Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Rush To Nuclear War With Iran [retread troll zotted]
self

Posted on 04/12/2006 11:03:38 AM PDT by bj1998

Is Your Entire Country On Crack?

Speaking as a Canadian who is fond of judicious language, I feel that this situation deserves careful and measured thought. So let me just open with:

Is your entire f*cking country on crack??? Are all you Americans out of your cotton picking minds??? Are you completely freaking delusional? Homicidal? Psychotic? Have you lost any shred of a moral compass? WHAT IN THE NAME OF JESUS H. CHRIST ON A CRUTCH IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!!!!!

Let me offer up one small datum which may completely change the equation for you: According to the CIA (If they have any credibility left.) Iran is at least five years away from a nuclear weapon.

Five years.

Five years is time for diplomacy to accomplish a hell of a lot.

I would also point out that the Atomic Energy Commission, various other international bodies and other inspections have essentially found no sign that Iran is even working on a nuclear weapon.

The only actual evidence that Iran has anything close to nuclear weapons technology is blueprints *that the CIA gave to them!*

Have you all forgotten that the evidence on Iraq was spectacularly wrong? Have you all ignored the fact that it was fabricated? Why then are we going down the exact same road of stage managed, fabricated pseudo-evidence and wild-ass hysteria?

What is wrong with you people?

This entire crisis has been manufactured, and has been years in the making.

Stop and think back five years. What did we have five years ago? A moderate reformist Iranian government making overtures to the United States, rebuilding its relationship with Europe, liberalizing its society, and modernizing its economy.

9/11 comes along, the Iranians are overflowing with sympathy. Mass candlelit vigils are held in Tehran. Iran offers aid and cooperation.

Iran hates the Taliban who have executed Iranian diplomats and massacred Afghan Shiites. Iran hates Saddam Hussein. Iran hates Al Qaeda which is a Sunni Fundamentalist organization which declares Shiites infidels and subhuman.

Iran shares its intelligence with America - they even arrested Taliban members and handed them over to US custody.

So we've got the Iranian spring; things are finally going to sort out.

And what happens? The Bush administration rebuffs every Iranian overture and does its best to instigate a cold war. Afghanistan is invaded, and suddenly, the Iranians are looking at American troops and allies on their eastern border. Then Iraq is invaded, and American troops and allies on their western border. Then bases and treaties in Uzbekistan, and whoops, there's more American troops and allies on the northern border. The Persian Gulf is filled with American warships and carrier fleets.

Now the Iranians are surrounded. And the tough talk is constant. Iran is part of the 'Axis of Evil' and Americans tell each other "Baghdad, humph, real men go to Tehran." Essentially, America has been threatening military action against Iran for the last five years, and has surrounded the country on every side with troops, bases and allies.

American aircraft invade Iranian airspace regularly, American special forces undertake operations inside Iran and Americans regularly accuse Iranians of interference in Iraq.

Dick Cheney pontificates about Israel bombing Iran *after he has just handed over to Israel the long range bombers and bunker busting bombs* required to do the job.

Meanwhile, the United States undertakes economic warfare against Iran, interfering with its business dealings with third party countries, trying to scuttle a pipeline deal with India, and it goes on and on. The hysteria about the Iranians nuclear program is just more of the same.

Now how in God's Bloody Name do you think the Iranians are going to respond to that. Should they concede the nuclear program, abandon their pipeline project? If so, its not going to do them any good. America will just seek more concessions. Each surrender will be met by new demands. This isn't hard to figure out. It's exactly what Bush did with Iraq.

Perhaps overtures, good will gestures, trying to act like a peaceful nation. Did all those things, doesn't matter. The Bush administration is still on a collision course.

So, the Mullahs are concerned that they're faced with a homicidal crazy state, the Iranian people are scared. When people are scared and faced with an aggressive warmongering power which keeps threatening to attack them, continually trespasses on its borders and is undertaking economic warfare... who the hell are they going to elect? Ahminajad may be a crazy bastard, but you assholes, you utter assholes did every thing you could to elect him short of donating 50,000 Diebold machines and mailing his party the trapdoor codes.

So, having pursued a psychotically aggressive course, you've backed Iran into a corner, and engineered a regime which refuses to back further.

And *you* are the victims in all this? *You* are the ones under threat? It's *self defense*????

And of course, you goofily believe that you can just bomb or nuke Iran with impunity?

Holy Microeconomic Theory Batman! Iran's nuclear facilities are distributed across the country and in hardened sites near population centers. So any strike that cripples a significant portion of Iran's nuclear capacity will inevitably be so large and kill so many people that its going to be tantamount to inviting full scale war.

