Liberals aren't for attacking Iran....

[Dubya]

Stupid and senseless as it would be, rw's would love another war. Hell, Romney even said that Russia is our biggest enemy or some such idiocy. The real question is, who would they not be happy to bomb into a war?

I'm afraid that's a really short list.

If bombing Iran's ability to make nuclear weapons starts a war, then Iran will start it and it won't last very long.

You've learned nothing from the failed Iraq War.

If they do nothing but have the capability for a bomb, and get bombed because of that, it's their fault? Huh????? Only America's doofish right wingers can exhibit such lunacy.

The world will not see it that way. It will fail, and then once Iran finally gets the bomb, they'll have an excuse for using it that the American right wing warmongers gave to them.

I don't have to learn anything, because we lost about 100 of our people taking Iraq and lost the rest trying to stay there. There is no plan to occupy Iran. There is a plan to bomb those uranium enrichment areas and I'm sure some other areas. If Iran tries to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, they will lose their military capability doing it, because we'll wipe out everything more than a human wave that they can't take across the desert. They won't have an airforce, air defenses or a navy and will only have an infantry that can't do shit. If they move into Iraq, they will be annihilated.

I'm not a right-winger, fool!

 

[Dubya]

Karzai accused the US of talking with the Taliban behind his back. Karzai's brother was a major drug dealer and Karzai acts like he's on drugs. Evidence is a liar telling you what you want to hear.

It's not the only thing he's said.

BTW, it doesn't make us look to good when he's the puppet we happen to have put in power. We must be doing something pretty fucked, if our own puppet government has turned against us.

You don't get to pick your puppets. The nation puts up the person they think is best and I think Karzai is a drug addict. I don't see evidence of him trying to develop his country to control their own land and people.

 

[Billo_Really]

You don't get to pick your puppets. The nation puts up the person they think is best and I think Karzai is a drug addict. I don't see evidence of him trying to develop his country to control their own land and people.

You don't think the President of a country infers control of that land?

 

[Billo_Really]

I imagine most are smart enough to not fuck up another post.

When people say things like nothing has changed, you can't take people like that seriously. I don't have a problem with using enough military force to give the Taliban a bad day. The fact is they have lost ground in Pakistan as well.

Then why are we paying them to guard our convoy's out to remote outposts?

 

[Dubya]

You don't get to pick your puppets. The nation puts up the person they think is best and I think Karzai is a drug addict. I don't see evidence of him trying to develop his country to control their own land and people.

You don't think the President of a country infers control of that land?

Not in Afghanistan. The government of Pakistan doesn't control their land and neither do many governments.

 

[Dubya]

I imagine most are smart enough to not fuck up another post.

When people say things like nothing has changed, you can't take people like that seriously. I don't have a problem with using enough military force to give the Taliban a bad day. The fact is they have lost ground in Pakistan as well.

Then why are we paying them to guard our convoy's out to remote outposts?

I doubt you even know who the Taliban are.

 

[Billo_Really]

I doubt you even know who the Taliban are.

They are the group Afghan's absolutely detest, but are supporting, because what we are doing in that country, is far worse. We are forcing Afghan's to support the Taliban because they are more sick of us, than they are of them.

It makes me sick that they are called the enemy, yet we pay them for security duty on our convoys. Boy, is that a tax dollar well spent!

 

[Billo_Really]

Not in Afghanistan. The government of Pakistan doesn't control their land and neither do many governments.

And just who does?

 

[Dubya]

I doubt you even know who the Taliban are.

They are the group Afghan's absolutely detest, but are supporting, because what we are doing in that country, is far worse. We are forcing Afghan's to support the Taliban because they are more sick of us, than they are of them.

It makes me sick that they are called the enemy, yet we pay them for security duty on our convoys. Boy, is that a tax dollar well spent!

