POLL: Do You Support War With Iran?

[there4eyeM]

Because it was based on a lie concerning WMD's.

Because of international law, approved by Congress and, so, binding on the U.S.
That's how democracy works, even republican forms.

 

[irosie91]

Mindlessly running on about how bad Iran was in 1979 (and who wants to defend Khomeini?) obfuscates the facts of provocation well before that time.

what provocation? your CLAIM that the USA invented the Iranian royal family and FOISTED it on Iran-------whilst Iran was scratching and screaming? I encountered Iranians long before 1979. ----at first I encountered young jews ---because way back then I was young-----(mid sixties) and Iranian parents were SENDING their kids to the US-----
because of something to do with the problem of being a jew in Iran ------AT THAT TIME. Later on my Iranian friends were physicians in the USA getting their post graduate training-----I talked extensively about ALL SORTS OF IRANIAN stuff with those IRANIAN people------I never heard about USA PROVOCATIONS or--------dislike of "OUR SHAH" Circa 1979 of ALL THE IRANIANS I KNEW-----only one (muslim) was in favor of KHOMEINI------at first-----then he got severely DISENCHANTED--------somehow the revolution seems to have AFFECTED HIS FAMILY IN IRAN. Can you detail the ONGOING "provocation" in the
decades before 1979? Way back in the early 1970s I DID hear about FANATICS in
Iran-------a RELIGION thing. My informants seemed a bit HORRIFIED by the "BACK TO THE OLD TIME RELIGION" movement

 

[irosie91]

Saddam was committing MASS DESTRUCTION in Iraq-----he did so with weapons at
his disposal------thus he had WMD. If some jerks decided that WMD means nuclear
bombs-------then those particular people are jerks

 

[there4eyeM]

Weapons provided to him by the U.S.

 

[there4eyeM]

The C.I.A., in compliance with the wishes of British oil interests, conducted a coup in a sovereign nation. That is history. 'Claiming' other wise gets into 'alt-fact' territory. That kind of foreign intervention commonly elicits resentment, as any rational person sees immediately.

 

[irosie91]

Over 82% of those who responded do not believe in war with Iran. It is going to take a lot of persuading for Donald Trump who intends to have his war to keep his followers behind him. This war could be Donald Trump's downfall but he will not go without a fight. Benjamin Netanyahu will be visiting Trump next week. Watch for some ratcheting up of anti-Iran rhetoric from Donald Trump after the Israeli visit.

you got a link to Donald Trump's declaration of war against Iran. Why do you imagine
that Netanyahu would try to convince Donald Trump to declare war on Iran? Has either country started to bomb Teheran yet?

 

[irosie91]

The C.I.A., in compliance with the wishes of British oil interests, conducted a coup in a sovereign nation. That is history. 'Claiming' other wise gets into 'alt-fact' territory. That kind of foreign intervention commonly elicits resentment, as any rational person sees immediately.

the CIA never conducted a COUP in Iran----------who went in? the US NAVY? the MARINES? the ARMY? can you name the battles? . The CIA supported IRANIAN ROYALISTS in their quest to put "DA SHAH" on "DA PEACOCK" throne----try not to lie

 

[there4eyeM]

Again, for anyone capable of non-knee jerk reaction:
CIA admits role in 1953 Iranian coup
Is the C.I.A. lying? Is The Guardian lying?
Is presenting history lying, or is it just that anything someone doesn't agree with is a lie?

 

[there4eyeM]

From the Guardian article (just in case the link doesn't work):
"The CIA has publicly admitted for the first time that it was behind the notorious 1953 coup against Iran's democratically elected prime minister Mohammad Mosaddeq, in documents that also show how the British government tried to block the release of information about its own involvement in his overthrow.

On the 60th anniversary of an event often invoked by Iranians as evidence of western meddling, the US national security archive at George Washington University published a series of declassified CIA documents.

"The military coup that overthrew Mosaddeq and his National Front cabinet was carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government," reads a previously excised section of an internal CIA history titled The Battle for Iran."

 

[irosie91]

Again, for anyone capable of non-knee jerk reaction:
CIA admits role in 1953 Iranian coup
Is the C.I.A. lying? Is The Guardian lying?
Is presenting history lying, or is it just that anything someone doesn't agree with is a lie?

do you know the definition of the word "role" I AGREE----the USA favored the IRANIAN ROYALISTS and supported the IRANIANS who wished to put DA SHAH
in power. DA FRENCH supported the PATRIOTS in the USA------in the second
half of the 18th century against the LOYALISTS in the USA-----so?. You supported the revolution of 1979 in Iran and the intensive support of world wide Islamic terrorism now in force as a result of that "revolution"
I prefer the French and the CIA in their history. That which YOU support stinks to high heaven

 

[there4eyeM]

Does anyone know to whom the above post is directed? Who supported Khomeini?

