Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Military Action on Iran Likely to Come
American Chronicle ^ | November 26, 2005 | Joseph McHugh

Posted on 11/29/2005 4:42:25 PM PST by saganite

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 last
To: Anti-Bubba182

This is the reason for the real urgency in getting extracted from Iraq. We have been at war with Iran since the beginning and now we are going to take it to them. However, one way or another, I believe that Syria will be taken out first so that Iran will be completely isolated.

This "war" has always been about Iran from the beginning, but our leaders don't want to level with us.


81 posted on 11/30/2005 8:53:42 AM PST by appeal2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: appeal2
However, one way or another, I believe that Syria will be taken out first so that Iran will be completely isolated.

I couldn't agree more. When they are taken out, Israel will probably play a role in keeping them honest, in the sense that Syria will be in a bad position when after we deal with them, and may be more worried about Israel than playing footsie in Iraq when we turn our attention to Iran.

82 posted on 11/30/2005 9:02:01 AM PST by He Rides A White Horse (unite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: strategofr
We are backed into a corner because support for the Iraq war has fallen away to too low a level to win elections in the US

Iraq is not going away just because of opinion polls. We will not be able to leave that job unfinished. Perhaps nobody wants to face Iran but it doesn't matter- democrat or republican in the white house- it will have to be faced up to. If doesn't even matter if public support for that is in negative numbers. Iran with nukes is simply a NO-GO.

83 posted on 11/30/2005 11:02:09 AM PST by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse
Like I said the mullahs are going to have to be overthrown, even if it means a full scale invasion.

If the mullahs are going to be overthrown then the people of Iran have to do it. We can't do if for them.

84 posted on 11/30/2005 2:58:41 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Like I said, don't be surprised if we start drafting soldiers to put enough feet on the ground to take them out. The stakes are simply too high.


85 posted on 11/30/2005 6:23:51 PM PST by He Rides A White Horse (unite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
If the mullahs are going to be overthrown then the people of Iran have to do it. We can't do if for them.

One positive thing to remember is that the Islamofascists know that we are no longer screwing around. We went into Iraq, killed the Hussein boys, and captured Saddam who will eventually be executed.

The mullahs in Iran are undoubtably soiling their pants as we speak, which is why they are trying to develop a bomb. Now when these 'holy men' see US troops massing on the border, don't be surprised to see uprisings, as I feel pro-democracy Iranians will know we mean business, and won't leave their rearends flapping in the breeze.

There won't be any long term stability until three things are done-Taking out Syria, Iran, and stabilizing Iraq (at which we are being quite successful, despite the proclamations of the doom-speaking MSM.

Syria and Iran are providing safe haven for terrorists, and frankly, I'm all for pursuing these roaches whereever they may hide. We cannot allow them to continue to filter in across the border creating mayhem.

Taking the fight to terrorists means taking on terror supporting states, which is Syria and Iran.

Personally, I would mind seeing a few cruise missiles dropped on the houses of some mullahs and Assad.

They are at war with us, whether it be by proxy, and they need to be dealt with.

86 posted on 12/01/2005 6:15:57 AM PST by He Rides A White Horse (unite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
I wouldn't mind
87 posted on 12/01/2005 6:17:02 AM PST by He Rides A White Horse (unite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: saganite

Now how did Iran go nuclear??? How many more of these oil dictators are making plans to be nuclear fitted? Maybe the Saudi kingdom needs nuclear... The world is going insane.


88 posted on 12/01/2005 6:22:34 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002
"One day the United States may be forced to take on Iraq."

It took me a second to figure out that you meant to type "Iran" instead of "Iraq." Made me think though. We might yet have to take on Iraq again if nut cases end up taking power there in the next few years.
89 posted on 12/01/2005 6:36:30 PM PST by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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