dubya's offense on Iran repaid with Iran's defense on dubya

[boutons_]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1198517213523&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[JoeChalupa]

Just a link and no thoughts?

[boutons_]

The article speaks for itself.
Russia arming Iran with some pretty powerful hardware. And I bet China has done secretly, or will do, the same to win favor and get access to Iranian oil, and perhaps to build Iran's nuke plants.

dubya's actions cause reactions, not that dubya has idea of how physics works. His brain-dead ideological refusal, not really his but the neo-cunts', to even talk to Iran certainly doesn't make Iran feel secure.

The pre-election window is closing for dickhead to attack non-threatening Iran pre-emptively. Will he do it? Iran's counter-attack seems to have gotten more powerful. Certainly pre-emptively attacking Iraq cost a lot more than dickhead expected, with no serious off-setting access to Iraqi oil.

[JoeChalupa]

Sometimes actions speak louder than words but there are also consequences to one's actions. I have no doubts that Iraq is better without Saddam but there are other countries who would be much better off with a new leader and where I feel the US should be involved for humane reasons. There are other dictators who are killing their own people but since it doesn't effect our national security we let it go.

[boutons_]

"I have no doubts that Iraq is better without Saddam"

:lol GMAFB And I guess you think geo-political stability and M/E + US security are also "better" post-Saddam?

"US should be involved for humane reasons"

How naively silly. Like all countries, the US, esp run by Repugs, is out for its own $interests, like enriching the oilcos and the MIC and for imperialistic aggrandizement, which was exactly the overriding goal in attacking Iraq. That Saddam was a "bad man" was/is totally beside the point.

And the US can't force "freedom and democracy" into any country. Why isn't US "humanitarianly" replacing the totally undemocratic, anti-freedom leadership in Saudi Arabia? Because the Saudis and the US/UK oilcos collude on oil supply and prices.

btw, it has been months since a majority of the democratically elected Iraqi parliament has voted for the US to set timetable for withdrawal. In the same sense that dubya ignores overhwhelmingly negative US citizenry, Maliki does a deal with the US to spite parliament. Some fucking democracies.

Iran has every right to arm itself with the best hardware oil money can buy, in the face of dubya's persistant sabre rattling. Perhaps that will dissuade dubya from attacking.

[JoeChalupa]

"I have no doubts that Iraq is better without Saddam"

:lol GMAFB And I guess you think geo-political stability and M/E + US security are also "better" post-Saddam?

"US should be involved for humane reasons"

How naively silly. Like all countries, the US, esp run by Repugs, is out for its own $interests, like enriching the oilcos and the MIC and for imperialistic aggrandizement, which was exactly the overriding goal in attacking Iraq. That Saddam was a "bad man" was/is totally beside the point.

And the US can't force "freedom and democracy" into any country. Why isn't US "humanitarianly" replacing the totally undemocratic, anti-freedom leadership in Saudi Arabia? Because the Saudis and the US/UK oilcos collude on oil supply and prices.

btw, it has been months since a majority of the democratically elected Iraqi parliament has voted for the US to set timetable for withdrawal. In the same sense that dubya ignores overhwhelmingly negative US citizenry, Maliki does a deal with the US to spite parliament. Some fucking democracies.

Iran has every right to arm itself with the best hardware oil money can buy, in the face of dubya's persistant sabre rattling. Perhaps that will dissuade dubya from attacking.

I'm glad to see you responded without a link to someone else's opinion. But I disagree and I'm not naive. And if you think Iraq would be better with Saddam you are not seeing the whole picture. Things ARE better in Iraq and while I do feel we went into Iraq under false pretenses the end results need to be acknowledged. Open your eyes a bit and give credit when it is due. Bush fucked up by not allowing our military to do their jobs and democrats need to take some blame too.
The surge should have been done years ago and perhaps we'd much closer to end today.

[boutons_]

There aren't any "end results" in Iraq. Only the eternally evolving current situation, which is more due to the ethnic cleansing of Bagdad. Even the Army is not trumpeting the current situation, because they know that it is extremely fragile (and not fully due to the Army's surge, anyway). Furthermore, the Army told us a few months ago the Army would "break" next April due to exhaustion of peope and equipment.

The fire under Iraq is still on full boil and won't go out just because of the surge or ANYTHING the USA does.

"the end"? dubya himself said he intended to occupy Iraq for decades, Korea-style, and is building 5 enormous bases to that end, 100% against the will of the Iraqi people and parliament. Unlike Korea where the occupation was against external NK, the Iraqi occupation is against the internal Iraqi civil war and to grab the Iraqi oil.

[Wild Cobra]

This is not a worthy thread.

So fucking what. Iran bought some defensive surface to air missiles.

wiki: S-300 Missile series (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300)

Think those things can lock on our latest?

[boutons_]

Exactly, USA spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined, and 10x more than 2nd place China, but USA needs to go bust up other countries because they threaten USA?

[Wild Cobra]

Exactly, USA spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined, and 10x more than 2nd place China, but USA needs to go bust up other countries because they threaten USA?
How do you extrapolate that from the given article? It is no more than an anonymous expert source making a statement, without even claiming a nationality or position. He might not even be a real expert on the subject.

This article is absolutely useless.

[boutons_]

"Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said Wednesday,"

OK, agreed, he was lying. LA Times lied, too:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iranrussia27dec27,1,6359648.story

lots of lying on this Iranian announcement.

[SouthernFried]

Are links proof that people cannot think?

Discuss...

(without links)