The Afghans are a collection of different people who support their own particular interests. The Taliban are a political movement that ruled Afghanistan for a little more than 5 years and that ended over 11 years ago. They haven't exactly made friends in Afghanistan or Pakistan. You aren't the first to act like the majority of people in Afghanistan want the Taliban back in power. The fact is they don't.

 

[Dubya]

Not in Afghanistan. The government of Pakistan doesn't control their land and neither do many governments.

And just who does?

Local groups do. Don't you know anything about what you are talking about? The Taliban didn't control all of Afghanistan, even with the help of al Qaeda. Many of those central asia countries have like a clan system that controls areas of the countries. The borders of the country don't control it and people can live on both sides of the borders.

 

[Billo_Really]

Local groups do. Don't you know anything about what you are talking about? The Taliban didn't control all of Afghanistan, even with the help of al Qaeda. Many of those central asia countries have like a clan system that controls areas of the countries. The borders of the country don't control it and people can live on both sides of the borders.

I'm well aware of their warlords. Just because I haven't commented on them, doesn't mean I don't know about them. I was giving you the chance to explain yourself in more detail so I could understand exactly what your point was.

In light of all these autonomous areas, it makes what were doing even more ridiculous.

 

[velvtacheeze]

If bombing Iran's ability to make nuclear weapons starts a war, then Iran will start it and it won't last very long.

You've learned nothing from the failed Iraq War.

If they do nothing but have the capability for a bomb, and get bombed because of that, it's their fault? Huh????? Only America's doofish right wingers can exhibit such lunacy.

The world will not see it that way. It will fail, and then once Iran finally gets the bomb, they'll have an excuse for using it that the American right wing warmongers gave to them.

I don't have to learn anything, because we lost about 100 of our people taking Iraq and lost the rest trying to stay there. There is no plan to occupy Iran. There is a plan to bomb those uranium enrichment areas and I'm sure some other areas. If Iran tries to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, they will lose their military capability doing it, because we'll wipe out everything more than a human wave that they can't take across the desert. They won't have an airforce, air defenses or a navy and will only have an infantry that can't do shit. If they move into Iraq, they will be annihilated.

I'm not a right-winger, fool!

Wow, lots of predictions of success there. I remember those kinds of optimistic predictions before the Iraq War. How did they work out?



Bombing Iran would be a global disaster, mostly for the United States and for Israel. Iran will also have much of the world's sympathy with them too. An occupation of Iran would be needed to stop them from obtaining a bomb. No wonder the US military leaders so vehemently oppose military action against Iran. I'll take their opinion over the opinions of the Wing Nut Internet's Couch-Bound Colonels any day. Iran will simply rebuild, but with an excuse to get a bomb, then use it, handed to them by US warmongers too stupid to learn lessons from the Iraq debacle.

 

[Dubya]

You've learned nothing from the failed Iraq War.

If they do nothing but have the capability for a bomb, and get bombed because of that, it's their fault? Huh????? Only America's doofish right wingers can exhibit such lunacy.

The world will not see it that way. It will fail, and then once Iran finally gets the bomb, they'll have an excuse for using it that the American right wing warmongers gave to them.

I don't have to learn anything, because we lost about 100 of our people taking Iraq and lost the rest trying to stay there. There is no plan to occupy Iran. There is a plan to bomb those uranium enrichment areas and I'm sure some other areas. If Iran tries to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, they will lose their military capability doing it, because we'll wipe out everything more than a human wave that they can't take across the desert. They won't have an airforce, air defenses or a navy and will only have an infantry that can't do shit. If they move into Iraq, they will be annihilated.

I'm not a right-winger, fool!

Wow, lots of predictions of success there. I remember those kinds of optimistic predictions before the Iraq War. How did they work out?



Bombing Iran would be a global disaster, mostly for the United States and for Israel. Iran will also have much of the world's sympathy with them too. An occupation of Iran would be needed to stop them from obtaining a bomb. No wonder the US military leaders so vehemently oppose military action against Iran. I'll take their opinion over the opinions of the Wing Nut Internet's Couch-Bound Colonels any day. Iran will simply rebuild, but with an excuse to get a bomb, then use it, handed to them by US warmongers too stupid to learn lessons from the Iraq debacle.