Think about that. Iran is 70 million people, an area five times the size of Iraq, not disemboweled by 12 years of sanctions and air raids. On the other side of the coin, America's ground army is busted and tied down in Iraq. There's no troops to throw at a major Iranian military force, so you have to hope that bombing will do the trick. The occupation forces in Iraq are in occupation and not territorial defense mode. And Iraq is 65% Shiites who are probably not going to be happy that you're blowing up their brother Shiites. Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz is so narrow that sinking one supertanker will block it indefinitely, and Iran borders the straight on three sides. Block Hormuz and any naval groups inside the Persian Gulf are trapped there. Any naval groups outside the Persian Gulf are trapped outside. Forget about any oil coming out of the Persian Gulf from Iraq, Kuwait, Quatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia or the UAE. Think about what

In short its so appallingly stupid and colossally risky, that I can see why your idiots in charge might consider using nuclear weapons. But throw a few nukes around and see how the rest of the world reacts? Every dirt-wad country is going to be mortgaging the Presidential palace to get its own nuclear deterrent from Pakistan or North Korea. How do you feel about the Indonesian Bomb, the Malaysian Bomb, the Thai Bomb, the Myanmar Bomb, the Algerian Bomb, the Saudi Bomb, the Egyptian Bomb, the Brazilian Bomb, the Argentine Bomb, the Venezuelan Bomb, the Cuban Bomb, the Japanese Bomb, the Canadian frigging Bomb. You are no longer trustworthy. North Korea, always borderline psychotic is going to be mondo difficult to deal with. You've just guaranteed yourself a full fledged nuclear arms race, balls to the wall with both Russia and China, and quite possibly Europe.

And of course there's no guarantee that the rest of the world will allow this. Do you want an armed standoff with the Russians. Suppose they 'loan' their finest interceptor jets, pilots and radar systems to the Iranians... Do you want to meet *that* on a bombing raid? And if you do meet *that* what are you going to do when half your planes are blasted out of the skies conducting an illegal raid on civilian populations in a foreign country? Cry? Send a harsh note?

Launch a first strike?

What happens if the Chinese decide to hold Taiwan and South Korea hostage? What do you do? Back off Iran or sell out East Asia?

Hell, in that kind of standoff, someone sneezes and its not going to matter who launched a first strike.

Or would you like an economic standoff, say with Europe, or with Japan and China. Suppose that the Europeans or Chinese decide "screw the worldwide depression, you assholes are just too dangerous to have around." Trillions of dollars get dumped on the market, loans get called in, the bottom drops out of your dollar, its thousand per cent inflation and no manufacturing base and your own trade embargoes. So much for America.

I mean, its morally wrong, its stupid on every level. And yet here you are discussing why maybe you should get out in front of the Republicans on this, or planning your surrender to Bush. Why are you even discussing this?

What is wrong with America?


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: canucklehead; dusuxxorz; ibtz; iran; irannukes; kittychow; rant; retread; seymourbuttshersch; takeoffyahoser; troll; vikingkitties; vk; windowlicker; wwiii; zot; zotwanker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-217 next last
To: bj1998
The DUmmies are watching this one get zotted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=110x10295

Morons.

61 posted on 04/12/2006 11:15:40 AM PDT by HoosierHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

62 posted on 04/12/2006 11:15:57 AM PDT by Blogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998
You forgot to post your photo on your home page.


63 posted on 04/12/2006 11:16:21 AM PDT by Deo volente
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

Two wolves and a lamb sit down together to discuss what's for dinnner. Guess which one you are ??


64 posted on 04/12/2006 11:16:27 AM PDT by Mopp4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998; Darksheare

Canadian hoser zotfest!


65 posted on 04/12/2006 11:16:27 AM PDT by dynachrome ("Where am I? Where am I going? Why am I in a handbasket?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome

Sounds like a State Department email.


66 posted on 04/12/2006 11:16:56 AM PDT by zarf (It's time for a college football playoff system.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

You sound a lot like MoveOn.org, I just got this from them



Dear MoveOn member,

Yesterday's New Yorker quotes a number of high-ranking administration and military officials on the possibility of pre-emptive war with Iran. Not only do the officials say war is really on the table, they report that the Bush administration is making plans to use nuclear weapons.1

Iran may well pose a threat. But people as diverse as Richard Clarke, Hillary Clinton2, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff agree that a nuclear attack—or even threatening one—is a terrible idea. Yet the White House insists on keeping the "nuclear option" on the table.3 And according to one member of Congress, "there's no pressure from Congress" for a more diplomatic route.4

This is one place where all of us can agree: Americans don't support a pre-emptive nuclear attack on Iran, and Congress must act to prevent the president from launching one before it's too late. Please send a message to your representatives at the link below and forward this message to friends and family who you think will be concerned.


We'll deliver your signature and comments to Congress as soon as they return from their spring recess.

