the Washington Times and close friend to the Bush's) sold nuclear subs to N. Korea, how he gave millions to N. Korean leaders for the sole purpose to help their nuclear program? (BTW.... why did Reagan and Bush SELL Moon those subs anyway? What does a private citizen who runs the mother of all religious cults need with them? And why did Bush I let Moon sell them to North Korea?) Course you won't answer those questions, you'd rather point fingers at the president from the other party and say it was all his fault, Reagan and the Bushys NEVER, NEVER did anything bad.

Point is, we have had president's giving China and N. Korea information for a very long time, and it isn't just one party. What do you think Nixon truly did when he went to China DURING A WAR AGAINST THEM? HOw do you think Nixon was able to end the war?

Study your history.

UsTwo, your fantasies of our efficiency leave me baffled. All these countries have shouted "death to America" at some point, when, exactly, should we have atttacked each of them in your opinion. Your concept of international relations makes me understand their desire for nuclear weapons.
No, I consider this part of the process. The United States has provided weapons for many our enemies. It is a constantly shifting range from friend to enemy(see photos of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein) It is these events that make the fantasy of our military strength so unsustainable, the one hand is giving while the other takes away.

We tried the cold war, it sucked.

Pakistan is helping us.

China is a demon waiting another 20 years.

Iran is now.

I do so very much hope you are not recommending an incursion into Iran.
This would be quite detrimental to stability in the region, and to our country as a whole. While I simply disagree with the invasion of Iraq, I would be extremely opposed to the same in Iran. Partially because we would likely lose such a war (three times the area of Iraq) but also because it would create the conditions for a third world war. Such a move would likely draw all parties, and the possibility of Nuclear assault into play, not something I am willing to consider as a viable course of action.

Opinion only....not reality

Iran must not be allowed to have nuclear weapons, period.

If that means blowing up their reators, so be it.

Iran has one of the better chances of having an anti-islamofacist revolution, and I'm willing to wait and see what happens, BUT if the choice is between letting the current Iranian government gain nuclear weapons, vrs bombing, I side strongly with bombing.

What part of "THE IRANIANS HAVE ALREADY SAID THEY WOULD USE NUKES IF WE SHOWED ANY AGRESSION TOWARDS THEM" do people not understand?

It's not a question of do they have them, or will they use them ..... it's a REALITY. Do we need to prove the US is so great that we are willing to start a nuclear war to prove it?

W. in all his greatness could have prevented Iran from getting this far, but chose instead to invade a country so down beaten from years of assault that they couldn't do much, and yet they are holding their own so far, aren't they?

Now we have people on this board wanting Iran or saying "if we invade Iran it MAY lead to nuclear war"...... there is no maybe.... there is only it WILL.

One can only hope, this is not the direction we are heading. If indeed it is, I fear for humanity, as the results should be relatively obvious. But then again....I have always looked towards worst case scenario, as the possible reality.

Where does this fear come from? Who would come to Iran's aid?

what a bunch of brat kids... i mean so verry typical. mmmm well if i can drink it might be ok... o the country were goging to dosnt support drinking well i guess its not so cool after all

oh wait i hat bush im not going..

sounds like a great big case of my parents have given me evreythign i want wip my as for me and why shoudl i start changing now.

otherwise known as pussitis thats puss- ite- is for those of you whos parents did your homework for you...


i hear the exact same thing form all the rich kids who got in the army for a free ride to school and then a war happens ( wether its rite or not ) and then all of a suden well i dont want to go fight.. i just want to goto school......

how about this scenerio clinton decides that we need to finish what bush sr started and creates the whole school deal and bouuses and all that shit that all the pretty people signed up for. and then leaves a not on the desk in the oval office for bush jr saying ok buddy i got the numbers for you now its your turn to use them.. go fucking invade someone yeah iraq is a great place...


that would fuck with some people....




edit #1


ok this was in response to #'s a long time ago.. but hey let er rip if yall want...

One possible scenario that comes to mind:

We attack Iran
Iran attacks Isreal
Isreal retaliates

If Isreal decides to attack ANY country in the middle east....it will escalate.
We do not have the needed forces to have a ground war in Iran.
Iraq would seem like childs play in comparison to an Iranian War.
We are far from "Winning" in Iraq at this time.(see tonights headlines)

If we cannot maintain control over Iraq, What makes one think we could attack, and control an area three times that size....with three times the population?

Seriously Ustwo....do you honestly think a War in Iran is a good Idea?

They said the same thing about Iraq, and Iraq would have a lot getter chance of attacking Israel than Iran.

We have already won Iraq, this is called clean up, and because we are a humane victor we are willing to risk our troops when no risk is really necessary. How would Iran do any better than Iraq, which was thought of as the strongest? Iran would be surrounded, but that is only a land battle.

A simple surgical strike is all that is required.

Would YOU rather wait and face the same people WITH nukes?

As the information pertaining to the current power, and armament of Iran is in question, and it is unlikely you would believe it if you were shown, this is becoming a pointless debate. As to my actual question, of whether you consider war with Iran to be a good Idea, I think you answered it quite well. Thank You for your reply.

Please, I'm all ears.

Thank you......but I will need to pass on the offer. Appreciate the information though.

Guess I need to find my own links.

