Posted on 07/16/2006 5:20:12 AM PDT by Dawnsblood
Horowitz suggests that Israel's best option is to strike Iran now. I agree. With Iran well on its way to becoming a nuclear power, Israel will never be stronger in relation to Iran than it is today.
"Ralphie, you'll shoot your eye out"
The U.S. has been fighting against Iran IN Iraq for months now. Iranian military is probably set up in Syria. Don't forget too that NATO is in Afghanistan. I think the U.S. military, NATO and Israel have already drawn up mutual plans of attack on Iran.
This idiot Armegeddon, whatever his name is who rules Iran...must be in the twilight zone. In case he has forgotton let's remind him...WE HAVE 100,000 BATTLE HARDENED US TROOPS AT YOUR DOOR STEP @SSHOLE....GO AHEAD MAKE OUR DAY.
While not a military strategist, it seems to me that a BUFF full of napalm could do a significant amount of damage. I'm wondering whether napalm can turn desert sand into glass anyway. Might be a good experiment.
But if you really wanted to hurt Iran you wouldn't do either. You'd start your invasion at the oil terminals.
Shalom.
---------------------------------------
I did? Gee, I don't remember ever saying that. Would you be kind enough to point me to where I did?
And don't shoot your eye out!
Americans have a short memory, we bombed Yugoslavia into oblivion under Clinton, just because they tried to defend themselves against islamic vermin (Albanians). Now we are paying the price of appeasing islamic terrorist over last 20 years or so.
It's time to bomb the living s@#$%^ of Iran and North Korea, that would send a message to the rest of the world.
After all, how much worst could it get, considering Iran is now in defacto war with Israel.
With Iran fighting each other for power, maybe they will stop putting efforts into going after Israel and the US.
/dream
Just think if Israel and the US had that friggin' madman to fight before engaging Iran.
Not to mention a couple of boomer subs in case this escalates into something very bad. Seldom seen, seldom talked about, but always ready.
"You wanted the Shah out and you got somethinng infinitely worse."
It wasn't a revolt against oppression although the Savak was hated. It was an Islamic takeover of the government. You could blame the failure to stop it on the US advisors at the time as much as the Shah, but the truth is nobody really understood how to handle it then and probably still don't.
I did? Gee, I don't remember ever saying that. Would you be kind enough to point me to where I did?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You have just encountered one of "the discerning ones", they claim the capability of reading your mind over the internet, be careful, there are more of them lurking nearby. When you meet one in the flesh his battle cry is, "well, you may not have actually said it but that is what you meant".
I would hardly characterize a large segment of "his people" (your term) as humans, in the true civilized sense of the word.
In fact, the Shah did a pretty good job of keeping the crazy Islamo-nazi mullahs under control.
If the Shah would have been allowed to remain in Iran, the world would have far, far fewer problems today.
Pres. Carter was a blooming idiot when it came to foreign affairs (and just about everything else).
Ahmadinejad will get his arse blown off. Of course, he'll try to hide out in a spider hole like Saddam did, but he'll be flushed out like a jihad turd down an Iranian latrine (facing Mecca). LOL
VERY hard!!!
There's a hundred thousands US soldiers in between them that would be happy to provide some re-fuelling.
We could and I believe we should, but the question I believe was about Israel.
Big things are happening!
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.