The big question on all of our minds, of course, is whether the president really is willing to wage nuclear war with Iran. After the disastrous invasion and occupation of Iraq, would he really attack the much larger, much stronger, much better armed country next door with nukes?

As he did before Iraq, President Bush claims he's just pursuing a diplomatic route—but he still refuses to take nukes off the table. In the New Yorker piece, Seymour Hersh—who broke the Abu Ghraib story—quotes numerous administration and Pentagon officials who make very clear that war plans involving nukes are in the works.5

Even a conventional attack would likely be a disaster. But just the threat of a nuclear attack could close off our best diplomatic options. Ironically, it would also increase pressure within Iran to create a full-fledged nuclear program—strengthening Iran's hard-liners. With most experts estimating Iran is 5 years or more away from having a nuclear weapon, there's time for a diplomatic solution.

And the consequences of an actual attack would be horrifying. The civilian deaths from a nuclear assault could be in the thousands or hundreds of thousands. According to a front-page article in the Washington Post, CIA experts believe Iran would almost certainly counter-attack through its terrorist network, Hezbollah.6 With 150,000 American troops right next door in Iraq, Iran would have what security experts call a "target rich" environment. Even Jack Straw, the British Foreign Sectrary, said that the nuclear option was "completely nuts."7

It's possible that all of this is bluster. Then again, that's what most people thought in the run up to the war in Iraq. It's like that old saying: "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." Our country can't afford to get fooled again.

Please take a moment to add your name to our petition to stop a nuclear attack on Iran. You can sign on now at:


The prospect of a nuclear attack is unsettling, to say the least. But there's real hope in the fact that this time, we are starting three million strong—and we're organized to raise our voices. With the president's historically low approval, and broad public understanding of the pattern of deceit, recklessness and incompetence in Iraq, our voices will be heard.

Sincerely,
–Eli, Joan, Nita, Marika and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
Wednesday, April 12, 2006


67 posted on 04/12/2006 11:17:20 AM PDT by RobFromGa (In decline, the Old Media gets more shrill, thrashing about like a dinosaur caught in the tar pits.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

rant time


68 posted on 04/12/2006 11:17:29 AM PDT by rightinthemiddle (Islamic Terrorists, the Mainstream Media and the Democrat Party Have the Same Goals in Iraq.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daralundy

Or a member of Saddam's defense team, LOL, or maybe John Kerry?


69 posted on 04/12/2006 11:17:31 AM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: bj1998
The McKenzie Brothers show more common sense and manners then you do.


70 posted on 04/12/2006 11:17:38 AM PDT by Michael.SF. ("Cynicism, is an unpleasant way of telling the truth" -- Lillian Hellman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

Is there a sudden shortage of BC Bud? You seem a bit strung out.


71 posted on 04/12/2006 11:17:49 AM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

Is that ozone I smell?


72 posted on 04/12/2006 11:18:06 AM PDT by JamesP81 (Ignorance of the 10th Amendment should disqualify a person from holding office or being a teacher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

And we'll save your sorry ungrateful butts too, gratis. You guys are really tiresome.


73 posted on 04/12/2006 11:18:13 AM PDT by RedQuill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998
The same CIA that was astonished when the Berlin wall fell? That CIA?

Five years??? We did it quicker than that from a cold start, not even knowing if it was even possible, with slide-rules, and no CNC machines...

74 posted on 04/12/2006 11:18:18 AM PDT by null and void (We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit. - Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windsong
Er..what do they have to do with anything?

Ever seen "Schindler's List"?

75 posted on 04/12/2006 11:19:22 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

I didn't get a harumph out of you, you watch your ass.


76 posted on 04/12/2006 11:19:25 AM PDT by eastforker (Under Cover FReeper going dark(too much 24))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

I'm always fond of the lumping of "you people."

snicker...


77 posted on 04/12/2006 11:19:35 AM PDT by bannie (The government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

As a man who spent time in Canada, I can assure you that most Canadians (at least most Ontarians) are sniveling, spoiled brats. They cannot even face the fact that the only reason they even exist as a non-Russian speaking country is the protective military umbrella that the USA has supplied for them unresevedly since WWII.


78 posted on 04/12/2006 11:19:36 AM PDT by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

"The only actual evidence that Iran has anything close to nuclear weapons technology is blueprints *that the CIA gave to them!*"

Yeah, I understand this is a troll about to be Zotted but this part deserves a serious answer.

Iran is known to have contacts with Pakistan which has a working bomb and is know to have assisted in further proliferation.


79 posted on 04/12/2006 11:19:49 AM PDT by gondramB (Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bj1998

did i make it


80 posted on 04/12/2006 11:19:49 AM PDT by joe fonebone (Vote YES! on Lake Iran......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-217 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson