Posted on 08/12/2005 11:23:03 AM PDT by jmc1969
US President George W. Bush refused to rule out the use of force against Iran over the Islamic Republic's resumption of nuclear activities, in an interview with Israeli television aired Friday.
"The use of force is the last option for any president. You know we have used force in the recent past to secure our country," he said in a clear reference to Iraq, which the United States invaded in March 2003.
"I have been willing to do so as a last resort in order to secure the country and provide the opportunity for people to live in free societies," he added.
(Excerpt) Read more at africasia.com ...
Since they're supplying the IEDs, could you rule it IN, Mr. President?
The left would really love us to tell the enemy what we're going to do. Not going to happen. Not with this president. Thank goodness.
> (Excerpt)
Alert to readers. Nope.
That's the whole thing.
The Iranians seem quite determined. The only way I see to resolve this problem is by military force. It is a race. Iran is attempting to acquire nuclear weapons before the US can stop them using military force.
The current Iranian regime cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.
The bombing starts in 5 minutes....
It's time for action.
There is no other resort available.
the liberal press wants the president to emphatically guarantee the world that under no circumstances will the US EVER lift a finger to harm anyone or anything ever anywhere, even if we are attacked and tanks are rolling on us. any statement Bush makes that draws even the slightest glimmer of light in between his position and that one is going to get him labeled a warmonger.
What about Afghanistan? The MSM is out to lunch.
How large (in terms of troop strength) would the Coalition of the Willing need to be for Operation Regime Change Iran in relation to Iran's troop strength and technical capabilities? Are there enough US boots to put on the ground? And how many boots would we need, at the minimum, for successful invasion, liberation, and occupation? Would we go with a Shinseki-like figure or with a Wolfowitz-like figure? Do we have enough air-borne weaponry stockpiled? Are there enough Humvees (uparmored) to ship? And how long would Operation Regime Change Iran likely take?
How fast do you think we can be in Iran, and how fast do you think we could get back out again?
My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you I just signed legislation which outlaws jihadist forever. The bombing begins in five minutes.
The terrorist flypaper would simply move to Iran. All the terrorists would flock to Iran to join the new battle there. Not many more troops needed.
I wouldn't invade at this point. I think we keep on pushing the E3 and eventually the UN to see what backbone they have (i know, none). However, if Iran is still agressively pursuing nukes by mid-2006, I would supply Israel with a significant number of bunker busting bombs. It would not stop Iran completely, but it would be a significant set-back.
What Coalition of the Willing? Who has the troops or the interest in invading Iran with us?
Training ongoing shows DoD has both Syria and Iran in its sights.
Classic trial baloon.
Massive air and missile strikes on the Iranian nuclear infrastructure, reducing it to rubble.
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.