Let's face it, you don't know what you are talking about! We don't have to bomb the whole country to stop their uranium enrichment and we can even bomb their reactors to prevent plutonium research. The only thing they can do is threaten the Straits of Hormuz and that will cost them dearly. No one needs to occupy Iran, so the operation could be quick and painless. It's just going to leave some fucked up areas in that country.

 

[velvtacheeze]

I don't have to learn anything, because we lost about 100 of our people taking Iraq and lost the rest trying to stay there. There is no plan to occupy Iran. There is a plan to bomb those uranium enrichment areas and I'm sure some other areas. If Iran tries to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, they will lose their military capability doing it, because we'll wipe out everything more than a human wave that they can't take across the desert. They won't have an airforce, air defenses or a navy and will only have an infantry that can't do shit. If they move into Iraq, they will be annihilated.

I'm not a right-winger, fool!

Wow, lots of predictions of success there. I remember those kinds of optimistic predictions before the Iraq War. How did they work out?



Bombing Iran would be a global disaster, mostly for the United States and for Israel. Iran will also have much of the world's sympathy with them too. An occupation of Iran would be needed to stop them from obtaining a bomb. No wonder the US military leaders so vehemently oppose military action against Iran. I'll take their opinion over the opinions of the Wing Nut Internet's Couch-Bound Colonels any day. Iran will simply rebuild, but with an excuse to get a bomb, then use it, handed to them by US warmongers too stupid to learn lessons from the Iraq debacle.

Let's face it, you don't know what you are talking about! We don't have to bomb the whole country to stop their uranium enrichment and we can even bomb their reactors to prevent plutonium research. The only thing they can do is threaten the Straits of Hormuz and that will cost them dearly. No one needs to occupy Iran, so the operation could be quick and painless. It's just going to leave some fucked up areas in that country.

You don't know what you're talking about. And what's this 'we' crap anyway? You're not going to be bombing anyone. You'll be in your chair, while other mother's sons risk their lives for stupid policies.

The bombing will be risky and costly to the United States, already hurting from Bush's loss of the Iraq War and the Bush Recession. They may have protected their nuclear sites too well already. Who can blame them, what with the GOP clamoring for war on Iran since Cheney was still back in his little bitty hidey-hole.

Their ability to close down the Straits of Hormuz is not nothing, and will cost us dearly, not Iran. They are already sanctioned so much, they can't do anything. The resulting economic decline around the world will be severe, and totally not worth it.

We should instead contain Iran, if they get a nuke. We lived with nuclear threats from China, and Russia. Pakistan, which is filled with CRAZY, even has them, and that didn't even stop Obama from getting OBL in Pakistan.

The idea that Iran is a threat is laughable.

 

[Dubya]

Wow, lots of predictions of success there. I remember those kinds of optimistic predictions before the Iraq War. How did they work out?



Bombing Iran would be a global disaster, mostly for the United States and for Israel. Iran will also have much of the world's sympathy with them too. An occupation of Iran would be needed to stop them from obtaining a bomb. No wonder the US military leaders so vehemently oppose military action against Iran. I'll take their opinion over the opinions of the Wing Nut Internet's Couch-Bound Colonels any day. Iran will simply rebuild, but with an excuse to get a bomb, then use it, handed to them by US warmongers too stupid to learn lessons from the Iraq debacle.

Let's face it, you don't know what you are talking about! We don't have to bomb the whole country to stop their uranium enrichment and we can even bomb their reactors to prevent plutonium research. The only thing they can do is threaten the Straits of Hormuz and that will cost them dearly. No one needs to occupy Iran, so the operation could be quick and painless. It's just going to leave some fucked up areas in that country.

You don't know what you're talking about. And what's this 'we' crap anyway? You're not going to be bombing anyone. You'll be in your chair, while other mother's sons risk their lives for stupid policies.

