Posted on 02/21/2006 9:13:28 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Thanks for mentioning that Marv sat in on the Impeachemnt love fest CSpud had on yesterday.
Yes .. we could
But it will be real messy and a whole lot of countries are going to be pissed at us
I'm not saying it couldn't be done or shouldn't be done .. I'm just dealing with the reality of it all
From what I've read there doesn't seem to be any way to take out the whole program frm the air. We would need enough good intelligence to be able to tell where the bottlenecks are and concentrate there.
Let's hope we have good intelligence this time.
If Iran hands one nuke to Al-Qaeda or another terrorist group, it might well be our direct problem.
Too bad our Cruise missle arsenal was depleted blowing Monica off the front pages.
The bombing raid on Osirak worked, but the Iranians have studied that and drawn conclusions: dig deep, conceal, and disperse. Facilities that cannot be hidden or dug in deep enough can be put `in the basement', with civilian human shields on top.
It is casual nonsense to presume that there is any simple, surgical way to stop Iran from getting nukes. Kalb is right. Bombing wouldn't work. It would inflame passions without incinerating much of the dirty work itself.
I'm not suggesting it would be easy, but I have to believe that a well-conceived strike would significantly set back the Iranian program if not entirely end it.
Kalb must be right. We should let the Mullahs get nukes and destroy New York City and our economy. A brilliant plan! [NOT]
I don't know how many times Iran has threatened to "wipe Israel off the map" in the last few months.
I don't think they will hesitate to lob nukes into Israel once they have the capability.
I hope Israel isn't waiting on us...there isn't the stomach in this country for another war.
I've become very concerned that Iran's cozying up to China could lead to a mutual defense pact.
She sure was one expensive whore.
I should add that in addition to the military difficulties, the political difficulties would be enormous. For one thing, Ahmedinejad is currently very weak, having alienated both the Khamenite clerics and, obviously, the reformers. But an attack would give him the chance to consolidate power -- it would play right into his hand.
Why... it might be as violent as if we were to print Cartoons of their 'Prophet'.
What else can they do?
Why do you think the mollahs want to destroy New York?
Without boots on the ground---fuggagetaboutIT.
Besides, the Iranians seem to WANT us to try some sort of limited air strike. It would be to their long term advantage in the region if we did so, since that would forEVER justify ANYTHING they did against us, including nuking New York, L.A., Washington, etc.
Let's not give them want they think they want, unless we are willing to FINISH the job!!!
Well if Marvin Kalb says so, it must be true.
The war on terror is our battle .. and the kooks in the Iran government are or support the terrorists
I'd say 9/11 was a clue.
There's only one way to know for sure. Let's find out.
The Iranians did that?
Why not go after Pakistan? They already have nukes, and many in the government have supported Al Qaeda, something the Iranian regime hasn't done. I'd say the risk of a Pakistani nuke being used against the United States would be much higher.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.