Peace Train

[Nbadan]

Only you can stop the war against Iran.

Pictures you won't see on the M$M (http://www.lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html)

[boutons_]

Iran can stop any war against Iran.

If dickhead attacks Iran, this country will go nuts.
I'm sure both he and dubya will be impeached.

[whottt]

http://direland.typepad.com/direland/images/iran_hanging_outrage_2.jpg


Best not to be gay, teenaged and live in Iran

[whottt]

Or 17 female, lawyerless, and raped(by 3 men)...

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Announcement/nazanin.jpg


"I hanged her for her sharp tongue", the judge that sentenced her to death.

[whottt]

But you are right, Iran is a beautiful place. I think you and boutons should move there, immediately and exercise your right to free speech there...be sure to champion liberal causes like you do here.

Peace to you both.



Oh and...look at it this way, if you do stay, if an American Cityy were to get nuked, you guys would not blame the perpetrators, you'd blame Bush and the Government...you need to do that same thing when it happens to Iran...blame their government, not the perpetrators. Same exact thing...

Best case scenario, move to Iran and blame the Iranian government when it happens to them...I think that'd be pretty entertaining personally.

Make sure that when you do convert to Islam that you don't convert back....it's illegal over there you know, and will get you life in prison.

[thispego]

if you dont like this Country, you can GIT OUT!

[whottt]

Awww is Pego mad because he didn't get to pull the lever on the raped and hanged 17 year old girl, like a good card carrying American Hypocr er liberal? Don't worry, your complete indifference is as good as you pulling the lever.





I simply think the middle east needs the enlightenment libs have to offer, they seem to have killed all of theirs...And since cowardice towards murderous thugs(insert moral equivalizing here) and modern American Liberalism go hand in hand...the fit is perfect.

[01Snake]

Saw this morning that the so-called Anti-war protesters spray painted the steps to the Capital. Classy.

[boutons_]

Whott-the-fucktard

How do the pictures and "justifications" about life in Iran you posted have anything to do with the USA? with the USA security?

They look just like the lynchings, bombing black churches a few decades ago in This Great Country of Ours.

Similarly, women get raped in Pakistan, 1000s of honor killings in Pakistan and India, Pakistan is harboring Al-qaida and Taleban, so shall we bomb and invade Pakistan and India?

You fucking people are fucking crazy as fucking shit.

And I bet if dubya raised the income tax rate 20% across the board and raised the tax on gasoline to $4/gal to pay for his bullshit, you'd all of a sudden become peace-niks.

[PixelPusher]

Awww is Pego mad because he didn't get to pull the lever on the raped and hanged 17 year old girl, like a good card carrying American Hypocr er liberal? Don't worry, your complete indifference is as good as you pulling the lever.

I simply think the middle east needs the enlightenment libs have to offer, they seem to have killed all of theirs...And since cowardice towards murderous thugs(insert moral equivalizing here) and modern American Liberalism go hand in hand...the fit is perfect.
Your brand of "enlightenment" has done wonders for Iraq. No raping or murdering going on there. Nope. None at all.

[whottt]

Why weren't you born in the middle east, where you'd be happier? As a muslim woman.

Life is full of many riddles...

[whottt]

Whott-the-fucktard

How do the pictures and "justifications" about life in Iran you posted have anything to do with the USA? with the USA security?

They look just like the lynchings, bombing black churches a few decades ago in This Great Country of Ours.

Similarly, women get raped in Pakistan, 1000s of honor killings in Pakistan and India, Pakistan is harboring Al-qaida and Taleban, so shall we bomb and invade Pakistan and India?

You fucking people are fucking crazy as fucking shit.

And I bet if dubya raised the income tax rate 20% across the board and raised the tax on gasoline to $4/gal to pay for his bullshit, you'd all of a sudden become peace-niks.



Got damn...I knew I shouldn't have clicked view post...

First of all idiot...your approach of attacking every country over there at once is stupid...idiot.

You know the first place we attacked after entering WWII was?

Was it Japan? No idiot, it was not.

Was it Germany? No idiot, it was not.

It was North Africa dickface, why do you think that was? The North Africans hadn't done anything to us...because strategically it allowed us to gain a logistical foothold for entry into both Europe and the Middle Eeast...fuck face. Did it work? Douche?

Are the governments of Pakistan, India and Saudi Arabia, openly hostile to the US as the Government of Iran is and has been since the Islamic Revolution? No they aren't, idiot.


Idiot.
Idiot.
Idiot.

If you remove those governments(which would be next to impossible anyway) what would you get? An openly hostile government and possible unification.

When Saddam was removed what replaced him? Something better or worse? It could not be worse....

Ditto Iran.

That is not true for Saudi and Pakistan, you fucking idiot.

What Iran is is isolated from it's middle eastern brethren as a pariah nation and the US military has position and logistical support on mutiple(read all) sides, not to mention Israel just itching to crawl up their ass...Iran also has a powerful anti-theocratic movement within it's borders..


Idiot.
Idiot.
Idiot.

You are a tactical idiot, as well as naive fool who thinks closing his eyes will make the problem go away.


Dickface...has pretending there was no problem, and using sanction and endless negotiations for the last 100 years solved the fucking problem? Or is it getting worse and more threatening and more deadly?

You are a fucking fool.

[clambake]

Wow, Whott wants to protect Al-qeada in Pakistan. You, sir, are a traitor. I think it's time you moved to the land of a million wheelchairs, considering you don't do your own walking.

[PixelPusher]

Got damn...I knew I shouldn't have clicked view post...

First of all idiot...your approach of attacking every country over there at once is stupid...idiot.

You know the first place we attacked after entering WWII was?

Was it Japan? No idiot, it was not.

Was it Germany? No idiot, it was not.

It was North Africa dickface, why do you think that was? The North Africans hadn't done anything to us...because strategically it allowed us to gain a logistical foothold for entry into both Europe and the Middle Eeast...fuck face. Did it work? Douche?
We deployed forces in North Africa to go after Rommel's forces there, not to topple the governments of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia in some neoconservative crusade to "spread democracy". For you to equate it to our occupation of Iraq makes you an

idiot
idiot
idiot

...or intellectually dishonest.


When Saddam was removed what replaced him? Something better or worse? It could not be worse....

Now who's being naive?

[mookie2001]

who wants to see what will happen if we go to war with Iran?, I don't, neither should neocons, liberals, Iran, you dont want to see that. It scares me I admit it. It should scare everyone because watch -some SERIOUS shit would go down in America I can't imagine someone advocating or supporting something so stupid

[whottt]

We deployed forces in North Africa to go after the Rommel's forces there, not to topple the governments of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. For you to equate it to our occupation of Iraq makes you an

idiot
idiot
idiot

Idiot...it was a tactical invasion...it served a tactical purpose idiot...

You and boutons would have been whining, "why didn't we invade Germany, and Italy too, was the Japaneese that attacked us.

Got damn you guys are fucking stupid.


BTW, I am not going to get into the whys and wherefores of why Northern Africa was the first place chosen...I'll just tell you that you need to do a lot more reading before you tangle with me on the subject.


...or intellectually dishonest.

Now who's being naive?

You are if you think rape and murder weren't frequent occurences under Saddam...and if you think the current situation in Iraq is more dangerous to America than the situation was under Saddam.

In fact that such a stupid contention I don't even want to respond to it...

At worst we traded out one anti-American despotic regime for another...but gained a military presence within the country as well as blew out it's fucking infrastructute to the degree that they are living the highlife if they aren't drinking their own sewage, much less working on developing WMD.