The bombing will be risky and costly to the United States, already hurting from Bush's loss of the Iraq War and the Bush Recession. They may have protected their nuclear sites too well already. Who can blame them, what with the GOP clamoring for war on Iran since Cheney was still back in his little bitty hidey-hole.

Their ability to close down the Straits of Hormuz is not nothing, and will cost us dearly, not Iran. They are already sanctioned so much, they can't do anything. The resulting economic decline around the world will be severe, and totally not worth it.

We should instead contain Iran, if they get a nuke. We lived with nuclear threats from China, and Russia. Pakistan, which is filled with CRAZY, even has them, and that didn't even stop Obama from getting OBL in Pakistan.

The idea that Iran is a threat is laughable.

Listen, fool, it isn't the GOP telling Iran to stop making nukes, it's the United States' policy. We have probably about a year at most to decide. I don't think Obama will change that policy.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I wouldn't trust Karzai or Obama. Why are we even in Afghanistan? That doesn't seem to be a question that Obama is required to answer. Yet, Bush was the most terrible person in the world for being there, killing babies.

That's a good question.

Why did George Dumbya declare an unwinnable war on Afghanistan?

And, don't even think about using the WMD excuse again. Not Saddam either. And, he said he wasn't looking for bin Laden.

Especially heinous of Bush is that while he was killing hundreds of thousands and wounding even more, the bastard never even pretended he was going to pay for those wars.

Instead, he stuck the next guy with his debts so he could look like the fiscal conservative when he's actually anything but.

Now, Lyin' Ryan is doing the same thing by saying his "budget" includes the repeal of ObamaCare.

The pubs. What a bunch of liars they are.

All's I heard is you want to blame Bush and give Obama a pass. Please correct me if I'm wrong. And please tell me why you think we should be in Afghanistan if you even have an answer for that.

<Crickets>

 

[JoeB131]

I think what we need to do is organize a volunteer brigade of NeoCons and Zionists led by Bill Kristol to go over and take on the Mullahs. No doubt, those Iranians are just waiting to be liberated.

Sounds a lot more effective than just getting some poor kids to go over and do it in hopes of a college education.

So let's have it, NeoCons. Colonel Kristol is waiting to lead you.

 

[Billo_Really]

I think what we need to do is organize a volunteer brigade of NeoCons and Zionists led by Bill Kristol to go over and take on the Mullahs. No doubt, those Iranians are just waiting to be liberated.

Sounds a lot more effective than just getting some poor kids to go over and do it in hopes of a college education.

So let's have it, NeoCons. Colonel Kristol is waiting to lead you.

No need to do that. Their population is just waiting for the old mullahs to die off. Then they'll exile their ridiculous President and end the theocracy that has ran that country since 1979.

70% of their population is under 30 and when you see videos of underground parties in that country, you see their kids are no different than us when we were in our 20's.

Here's the real Iran!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulm4Gj406E8]illegal Rave Party in Iran - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JoeB131]

We can only hope.

 

[Dubya]

Local groups do. Don't you know anything about what you are talking about? The Taliban didn't control all of Afghanistan, even with the help of al Qaeda. Many of those central asia countries have like a clan system that controls areas of the countries. The borders of the country don't control it and people can live on both sides of the borders.

I'm well aware of their warlords. Just because I haven't commented on them, doesn't mean I don't know about them. I was giving you the chance to explain yourself in more detail so I could understand exactly what your point was.

In light of all these autonomous areas, it makes what were doing even more ridiculous.

Anything pertaining to war is ridiculous to you. I guess we should have let Bin Laden live cozy in Afghanistan after 9/11, right? Bin Laden wasn't going to live in an area of the world where the government exercised it's authority over the area.

You seem to forget Bin Laden started this nonsense against America because of his extreme views. He believed he could take on Iraq and didn't want Americans to push the Iraqis out of Kuwait. He was offended when the Saudis turned him down.