Edit: Found a good one http://www.csis.org/features/0407_IransMilForces.pdf

You are right, I'm not worried in the least.

Its like Iraq lite. More untrained men, less real weapons.

It would save a lot of effort if you would read what I said before trying to "correct" it.

I said NORTH KOREA. There's a difference between North Korea and China. They happen to be two different countries.



Clinton demonstrated that he would do or say anything, including bombing countries without even consulting Congress, if he thought it would keep him in office.

BTW, why is it okay to hate Bush, but saying anything negative about Clinton is "f-ing partisan and hate filled?"

Well, if you can still manage to read your monitor with your knee jerking so furiously, I'll correct you again:

In January, 1994, a Japanese trading company "Touen Hoji" in Suganami-Ku, Tokyo, purchased 12 F and G Class submarines from the Russian Pacific Fleet Headquarters. These submarines were then sold to a KN (North Korean) trading company. Although this transaction garnered a great deal of coverage in the Japanese media, it was not disclosed at the time that Touen Hoji is an affiliate of the Unification Church.

Do you happen to remember who was president in 1994? Kind of hurts your credibility when people see that you blamed Reagan (who left office five years before), now doesn't it?


Likewise, but add geography to the list.

Bahrain and Dubai were certainly not dry, and while Kuwait and most of Saudi Arabia were, there definately wasn't any shortage of "listerine bottles" of jack!

All US naval vessels are dry. HMS naval vessels are not. We used to love taking tours aboard the ships of our conterparts of the British Royal Marines!

Aaaah the good ole days.

-bear

ustwo brings up a salient point with his posting of the stealth jet photo. Americans and the world at large should be aware that Americans are capable of, and have exhibited violent behavior unrivalled in the annals of history [note I am NOT making a value judgement]. The other unspoked draft alternative is the use of overwhelming indiscriminate ordinanace: napalm, carpet bombing, or nuclear weaponry on population centers. These weapons are in place and there are contingency plans for their use. If our leaders feel threatened enough they will use them, ask the old folk in Dresden, Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Tokyo, or Nuremburg--they can tell you about American vengence.

It's as if GWBush declared "mission accomplished" and you stopped paying attention. It turns out that Iraq had far fewer functional conventional weapons and troops than our prewar intelligence indicated (and none, zip, zero, 0%, nada of the WMDs we thought they had). And yet we're in a position of facing 50-100 attacks per day on our troops with a steady casaulty rate.

Your statistics fail to address the biggest adversities our country would face in a possible Iran invasion. If only they lined up their tanks and troops and we could line up our weapons across from them and have at. Sorry ustwo, that kind of war hasn't occured in the past 50 years. It's much more important to look at the prevailing sentiment of the people (rabidly anti-American), experience of the troops (Iran has troops that have actually been in battle not just seen them on TV), terrain (Iran is mountainous which would provide ample cover for a resisitance), and distribution of small arms (I'm not sure about Iran on this, but I would guess it's pretty similar to Iraq--an AK for every person).

If war is such a cakewalk why don't you enlist?

REALLY??? WOW...that's awesome. That would be sweet to pull that off over there. Pretty interesting experience. Good thing they don't do that here in the States. We have enough crackheads as it is :crazy:
- Undercover_Man

I'm sorry but you have a very short history book. You are so far from logic here I have to wonder if you post this impared. Saying our 'violent behavior' is unrivalled in history is so amazingly wrong that I would think it was a troll post if you weren't so consistant.

Uh oh! Am I not being patriotic enough for you? Did you miss my [not making value judgements] disclaimer? Tell me which other nations have offensively detonated nuclear weapons and I'll concede that the U.S. has had an undistinguished record of violent wartime acts.

What a concession that will be too, to be rated average in violent acts. :love:

Why do you hate America?

I think a draft was more likely under Kerry- being that Dems started the bill


Or wait Would we rather have Clinton - a firefight and we back outta Somalia- that sends the wrong message... We arent a Spain


I'd trust Bush with my life- He'd go nuclear before we had a draft


Its like Reagan, you wnana President that acts so crazy- they think he'd push the button

:thumbsup:

Well....we're gettin' to see, pretty quickly, where the real threats to
America's future are coming from......from the white house, and from the
heeartland. Uncannily similar to Macnamara's description of General Curtis
LeMay's attitude during the Cuban missle crises (see the film, "The Fog of
War"). And.....when Powell resigns from Statee, just disband the department,
and recall all the ambassadors......ain';t gonna need 'em.....anymore!

Reagan ????? Reagan......oh...you must mean this Reagan.....

I agree...except that this war we're fighting now isn't trying to protect our "Beloved Country"...it definately is about Oil and revenge. Soon enough though, we will have to fight to protect our country, because everyone in this World hates us. Except the UK...oh, and don't forget Poland :lol:

Under Bush's proposed plan, this would no longer matter

Worthless youth? I hope that's not your true feelings because us "worthless youth" are the future of the country that you live in and love.

I think what people don't seem to understand here is that Iran DOES have and continues to develop nukes. The MILITARY is stretched way too thin for us to continue our dedications around the world. And finally, people need to realise that the US is not the only country that possesses nuclear materials or nuclear "Secrets". All of that is for sale if the money's right