Posted on 09/25/2004 5:50:59 PM PDT by LSUfan
"We can take out the weapons of Iran and North Korea at any time we desire
How would we do that? Once produced they will be scattered around the country."
Another good reason why pre-emptive strike has been brought into the game plan.
Let's see....We are on the ground at Iran's East and West boarders not to mention having control in a seconds notice of the waters of the Gulf. We have secured the second largest supply of oil in the world so that if Iran or Saudi Arabia say have a little disruption of oil supply it will not send the world into an economic tailspin. Not to mention the little fact that Saddam did have and use in the past, and we have found some of his WMDs. Nor to mention the fact that he was training terrorist and had given haven to islamic terrorist, nor to mention the fact that he felt he had a bone to pick with the US and revenge was very much on his mind.
No strategically I would say that we are right where we want to be...cleaned out one dangerous snake who wanted revenge, secured oil flow in case there are disruptions in other oil supplies (say in case of war or internal uprising(maybe with a little help from our friends at the CIA)) and surrounded a second perhaps more dangerous target with the hope that just the threat alone will cause cooperation and if not...so be it.
I would not want to be Iran at this moment unless Kerry gets elected.
As for North Korea thanks to clinton they are a problem, but we have or are in the process of moving back many of our troops from the boarder and are strengthening our presence in the sea. If I was North Korea I would be more worried about that than if we had left our troops on the boarder within their quick range and grasp.
I think that Afghanistan, Gulf War I and II have shown that we use air power first so moving the troops indicates that we are preparing in case of war. But to be honest I think that China will clean out that nest of snakes before they let us do it. They will not want us on their boarder and the threat that we might go after them might be just what it takes for China to get serious.
I would have to say Yes going after Saddam was well worth it and has placed us right where we need to be on the ground splitting up the islamic world. LOL!
"Iran...That's what B2's are for. As soon as I saw them doing anything nuclear I'd bomb it. Why we've played around with them is beyond me."
Just keep watching and don't blink.
Yes it is in the Fremont district.
A student of military history I see ...
NK I agree, we were stuck because of SK. I guess our only hope would have been sending in spies to sabotage, James Bond like.
I'm sure Oliver Stone or Michael Moore could make that happen in a movie but real life keeps a different set of schedules ...
Iran...That's what B2's are for. As soon as I saw them doing anything nuclear I'd bomb it. Why we've played around with them is beyond me.
As simple as a game of NukeWar. Fortunately for all of us, patriotic adults are still in charge. They are trying to avoid the deaths of millions of human beings. Sorry if that makes it a bit complicated but we have to wait a few months ...
LOL, whoops...I meant for this reply to be in another thread :-\
So, are you suggesting that Iran wouldn't have gone nuclear if Saddam would have been left in power? Also, If a Mullah drops a bomb, it will be the last coming from Iran, and hence, in a sense, the world will be a much safer place.
No, this is a complete and total religious war for them. They must be permanently removed from office, so to speak.
Yes, his name is Jimmy Carter.
"I would not want to be Iran at this moment unless Kerry gets elected."
DON'T EVEN SAY THAT :)
Today London, tomorrow New York.
The King of Terror from the skies has arrived. As soon as Bush gets re-elected, he should take out the ayatollahs. Even nukes are not beyond consideration. Interesting they mentioned southern Russia.
That's what YOU say. Meanwhile NBC reports that there are "defenders of (Chief Nuke Inspector) Muhammad ElBarradei within the (Bush) Administration", and we do NOTHING WHATSOEVER about Iran. If there isn't a joint US-Israeli strike by year's end, I will be pissed.
Bush lied.... Iran is not a threat, either. Imperialist America is the biggest threat to world peace. If we could only defer all foreign policy decisions to the United Nations, world peace would immediately break out.
/MAJOR SARCASM!!!!!!
It does sound like something you'd hear out of a Democrap's mouth huh? I'm sure this is what we'll hear in the future....
"Once they detect Israel launching a strike"
it will be to late to do shit because they will be looking a fire balls.
We don't need the Israelis. Only the US military is capable of taking out Iran's nuke facilities and their missile sites.
Iran has 15 or more key facilities. This is no Osirak operation. Several of Iran's site's are much further away than Osirak was. I am not even sure that the Israeli F-16s can make a round trip. This strike would have to be much larger than Osirak and I do not think Israel has enough in-flight refueling capability for such an operation.
They have 25 F-15I Strike Eagles, similar to the F-15E. Those are capable of an operation, but there are not enough of them to hit 15+ targets.
This is going to have to be a US operation with cruise missiles, F-117s from Iraq and Afghanistan, B-2s and probably B-1s and F-15Es as well.
Excellent points. But do we have the balls to do it?
I don't think we can blame the deposing of Saddam for NK and Iran going nuclear. However, I think Dubya will deal with them once he has won re-election and doesn't have to worry about the media wringing their hands and crying over every little scraped finger a US soldier causes.
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.