[Fidelista]

Hello my friends!.
I have just finished reading an article in the Jerusalem Post, and I thought it was important. I am interested in how the good folks here in this forum feel about a new war---is it justified--can we 'win' it---would it be supported?.
I am not a Generel or a Banker, but I have serious doubts about this. >f

Report: US discussing strikes on Iran


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Douglas Davis, THE JERUSALEM POST Nov. 21, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LONDON – Pentagon officials are said to be discussing possible military action to neutralize Iran's nuclear weapons threat, according to a report in London's Observer. US administration sources are quoted as saying that air strikes – "either by the US or Israel" – to wipe out Iran's fledgling nuclear program would be difficult because of a lack of clear intelligence about where key components are located.

Instead, sources quoted by the paper said the Pentagon is considering strikes in support of regime change, including attacks on the leadership, as well as on political and security targets
.
The new "modeling" at the Pentagon, with its shift in emphasis from suspected nuclear sites to political target lists, is said to be causing deep anxiety among officials in Britain, France, and Germany, who last week appeared to have negotiated a deal with Teheran to cease work that could contribute to a nuclear weapons program. But Washington is said to be skeptical about the deal.

Link>>> http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...=1101010793582

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Fidelista

Hello my friends!.

lemme just look at this politically for a moment....the bush administration continues to insist that hussein had all those WMD, but, to his credit he has softened his message a bit, claiming now that our goal is a free iraq....

it's one or the other or something altogether different....his future actions will be very revealing in this regard

so how would a "regime" change alter his political truth?....for many progressives, and a big chunk of the international community, not a bit....it would only substantiate what they have suspected all along.....

and can you image how the pakistanis would feel?....like the next on the list?....and they might want to seriously consider are the benefits of their "alliance" (even if you only consider it a wary friendliness) with america, not to mention giving yet another boost to world wide terrorism and polarity

the other thing this brings to mind is some speculative conjecture i read about 3/4 months ago.....that some consider the presidency to be under the thumb of the military, at least in the sense that the military EXPECTS and DEMANDS and ever increasing share of the national budget to pursue its dreams of perfect weaponry, perfect positioning, and unending "practice" for both.

personally, i think for the pentagon to be discussing this NOW is well beyond anything i would call sane.

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Fidelista

Hello my friends!.
I have just finished reading an article in the Jerusalem Post, and I thought it was important. I am interested in how the good folks here in this forum feel about a new war---is it justified--can we 'win' it---would it be supported?.
I am not a Generel or a Banker, but I have serious doubts about this. >f

Report: US discussing strikes on Iran


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Douglas Davis, THE JERUSALEM POST Nov. 21, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LONDON – Pentagon officials are said to be discussing possible military action to neutralize Iran's nuclear weapons threat, according to a report in London's Observer. US administration sources are quoted as saying that air strikes – "either by the US or Israel" – to wipe out Iran's fledgling nuclear program would be difficult because of a lack of clear intelligence about where key components are located.

Instead, sources quoted by the paper said the Pentagon is considering strikes in support of regime change, including attacks on the leadership, as well as on political and security targets
.
The new "modeling" at the Pentagon, with its shift in emphasis from suspected nuclear sites to political target lists, is said to be causing deep anxiety among officials in Britain, France, and Germany, who last week appeared to have negotiated a deal with Teheran to cease work that could contribute to a nuclear weapons program. But Washington is said to be skeptical about the deal.

Link>>> http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...=1101010793582

First Iran has agree to stop it's nuclear enrichement progrram, second the people of Iran want a change in their gov. If we start strikes against Iran we will take the people that like us and turn them against us just like we have done with so much of the rest of the world!

[Rep]

Fidelista -
"Hello my friends!.
I have just finished reading an article in the Jerusalem Post, and I thought it was important. I am interested in how the good folks here in this forum feel about a new war---is it justified--can we 'win' it---would it be supported?.
I am not a Generel or a Banker, but I have serious doubts about this."

If President Bush wants to attack another country he will do so. I would imagine he will use the same tactics as the last time. He will hype us into believing what he wants us to believe with facts and consequences mattering little.

The President has surronded himself with people that will provide to him what he wants to hear and only what he wants to hear. Action will then be taken based on one sided information.

His decision will be supported by the political machine that Karl Rove has created. This will then create a closed loop feedback system that has worked so well for him.

That's how America now operates.

[bassetman]

Write your elected officiacls and let them know how you feel about this!

[EdGreene]

Originally Posted by Rep

Fidelista -
"Hello my friends!.
I have just finished reading an article in the Jerusalem Post, and I thought it was important. I am interested in how the good folks here in this forum feel about a new war---is it justified--can we 'win' it---would it be supported?.
I am not a Generel or a Banker, but I have serious doubts about this."

If President Bush wants to attack another country he will do so. I would imagine he will use the same tactics as the last time. He will hype us into believing what he wants us to believe with facts and consequences mattering little.

The President has surronded himself with people that will provide to him what he wants to hear and only what he wants to hear. Action will then be taken based on one sided information.

His decision will be supported by the political machine that Karl Rove has created. This will then create a closed loop feedback system that has worked so well for him.

That's how America now operates.

I foresee long range, "over the horizon" strikes by sub based Cruise missiles. We can launch from aircraft over the Persian Gulf.
Remember too Israel is not bound by anything or anyone. They only have to (Secretly) inform the US they're planning to strike, as I believe they've done before.

Either way, Iran loses its nuclear capability for a few years.
And Dubya? He'd face impeachment. The people would demand it.

[Fidelista]

Originally Posted by bassetman

Write your elected officiacls and let them know how you feel about this!

If I did---I might be jailed!
Seriously , this is getting ridiculous.
Attacking based on the possible desire to produce weapons.
Considering Israeli "help" Just what we need
What really concerns me is a number of things.
In Iraq, we can extract ourselves, although at great cost,a situation that leaves things worse than when we started, but a option.
If we attack Iran we well may start something that we are not in a position to finish--- throw the whole region in turmoil--with "moderate" Govts being overthrown. A fight to finish with a religion and several cultures and nations.
And where comes the money and troops?.
Would we attempt to occupy---install a puppit Govt?.
I hate to be pessimistic but I think even the craziest ideas may fly with this Administration.
I am not an expert in this subject, but I have been correct in my views about the Iraqi situation --SO FAR.
I hope I am wrong about the outcome of a Iranian adventure.
Ps ---Glad to meet you REP. I have read many of your posts. >f

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Fidelista

If I did---I might be jailed!
Seriously , this is getting ridiculous.
Attacking based on the possible desire to produce weapons.
Considering Israeli "help" Just what we need
What really concerns me is a number of things.
In Iraq, we can extract ourselves, although at great cost,a situation that leaves things worse than when we started, but a option.
If we attack Iran we well may start something that we are not in a position to finish--- throw the whole region in turmoil--with "moderate" Govts being overthrown. A fight to finish with a religion and several cultures and nations.
And where comes the money and troops?.
Would we attempt to occupy---install a puppit Govt?.
I hate to be pessimistic but I think even the craziest ideas may fly with this Administration.
I am not an expert in this subject, but I have been correct in my views about the Iraqi situation --SO FAR.
I hope I am wrong about the outcome of a Iranian adventure.
Ps ---Glad to meet you REP. I have read many of your posts. >f

We tried that once in Iran, didn't go over well, and that's why they still have some distrust of us and what we are doing in Iraq!

[bassetman]

Hey Rep how are the left overs and the new HD?

[Fidelista]

Most know already what my opinion is.
What I am curious about is---is there anyone here that would approve of this? ---see wisdom in it.
I am interested to see if the 'right' leaning members of this forum support this , and if so why?.
I would suspect little support for this among Republicans, which could change events---hopefully. >f

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Fidelista

Most know already what my opinion is.
What I am curious about is---is there anyone here that would approve of this? ---see wisdom in it.
I am interested to see if the 'right' leaning members of this forum support this , and if so why?.
I would suspect little support for this among Republicans, which could change events---hopefully. >f

Well shoot Fidelista, they want to invade everyone to "Liberate" them!

[Davey7549]

John
Now you are talking through another orifice not normally used for intelligent communication!
What makes you think Conservatives would go along with this idea especially after the intel mistake in Iraq!
Seems to me you may be selling most of us short here!

Dave

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Davey7549

John
Now you are talking through another orifice not normally used for intelligent communication!
What makes you think Conservatives would go along with this idea especially after the intel mistake in Iraq!
Seems to me you may be selling most of us short here!

Dave

Normally I would jump to agree with you on that Davy, but look at some of the wingers here who just switch the rational for the war from WMDs to the "intent to have WMDs" and "liberation".

If any of the other righties here come along and renounce the idea of attacking Iran, I will retract my opinion!

[Davey7549]

John
I would be surprised if they do not!

Dave

[linskyjack]

If we were to attack Iran, then it would be through proxy--the Israelis--They would take the fall for it--willingly. I do hope we have learned something in Iraq--You dont win the hearts and minds of people by blowing up their homes, even though you are trying to help them.