 

[irosie91]

Posting again, not for the obtuse who have seen this before and remain in denial for some perverse reason, but for anyone remaining with a shred of objectivity.
link: Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan
The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.

Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish."

He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."
Mr Annan has until now kept a tactful silence and his intervention at this point undermines the argument pushed by Tony Blair that the war was legitimised by security council resolutions.

----ROFLMAO-----"not in conformity with the UN charter" I am fascinated-----
since the inception of the UN----please name the wars which were "in conformity
with the UN charter"

 

[irosie91]

Does anyone know to whom the above post is directed? Who supported Khomeini?

way back then----LOTS OF PEOPLE supported Khomeini-------I was acquainted with an
Iranian physician who supported his RISE to power. Khomeini was VERY popular in Iran-------back then

 

[there4eyeM]

There is nothing to show that the poster in post #231 supported Khomeini, nor any other form of theocracy, monarchy, authoritarian, absolutist, etc., government. That poster finds that anything which tries to replace the human spirit with an outside force is idol, as well as idle, worship.

 

[there4eyeM]

Not in conformity with law means outlaw.

 

[irosie91]

Not in conformity with law means outlaw.

yeah? so?

 

[Tuatara]

Anyone who wants war with Iran wants war with China and Russia as that is what an attack on Iran actually means. Does any sane person truly want that?

Let's not forget...

What's Behind the New Chinese-Russian-Iranian Alliance? | The Huffington Post

If Iran is truly aligned with Russia and China then it would mean US would be in for a major fight instead of picking on Iraq or Grenada. Anything that would have the US lose their global power would be great with me. Such a cesspool of a country right now.

 

[Dschrute3]

It's a VOLUNTARY army - no one was drafted into it. Second, it's the fucking army, not the boy scouts; if those joining had no thought that they might ever get called upon to actually fight, then they should have joined the peace corps or taught high school social studies.

Don't stop yet!

I hear ya. I'm just saying, if you don't wanna send your children to die and be maimed in some foreign Hellhole, don't be a Warmonger.

I and every male member of my family has served in the military, many of them in combat as far back as the Revolution. We don't want war but if there is one my family is gonna work for Uncle Sam.

I hear that a lot from Warmongers. They 'don't want war', yet they keep us in a Permanent state of War. So i'm sorry, i have to be skeptical of Warmongers who claim they 'don't want war.' Because it appears they do want it.

I wasn't talking about warmongers but the people who fight them. I can assure that once a man has been in combat, he is against war, doesn't hurt people or animals and is easy going. But if war happens and that man has to go back, then there's a man who will kill again.

Well said. I respect that. But in my experiences, most Warmongers claim they 'don't want war', yet always commit us to more of them. So i'm very skeptical. I remember seeing a similar poll on Syria here awhile back. The poll indicated most didn't support war with Syria. It was a Landslide. Yet we ended up intervening in Syria anyway. And the usual suspects here cheered it on.

I actually respect folks who just acknowledge they want more war. They're honest people. I disagree with them, but i respect their honesty. I just don't care for disingenuous hypocrites. Don't claim you don't want more war, when you clearly do. Just be straight up about it.

 

[Dschrute3]

Well, let's just put it all out there. Let's just ask the question. We all know tensions are rapidly coming to a boiling point between the US and Iran. It does appear an attack on Iran is imminent. So, do you support a war with Iran?

Vote and share your thoughts.

I don't believe you've won until your enemy is vanquished.

A war with Iran would cost us more than Vietnam did. And Iran poses no major danger to the US at present. This is the same kind of bullshit we saw in the runup to the invasion of Iraq.

A wise observation.

 

[Dschrute3]

Well, let's just put it all out there. Let's just ask the question. We all know tensions are rapidly coming to a boiling point between the US and Iran. It does appear an attack on Iran is imminent. So, do you support a war with Iran?

Vote and share your thoughts.

I support war with Iran if they build and deploy a nuclear weapon.

No doubt, but lets hope peaceful methods can work first.

Iran feels it has the right to possess nuclear weapons. So far, it hasn't developed them. But it feels it has the same right to possess them as the US, Israel, and other nations have. That's their perspective anyway. So why is Iran prevented from possessing nuclear weapons, while others have been allowed to? It is something interesting to ponder.

Iran's government is the world's largest supporter of state-sponsored terrorism.

That's why!

How so? When's the last time you heard of an Iranian or Shiite Terrorist attack in a Western nation?