To: hinckley buzzard
> Not a problem for me.
Actually, this is a big problem.
Iran does not have ICBMs, but they do have missiles that can easily travel the 200 miles off territorial waters.
Multiple launches from nuclear tipped missiles from these vessels could destroy all major US cities with little more than a few minutes warning.
They should be promptly sunk before they can come within the range of their missiles. They would have to be sunk in international waters, and a war would ensue, but better to get it over with now, while we have an advantage.
To: Westbrook
Iran does not have ICBMs, but they do have missiles that can easily travel the 200 miles off territorial waters.First it was the CMC, now it very well could be the IMC.
28 posted on
10/29/2011 11:10:52 AM PDT by
EGPWS
(Trust in God, question everyone else)
To: Westbrook
Exactly. This is a viable and serious threat to our homeland! Not merely a political taunt. Unfortunately, we do not have a CiC who understands this.
Give warning. No compliance? Sink them all!
33 posted on
10/29/2011 12:26:22 PM PDT by
Jagdgewehr
(It will take blood. Seriously.)
To: Westbrook
Multiple launches from nuclear tipped missiles from these vessels could destroy all major US cities with little more than a few minutes warning.All major US cities are 200 miles off of the coast?
66 posted on
11/03/2011 5:28:43 PM PDT by
Eaker
("If someone misquotes you, it's because they know you're right.")
To: Westbrook
The rhetoric coming out of Tehran would certainly support us carrying out a preemptive strike against their ships.
68 posted on
11/04/2011 6:48:57 AM PDT by
papertyger
(What has islam ever accomplished that treacherous, opportunistic, brutality couldn't do on its own?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson