Do you think we will invade Iran?



You're an idiot. The US doesn't defend freedom, we defend strategic interests and massacre countries. Granted, most countries had/have tyranical governments, but that doesnt change the fact that there 650k-700k Iraqi casualities.

On that note, if we get another urban invasion I'm joining the Marine corps. :D

I really get sick of this liberal fuck argument. The U.S. is the ONLY reason that many parts of the world enjoy freedom. I will promise you in 20 years if Iraq can keep the Islam fucks outa their government, that they will praise our liberation from the maniac killer dictatorship of Saddam. The liberals want to fuckin cry about all the casualities. Saddam killed, raped and tourted MILLIONS. Death and lots of it, is the price some times for freedom.

In 20 year, most of the flavor of the month liberals today, will think this way as well. Wisdom, age and experience tend to lead to more rational thinking (and an abandoment of the liberal fuck idealology as well ).
 
I really get sick of this liberal fuck argument. The U.S. is the ONLY reason that many parts of the world enjoy freedom. I will promise you in 20 years if Iraq can keep the Islam fucks outa their government, that they will praise our liberation from the maniac killer dictatorship of Saddam. The liberals want to fuckin cry about all the casualities. Saddam killed, raped and tourted MILLIONS. Death and lots of it, is the price some times for freedom.

In 20 year, most of the flavor of the month liberals today, will think this way as well. Wisdom, age and experience tend to lead to more rational thinking (and an abandoment of the liberal fuck idealology as well ).

Funny thing is, if NATO did the same thing instead of primarily a US incursion, the US would still get all the slack. Course if NATO was in complete control of it, it would be like another Desert Shield (and maybe eventually Desert Storm, where most troop casualties were friendly fire).

But keep in mind it was a conservative intelligence that had to use WMD to convince people as a nation that they were a threat. IF the US public and congress didn't think Iraq had the capability to nuke us, we would not have done a thing, no matter how many families were tortured and destroyed by the regime. I mean look at Burma, and a number of other countries that we blatantly KNOW are committing mass atrocities, but the US doesn't do a thing because the American people do not feel strongly enough bout the issue to support any kind of intervention unless their own lives are threatened.

Because of the mass publicity of the Iran protest, and a media look at Iran's real people plus the events involving Afganistan/Iraq, Its going to be very difficult to convince the nation and congress to sanction an attack on Iran, and the WMD claim isn't going to work as easily this time around.
 
Will we? Nope

Iran hasn't had a war since the late 80s, and we nearly destroyed Iraq's entire military during the first gulf war , making this second one easy.

Iran has Chemical and Bio weapons ,along with top of the line Russian AA equipment, the losses would be at least 10x higher than they have been, and people don't even have a stomach for the current conflict.

One of 3 things will happen

(Most Likely) Israel will bomb Iran , resulting in a MASSIVE middle east conflict, worse than all previous ones combined, with quite possibly ruining the US due to the loss of most oil imports.

(More Likely) Israel won't bomb Iran , who eventually gets a nuke and attempts to use it on Israel ,whether it works or not, Israel fights back with a few of their Jericho 3s , turning Iran into a sea of radioactive glass.

(Least Likely) Popular revolt takes place, and Iran's current mullah's are overthrown , leading to a more open and less conflict-driven country.

Currently, Iran is doing a TON of stuff to support instability in the region , like arming Hezbollah , so them wanting to acquire and utilize a nuke really isn't out of the question.
 
Currently, Iran is doing a TON of stuff to support instability in the region , like arming Hezbollah , so them wanting to acquire and utilize a nuke really isn't out of the question.

Course if they can actually refine enough nuclear material, its not that hard to make a small nuclear device strapped a suicide bomber. Though while we would expect that to happen on our own targets instead of their neighbors, the presence of a nuclear suicide bomber blowing up anywhere would be quite alarming, especially considering how much damage even a small device would do, and the lasting effect of the area around the impact.
 
