US prepares battlefield in Iran

Unless of course some crazed terrorist loosely connected to Iran blows up a major city.

All bets are off after that, huh?

given the "loose" connection that we know as a punchline the LAST time that accusation was tossed around...
 
Thank you, President Bush, for focusing on attacking the biggest Bin Laden ally and the biggest threat to Israel, Iran, which is on our President's Axis of Evil list. First we do another Shock and Awe, then do a pincer attack from Iraq and Afghanistan. As for North Korea, I trust our President has made a wise decision in removing North Korea from our list of Axis of Evil, although it's a highly classified secret.

You are just begging to pay $10 for a gallon of gas, huh?
 
if they don't attack, they are bluffing well. and they just got $400 mill to perform covert operations. totally unnecessary. whoever doesn't sell out to "the west", gets embargoed or bombed. do you remember bush tried to kill chavez? n.korea just sold out. now they will be westernized. controlled by the same bankers that control us.

we are gobbling up control thru banks so collectively they will have leverage and wealth after china takes over. they are going around doing business with are trading partners. this is a conspiracy theory. imo. just speculating.

did chaney send the antrax? why did he have control of norad on 9 11. no one can say.

The U.S. Army anthrax was sent to the two Senators, Daschle and Leahy, who were holding up the Omibus Spying Bill(Patriot Act). The case has never been solved.

And why did Cheney have control of NORAD on the morning of 9/11? Awfully big cowinkidink, don't you think?
 
Last edited:
The U.S. Army anthrax was sent to the two Senators, Daschle and Leahy, who were holding up the Omibus Spying Bill(Patriot Act). The case has never been solved.

And why did Cheney have control of NORAD on the morning of 9/11? Awfully big cowinkidink, don't you think?

Kirk, for you I'm sure conjecture is proof but for most reasonable minded people they need a little more than coincidences to believe something occured.
 
Kirk, for you I'm sure conjecture is proof but for most reasonable minded people they need a little more than coincidences to believe something occured.

Just out of curiosity, how many coincidences would need to occur before you thought something seemed fishy?

I'm not just talking about this particular subject, but anything.
 

Oh no. :eek: Not again. Not another screw-up. Are we going to have the same mistakes and rush to judgment – WMD, strong links to anti-American terrorist camps, it being a significant threat to America? Are we going to throw our soldiers in without full armor? At least let’s be sure that our military hospitals are in readiness for our injured.

Hurry up Obama before Bush and his lackeys do something foolish again. :eusa_pray:
 
Just out of curiosity, how many coincidences would need to occur before you thought something seemed fishy?

I'm not just talking about this particular subject, but anything.

Anthrax being sent to senators doesn't constitute proof of wrong doing by the Bush adminstration.....OMG
 
Anthrax being sent to senators doesn't constitute proof of wrong doing by the Bush adminstration.....OMG

Like I said, I wasn't talking about this particular issue. I also didn't mention the Bush administration.

I'm just asking a question. How many coincidences would you require before you deemed something to be fishy?
 
Like I said, I wasn't talking about this particular issue. I also didn't mention the Bush administration.

I'm just asking a question. How many coincidences would you require before you deemed something to be fishy?

If you are going to deal with hypotheticals maybe you should ask a specific question then I can answer it?
 
I'll just say what I always say about Iran.

"Yo, Israel, Iran is that --------------->way. If you feel so threatened, have at it."
 
Oh no. :eek: Not again. Not another screw-up. Are we going to have the same mistakes and rush to judgment – WMD, strong links to anti-American terrorist camps, it being a significant threat to America? Are we going to throw our soldiers in without full armor? At least let’s be sure that our military hospitals are in readiness for our injured.

Hurry up Obama before Bush and his lackeys do something foolish again. :eusa_pray:

Such a moderate..:badgrin:

Are we going to have a war authorization then have democrats using the war as a political hingepin issue?

Until the war improves and the casuality numbers are reduced by 80%, then democrats in congress stop talking and the media withdraws reporters.....
 
Such a moderate..:badgrin:

Are we going to have a war authorization then have democrats using the war as a political hingepin issue?

Until the war improves and the casuality numbers are reduced by 80%, then democrats in congress stop talking and the media withdraws reporters.....

According to the left wing nut jobs we have been on the verge of invading Iran for what? 4 years now? Just like the " Bush will become dictator" claims this one is up there with the birds.

Of course at first the Dems DEMANDED action against Iran and their Nuclear threat, now it is, "oh no another war" It is just a game for them to play in hopes of scaring people to vote for them as usual.

The left gets their votes two ways, BUY them or SCARE people into voting for them with lies and less than half truths.
 
You think the Dem-lead Congress is going to fund an invasion of Iran for a Republican president? Not likely.
 
Such a moderate..:badgrin:

Are we going to have a war authorization then have democrats using the war as a political hingepin issue?

Until the war improves and the casuality numbers are reduced by 80%, then democrats in congress stop talking and the media withdraws reporters.....

Authorizing war and wanting to go to war are two different things. I think that if the Democrats had known that Bush would respond so quickly and recklessly, they would not have voted to authorize the war.

It is about time that it shows improvement. Still, it is too little too late. The war was unnecessary and poorly run.
 
You think the Dem-lead Congress is going to fund an invasion of Iran for a Republican president? Not likely.

Well, they've almost unanimously passed every resolution against Iran since they've taken power in Congress. They don't seem to be very shy in regards to Iran.

Plus, they haven't yet closed the purse for Iraq like they said they would do in 2006.

If the establishment wants war, it will happen regardless of dem or repub.
 
It would be galactically stupid for the US to attack Iran at this time yet alone invade.
 

Forum List

Back
Top