Iran may face US attack after all
- Thread starter Changleen
- Start date
hmmmm, at least he knows how to spell "you're" and "too"... that right there puts him a couple rungs above you on the evolutionary ladder.The Amish said:
ink:
Corrections are in red.The Amish said:
I have been living in the US for 5 years. Long enough to figure out that there are a lot of people here like The Amish. They want solutions, dammit.
It doesn't matter how stupid, irrational, or untenable the solution is. They are so stupid themselves that the fact that someone made a decision, any decision, is like a psychological handjob for them. It gives them relief.
This is why being painted as a "flip flopper" is bad. An "American" doesn't change his goddamn mind, no matter the facts or reality of the situation.
It doesn't matter how stupid, irrational, or untenable the solution is. They are so stupid themselves that the fact that someone made a decision, any decision, is like a psychological handjob for them. It gives them relief.
This is why being painted as a "flip flopper" is bad. An "American" doesn't change his goddamn mind, no matter the facts or reality of the situation.
grammar fags don't exactly impress me muchdante said:Corrections are in red.
I don't think it's quite as simple as that. People hate a guy who will do ANYTHING to get a vote. Because, well, they know that's all he wants. I have alot more respect for Ralph Nader than John Kerry for this very reason.Silver said:
People who enjoy looking ignorant because they can't properly express themselves in their native language don't impress the rest of us much.BurlyShirley said:
I'm just saying attack the idiot, not his grammar. That's lame. Unless, of course, your grammar is attacked first. Then it's fair game.Transcend said:
Except Kerry wasn't a flip-flopper, but way to eat up the sound bite.BurlyShirley said:
What people want is someone that not only makes decisions but can explain them in the simplest possible language. Kerry's failure was language, not a lack of decisiveness or principle. Bush explains things in the simplest possible language (simpler than I ever thought was possible). It doesn't matter what the actual decision is, just that he made one and the majority of the population can understand it in the same terms he does (a chimp could understand it in the same terms he does).
Kerry was the biggest flip-flopper Ive ever seen in my life. You don't get photographed throwing your war medals over the whitehouse fence and then try to play war hero to win votes. Im sorry, but that doesnt work.ohio said:
There's other stuff thats debatable about that maybe he was mislead with intel so he voted for the war, etc... Im not even talking about that.
I think the US is lacking a lot more deployable ground forces and equipment than most people seem to notice. I have serious doubt we have the manpower and equipment for a full invation of Iran while supporting fronts in ANA and Iraq.
I also think that if we were to use what forces we do have to invade Iran, we would be in the single worst spot in case of an attack here. Let alone the ability to respond to something like a natural disaster if we ship what few Guardsmen we do have overseas.
I also think that if we were to use what forces we do have to invade Iran, we would be in the single worst spot in case of an attack here. Let alone the ability to respond to something like a natural disaster if we ship what few Guardsmen we do have overseas.
Only when you start to throw around insults calling people stupid, you had better at least be semi-coherent and appear at least a little bit literate.BurlyShirley said:
I just like to get all my internettin' done at one site. I can wank while I read about bikes and politics. Really a timesaver.Changleen said:
Wow, someone needs to welcome you to reality. No one is GIVING Iran anything. No one has the right to DENY Iran anything however, they are a sovereign nation, just like the US. Deal with it.The Amish said:
Please educate yourself before you argue about a topic, fox news doesn't count as education.
Amish people most likely are highly insulted by the kinds of behavior shown by "The Amish".
I doubt that would matter much to "The Amish" though. probably that's part of the "cool insider joke" about his name.
I doubt that would matter much to "The Amish" though. probably that's part of the "cool insider joke" about his name.
Im pretty confident we americans will "DEAL" with it, although I highly doubt it will be in a way you approve of. Thank god we're not all the coward you are. Why dont you wait for your balls to drop before you try an insult me any moreTranscend said:Wow, someone needs to welcome you to reality. No one is GIVING Iran anything. No one has the right to DENY Iran anything however, they are a sovereign nation, just like the US. Deal with it.
Please educate yourself before you argue about a topic, fox news doesn't count as education.
Curiously, I would be willing to bet I am older then you, as well as much more highly educated and in tune with world politics. Not to mention being slightly more in touch with reality.The Amish said:
Just a guess though.
Best part ius if they move on Iran, they will get their asses handed to them much as they are in Iraq, only worse as the equipment and manpower isn't there. They will also descend the entire region into chaos, and should expect MANY more attacks at home.
Yeah, but Transcend also likes guys.Changleen said:
mmmmmm....smooth, hairless dolphinsChangleen said:
Were gettin our ass's handed to us? You must be jokin! We may be loosing some men here and there but were far from gettin our ass's handed to us. Why dont you do a little homework on the casualties we've suffered in a single day in previous wars. Better yet why dont you try and imagine what would happen if we didnt have a country half full of commie libs like yourself insisting our men go into battle with one hand taped to their dick and the other glued up their ass. This war would be over, but instead we spend months worryin about whos gettin panties put on their heads instead of doin what needs to be done and getting the hell outTranscend said:Curiously, I would be willing to bet I am older then you, as well as much more highly educated and in tune with world politics. Not to mention being slightly more in touch with reality.
Just a guess though.
Best part ius if they move on Iran, they will get their asses handed to them much as they are in Iraq, only worse as the equipment and manpower isn't there. They will also descend the entire region into chaos, and should expect MANY more attacks at home.
Right, just like it wasn't handed to you in Vietnam either, right?The Amish said:
This isn't WW2, things have advanced significantly. You are an idiot, thanks for proving that. Bye now.
Amish, you are a dumbass....but that was perfect.The Amish said:
Well, vietnam, we had what? 50,000 die?Transcend said:Right, just like it wasn't handed to you in Vietnam either, right?
This isn't WW2, things have advanced significantly. You are an idiot, thanks for proving that. Bye now.
Thats less than attend a pro football game.
The vietnamese lost, what? 2 million or something?
Yeah...asses handed to us.......riiiiiiiiiiiight.
No political point was proven, the NVA/Kong took what they wanted, and the US looked stupid.BurlyShirley said:
Ya, I'd say you lost.
Id trade few thousand miles of that godforsaken hellhole for 2 million of my countrymen not to die, but hey, thats just me.Transcend said:
Really? You'd surrender the US to a foreign invader if it meant you could minimize loss of life?BurlyShirley said:
Wars are not just numbers game, but also political will. During the Vietnam and Iraqi conflicts the will of American people to win is not as strong, as lets say, WWII.The Amish said:
If we committed our full resources, like reinstituting the draft, there would be no doubt we would win in Iraq.
Even Afghanistan the political will was total victory at any cost. In comparison, going into Kosovo was zero.
only if i were vietnamese.Silver said:
The rules controlling nation states development and possession of nuclear weapons are tenuous at best. Do you think the Western powers wanted East Germany to have nukes? But what, short of attacking the USSR, would have stopped them?Transcend said:
Would Israel drop the bomb because they are mad? Doubtful. However, they have attacked Iraq with traditional weapons before to stop them from developing the bomb: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Osirak.html.
Obviously, the West allows their allies to possess the bomb and attempts to thwart their enemies, like North Korea. However, short of invasion, the only other options are political and economic embargo, which North Korea is suffering from anyway.
Exactly.Silver said:
I agree 100%, that was sort of my point. They US and it's alies (or pretty much then entire "western" world) thinks that they should be the only ones with nukes. They deal with Russia and China, basically only because they cannot stop them with the use of force.sanjuro said:
I know all too well about Osirak, only Iran is a MUCH larger country to hide things in.
Multiple locations, easier to hide stuff, harder to find stuff. Especially in a country where the people aren't very likely to work as agents for the US.sanjuro said: