48% of Americans back military action in Iran. You don't learn do you? The first lessons on war is you never open a two front war. This would be a third.
4 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Actually we would still be fighting a two front war if we were to attack Iran.
Front 1: Iraq into Iran.
Front 2: Afghanistan into Iran.
Since it’s all part of the war on terror I don’t consider the war on terror to be another front.
Positioning ourselves for the coming clash of civilizations is what the war with Iraq was all about my friend. WMD’s was simply the excuse our leaders needed to feed the short sighted politically, fanatical ignorant masses in our society to justify the unavoidable.
It's all about logistics and the survival of the West…oh and Israel. The real question you should be asking yourself is, do I want to face the truth and deal with the inevitable or shall I burry my head in the sand and hope they don’t load a nuke onto an airliner in some Middle Eastern country, fly it into JFK and wipe out NY.
Whose side are you on? Sooner or later all politics will have to be put away and we will all have to make that choice.
As for me, I live in the USA so naturally I want this my country to be in the best possible position to kick the shit out of Iran when we do finally comes to blows.
If Afghanstan is one front, Iraq would be a second front then Iran would be a third front. I don't believe Bush about anything he says since the Iraq disaster. The only war I support is the one getting Osama Bin Laden. No other. That's the side I'm on. I don't think you or anyone realizes what would happen if Bush would use any nuclear weapon for any reason. And I believe Bush would use them. And just because you invade Iran, Iraq or wherever doesn't mean or won't stop another attack here in the United States. Remember I believe there are already cells here and I don't think it's just middle eastern men/women. That's my view.
It rarely is mentioned, if at all, but I believe one of the real reasons we invaded Iraq is to establish a strategic stronghold in the Middle East. Right now, all we really have is Israel. Iran has been a true enemy of the United States for 30 years. Unlike Iraq, there are clear links between the Iranian government and terrorist activities against the United States.
Erik, I believe you give Osama Bin Laden too much credit. 9/11 was much more than just him. While he probably had something to do with 9/11 and probably funded much of it, he is a convenient scapegoat. The war on terror has to involve more than him.
4 comments:
Actually we would still be fighting a two front war if we were to attack Iran.
Front 1: Iraq into Iran.
Front 2: Afghanistan into Iran.
Since it’s all part of the war on terror I don’t consider the war on terror to be another front.
Positioning ourselves for the coming clash of civilizations is what the war with Iraq was all about my friend. WMD’s was simply the excuse our leaders needed to feed the short sighted politically, fanatical ignorant masses in our society to justify the unavoidable.
It's all about logistics and the survival of the West…oh and Israel. The real question you should be asking yourself is, do I want to face the truth and deal with the inevitable or shall I burry my head in the sand and hope they don’t load a nuke onto an airliner in some Middle Eastern country, fly it into JFK and wipe out NY.
Whose side are you on? Sooner or later all politics will have to be put away and we will all have to make that choice.
As for me, I live in the USA so naturally I want this my country to be in the best possible position to kick the shit out of Iran when we do finally comes to blows.
We are now so LET’S ROLL!
If Afghanstan is one front, Iraq would be a second front then Iran would be a third front. I don't believe Bush about anything he says since the Iraq disaster. The only war I support is the one getting Osama Bin Laden. No other. That's the side I'm on. I don't think you or anyone realizes what would happen if Bush would use any nuclear weapon for any reason. And I believe Bush would use them. And just because you invade Iran, Iraq or wherever doesn't mean or won't stop another attack here in the United States. Remember I believe there are already cells here and I don't think it's just middle eastern men/women. That's my view.
It rarely is mentioned, if at all, but I believe one of the real reasons we invaded Iraq is to establish a strategic stronghold in the Middle East. Right now, all we really have is Israel. Iran has been a true enemy of the United States for 30 years. Unlike Iraq, there are clear links between the Iranian government and terrorist activities against the United States.
Erik, I believe you give Osama Bin Laden too much credit. 9/11 was much more than just him. While he probably had something to do with 9/11 and probably funded much of it, he is a convenient scapegoat. The war on terror has to involve more than him.
That's not what George said. That's not what the 9/11 commission said.
Post a Comment