I know a 50-1 death total in our advantage by our all volunteer military in a guerilla war constitutes a loss in your stupid eyes, but I don't really give a shit. You are wrong. Stupid is always wrong...Nest time you are whining about their innocent civillians I want you to try and reconcile the absolute oppositional POV of those standard liberal talking points...you got damn morons. Once you realize it's not possible, you'll understand why Bush got Re-Elected.

Good luck spinning this one as sarcasm...and BTW, you didn't get it in the patriots thread...you merely embarrassed yourself.

[whottt]

So a Theorcraic Shia Regime in Iran is nothing more than pretty pictures of paradise, yet that same form of government in Iraq is worse than Saddam...

You guys are so full of fucking shit and contradictory, as well as historically ignorant, you make me want to puke.

[mookie2001]

that video of Iran changed my mind, before I was like Toby Keith

[George Gervin's Afro]

take it wasy on whott..he still thinks we can kill all of the terrorists.. let him hang himself..



and on a side note I'd do an Iranian chick..

[PixelPusher]

Idiot...it was a tactical invasion...it served a tactical purpose idiot...

You and boutons would have been whining, "why didn't we invade Japan, and Italy, was the Japaneese that attacked us.

Got damn you guys are fucking stupid.
If you can find any post where I'm "whining" about which countries we did or didn't invade during WWII, show a link or stfu.


You are if you think rape and murder weren't frequent occurences under Saddam...and if you think the current situation in Iraq is more dangerous to America than the situation was under Saddam.

In fact that such a stupid contention I don't even want to respond to it...

At worst we traded out one anti-American despotic regime for another...but gained a military presence within the country and well as blew out it's fucking infrastructute to the degree that they are living the highlife if they aren't drinking their own sewage, much less working developing WMD.

I know a 50-1 death total in our advantage by our all volunteer military in a guerilla war constitutes a loss in your stupid eyes, but I don't really give a shit. You are wrong. Stupid is always wrong...

Good luck spinning this one as sarcasm...and BTW, you didn't get it in the patriots thread...you merely embarrassed yourself.
You accuse me of "contending that there was no rape or murder in Iraq" and then feign outrage at this contention, but I never said that. You should try reading people's posts for what they say, instead of inventing false motives for anyone who disagrees with you and then blasting them for the false motives you assigned to them. Yes, rape, torture and murder occured under Saddam, but now it's multiplied exponentially as crime has risen alongside the insurgency and sectarian violence. You talk about the 50-1 death toll for our soldiers there but completely ignore the Iraqi causualties. "Who gives a fuck!"...well you should if you want Iraq to be "better off now than during Saddam's reign".


At worst we traded out one anti-American despotic regime for another...but gained a military presence within the country and well as blew out it's fucking infrastructute to the degree that they are living the highlife if they aren't drinking their own sewage, much less working developing WMD.

This is by far the most retarding thing you've ever posted. How does having military forces bogged down in a hostile nation help us strategically? So we're "that much closer to invading Iran?" We don't even have enough troops to secure Iraq. "So we can bomb the shit out of Iran if they so much as flinch!"...we can do that from carriers in the gulf and air bases in Turkey.

[whottt]

Damn....the dead teenage boys and girls who were the victims of a brutal and backwards and most decidedly unliberal govermen sanctioned murder barely register on the liberal richter scale...

Just pretend they terrorists masquerading as Iraqi civillians and were killed by US Soldiers after they fired upon them...

Then maybe you'll be able to rediscover your empathy...you retarded hypocritical USEFUL IDIOT swine.

[boutons_]

Go puke your gutz out, we've obviously pulled your chain hard enough.

The reason the WH lied about WMD and all the other bullshit reasons for their going into Iraq was that they knew the "bring democracy to Iraq" would NEVER fly with, never be approved by the US citizenry and the UN.

Nor would invading Iraq to secure sweetheart oil deals for US oilcos from a supposedly grateful Iraqi govt be acceptable by the US citizens.

Now that the US and the world has seen what kind of fiasco dubya has created in Iraq based lies, the US voters fired dubya in the November election, and they are 70% against dubya and how he is fucking up Iraq, and against the escalation. The people are sovereign, not the WH.

Now you're saying we should invade Iran to police them from raping and oppressing women and hanging gays? You're absolutely fucking nuts, Macho Man.

[whottt]

take it wasy on whott..he still thinks we can kill all of the terrorists.. let him hang himself..



and on a side note I'd do an Iranian chick..


I don't belive that...in fact I think there's nothing you'd like to do better than go suck a terrorists dick in reality rather than the virtual BJ's the miles of separation limit you too here on the forum...


Sure they'll hang you for being a faggot after you swallow...but at least you'll have achieved your dreams...go there and hang, you smart liberal you.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I don't belive that...in fact I think there's nothing you'd like to do better than go suck a terrorists dick in reality rather than the virtual BJ's the miles of separation limit you too here on the forum...


Sure they'll hang you for being a faggot after you swallow...but at least you'll have achieved your dreams...go there and hang, you smart liberal you.



so what do you propose mr christian? bomb iran and creat a whole new level of terrorists?

[PixelPusher]

Damn....the dead teenage boys and girls who were the victims of a brutal and backwards and most decidedly unliberal govermen sanctioned murder barely register on the liberal richter scale...

Just pretend they terrorists masquerading as Iraqi civillians and were killed by US Soldiers after they fired upon them...

Then maybe you'll be able to rediscover your empathy...you retarded hypocritical USEFUL IDIOT swine.
Keep pretending military action is the only solution to other countries cultural problems. The majority of Iran's population is under the age of 30 and is much more inclined to western ideals than their theocratic government...but that potential for good will and future reformation within Iran dissapates like a fart in the wind if we invade.

[whottt]

This is by far the most retarding thing you've ever posted. How does having military forces bogged down in a hostile nation help us strategically? So we're "that much closer to invading Iran?" We don't even have enough troops to secure Iraq. "So we can bomb the shit out of Iran if they so much as flinch!"...we can do that from carriers in the gulf and air bases in Turkey.


Someone needs a serious geography lesson...

Go find the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan on a map...

Then go give yourself a lesson on the military strike capabilities, both nuclear and non nuclear, of the air and navy power of the US Military.

Then we can continue this lesson later...

Suffice to say...we most certainly can kill all of the terrorists, in Iran at least.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Someone needs a serious geography lesson...

Go find the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan on a map...

Then go give yourself a lesson on the military strike capabilities, both nuclear and non nuclear, of the air and navy power of the US Military.

Then we can continue this lesson later...

Suffice to say...we most certainly can kill all of the terrorists, in Iran at least.


In other words whott has no idea so he will evade the point by calling you a meat smoker and tell youi to go back to school..

[whottt]

so what do you propose mr christian? bomb iran and creat a whole new level of terrorists?



Um...what new level of terrorism would that be praytell?

Last I checked they have every intention of nuking US cities to make their point...does it get worse?


People pay the price of their governments...we will, they will....may the least backward culture win...

And no, peace is not always an option.

I am all for helping their sane civillians...of which there are many, however if they won't do shit to help themselves...fuck em. Their governments are still a threat to us...and I could give two fucks about, who's right or those who chose to cower, if my way of life is on the line.

[mookie2001]

People pay the price of their governments...we will, they willno doubt

[whottt]

Ya'll need to read the story of the teenaged Iranian chick....she was willing to die for what she believed was right...you think she'd have a problem with us leveling their fucking government...think again, she's the one I care about. Not the ones who do nothing except stand around like a bunch of human shields, fuck em.

[01Snake]

I don't see the US INVADING Iran. Some tactical airstrikes, yes, but a ground invasion ain't happening. Why would it?

[mookie2001]

read the story that 7 iraqi children died at school today

[LaMarcus Bryant]

I think whotttttttt has watched Team America World Police one too many times.

[PixelPusher]

Someone needs a serious geography lesson...

Go find the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan on a map...

Then go give yourself a lesson on the military strike capabilities, both nuclear and non nuclear, of the air and navy power of the US Military.

Then we can continue this lesson later...
Is this some desperate rhetorical attempt to intimidate me with your assumed superior knowledge of military tactics? Here a quiz noted military tactician whottt...back in 2001, when we decided to deploy forces to Afganistan, which air bases did we use? (hint: they certainly weren't IRAQI airbases, now were they?)

Oh...I just can't help myself...just google "Incirlik Air Base"

Suffice to say...we most certainly can kill all of the terrorists, in Iran at least.
...and create more in the process, mongoloid.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

You guys are debating with someone who said we should nuke mecca, back in like 2005, and seriously thought it would solve the problem. You just can't do tings like dettt

[whottt]

Keep pretending military action is the only solution to other countries cultural problems.


Um...there cultural problems are an inhumane, feature virtually no civil rights, cause life to be cheap, result in rampant unemployment, mass emmigration, all of which is blamed on the US, which breeds religious fantacism and the willingness to strap a bomb on themselves and kill anyone they can....

Their cultural problems are terrorism, we didn't cause it, Europe did, and we have thrown money at it for a century, none of which serves it's intended purpose or makes them like us, in fact, I don't even think they realize we do it....throw money at them, inspite of the fact that these are the most minerally wealthy countries in the World...


How in the hell you think anything is going to change is beyond me...should we wait another 100 years and a few nuked cities?


It's time to fire some fucking coaches....







The majority of Iran's population is under the age of 30 and is much more inclined to western ideals than their theocratic government...but that potential for good will and future reformation within Iran dissapates like a fart in the wind if we invade.


The majority of their population over 30 is inclined to Western Ideals...or it was, a near 4 per 1000 Emmigration rate may have changed that...

Pssss...the Iranian Govt Is Brutal...you know it's why it's Brutal? Because it's a minority ruling over a majority...the only such a government stays in power is by brutality...that's why shitty governments, like all Socialist and Theocratic governments...become brutal.

[whottt]

Is this some desperate rhetorical attempt to intimidate me with your assumed superior knowledge of military tactics? Here a quiz noted military tactician whottt...back in 2001, when we decided to deploy forces to Afganistan, which air bases did we use? (hint: they certainly weren't IRAQI airbases, now were they?)

Oh...I just can't help myself...just google "Incirlik Air Base"

Up...you pretty much kicked your own ass on any kind of knowledge front by your ignorance of some of the more raucous protesting tactics of anti-abortionists, not to mention the Muslim stance on abortion.

Right now I rate you just above clambake as the stupidest poster on the forum...thanks to that bit of sarcasm.


...and create more in the process, mongoloid.


Um...leaving those governments in power is what starts them, it's what creates them...and the larger those countries get in population the more severe the problem is going to become.

[PixelPusher]

Up...you pretty much kicked your own ass on any kind of knowledge front by your ignorance of some of the more raucous protesting tactics of anti-abortionists, not to mention the Muslim stance on abortion.

Right now I rate you just above clambake as the stupidest poster on the forum...thanks to that bit of sarcasm.
Your cowardly dodge was noted.

[whottt]

I think whotttttttt has watched Team America World Police one too many times.


And I don't think you've seen it once...if you did you didn't get it.

[PixelPusher]

And I don't think you've seen it once...if you did you didn't get it.
:lmao

ok, I'm done.

[whottt]

Um...you were done the day your daddy didn't wear a condom.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Um...you were done the day your daddy didn't wear a condom.


If only Bush 41 would have had one on as well.. oh well

[whottt]

If only you guys hadn't been stupider than Bush in 04 by coming up with the worst war time candidate humanly possible...


It's not that middle america got stupid enough to think Bush was a great leader...it's that the Democrats got stupider than Bush.

[George Gervin's Afro]

If only you guys hadn't been stupider than Bush in 04 by coming up with the worst war time candidate humanly possible...


wish i could argure this one.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I don't think you realize what a war with Iran would do to this country.i don't think you realize what not having a war with Iran would do to this country and one other country. basically, we're damned if we do and damned if we don't at this point. president ahma-genocide is too pyschotic and wants The Apolcalypse to get here in a hurry.

[PixelPusher]

Someone needs a serious geography lesson...

Go find the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan on a map...

Then go give yourself a lesson on the military strike capabilities, both nuclear and non nuclear, of the air and navy power of the US Military.

Then we can continue this lesson later...
You're so right, whottt - you do need a serious lesson in the military capability of our armed forces, otherwise you wouldn't have made such a ignorant comment regarding our ability to reach Afganistan (even though I was talking about Iran, which is right on the Persian Gulf). Hey, looky here!

http://www.usni.org/proceedings/Articles02/PROnathman03.htm

It's an article by a Navy admiral all about the naval air operations into Afganistan in 2001 (you know, before we had any bases in Iraq?)...b-but how? They couldn't possibly reach Afghanistan from the Gulf! Whottt says so! :lmao

[whottt]

I'm speechless...I didn't think it was possible for you to top the dumbassedness you exhibited in the patriot thread...but you are succeeding in spades...keep it up, by all means, keep it up. This is great...whatever you do, don't stop to consider you might be making an ass of yourself...

[whottt]

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 5 (4 members and 1 guests)
whottt*, PixelPusher, boutons_, VIVA_LAS_ESPUELAS


Don't bother typing anything to me...I gave you a chance and you were as lame as the last time I read one of your posts a couple of months ago...absolutely not interested in your, "shrub, dickhead, repug" drivel....

You simply suck, and you will remain on ignore until you stop sucking.

[boutons_]

"you will remain on ignore"

fake Macho Man is truly Girly-Man. chicken-shit wimp.

[clambake]

Absolute chickenshit, but he does attribute his mental condition to an earlier skulldrop occasion. Just make sure the straight-jacket is securely fastened.

[Nbadan]

Ok now, life in Iraq before the first Gulf War and years of U.S. led embargo....

Iraq 1990 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoHnJoqCdl8)

[ChumpDumper]

Dude, I'm supposed to take something hosted on this guy's website seriously?

http://www.lucasgray.com/images/indexMustache_04.gif

[whottt]

"you will remain on ignore"

fake Macho Man is truly Girly-Man. chicken-shit wimp.

Kiss my ass...I've never acted macho or tried to pass myself off as some kind of tough guy on this site...suck wad. Although I have gotten some death threats from a few of you peace loving libbies...

You aren't on ignore because of any weakness on my part...you are on ignore because you suck dicks.

Is NBADan on my ignore? No he isn't, have I ever put Chump on ignore(even pre-mod), uh no I haven't...and I've gotten into more arguments with Chump than anyone...

IT's not that I am pussy, it's that you suck...dicks.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

Whatt is whottt arguing for anyways? Can't we all just agree to disagree? Okay, I admit it, Team America was a movie about how we should be the World's Police. My bad. This makes me want to bump that thread whottt made about how Team America was the Modern Marriott Neocon's comedy, and it obliterated the left, proving the right to be far superior.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

you are on ignore because you suck dicks.wow. quote of the year.

[whottt]

Whatt is whottt arguing for anyways? Can't we all just agree to disagree? Okay, I admit it, Team America was a movie about how we should be the World's Police. My bad. This makes me want to bump that thread whottt made about how Team America was the Modern Marriott Neocon's comedy, and it obliterated the left, proving the right to be far superior.


Hogwash...it's just that the left never gets lampooned in cinema...it's always the right, the fact that Team America parodied the left was a novelty, a unique and rare treat...and the celebrity bashing was oh so accurate. Bump away...LaMarcus.

And the point of arguing is because the stupid need to know they are stupid...it's not like the forum is over run with moderates, it's pretty much been reduced to a hysterical leftist circle jerk...with the occassional appearance by a moderate or righty.


The funniest thing is I am not a right winger by any definition except maybe on the death penatly and foreign policy in the midle east...I didn't vote for Bush in 00, in fact I couldn't stand him and still can't...but at least he had the single redeeming quality that he didn't give a shit who liked him(he since lost that), which was more than any redeeming qualities Kerry had.

It does not good to protest this war, now, we are in it...unless you truly believe we should just cut and run because we can't take the heat and let the chips fall where they may...which would be an incredily bad idea.

If it goes to Civil war then ok...but until that time finish it.


And period...until those despots get removed from power terrorism will continue to be a problem.

[PixelPusher]

I'm speechless...I didn't think it was possible for you to top the dumbassedness you exhibited in the patriot thread...but you are succeeding in spades...keep it up, by all means, keep it up. This is great...whatever you do, don't stop to consider you might be making an ass of yourself...
Your 2nd cowardly dodge was again noted.

[whottt]

Note away...then go look at Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf on the map.


Then douche, put 2 and 2 together and realize that I asked you to look at those locations because of where they lie in relation to Iran...not because I thought you were talking about Afghanistan.

Get it?

I know, I know...Sarcasm.

[PixelPusher]

Note away...then go look at Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf on the map.


Then douche, put 2 and 2 together and realize that I asked you to look at those locations because of where they lie in relation to Iran...not because I thought you were talking about Afghanistan.

Get it?

I know, I know...Sarcasm.
You made specific references to our airstrike capabilities, I demonstrated them to you. 3rd cowardly dodge.

[whottt]

Idiot. Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf border Iran, you fuckwit, that was why I asked you to look them up, not because I thought you were talking about invading Afghanistan.

See the Pretty Map?

http://almashriq.hiof.no/general/900/910/912/maps/middle.east.gif

[PixelPusher]

First, I posted:

This is by far the most retarding thing you've ever posted. How does having military forces bogged down in a hostile nation help us strategically? So we're "that much closer to invading Iran?" We don't even have enough troops to secure Iraq. "So we can bomb the shit out of Iran if they so much as flinch!"...we can do that from carriers in the gulf and air bases in Turkey.
then in response, you posted


Someone needs a serious geography lesson...

Go find the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan on a map...

Then go give yourself a lesson on the military strike capabilities, both nuclear and non nuclear, of the air and navy power of the US Military.

Then we can continue this lesson later...

Suffice to say...we most certainly can kill all of the terrorists, in Iran at least.
I demonstrated that we can, in fact, bomb Iran (and Afghanistan) from Turkey (we have airbases in S.A. as well) or from carriers in the gulf. Your off-tangent psychorant about looking up Afganistan on a map has nothing to do with my original statement. Yes, Afghanistan borders Iran. That has precisely DICK to do with keeping forces in IRAQ.
You're like a shitty poker player who keeps bluffing through a shit hand after the flop.

[whottt]

Idiot...we can also now launch airstrikes from our bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you consider that a negative? Idiot?


Being able to attack Iran from all sides>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than not.

And we have near carte blanche to do so(albeit not as much as we'd hoped fro in Iraq).

Now we don't have to kiss turkish ass, or tiptoe around Pakistan.

[whottt]

Look at the map please...then shut up.

[clambake]

All an act to deflect attention away from your cowardice shottt, but keep it up.

It's for posterity

[PixelPusher]

Idiot...we can also now launch airstrikes from our bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you consider that a negative? Idiot?


Being able to attack Iran from all sides>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than not.

And we have near carte blanche to do so(albeit not as much as we'd hoped fro in Iraq).

Now we don't have to kiss turkish ass, or tiptoe around Pakistan.
But we don't need Iraq or Afgahnistan to lauch airstrikes at Iran. Carriers don't need any country's permission. The only reason it would be helpful to "attack from all sides" using Iraq and Afghanistan would be if we planned on doing more than airstrikes...such as invading with ground troops. Like I said earlier, we don't even have enough to secure Iraq.

[whottt]

Good god you are a tactical idiot...

I'm just fucking speechless.

It's almost as bad as having to teach you english while I am arguing with you.

[clambake]

Goddammit Pix, don't you understand our motive is to invade Iran so we can have a clear path to the Caspian Sea. Go suck some dick you iranian dick lover!!!!!!!

[Nbadan]

Whott needs to take another look at his map. Anbar province, where most of the Iraq resistance is center, is 1/3 the size of Iraq. Now look at the size of Iran and imagine the whole country as one big anbar province with the Persian Gulf, the life-line to industrialized society as we know it, on one side.

[whottt]

I finally get it...I never thought you guys were true liberals...too much hypochracy. I was right, you aren't.

You really are completely utter and total tactical idiots...

At last I understand.

Nbadan...I am well aware of the issues in Iraq, safe to assume that it was hoped the internal military forces would be stronger by now than they are, that doesn't change the fact that for purposes of war with Iran were in 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times better position to knock out any nuclear facilities than we were prior to invading Iraq and if you can't see that...I'm sorry, it's because you are stupid, not because I am wrong.

We are also in position to economically strangle Iran....something Saudi and Pakistan will be only be too happy to help us do.

[whottt]

The funniest thing is watching you guys act like Iran is the military juggernaut...newsflash, Iraq kicked the shit out of Iran in their war...it took us about 5 seconds to obliterate that same Iraqi military without a single boot setting foot on the ground.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

I agree about team america whottt, but i still don't see how your anger at cut and running applies to iran....

[whottt]

LaMarcus...check your PM please.

It is of the utmost urgency and far more important than trivial arguments on the political forum.

Thanks in advance.

[PixelPusher]

The funniest thing is watching you guys act like Iran is the military juggernaut...newsflash, Iraq kicked the shit out of Iran in their war...it took us about 5 seconds to obliterate that same Iraqi military without a single boot setting foot on the ground.
If you're trying to pass yourself off as someone who's infinitely superior in military knowledge to "tactical idiots" like me for daring to suggest we can reach Iranian airspace from carriers in the gulf and air bases throughout the M.E. other than Iraq and Afghanistan, you might want to avoid such ignorant and false statements like the one you just made above.

To your other point, yes we can take on the Iranian military, but that's not the problem...the problem is trying to occupy yet another country hostile to our prescence there.

[johnsmith]

"you will remain on ignore"

fake Macho Man is truly Girly-Man. chicken-shit wimp.


:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

The guy that has half the people on this board on his ignore list is calling someone a "chicken-shit wimp" for having him on ignore..........priceles..


Boutons, you truly are a huge douche bag.

