Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran?

[chance1]

John McCain ran closer than any republican could have imagined

and was within striking distance

if the banks had not fallen ......................... he might have been elected

had another republican won the nomination

romney
huckabee

would've gotten obliterated by double digits

yep - mccain did not run a great campaign - he did not have the $ that barack obama had

not sure what the point of this thread is

oh yeah

there is none

alfie ran out of film

 

[USEDCAR]

Nope the usa can not afford another war and the troops are stretch way too thin and it will cause a draft to happen. And i don't feel like getting off ma couch and be forced to fight a war

 

[kallipolis]

The new revelations on Iran's nuclear weapons programme, does strengthen the Israeli case.

The Arab neighbourhood is encouraging more robust action against Iran.

Another view, that encourages less sabre rattling, and much more diplomacy:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...oled-for-sake-of-the-middle-east-1793486.html

 

[NickCole]

Chance, John "Sold My Pals Out for a Pack of Virginia Slims" McCain lost in a landslide. Please don't re-write history, certainly not in Haiku format, dontchaknow.

Considering the mess Bush & Co had made of it for Republicans, McCain's inherent weakness with Republicans and the huge financial and media advantage the Obama campaign had, it's amazing it took a crisis for Obama to pull ahead.

In mid-September McCain was ahead of Obama.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

(Scroll down one for the chart)

 

[NickCole]

^ The election was in November, not September. McCain was "basking" in the afterglow of Sarah Palin. Obama won in a landslide and he won for many reasons, get over it.

I'm aware of who won and by how much -- as I'm aware of what he's [not] done with it.

My point stands. The democratic candidate, for the reasons mentioned, should have been soaring beyond the GOP all through the general campaign. That McCain not only kept it a contest but actually pulled ahead of Obama and was only defeated because an economic crisis suddenly took the front pages is noteworthy.

 

[NickCole]

^ Noteworthy? Noteworthy to whom, to a Republican, perhaps?

Noteworthy to any intellectually honest student of history.

Anywhom, may we move back to topic, the topic being Iran?

​

As you wish.

I was responding to a side-trip the thread starter decided to take.

 

[chance1]

^ The election was in November, not September. McCain was "basking" in the afterglow of Sarah Palin. Obama won in a landslide and he won for many reasons, get over it.

funny wouldn't think u would be referring to a palin choice as "basking" - irony?

as for "get over it" u brought it up ................ stupidly in this excuse of a thread

mccain by any measure ran about as close as one could for a repub following gwb and given the obama/dem political machine

nick is right

i am right

u should lay in the corner and take a nap doggie

remember it's 7 for 1 in dog years

 

[opinterph]

… In light of President Obama's statement today, should the US and/or its allies bomb Iran?

Is this the statement to which you refer?

Statements by President Obama,
French President Sarkozy,
and British Prime Minister Brown
 on Iranian Nuclear Facility​

 

[01solara]

John McCain in his failed and laughable campaign in 2008 advocated bombing Iran. In light of President Obama's statement today, should the US and/or its allies bomb Iran?

​

Bomb the hell out of them and do not rebuild. The problems with Iraq had nothing to do with the military campaign. They were related to trying to rebuild and give them a chance at democracy. Democratic reforms should come from Iranians. Prevention of a crazy lunatic having nuclear weapons at his disposal should be done from the air. We must stop rebuilding these places we need to destroy them and leave them destroyed.

 

[Harke the Boeotarch]

John McCain in his failed and laughable campaign in 2008 advocated bombing Iran. In light of President Obama's statement today, should the US and/or its allies bomb Iran?

The US cannot afford another war like the one in Iraq or the 'Peace Missions' in Afghanistan. If they want to do anything at all, they should probably warn, nuke & run.

 

[justapixel]

Dumbasses McCain and Palin...If we were to bomb Iran the whole MiddleEast would explode

Umm, Iranians are Shites (and Persians). Most Arabs are Sunni.

The Arabs would be happy if we took Iran out.

 

[TX-Beau]

^ Pretty much. America cannot afford another war...it's high-time to stop playing neighbourhood watchdog when domestic issues are rampant in America itself.

