Bolton: Attack Iran, 'remove' its leader

**mcpeepants** · 10-07-2007, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Johny-too-small

Thats so retarded.

If you want to send messages that no one else can respond to, send it as a pm.

**Johny-too-small** · 10-07-2007, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by mcpeepants

If you want to send messages that no one else can respond to, send it as a pm.

Okay, peepants, can you talk to eliteforce in place for me? Tell him that you must post for him because he cant handle it by himself and your superior rhetoric far exceeds his fantasy banter anyway.

**nbkandrew13** · 10-07-2007, 05:06 PM

omfg you didnt know that essentially 100 different sources reported that we called musarreff and gave him a choice do what hes told (be our ally) or get bombed back to the stone age................ what makes you think if we made the decision to bomb iran we would allow them to get rockets off... as long a s we dont care about their casualties then they wont.. and why should we care about their peolple if they dont care about their own people....

**Prada** · 10-07-2007, 05:56 PM

^^^ You are saying that to whom?
Anyways Richard Armitage went to Musharraf and told him straight up, apparently:"The US threatened to bomb Pakistan "back to the stone age" unless it joined the fight against al-Qaeda, President Pervez Musharraf has said"

Which I think was a very irresponsible way of getting ones point across, not a very good show of diplomacy either.

**nbkandrew13** · 10-07-2007, 07:25 PM

well everyone has an opinion i always want to be told strait wo the bs

**eliteforce** · 10-07-2007, 07:59 PM

johhny-toosmall:

What makes you an expert?
.....
you refuse to answer my basic question directed towards you.

That was it? that was this big insightful question that I'm supposed to answer? Did I say I was an expert, if you need something sourced then ask me for a source of the information..or too explain my position further..
for example I will say that it's impossible to destroy Irans most sensitive, weapons capable producing nuclear facilities with the bunker busting nukes in the first place, is that a fact? I think it is but if you say thats not true then I'll back it up with something.

like this:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_securit...animation.html

nbkandrew13:
If you are so simple minded to think that the US will initiate a mass casualty attack that poisons the environment of an entire region and a 1st strike at that..and NOT get hit right back then your typical of these supramist neo-cons like bolton..there are soo many ways to deliver such a small package, it's inconceivable that the US could hold off a retaliatory attack indefinently..lets not forget that attacking Iran with more than 1 nuclear devise is also to attack it's neighbors..then once retaliation happens where do you go from there? retaliate again? They will wipe out all of America as soon as America wipes out that massive region. Nuclear war isn't between 2 states it's between entire hemispheres.

***xxx*** · 10-08-2007, 07:32 AM

at this moment the US isn t even capable of taming Iraq and your military is overstreched (and this is a fact, stated by your own military). I want to see how you would manage an attack on Iran right now. You could bomb'em but you couldn't change the regime.

The war on Iraq was costly enough and your economy (and our) can't take anymore of your central banks normal reaction (printing money). your money lost almost 50% of its value withing 6 years compared to the €uro.

It is neoliberal bs stating Iran will be next. Nobody is doubting the capabilities of the US military: Yes, you are the strongest! But if you think you can bomb countries just because they don't fit into your plan, you're wrong. And Iran is a totally different story (and no I m not pro Iran or anything).

And you don't have to be an expert to see that an attack on Iran would be a total suicide commando, respectively with all the problems unsolved in Iraq...

**Johny-too-small** · 10-08-2007, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by eliteforce

That was it? that was this big insightful question that I'm supposed to answer? Did I say I was an expert, if you need something sourced then ask me for a source of the information..or too explain my position further..
for example I will say that it's impossible to destroy Irans most sensitive, weapons capable producing nuclear facilities with the bunker busting nukes in the first place, is that a fact? I think it is but if you say thats not true then I'll back it up with something.

like this:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_securit...animation.html

Fair enough, thanks!

Originally Posted by ***xxx***

at this moment the US isn t even capable of taming Iraq and your military is overstreched (and this is a fact, stated by your own military). I want to see how you would manage an attack on Iran right now. You could bomb'em but you couldn't change the regime.

The war on Iraq was costly enough and your economy (and our) can't take anymore of your central banks normal reaction (printing money). your money lost almost 50% of its value withing 6 years compared to the €uro.

It is neoliberal bs stating Iran will be next. Nobody is doubting the capabilities of the US military: Yes, you are the strongest! But if you think you can bomb countries just because they don't fit into your plan, you're wrong. And Iran is a totally different story (and no I m not pro Iran or anything).

And you don't have to be an expert to see that an attack on Iran would be a total suicide commando, respectively with all the problems unsolved in Iraq...

Agree with many of your points. It would be a nasty episode and I hope it doesnt happen. I dont have the confidence, however, that things will get "more stable" over time. Im afraid its going to get worse before it gets better.

The US $ is getting killed. I was in Europe this summer and I spent over $10,000 on a 2 week vacation....not that I was trying to keep a budget or anything.