How come George Bush doesnt bomb Iran,they are farther ahead then Iraq in the WMD dep

well you have to admit it was about oil. If it was about terriosm, then why isnt bush already calling up a draft and preparing for an invasion of iran. Why hasnt he asked congress for a declaration of war? It has and always has been about oil. This time he is afraid oil would skyrocket to uncharted terriority. You tell me aaabeltyway. What was the entire war for? He keeps claiming it was about regime change, stopping wmd's. Iran has wmd's, so lets start a draft, and start invading iran. Stop with this diplomatic crap. Iran has shut down all avenues of diplomacies, way farther then iraq ever did. At least iraq was recieaving your diplomats. Iran isnt. So where is the 5th fleet preparing to bomb iran, and where is the army preparing to invade. I dont care if it costs 10's of thousands of american lives, if you say you want to stop terriosm and it wasnt about oil, then invade iraq. No more flip flopping, its time to invade, or concede you are weak on terriosm.

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:[/i]

So you are saying that Bush was involved in 9/11 for oil money? That he received instructions from his Saudi paymasters to accommodate 9/11? [/QUOTE]
 
Exactly what threat of force are we hanging over the head of NK to get them to disarm?

Oh yeah, they have no oil, they are not sabre rattling at Israel.

The inconsistency of our foreign policy is pathetic.



Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

It's not a matter of agreeing with me. I just wondered what your plan for Iran was, since you want to take force off the table? It seems to me they will not negotiate seriously, without that hanging over their heads.
More...
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Exactly what threat of force are we hanging over the head of NK to get them to disarm?

Oh yeah, they have no oil, they are not sabre rattling at Israel.

The inconsistency of our foreign policy is pathetic.
More...

I'm not defending the NK policy, I'm just asking a simple question. What is the appropriate policy for dealing with Iran?

The North Korean situation is complicated enormously by the fact that the South Koreans are totally conflicted about the north. On the one hand, they fear the North and the consequences of war. So they find the appeasement road very attractive, particularly when they have American troops defending them and they can free ride off us.

On the other hand, they harbor not so secret desires about reunification, and in that event they would like to be able to take advantage of the North's nukes and become a major world power.
 
The policy in dealing with Iran is difficult now, primarily because of Bush stupidly labeling Iran a member of the "axis of evil."

Not a great way to start a negotiation. Nor is being on either side of Iran likely going to produce an environment of cooperation.

If you study the history of Pakistan getting nukes, you will find that your beloved hero Reagan did nothing to stop it.

I don't see Iran as having nukes as the biggest threat in the world, so containment and diplomacy, with the support of the global community is probably the best approach at this point.

I would like to see all nations ban any nuclear device, but I doubt that happens.

We should be much more worried about missing soviet nukes, that what Iran may do in 10 years....


Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

I'm not defending the NK policy, I'm just asking a simple question. What is the appropriate policy for dealing with Iran?

The North Korean situation is complicated enormously by the fact that the South Koreans are totally conflicted about the north. On the one hand, they fear the North and the consequences of war. So they find the appeasement road very attractive, particularly when they have American troops defending them and they can free ride off us.

On the other hand, they harbor not so secret desires about reunification, and in that event they would like to be able to take advantage of the North's nukes and become a major world power.
More...
 
aaabeltway,south korea already has the know how and technology to make nukes. So do many countries. For example canada. Canada was the only western power with the technology,resources, and capabilities to decide not to make nukes.

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

I'm not defending the NK policy, I'm just asking a simple question. What is the appropriate policy for dealing with Iran?

The North Korean situation is complicated enormously by the fact that the South Koreans are totally conflicted about the north. On the one hand, they fear the North and the consequences of war. So they find the appeasement road very attractive, particularly when they have American troops defending them and they can free ride off us.

On the other hand, they harbor not so secret desires about reunification, and in that event they would like to be able to take advantage of the North's nukes and become a major world power.
More...
 
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

What is the appropriate policy for dealing with Iran?
More...
It's the same appropriate policy that can be used to deal with every blood-sucking leech member of OPEC and any terrorist funding state in the region: alternative and renewable fuel technologies.

An enormous political and economically back effort to speed the conversion process would be enough to get the big boys to the bargaining table unconditionally. But, as usual, Americans are their own worst enemy.
 
so zzz is on record saying let iran go nuclear. That is why you cant have a democrat or a liberal in high office.
 
If we let NK go nuclear, if we let Pakistan and India go nuclear, if China has nuclear, if the Soviets have nuclear, if Cuba has nuclear (do we really know?)....what is really the big deal with Iran?

Regime change in any one of these countries could represent just as much, if not more threat than Iran.

Are the right wingers really so elephant minded that they can't remember a time when Iran was our ally with the Shah, Iraq was our friend in the early days of Saddam....etc.

For that matter, we really don't have control over Israel...

The point is that there are already too many nukes on the planet, that we do nothing about....so getting the right wing panties in a bunch doesn't seem all that rational to me.

Shoot, we have a crazy sonabitch right now as president who could start WWWIII any moment on the basis of "divine intervention."

"Well, God told me to nuke China....."

Quote from jem:

so zzz is on record saying let iran go nuclear. That is why you cant have a democrat or a liberal in high office.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top