Posted on 02/21/2006 9:13:28 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
For this reason alone, they won't be left in place.
bump
I know they have a MOU with iran. http://www.fin24.co.za/articles/economy/display_article.asp?Nav=ns&lvl2=econ&ArticleID=1518-1785_1883427
Kalb is a nut case just like his elder brother. The Persian/Iranians don't learn by being nicey nice. They learn by having their heads banged against concrete.
We need to be preparing for the Big War that is to come rather than running around pretending it isn't coming.
Hurricane Katrina Vandenheuvel? She's a real piece of work.
Let's face the reality, grim as it may be. The only way to get the Iranians to stop is Regime Change. That is a completely different target set.
I've been thinking that the reason we have stayed our hand so far is in order to let our intelligence assets do their work.
REGIME CHANGE.
Who? The Media or the Muzies? I'm beginning to think that might be fine to let the Muzies run wild against lefties...as long as they take out the lying media first.
As usual he is another ignorant liberal enamored with the sound of his own voice that Fox has brought on to try to further expand its audience base beyond the right thinkers.
Then why are the Israeli's practicing it in the Arizona desert?
I visualize, if Iran gets the nuke, them telling the Israeli's to leave Israel by a certain date, and telling Us to leave Iraq by a certain date, after which we will be blown out of our respective places. Whether they would go through with it, I don't know.
Marvin Kalb must be one of those military experts the MSM brings to the screen to tell us what and how to think. Didn't he used to be a Hollywood commentator?
Because we can't go after them once they have the nuke. If we can stop them getting it, we're much better off. Pakistan is a big problem. Don't think it isn't keeping plenty of military analysts up at night. But while we have the head of state on our side, we're not going to rock the boat.
So, I know you meant to end the argument by using the tactic of "if we can't take all of them we shouldn't take any of them", but your argument is without merit. I reject you, Praise God, I reject you, I reject you.
"REGIME CHANGE."
The American taxpayers can't afford to change all the regimes that need to be changed.
We may not be able to afford NOT to change this regime.
"Because we can't go after them once they have the nuke. If we can stop them getting it, we're much better off. Pakistan is a big problem. Don't think it isn't keeping plenty of military analysts up at night. But while we have the head of state on our side, we're not going to rock the boat."
Yep, it's a really crappy situation - we are supporting a brutal, military, nuclear powered regime that turns a blind eye to cross border terrorism into India because the other choices are worse.
Sadly the Iraq War has diminished our ability to go into Iran.
We took out the wrong dictator.
And, the Saudi's are NOT our "friends" as many in the Administration claim.
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.