W announces...

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Iran has 2.5 times the population as Iraq and around 3x the land mass. They also have a military that won't just quit before firing a shot."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I'd argue that point--Saddam bitch slapped them around for 6 years--and we took Iraq and Afgan in days.

I could be wrtong but don't think majority of Iran care fo rthe Moolahs running the country--of course you run same risk as Iraq--having population celebrating after overthrow and killing each other later.

 

[kosar]

"Iran has 2.5 times the population as Iraq and around 3x the land mass. They also have a military that won't just quit before firing a shot."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I'd argue that point--Saddam bitch slapped them around for 6 years--and we took Iraq and Afgan in days.

I could be wrtong but don't think majority of Iran care fo rthe Moolahs running the country--of course you run same risk as Iraq--having population celebrating after overthrow and killing each other later.

I don't remember Saddam 'bitch-slapping them' from 1980-1988, but you're right that Saddam held his own and it ended a draw.

You failed to mention that even though we have the new Iraqi army fighting WITH us, we still can't control this little country. Invading Iran would be 10x as difficult.

We could bomb, I guess, but Iran can cause us so many more problems in Iraq than they already have. Once again, you are underestimating religion, my friend.

You are correct that the majority of the young people in Iran do not like the Mullahs. However, I wouldn't count on 22 year old girls or 25 year old computer programmer men overthrowing the government. We've been hoping for this since 1980. Not gonna happen. The CIA orchestrated this in the 1950's, but many things have changed since then in that country.

The military will not turn against the government in Iran and that's exactly what would need to happen for an overthrow.

Let's say that i'm wrong. Let's say that we invade Iran and their military runs and drops their arms like the Iraqi military did. Then what? Then what do we do?

 

[AR182]

to my free thinking friends (Smurph, Kos, Chad, you know who you are)...disregard the idiotic premise, disregard the idiotic action..is everyone ok with total withdrawl? Save me from agreement with Dick "Darth" Cheney on some sort of twisted, Machiavellian terms.

i guess those that agree with jabberwocky are free thinkers & those that don't agree with him are not....

jabberwocky let me introduce you to nick douglas....nick this is jabberwocky....it seems that you both have something in common......

 

[kosar]

i guess those that agree with jabberwocky are free thinkers & those that don't agree with him are not....

jabberwocky let me introduce you to nick douglas....nick this is jabberwocky....it seems that you both have something in common......

His question was about withdrawal from Iraq, Al. Where do you stand on that? Stay the course?

 

[AR182]

His question was about withdrawal from Iraq, Al. Where do you stand on that? Stay the course?

i have said that i agree with the invasion but there should have been more troops (1/2 million) to seal off all of the borders around iraq...they wouldn't have had as many problems, imo.

btw, the u.s sent 2-3 x as many troops to fight the first gulf war than they did for this war...imo this is a major blunder not sending in enough troops....

that said we got to stay the course....by that i mean the u.s. should increase the troop levels in iraq, seal off all of the exits out of baghdad....tell everybody they must leave....check all of those that leave (even if it takes months).....then carpet bomb baghdad until nothing is standing & kill whoever is left.

if we leave iraq... iran will be entering from the other direction...& i heard an economist say if this happens oil prices will skyrocket......

 

[AR182]

and btw my problem with jabber's post is the same problem i had with nick's post the other day.....they sound elitist.....their posts are talking down to people who disagree...

in other words...they think their shit doesn't stink...

that rubs me the wrong way....

 

[smurphy]

Al, you greedy bastid. You were just featured on Vyrus' short list of best cappers. Now you get pissy cuz your not on Jabberwockey's list of elite free-thinkers.

It seems you've let those green cards go to your head, my diva friend.

 

[djv]

We can bomb all day long. But as always if you have not got the boots to put in there. It becomes a draw. Right now we don't have the boots. They seem busy next door in Iraq. Iraq better be under better control before we even think about Iran. And for sure Rumsfeld and Cheney can not be left to run any of it. Bush better start his tough talk behind closed door. He does not need to make a bigger ass out of him self. A resent survey done in Iran about us and Iran in Readers Digest. gave these answers. Is America a model country for it's values. 36% say yes. Or is America a country that is dangerous and seeks control 46% say yes. That sounds like this idea we again will be greeted with rose could be some more B S like Iraq.

 

[Roger Baltrey]

Dogs that Bark

"I'd argue that point--Saddam bitch slapped them around for 6 years--and we took Iraq and Afgan in days."

Saddam didn't do any bitch slapping. He was on the verge of losing 3-4 times when we provided him real time satellite feeds on Iran's troop movements among other things. The whole world propped him up cause it feared the Ayotollahs. Saddam was our boy and the Republicans always seem to omit that when they spew their fantasies on the middle east . Iraq is essentially 3 countries in one and it will take an act of God to unite them in a democracy.

 

[ELVIS]

doesn't Alaska have oil? why can't we live on that $hit until we invent a better fuel source?

all i know is that we can cure cancer, but we can't seem to travel w/o gas.......

either way, we do have too many troops in iraq.


freeze, always respect your opinion and we agree on social issues like a hand and a glove.

however, the iraq war was a poor planned event and Americans are suffering for it everyday and will continue to suffer while we occupy it. I am all for defense - but this ordeal in Iraq is purely offensive (it is based on controling oil) and could have been handled much better.

if there is oil in Alaska, why not pull the troops and start drilling here. then stop buying oil from that f'kn desert and we will see how much influence the middle east really has. as long as the US allows itself to be dependent on that region for our economy then we are trapped. if we can produce our own than we should. i do not know what alaska has, but it would be nice to try. i'm sure it would be even more expensive per gallon, but i would pay more if i knew it supported the US - and not the towel heads in the desert.furthermore, if it was American produced - we wouldn't be spending billions on a war - so i could get a tax break. :shrug:

 

[AR182]

Al, you greedy bastid. You were just featured on Vyrus' short list of best cappers. Now you get pissy cuz your not on Jabberwockey's list of elite free-thinkers.