But, but but, America© is world police!! What would the rest of you do without us!

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYSYipouABI[/ame]

 

[Ambrocious]

There is no easy way to deal with Iran in my point of view. If Iran is bombed...dam...it looks like a lot of other people will be pissed off also. Pretty much WWIII will begin and we can kiss all of our butts good by.

P.S. CowboyBob, I love your avatar.

 

[TX-Beau]

You know, it never fails to amaze me when people in this country advocate the wholesale slaughter of other people. Who the hell do we want to be as a nation? Because that’s the question underlying all these arguments. Do we want to be a nation running scared that strikes out violently at anyone and everyone? Do we want to be a nation of fear-mongering and prejudice? Do we actually believe in the things we say we believe in?

Why not just have done with it and tell the world that if we don’t like you, if we think you’re a threat, if we don’t like the way you govern yourselves, we, Imperial America, will reduce you to rubble.

Is that who we want to be?

The problems facing all of us are not easily solved, but who among us actually believes that we can bomb the rest of the world into peace and harmony.

So we bomb Iran, and then North Korea, but why stop there, if this is a winning strategy, why not bomb China, then who else? Surely there are many many more who would benefit from American bombs raining from the sky.

All the world needs is thousands of tons of US ordinance raining from the sky to see the justice of the American way. You know that in the end, they'll all love us for the freedom we dropped on their people.

 

[Harke the Boeotarch]

All the world needs is thousands of tons of US ordinance raining from the sky to see the justice of the American way. You know that in the end, they'll all love us for the freedom we dropped on their people.

Nobody ever ruled the world by smiling and shaking hands. If you think bombings that kill 'innocent' civilians are bad, what do you think of of all the killings in Iraq?

War is not for the squeamish.

I'd much prefer a strike that takes out those who must be killed rather than some fake 'peace mission' where the Allied forces are continually ambushed.

Either strike or leave it be.

 

[chance1]

I don't think it's any of our business if Iran has nukes or not.

They are a soveriegn country and have the right to defend themselves however they like.

We have thousands of nukes.Who are we to say they can't have any?

this is a classic "head buried in the sand" POV

the guy who runs the country is a nut - a dangerous one

dangerous to his own people now - and with a nuke - more dangerous to them and to the rest of the world

they cannot be allowed to have nukes

 

[TX-Beau]

Nobody ever ruled the world by smiling and shaking hands. If you think bombings that kill 'innocent' civilians are bad, what do you think of of all the killings in Iraq?

War is not for the squeamish.

I'd much prefer a strike that takes out those who must be killed rather than some fake 'peace mission' where the Allied forces are continually ambushed.

Either strike or leave it be.

I think that killings we commit are our responsibility and killings done by other people aren't. And I think that we are not exonerated by the reprehensible acts of others if we behave in a reprehensible fashion.

The rest of that sounds a lot like playground testosterone posturing.

 

[chance1]

Classic you can't have 65 year old technology because only we can.

So Chance1, how do you disallow Iran from having nukes? Sanctions? Bombings? Invasion?

obviously we're not the only ones with nukes

pres. obama does not want them to have nukes

they are the classic renegade nation with a leader who has shown he is not to be trusted

as with anything force is the last resort

i trust the president will do the right thing

 

[chance1]

You ignored the question. What would you do? You've said they cannot be allowed to have nukes. What do you want Obama to do? And when?

i didn't ignore the question sweetie

i don't think bombing iran is prudent though

i am not a govt official

and thus i don't set policy

i know u imagine that u do

pres. obama and his advisors r there to make those tactical decisions - that's what THEY do

but allowing nukes is not good policy

 

[01solara]

i didn't ignore the question sweetie

i don't think bombing iran is prudent though

i am not a govt official

and thus i don't set policy

i know u imagine that u do

pres. obama and his advisors r there to make those tactical decisions - that's what THEY do

but allowing nukes is not good policy

Peace though weakness has never worked and never will. God help us we are in big trouble. It feels like most of America followed the pied piper in the last election and are happily going along to their own demise.