[Nbadan]

Whott's lack of understanding in assymetrical warfare prevents him from seeing the forest from the trees. Yes, we could cripple Iran economically, and they could cripple the rest of the world economically.

[johnsmith]

Whott's lack of understanding in assymetrical warfare prevents him from seeing the forest from the trees. Yes, we could cripple Iran economically, and they could cripple the rest of the world economically.


Yes, and clearly you should qualify as an expert in "assymetrical warfare".

[01Snake]

Yes, and clearly you should qualify as an expert in "assymetrical warfare".


:lol

Didn't you know? Dan is an expert in EVERYTHING!!

[boutons_]

"Iraq kicked the shit out of Iran in their war"

25 years ago, and many 100s of $Bs oil revenue into Iran since.

Do you really think Iran military of 2007 is the same as it was in the early 80s?

Do you really think Iran's military will melt away, disappear like the bogus Iraqi military did twice when confronted by the US military? The Iraqi army was loyal to their salaries and privileges, not to Saddam and the fabricated Iraq.

The Iranian military is very much dedicated to preserving and defending Iran.

The US would lose many 1000s of military on the ground invading Iran.

Whott, you're so fucking stupid geo-politically and militarily it's laughable.

[johngateswhiteley]

i always liked Cat Stevens.

[whottt]

Poppycock, and if we can't discuss this like gentlemen I'll not discuss it all. What the fuck is wrong with you people?

[johngateswhiteley]

Poppycock, and if we can't discuss this like gentlemen I'll not discuss it all. What the fuck is wrong with you people?

:lol ...gentlemen? the discussions have been anything but gentlemanly.

[gtownspur]

:lol ...gentlemen? the discussions have been anything but gentlemanly.

yeah,.........


that's what he said already..??

[boutons_]

Whott gets his ass kicked to a bloody pulp, so he

chicken-shit IGNOREs people who kick his ass

and/or

plays the "let's play nice card (aka quit kicking my ass!)" :lol

"What the fuck is wrong with you people" who keep kicking Whott's ass? :lol

[clambake]

Cut him some slack. It's funny. He rewrites history by claiming the first objective in WWII was to topple North African governments. I'm more interested in examining his fetish.

Long ago , it started out with you should "go suck bin ladins dick, then al-queada dick, then taliban dick, then saddam and iraqi dick. Now it has progressed to north korean dick, iranian dick, syrian dick, hezbollah and hamas dick. Well the russians just delivered missle systems, so how about some russian dick. But he hasn't suggested pakistani dick. Pakistan is full of al-queada and taliban dick so what's the holdup?

[whottt]

Go suck Pakistani dick.

[whottt]

PS: The serverity of this brutal asskicking by such knowledgable posters as dickbake, fucktons and pixel douche has run me from the forum yet again.

Pointing out that full on eastern and western borders with fully functional bases adds nothing to our logistical or air capabilities over what was available to us in the Persian Gulf, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, was the straw that finally did me in. I mean shit...when you are confronteed with brilliance like that best just to quit while you are behind.

Ditto the realization of the greatness of the mighty Iranian army...I mean they are proven, if nothing else.



I leave the forum having been dismantled by the brilliant liberal mind yet again. Sniff. Going to curl up with my stuffed W teddy bear now.


You cruel cruel bastards.

[clambake]

That's funny, go suck pakistani dick. Thanks for including me in "Dickfest 2007"

[DarkReign]

This thread is one post away from absurdity.

Gentlemen? When every other word is "douche", "stupid", "ignorant", etc, I dont see how you can expect people to respond politely.

Whott, have you ever tried relating your thoughts without insulting another member....ever? Or is that how you "win" an argument? Claiming superiority and being superior are two very different things.

[clambake]

It's just his way. But on a serious note, I can't think of anyone more suited to be the future curator of W's presidential library.

[whottt]

This thread is one post away from absurdity.

Gentlemen? When every other word is "douche", "stupid", "ignorant", etc, I dont see how you can expect people to respond politely.

Whott, have you ever tried relating your thoughts without insulting another member....ever? Or is that how you "win" an argument? Claiming superiority and being superior are two very different things.



Go fuck yourself, and go suck a dick while you are it. If there's one thing that pisses me off it's a rude fucking lib. Where's the Kumbaya you preach preach preach about?

Buncha rude dicksuckers.

[DarkReign]

Go fuck yourself, and go suck a dick while you are it. If there's one thing that pisses me off it's a rude fucking lib. Where's the Kumbaya you preach preach preach about?

Buncha rude dicksuckers.

I wasnt trying to be rude, nor am I a "rude fucking lib". Yet you respond in the only way you know how I guess.

Question = answered.

[johnsmith]

Whott gets his ass kicked to a bloody pulp, so he

chicken-shit IGNOREs people who kick his ass

and/or

plays the "let's play nice card (aka quit kicking my ass!)" :lol

"What the fuck is wrong with you people" who keep kicking Whott's ass? :lol

Again, am I the only one that sees the hypocrisy in Boutons making fun of someone for putting people on ignore?

[whottt]

I wasnt trying to be rude, nor am I a "rude fucking lib". Yet you respond in the only way you know how I guess.

Question = answered.

I notice you didn't deny being a cocksucker...

[ChumpDumper]

Well, MSNBC is describing our Gulf of Tonkin rationale for attacking Iran. Five soldiers killed in an ambush in Iraq that we are apparently concluding could only be planned by Iran. There's even a videogame re-creation.

[thispego]

how convenient

[valluco]

Again, am I the only one that sees the hypocrisy in Boutons making fun of someone for putting people on ignore?
Nope. It's just that the rest of us don't care.

[boutons_]

JS, you just suck, you're just stupid dumbfuck, a joker, a clown, wanting to fight me, wanting my mother dead. your silly shit is not worth reading or responding to, so from about the 3rd post of yours, you've been on my ignore. From your shit quoted by others, my decision remains as precise and as brilliant as ever.

Whott is at least serious and makes an effort. Your pixels are waste of Internet.

go fuck your wimpy self, and thank whatever the fuck it is you thank that you'll never have the balls to fight me.

[johnsmith]

JS, you just suck, you're just stupid dumbfuck, a joker, a clown, wanting to fight me, wanting my mother dead. your silly shit is not worth reading or responding to, so from about the 3rd post of yours, you've been on my ignore. From your shit quoted by others, my decision remains as precise and as brilliant as ever.

Whott is at least serious and makes an effort. Your pixels are waste of Internet.

go fuck your wimpy self, and thank whatever the fuck it is you thank that you'll never have the balls to fight me.


I love it, take a shot for me wanting to beat you up and then say I'd never have the balls. Boutons, you are a clever little bastard.

[01Snake]

Boutons, you are a clever little bastard.

I agree...except for the clever part.

[DarkReign]

I notice you didn't deny being a cocksucker...

Ooooookay then. Man, youre incorrigible.

[Spurminator]

Note to Fillmoe... THIS is how you troll the Political Forum.

[clambake]

The animated recreation had the quality of those phantom mobile chemical labs back in 03. Still waiting to see animated Iranians holding little vials of white powder. The GOP is always attacking Hollywood, but they sure do exploit the use of drama. Time to break out the "mushroom cloud" fear bomb.

[101A]

The US would lose many 1000s of military on the ground invading Iran.



Not advocating invasion here; but you are insane if you believe that.

The air campaign alone would reduce the will of the Iranians to fight; the ground invasion would be a mop-up exercise. Iranians would resist for a short while, but would soon understand the absolute inevitability of defeat, and would quit, or surrender; just like the first gulf war. BTW: predictions such as yours were ALL OVER the place, in fact it was conventional wisdom about the invasion of Iraq b4 the Gulf War. The main reason given? Because Iraq had defeated Iran, and were experienced, hardened vets. Didn't work out so well for them, and it wouldn't for Iran either.

The US military is BUILT to invade, take ground, kill, maim, destroy, etc... THEY are not built to police a country; they would love to fight a REAL war, compared to what they're doing now, I'm betting.

[DarkReign]

:tu to 101A's post

[Oh, Gee!!]

The air campaign alone would reduce the will of the Iranians to fight; the ground invasion would be a mop-up exercise. Iranians would resist for a short while, but would soon understand the absolute inevitability of defeat, and would quit, or surrender; just like the first gulf war.

sounds like what many "experts" said about Iraq

[101A]

sounds like what many "experts" said about Iraq


And that's EXACTLY what happened....TWICE.

[mookie2001]

that and its not like 500 american lives and thousandS more Iranian dead would be worth it

[boutons_]

OK, go ahead, let the US military bust up another Islamic country.

Then what? More "insane" shit like we have in Iraq?

The Iranian military is larger and much more equipped than al-Quaida and the Taleban in Afghanistan, the "allies" still have not shut them down after 5 years of trying, they keep "resurging".

The Iranians resisted the Saddam/Iraq attack very well. At that point, Iranians were much weaker than now, totally surprised, and still trying to get Iran re-organized after their revolution a couple years earlier.

Iran is 25+ years down the road and has been spending $Bs in Russian, China, and NK on weapons as well as building their own, and motivated as ever to defend their country, something the Iraqis under Saddam never were.

What's insane is assuming invading Iran would cause the US few casualites AND ignoring what to do with Iran after our badass mlitary busts it up and "owns" the pieces, like it does now Iraq.

We've already had too many Macho Man jerk-off, VN-war-evading, myopic, incompetent, Strangelovian assholes in the Exec invading countries with NO plans for the post invasion, and no proof that such invasion advances US interests in any way.

The military is fucked in Iraq and to no benefit to the USA, and no benefit to the Iraqis or anybody else in the M/E.

The first Gulf war had the clearly defined objective of kicking Iraqis out of Kuwait, and dozens of countries willing to help and/or pay ("coalition of the billing"). Mission Accomplished.

What's the objective of invading Iran?
What's the plan for after invading Iran?

And would an overwhelming majority of the US people, now dead set against dubya and how he ihas fucked up Iraq, support invading yet another country that is no threat to the USA?

A massive bombing campaign over Iran would kill 10s of 1000s of Iranians and inflame and recruit jihadists even more than Iraq did.

dubya's problem is that he has zero credibilty with his own party outside of the crazy hard right. dubya's advantage is that he has a nutty Strangelove as veep who will do whatever the fuck shit he wants, who won't even bother to "sell" invading Iraq to the US and the world.

[mookie2001]

have we talked about what a war with Iran would mean on the homefront, inside our borders?, the people of this country would be regulated upon like no other and we and our children would be fucked forever on

[DarkReign]

have we talked about what a war with Iran would mean on the homefront, inside our borders?, the people of this country would be regulated upon like no other and us and our children would be fucked forever on

Please expand on what you mean by "regulated upon..", because I dont understand what you mean in the slightest.

[mookie2001]

in travel and movement, in ID cards, in patriot act IVs, OnStar*s, war corporations gaining even more power, government secrecy

[DarkReign]

OK, go ahead, let the US military bust up another Islamic country.

[sic]

A massive bombing campaign over Iran would kill 10s of 1000s of Iranians and inflame and recruit jihadists even more than Iraq did.

Jihadists arent going anywhere any time soon. Sure, another offensive in their land would drive supply of said whackos thru the roof, but at what point does this even matter?

It is without a doubt, no question, that the US military could wipe out Iran's military, military capability and current leadership in under 100 days. So lets not argue that (the casualty rate would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 500-1 or 1000-1, that may be a bit under).

What are the reprecussions? The obvious of course. But I am really starting to not care at all WTF those fuck-jobs think anyway. We want what their country sits on, not the people treading over it. We are willing to pay. Make nice and everyone wins.

I just dont care about the middle east or the people in it. To blindly live your life according to some religious book...and not just your life, but your country's life and everyone in it....I just dont respect that. Never will. Yet I still believe in "Live and let live" to a degree, but not at the sacrifice of basic human rights and equality. Raped women and gays being executed/lynched is intolerable.

But its a double standard really. The US picks and chooses who it will enforce such moral standards upon, so I guess thats a weak argument.

Bah, fuck it....I just dont like the Middle East at all. Fuck em. I will only have a problem if the US decides to Occupy....barring that, I could care less what the President and his/her cronies come up with. Deal with them, leave them alone...whatever.

[clambake]

They don't "all" blindly live their life based on a religious book. It's leaders of countries that use religion as a tool to pretend that their actions are Godly. Pretend to be acting from the wishes of their lord. All horseshit.

[DarkReign]

in travel and movement, in ID cards, in patriot act IVs, OnStar*s, war corporations gaining even more power, government secrecy

Regardless of circumstance, such things were inevitable. Paper money is going the way of the dinosaur yet probably not in my lifetime or my children's.

If you mean travel in your own country, I would disagree.
If you mean travel to other countries, then I would agree.
But again, that was inevitable.

The future, in my opinion, is bleak regardless of current events. Whether we wish to accelerate the downfall, or prolong the inevitable has no bearing on anyone alive today (in my opinion).

[DarkReign]

They don't "all" blindly live their life based on a religious book. It's leaders of countries that use religion as a tool to pretend that their actions are Godly. Pretend to be acting from the wishes of their lord. All horseshit.

Ahhh, I would disagree. Why do middle eastern people turn to their local religious leaders in every bad situation, then? Certainly cant blame the government level leadership for that, can you?

They werent told to follow, they choose to follow. Whether thats a product of the enviroment or not, I am not sure. But when shit hits the fan in the middle east, one thing is for sure, religious leaders (clerics and Omans, I think?) become the movers and shakers.

[Extra Stout]

Unless Bush is thinking about declaring a military dictatorship so he can get the necessary troops without going through Congress, the idea of an Iran war is stupid.

Who here actually thinks he could get authorization unless Iran is all but fueling missiles aimed at Tel Aviv? Or unless Cheney has a suitcase nuke set off in Grand Central Station to blame on Tehran?

[ChumpDumper]

The air campaign alone would reduce the will of the Iranians to fight; the ground invasion would be a mop-up exercise. Iranians would resist for a short while, but would soon understand the absolute inevitability of defeat, and would quit, or surrender; just like the first gulf war.You realize we are talking about Iran -- not Iraq, right?

Why do you think Iran resorted to terrorism in the first place? They learned from their war with Iraq that they could have their asses handed to them in open warfare. And it's disturbingly hilarious to see you learned absolutely nothing from Afghanistan or Iraq. So we go and "mop up" with another smaller-than-necessary-to-really occupy-a-country force. What then? Sit around and get killed by terrorists again, who this time don't have the inconvenience of fighting other factions in their country in addition to us?

Brilliant!

[101A]

...unless Iran is all but fueling missiles aimed at Tel Aviv?

In the current atmosphere in this country, I don't think that would do it.


Or unless Cheney has a suitcase nuke set off in Grand Central Station to blame on Tehran?

Easy ES. Fudging veracity of information, when you ultimately believe that information in correct is one thing. Wagging the dog by killing thousands of your own citizens is quite another. Or are you borrowing Dan's shiny hat?

[clambake]

Their choices are made for them "or else". That's what happens when politics, religion and sects rule the hallmark of hatred. It's live or die, it's protect your loved ones or watch them vanquish. It's the mixture of politics and religion that supplies the weapons and fuel for fighting. Religious leaders are the sources that aquire the weapons, that is why people turn to them. You must take a side to have a chance for survival. The goal shrinks to protecting your family.

[101A]

You realize we are talking about Iran -- not Iraq, right?

Why do you think Iran resorted to terrorism in the first place? They learned from their war with Iraq that they could have their asses handed to them in open warfare. And it's disturbingly hilarious to see you learned absolutely nothing from Afghanistan or Iraq. So we go and "mop up" with another smaller-than-necessary-to-really occupy-a-country force. What then? Sit around and get killed by terrorists again, who this time don't have the inconvenience of fighting other factions in their country in addition to us?

Brilliant!


Took the quote out of context, CD. Hell, in that post I state that the US military is NOT good at occupation and/or policing. I never said an invasion of Iran would be clean. I said the United States Ground Invasion vs. the Iranian Army would be an unfair fight - that military v. military would be lopsided, and over very quickly - and that that action would not result in 10's of thousands of American lives. An occupation would be a different story. I AM NOT in favor of an invasion of Iran.

[ChumpDumper]

Sorry, your post sounded like Wolfowitz "cakewalk" talk. I just remember the reports of human wave attacks from Iran and I shudder to think what they might have in store for us if we choose to occupy their country.

[boutons_]

If the Scooter trial gets real close to dubya and dickhead, I wouldn't be surprised if they did some shit to Iran to deflect attention.

dickhead's notes shown in the trial today could be interpreted as dubya being in on sliming/swift-boating Wilson and outing Plame.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/013107Z.shtml

dubya/dickhead/rove have already lied their way into one war.
They are ruthless motherfuckers.

They're stuck now with the rep for losing Iraq.

All this Repug shit and repeated lying makes WH blowjobs totally harmless (as they always were).

[Extra Stout]

Easy ES. Fudging veracity of information, when you ultimately believe that information in correct is one thing. Wagging the dog by killing thousands of your own citizens is quite another. Or are you borrowing Dan's shiny hat?
The farfetchedness of that scenario is meant to underscore the unlikelihood of rallying up support for an Iran war.

Although false-flag terrorism is hardly unheard of. In 1961-62, JFK's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was advocating setting off bombs in downtown D.C. and Miami, shooting down commercial airliners, and even blowing up John Glenn's rocket on takeoff -- all so it could be blamed on Castro to justify overthrowing him in Cuba.

[101A]

The farfetchedness of that scenario is meant to underscore the unlikelihood of rallying up support for an Iran war.

Although false-flag terrorism is hardly unheard of. In 1961-62, JFK's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was advocating setting off bombs in downtown D.C. and Miami, shooting down commercial airliners, and even blowing up John Glenn's rocket on takeoff -- all so it could be blamed on Castro to justify overthrowing him in Cuba.


:wow

[Extra Stout]

:wow
Senator Al Gore Sr. pressured Kennedy to get rid of that guy. JFK complied, and put him in charge of NATO instead.

[Oh, Gee!!]

And that's EXACTLY what happened....TWICE.

and what's happening in Iraq will happen if we invade Iran. good plan.

[boutons_]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyman_L._Lemnitzer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

[101A]

and what's happening in Iraq will happen if we invade Iran. good plan.


Do you actually read threads?

[101A]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyman_L._Lemnitzer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods


Thanks.

You know, reading the plans for Operation Northwood and Mongoose; it strikes me that the administration today has actually acted relatively above board on Iraq.

Killing people on American soil; hijacking plans, SINKING an American WarShip - and pinning it on Castro!!!!

Say what you will about the build up to war, but ALL this administration had to do to justify Iraq, ultimately, was plant a little WMD evidence somewhere in the vast empty desert of that country "Hey, look what we found!!". No loss of life, nothing on American soil; just a little sleight of hand. Ultimately, they didn't do that.

They said there was WMD, they took us to war because of it, they didn't find WMD, and they have had to live with the consequences. Granted, neither of the operations proposed by the JCS were carried out, but there must have been an atmosphere in the WH where such things were considered. It seems, based on this evidence, that past administrations possibly haven't been as above board as the current one.

[boutons_]

The current WH can't be absolved by comparing to Kennedy NOT accepting the advice to fabricate justifications to invade Cuba.

The Repugs came into office in 2000 with the policy of starting a war in Iraq.
It was a policy, a neo-cunt ideology, decided upon, and a year or more before WTC.

Even with the WTC diversion (facilitated by the Exec's dereliction of duty), the WHIG stuck to its Iraq policy, dickhead fabricated the Saddam-WTC link, and the WHIG cherry picked and hyped intelligence supporting Iraq WMD while suppressing/classifying all serious doubts about WMD (eg, slimiing Wilson/outing Plame).

NatSec people have said it was clear dickhead came to the NatSec people with the Iraq war decision already made and pressuring NatSec to come up with the supporting evidence.

The Brits said the Iraq war decision was made and the WH was "fixing up" the evidence to support it.

Above board? G M A F B

[johnsmith]

The current WH can't be absolved by comparing to Kennedy NOT accepting the advice to fabricate justifications to invade Cuba.

The Repugs came into office in 2000 with the policy of starting a war in Iraq.
It was a policy, a neo-cunt ideology, decided upon, and a year or more before WTC.

Even with the WTC diversion (facilitated by the Exec's dereliction of duty), the WHIG stuck to its Iraq policy, dickhead fabricated the Saddadm-WTC link, and the WHIG cherry picked and hyped intelligence supporting Iraq WMD while suppressing/classifying all serious doubts about WMD (eg, slimiing Wilson/outing Plame).

NatSec people have said it was clear dickhead came to the NatSec people with the Iraq war decision already made and pressuring NatSec to come up with the supporting evidence.

The Brits said the Iraq war decision was made and the WH was "fixing up" the evidence to support it.

Above board? G M A F B





Read Plan of Attack by Woodward. He actually supports what Boutons has just said, the war on Iraq was decided upon well before any evidence of WMD's or lack thereof, were "discovered".

However, I do agree with 101A, it is surprising that they never went in and just planted some WMD's so they could say, "I told you so".

[101A]

Read Plan of Attack by Woodward. He actually supports what Boutons has just said, the war on Iraq was decided upon well before any evidence of WMD's or lack thereof, were "discovered".

However, I do agree with 101A, it is surprising that they never went in and just planted some WMD's so they could say, "I told you so".


Yeah, I guess the operative word in my original post would be "relatively" above board. As in: "Relative to what past administrations would have felt obliged to do to further their cause politically".

In other words: Not "Above Board" in an absolute sense.

[clambake]

Anything purposely planted would have gone through an autopsy of examination. Any weapons such as this could easily be traced back to it's origin. The world was waiting to see this evidence and it would have failed the test of scrutiny. I'm glad we didn't commit this fraudulent act.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Do you actually read threads?

sometimes

[Nbadan]

Say what you will about the build up to war, but ALL this administration had to do to justify Iraq, ultimately, was plant a little WMD evidence somewhere in the vast empty desert of that country "Hey, look what we found!!". No loss of life, nothing on American soil; just a little sleight of hand. Ultimately, they didn't do that.

I don't think finding just a few WMDs would have been enough. In the drive up to the war they were saying there were stockpiles of immenent threat weapons. Toxins and biological/chemical weapons can be traced back to the weapons labs where the cultures were cultivated. Planting WMDs would have been more difficult than you think, and if it didn't work, it would have undermined the whole U.S. mission (whatever that may be).

[Nbadan]

Ouch!


Baa, baa, bush sheep.
Do you support the war?
Yes sir, yes sir!
Give-Us-More!

One for Afghanistan,
One for Iraq.
One for the surrender-monkey
whose name is Jacques Chirac.

Baa, baa, bush sheep.
Will you ever serve?
No sir, no sir,
I haven't got the nerve.

A flag, I will wave.
To the libs, I'll talk smack.
But one thing that I'll never do
is sign up for Iraq.

Baa, baa, bush sheep.
Have you any shame?
No sir, no sir,
For that you need a brain.

I get my facts from FOX News
Their pundits never lie.
They feed my mind a steady diet
of tasty freedom fries.

Answers Yahoo (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvIPm8sExjJh9HhnxquaIErsy6IX?qid=200702 02115415AA3Yb6J)

[Nbadan]

Iran: People Like Us (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEHW7r3HsKI)

[ChumpDumper]

The trial of an Iranian girl convicted of killing a man who attempted to rape her concluded Wednesday, according to a former Miss World Canada who has advocated on her behalf.

Nazanin Fatehi, 19, has had her case championed by former beauty pageant contestant Nazanin Afshin-Jam.

The four judges overseeing the case have agreed that the killing was not premeditated, so Afshin-Jam said she is hopeful Fatehi will avoid the death penalty and may even be released from custody.

"At this point, they might still give her a prison sentence or they might release her completely," Afshin-Jam told CTV Newsnet.....

Under Iran's strict laws on chastity, if Fatehi had allowed the men to rape her and her niece, the girls would have been subjected to 100 lashes.

If they had been married at the time they were raped they would likely have been found guilty of adultery and sentenced to death by stoning.

Self-defence is a valid defence for murder in Iran, but it depends largely on the circumstances. For example, the fact that Fatehi and her niece were in a park in the evening could have affected her defence.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070110/iran_case_070110/20070110?hub=Canada

So like us.....

[Nbadan]

Well, If that's all it takes, then let's invade Saudi Arabia too...


A Saudi Arabian judge sentenced 20 foreigners to receive lashes and spend several months in prison after convicting them of attending a party where alcohol was served and men and women danced, a newspaper reported Sunday.

The defendants were among 433 foreigners, including some 240 women, arrested by the kingdom's religious police for attending the party in Jiddah, the state-guided newspaper Okaz said. It did not identify the foreigners, give their nationalities or say when the party took place.

Judge Saud al-Boushi sentenced the 20 to prison terms of three to four months and ordered them to receive an unspecified number of lashes, the newspaper said. They have the right to appeal, it added.

The prosecutor general charged the 20 with "drinking, arranging for impudent party, mixed dancing and shooting a video for the party," Okaz said.

The paper said the rest of those arrested were awaiting trial.

Saudi Arabia follows a strict interpretation of Islam under which it bans alcohol and meetings between unrelated men and women.

The religious police, a force resented by many Saudis for interfering in personal lives, enjoys wide powers. Its officers roam malls, markets, universities and other public places looking for such infractions as unrelated men and women mingling, men skipping Islam's five daily prayers and women with strands of hair showing from under their veil.

In May, the Interior Ministry restricted the powers of the religious police to just arresting suspects, because the police sometimes had held people incommunicado and insisted on taking part in ensuing investigations.

Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/saudi_foreigners_sentenced&printer=1)

Why leave any ambiguity?

[Nbadan]

Fact is, any attack on Iran may strengthen religious hard-liners hold on the country...


STANFORD, CALIF. - From the rhetoric of President Bush to his dispatch of Patriot air-defense systems and a second carrier battle group to the Persian Gulf, there are growing signs that the Bush administration is showing its willingness to solve the Iranian nuclear crisis with a preemptive military attack. The already tense US-Iran relationship is now a tinderbox.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was correct in stating recently that Iran is "acting in a very negative way" in the Middle East. The Islamic Republic trains and supports Hizbullah and Hamas. It provides aid and explosives to Iraqi Shiite militias who attack American soldiers. Most alarming, it seems determined to develop a nuclear bomb. This panics moderate Arab states and poses an existential threat to Israel. The ruling mullahs in Tehran terrorize their own citizens, especially pro-democracy groups.

Bombing Iran, however, will not resolve any of these dangers – it would exacerbate them. But where military strikes would fail, containment and comprehensive negotiations would succeed.

Contrary to conventional accounts, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is neither the most powerful official in Iran nor is he loved by the Iranian people. The authoritarian regime is not united behind Mr. Ahmadinejad and his policies, but divided and uncertain about who will prevail. The real kingpin in Iran is Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, and his failing health has launched a succession struggle. On one side of this fight are Ahmadinejad, a cabal of leaders from the Revolutionary Guards, and the Basij (the militia-cum-gangs that terrorize the regime's opponents). On the other side is a loose coalition united by their disdain for Ahmadinejad's gross economic mismanagement and reckless hubris. This includes Iran's bulging generation of young people, along with businessmen, technocrats, reformists, allies of former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, and even the conservative Motalefe Party.

After a year of rising stardom, Ahmadinejad is starting to lose in this power struggle. He has not delivered on his campaign pledges to fight corruption or improve the lot of the working classes and the poor. In recent elections for local councils as well as for the powerful 80-man Council of Experts (entrusted with the task of choosing the next spiritual leader) Ahmadinejad and his allies suffered humiliating defeats.

To reverse his waning popular support, Ahmadinejad has tried to change the subject from his domestic failures to his foreign adventures. He knows there is only one thing that could bring the people back to him – a US military attack on Iran. His repulsive remarks about Israel and his nuclear bravado aim precisely to provoke such an attack, which would create the crisis conditions necessary for his faction to seize full power.

Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0206/p09s01-coop.html)

[ChumpDumper]

What is your purpose of mercilessly pimping Iran as some kind of peacenik paradise that is America's buddy?

[ChumpDumper]

Fact is, any attack on Iran may strengthen religious hard-liners hold on the country...



Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0206/p09s01-coop.html)I completely agree with that contention, but why act like the hardliners don't have a hold on the country in the first place?

[Nbadan]

Peacenik Paradise? Hardly. Much like the second video states, the art of dehumanizing your enemy is a common pre-war tactic. All I'm doing is showing that life in Iran isn't as backwards as our M$M portrays it to be.

[Nbadan]

I completely agree with that contention, but why act like the hardliners don't have a hold on the country in the first place?

because anything we do will just make the problems worse, including bombing Iran's nuclear facilities. Let's let the next generation or Iranians replace these religious hardliners or risk raising another generation of lost fundamentalists.

[ChumpDumper]

Peacenik Paradise? Hardly.Do you want the link to your first post in this thread?

[ChumpDumper]

because anything we do will just make the problems worse, including bombing Iran's nuclear facilities. Let's let the next generation or Iranians replace these religious hardliners or risk raising another generation of lost fundamentalists.What if they don't replace them?

[Nbadan]

What if they don't replace them?

I'll take my chances versus the alternative.