It seems you've let those green cards go to your head, my diva friend.

murph...

i've read some of what is posted in that thread...it's unbelievable how that thread has a life of it's own. i'm going to be the first to tell you that i don't think i'm as good as everybody seems to think...i think people are going to be disappointed if they follow me blindly...

and as far as being a diva.. please refer to me as mr. al....

 

[bjfinste]

AR- complete side note question... who is Kyl even running against? I've seen countless Kyl ads and haven't seen any other ads by anyone else. I know (for reasons that I simply can't fathom) that Kyl is a gimme to get re-elected, but I wondered if he was even facing anyone based on the TV ads.

 

[AR182]

AR- complete side note question... who is Kyl even running against? I've seen countless Kyl ads and haven't seen any other ads by anyone else. I know (for reasons that I simply can't fathom) that Kyl is a gimme to get re-elected, but I wondered if he was even facing anyone based on the TV ads.

i'm not tuned into local politics, but think he is running against the guy who owns or owned or built all of the malls in the valley...can't think of his name.....

 

[smurphy]

i don't think i'm as good as everybody seems to think...i think people are going to be disappointed if they follow me blindly...

and as far as being a diva.. please refer to me as mr. al....

Mr. Al,

I am blindly following. You are my 2006 football season.

 

[smurphy]

Dogs that Bark

"I'd argue that point--Saddam bitch slapped them around for 6 years--and we took Iraq and Afgan in days."

Saddam didn't do any bitch slapping. He was on the verge of losing 3-4 times when we provided him real time satellite feeds on Iran's troop movements among other things. The whole world propped him up cause it feared the Ayotollahs. Saddam was our boy and the Republicans always seem to omit that when they spew their fantasies on the middle east . Iraq is essentially 3 countries in one and it will take an act of God to unite them in a democracy.

some pictures are worth 1000 words (which vyrus would gladly type)

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Some good points on Iran Matt--maybe I should have rephrased that to--with 2 1/2 times population and 3 times land mass they couldn't budge Iraq--Maybe they were afraid of that mythical biological arsenal
Seriously I would not be so much for invading as I would be for approach like Israel used.
I'd be for for airstrikes--little doubt we'd have them waving the white flags in short order or at the least teach them a little humility--believe Syria would follow the route of Lybia when they saw consquences of action vs talking. I definately think an attitude adjstment is in order.
It pisses me off that they can munipulate and stall all these countries--how many years and finger waving does it take for the world to learn you can't negotiate with these idiots. As with Saddam they care little about sanctions and pay no attentions to resolutions.--and with UN failure to enforce anything,who can blame them.
Thought this of interest but take info from un named sources with grain of salt--

"Fed Up With Funding Hezbollah?

A London-based Arab newspaper reports Iranians hit hard by recent wars and natural disasters are outraged over allegations that their government has pledged $500 million to support Hezbollah, saying they're still waiting on money to rebuild their own homes.

So-called "informed sources" tell Asharq al-Awsat that spontaneous demonstrations broke out in the western Khuzestan district, which sustained severe damage during the Iran-Iraq war, and in Bam, which was hit hard by an earthquake three years ago.

Protesters allegedly shouted anti-Hezbollah slogans and demanded reconstruction efforts at home, instead of in Lebanon.'

 

[Chadman]

if we leave iraq... iran will be entering from the other direction...& i heard an economist say if this happens oil prices will skyrocket......

I'm not sure I agree with your premise on this AR. First of all, as Kosar points out repeatedly, now that we instigated regime change in Iraq, Iran is already there - at least as far as population makeup and the new "government" (whatever the Hell that means).

Secondy, what would Iran have to gain by attempting to take over Iraq on a grand scale, like attack them, move on the country, occupy it and take it over? I think that is what you and Freeze might me alluding to. By invading Iraq, what would Iran really have to gain? Oil? I think they have quite a bit already, don't they? They need to go through a war to get some more oil, by taking over multinational oil companies (mostly US and British companies) in the process? Or maybe they want the land for some reason? Why? What would the reason be for invading Iraq?

What do they risk by invading Iraq? Essentially the sovereignity of their country, at least, and losing their country period, at most. They are going to attack another middle eastern country that has a strong muslim population? How does this forward their cause? This would somehow galvanize muslim support worldwide? How? I can see it if they invade while the US is patrolling, killing Zionists and Americans, but if we were gone? I don't see it.

You don't think that after all we have gone through over the past few years, and evidently will for at least two more, that the US would respond militarily and finish the job that (at least) the current administration has been positioning for? Do you think they don't understand that? You don't think that the US, Britain and Israel (among others) would make sure this kind of thing never happened again? It would galvanize a lot of support from sideline countries, and give this administration complete vindication for putting an end to Iran as we all know it. Essentially, I think, this WOULD be WW3, and I don't think the Grand Poobahs in 'ol Iran want to go out that way.

I've heard reports that they are telling the new guy to shut his trap. He's spotlighting things that they prefer to keep quiet. So, this mouthing off and posturing may be even taken care of internally. Could happen.

Finally, what did you - or the administration - think would happen when we eventually won this war in Iraq? We would stay there forever? Or would we ever leave out of fear of Iran? It just makes no sense to me. This argument, anyway.