lol I did see the sarcasm and it's not that I'm not worried, but the facts being laid out simply don't cut the mustard IMO I've already stated and I'll state again some decent factual basis and I would support a bombing campaign to dismantle much of Irans nuclear ambitions, I say 'much' as of course we probally would not get all of it. On a seperate note though while bringing up Iran and the potential for a serious danger to us, doesn't anyone see that as another problem for the Iraq war? When much more severe dangers are in fact in place already such as N Korea, China and others and developing dangers such as Iran, plus the war on terrorism we attack a country for reasons of WMD's taking our military away from where it's potentially needed. Again not attacking Bush on the Iraq war, maybe he did it for all the right reasons, I hope he did. But I am still not buying most of the original argument for going to war nor the timing, the timing almost being more important to me than the distortion of the facts and the use of fear and 9/11 to get americans on the side to attack Iraq.
Fair enough hrbl, that's actually the point. In these cases getting some decent factual basis is very hard and would be challenged anyway. I am against any bombings except if there's nothing else to do, the world deserves some peace and you are not going to get any by asking. I know it doesn't sound right but that's the way it is with mankind, we can only improve it, not change it. And if you're not buying, it means that you are not the right customer nor were they trying to sell anything to you, but to those that want that "product". I didn't buy it either, but I already had it long before they set up the store! See you all soon...
uca - everything you're talking about is based on speculation.. Do you think we should go attack a country based on speculations and not proof? How many lives are you willing to risk on nothing but assumptions?
yo-yo: How many are you willing to risk based upon your fantasies that the Iranians are really a warm wonderful peaceful regime that is just joking when they state that they intend to attack Israel and the U.S.?
I suppose Iran shouldn't worry about the U.S. attacking them? Just speculation? They don't need to worry and just keep doing whatever they want.
I don't think this about the Iraq war for most people its just about war some people will always support war over peace regardless, to them the answer always involves bombing and the military it doesn't matter what war, just that they always support war as the first action I think it stems from sort of penis issues like bullets are the penis going into the enemy maybe it stems from sort of feeling of inadequacy or confusion sexually, that's projected on their views of the world so that to over compensate they want to always solve problems "fucking" it I think we could go to war with anyone for any reason and you guys would mindless support it as the best option. Its ok guys, don't worry, people won't think you have a small penis if you don't support wars all the time, it all psychological.
Quote where I made any reference to "iranians being warm wonderful peaceful regimie" Then why don't you quote where they state "THEY INTEND TO ATTACK ISRAEL AND THE U.S." Why don't you quote these things so I know they're fact? (btw: saying isreal is a blot that should be wiped out IS NOT the same as saying "we're going to wipe them out")
You're not saying "iranians being warm wonderful peaceful regimie" but you seem like you're playing both sides. You pretty much say they are bad, but let's just overlook it and hope they don't mean to really attack israel. Maybe they're just playing. You're either pro terror or completely out of your mind to be so naive. You are giving them the benefit of the doubt, yet our government is any name you can find for it under the sun. geesh, dude, I can't believe you are actually American. If I didn't know any better, I would assume you were German or French.
I didn't say "Just overlook" anything. I didn't even say not to attack them did I? If every time George Bush called another country evil and said we're attacking terrorist everywhere meant we were going to actually attack them all then we'd be in a whole lot more wars wouldn't we? If there was accurate information saying Iran was going to actually attack someone then I'd be all for it, but when you're going on your assumptions it's just not good enough.... Put it like this, the law in arizona allows you to use deadly force on someone only when they've threatened it on you and using deadly force is reasonable. That means just because someone looks at me mad, or says they're going to beat me up, that doesn't mean I can just pull out a gun and shoot them.. then use reasoning like you're trying to use for Iran.
oh geesh ... wake up little snoozie .... what are you waiting for, an attack on Israel? How do you know what evidence the CIA has? Are you that well informed? Stop contradicting yourself again. I'm not sure what exactly you are so pissed about, but I'm assuming now that those are rather personal issues which have nothing to do with our government (some people just love to complain).
No, and neither do you. And guess what? We aren't at war with Iran are we? I specifically said going to war with a country based on assumptions and speculation isn't good enough, if the CIA had more than that, then maybe it is good enough, how is that a contradiction?
What makes you think that they can share all of the information with the public? It's called the Secret Service and not the Open Directory Project
Because there is no information then you assume that there must exist information. Kind of like, the fact that we didn't find WMD, proves that it existed but disappeared. Your logic is that if something doesn't exits, it proves that it exists. Have you ever thought that there is no information and there was no WMD because they didn't exist. If there was any information about Iran or WMD in Iraq, wouldn't you think that these administration would have done it's best to use it in it's advertising campaign for war. I mean this government goes so long as to fabricate information, then why shouldn't they use the real information if it existed?