Replies

go back and read what was posted.

NO ONE said to keep either of those groups in power after the Mullahs are gone

Too may people who read this thread just stop reading once they get to the MEK part.

46 posted on 07/11/2005 5:16:59 PM PDT by RaceBannon ((Prov 28:1 KJV) The wicked flee when no man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion.)

Because MEK is a sensitive issue for most Iranians.

That is why it catches attention of readers here and there.

You're being extremely naive to think that MEK or Rafsanjani would ever leave after 6 months. (When's the last time you bought a bag of M&M's and ate 1?) This is what MEK has been dreaming of for 25 yrs. They will not leave after achieving their dream & goal. And they certainly can't be trusted with nukes. So, we'd have to go in and kick their butts out of there, causing more death, destruction and more upheaval in the country.So what's the point of the whole thing? Cuz in the end, the Iranian people wouldn't trust us thereafter and we will have lost our best allies. The idea truly verges on insanity. (unless the person suggesting it is an MEK supporter. Do I hear any denials?) Go back and read #14.

49 posted on 07/11/2005 9:02:40 PM PDT by nuconvert (No More Axis of Evil by Christmas ! TLR) [there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])