I would much rather see an Iranian revolt to over throw the current regime, but they should get on with it already.

This would rock. The hardliners are dug in pretty deep though.

Regarding an Iranian revolt...

The recent death sentences handed out will make this difficult. The rulings will fan the flames of unrest, but effective revolution requires strategy, especially in the absence of guns.

Making matters worse, Iran's populace is young. A movement built upon a massive force of young revolutionaries can be effective, but it's easily distracted. There's a lot of emotion, but emotion is one of the simplest things to harness.

As a side note, this is the reason a revolution (not necessarily armed) will not happen in the U.S. There is far too much emotion. It destroys cohesiveness.

I remember reading the mini-revolution in Iran earlier this year was disorganized and thus, doomed from the beginning. And that's only in the context of forcing an election "do over." It would be more difficult by a magnitude of "X" to overthrow a regime.

... without the CIA mucking up the works, of course.
 
Course if they can actually refine enough nuclear material, its not that hard to make a small nuclear device strapped a suicide bomber. Though while we would expect that to happen on our own targets instead of their neighbors, the presence of a nuclear suicide bomber blowing up anywhere would be quite alarming, especially considering how much damage even a small device would do, and the lasting effect of the area around the impact.
I think your talking about hezbollah because no Iranian has ever strapped a bomb to himself and blown himself up.
 
Just read an article on a previously secret iranian nuclear site. This site is advertised as a site to produce peaceful nuclear energy. The problem is it would take 90 years for enough material to be refined there to run a reactor. It DOES produce enough material to make one bomb a year. If this is true, it seems obvious they are trying to get a nuclear weapon built and I would say Israel would be target #1
 
I can't see it happening. Used to be we would conquer a country and then have them make really good cars for us on the cheap, like Germany and Japan.

For whatever reason we quit that policy and it has really messed up the automotive industry as a result - German and Japaneese cars got expensive. Look how much money we spent on Iraq and Afganistan without getting a single automobile in return.

What's the point in invading if we can't take the oil back with us for free or at least get some decent rides.
 
The sooner the US and UK gets rid of the Israeli lobbies the better.

I said in another thread that if we stopped supporting Israel, 90% of the 'Muslim threat' would vanish. And why shouldn't we? What good does supporting Israel get us?

What part of your ass did you pull your "90%" stat from exactly? The sad truth that you left sided, soon-to-be-bowing-to-mecca Israel haters, fail to realize is that if that the US didn't come to your rescue in WW2 you would be speaking German right now.

So if you don't see sense in the US giving support to countries with common interests AKA allies like Israel, than you are either too left sided, a jihad supporter or an antisemite of which case I won't even waste my time explaning "what good supporting Israel will get us".

I think your talking about hezbollah because no Iranian has ever strapped a bomb to himself and blown himself up.

And they wouldn't even think of it either....
Iran's Suicide Brigades: Terrorism Resurgent :: Middle East Quarterly

Our President now is a Jimmy Carter and will not do the job that he needs to do but the liberals won't be in the White House forever. Let's just hope that they don't get a viable nuke before a competent person takes back the White House.

It takes a Carter to bring a Regan.

What's the point in invading if we can't take the oil back with us for free or at least get some decent rides.

And persian rugs of course.
 
It takes a Carter to bring a Regan.

Technically it takes a Reagan to bring a Regan

3234-1.jpg
 
i smile to see... you guys are stil so proud to go for war.

the whole country being the super power of world. itself is facing financial problems, unemployment rate touching the sky..

due to only the craze of war and war...good luck on war...lols

all the money is eaten by the fire flames of war...

i dont think iraq was a enemy of us ever,

no nuke weapons found there.. but yes oil is found alot,
maybe that oil was desired and allegations of nuke were placed on iraq..lols. its so ridiculous.


i dont support war, i support peace and harmony..
because water is cure of fire. fire is never cure of fire.

good bye

You just blew your cover, sleeper cell dude.