Author Topic: Place your bets: syria or iran? (Read 1610 times)

Conan The Librarian · « **on:** February 22, 2012, 02:23:46 AM »

Which is will be our next war, syria or iran, or both at the same time?

And why would we be in either one?

magooch · « **Reply #1 on:** February 22, 2012, 02:41:25 AM »

I don't see the need for a war with either one. It seems to me that Syria already has their hands full with a civil war. Iran could be handled by Israel, or if we had a leader, we could deliver a couple of nukes to them since that seems to be what they want.

briarpatch · « **Reply #2 on:** February 22, 2012, 03:45:09 AM »

The russians and chinese are just waiting for a check along with most of our economy and culture or what is left of it. The clown will comply, his ideology is communist and his religion is islam.
Syria is on the way out, the muslim brother hood will have all of the middle east with iran going soon after. The blood shed will be American and a few europeans, as always the strings will be controlled by the jewish elite.
Where did I get this? From every newpaper and media outlet in the world. If you listen they will tell you what is going to happen and who is going to do it. The key is listen. When there is a key event happen and you dont hear anything form all media, listen harder.

rio grande · « **Reply #3 on:** February 22, 2012, 05:55:10 AM »

Quote from: magooch on February 22, 2012, 02:41:25 AM

I don't see the need for a war with either one. It seems to me that Syria already has their hands full with a civil war. Iran could be handled by Israel, or if we had a leader, we could deliver a couple of nukes to them since that seems to be what they want.

Are you advocating using nuclear weapons to murder unarmed women, children, and old folks in Iran? Can you explain exactly why such a crime is necessary? A "leader"? OK, you just tag along behind some homicidal maniac. Not for me.

ironglow · « **Reply #4 on:** February 22, 2012, 09:09:47 AM »

Quote from: rio grande on February 22, 2012, 05:55:10 AM

Quote from: magooch on February 22, 2012, 02:41:25 AM
I don't see the need for a war with either one. It seems to me that Syria already has their hands full with a civil war. Iran could be handled by Israel, or if we had a leader, we could deliver a couple of nukes to them since that seems to be what they want.
Are you advocating using nuclear weapons to murder unarmed women, children, and old folks in Iran? Can you explain exactly why such a crime is necessary? A "leader"? OK, you just tag along behind some homicidal maniac. Not for me.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I doubt Magooch wants to target "unarmed women, children, and old folks in Iran"..But it sure looks like the idiots in charge of Iran don't mind if their people die for the "12th Imam".

rio grande · « **Reply #5 on:** February 22, 2012, 10:18:25 AM »

Quote from: ironglow on February 22, 2012, 09:09:47 AM

Quote from: rio grande on February 22, 2012, 05:55:10 AM
Quote from: magooch on February 22, 2012, 02:41:25 AM
I don't see the need for a war with either one. It seems to me that Syria already has their hands full with a civil war. Iran could be handled by Israel, or if we had a leader, we could deliver a couple of nukes to them since that seems to be what they want.
Are you advocating using nuclear weapons to murder unarmed women, children, and old folks in Iran? Can you explain exactly why such a crime is necessary? A "leader"? OK, you just tag along behind some homicidal maniac. Not for me.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I doubt Magooch wants to target "unarmed women, children, and old folks in Iran"..But it sure looks like the idiots in charge of Iran don't mind if their people die for the "12th Imam".

So...if I blow up a honky-tonk to get rid of a 'bad guy', and kill dozens of other good people there, that's morally acceptable....because I didn't 'target' them? Tell that to the Judge! Better yet, try to explain that to the eternal Judge on the last day.
And if you are complicit in the murder of millions of civilians, whether you push the button or promote the use of indiscriminate atomic weapons, how will you justify it?

Poopers · « **Reply #6 on:** February 22, 2012, 12:16:17 PM »

Iran, because thats what Israel wants

pastorp · « **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2012, 12:45:19 PM »

How did we justify Japan being bombed to end WW2? Sometimes it costs some lives to save a lot more.

Regards,

Shu · « **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2012, 03:16:36 PM »

Iran or Syria good question. Once you start you just can't stop. My vote is stay out of both.
Syria is a civil war, let each country govern themselves without the US poking their long nose in it.
Iran make it well known you may develop a nuclear weapon and if any American city is attacked a Trident submarine will target and destroy every city in your country. Welcome to the nuclear club, it has a price.

I am against war and meddling in other countries. I am even more against the killing of American citizens. The price of freedom is very high indeed.

One thing that is not understood about war anymore unfortunately, war must be fought without remorse or considerations. You must force your enemy into submission or it cannot be won.
Perhaps reading a bit of Sun Tzu's Art of War by the president and joint chiefs is in order.

magooch · « **Reply #9 on:** February 23, 2012, 03:48:18 AM »

Nearly everyone with a brain believes it would be very bad if Iran were to develop nuclear weapons, and they seem to be doing just that. All I'm saying is that it is imperitive that Iran be stopped from attaining offensive weapons of that magnitude. If it requires nukes to stop them as opposed to sending our troops, I would opt for nukes every time.

One thing for sure is that I would not wait for one of our cities to be flattened and then retaliate. And I wouldn't try to talk Israel out of doing what they think is in their best interest.

We could choose to sit on the sidelines and let the Middle East fester, but it is folly to believe we wouldn't eventually be drawn into it. Imagine how much more secure we and the rest of the world would be now if Iraq and Libya had gotten nukes. Add Iran to the list and we all could sleep tight.

This looks to me like it is going to develop into a case where a megaton of prevention will be worth it. And yes, if some Iranian civilians are living too close to the targets ....

Nuke41 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 23, 2012, 04:41:25 AM »

The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) has an excellent report out on the Iranian military nuclear program:

http://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-reports/documents/PHRC_report_23February2012.pdf

ISIS is an excellent open source for analysis; they had superb details on the Syrian nuclear program before and after the Israelis raised it to the ground.

Singleshotsam · « **Reply #11 on:** February 23, 2012, 04:54:11 AM »

Quote

If it requires nukes to stop them as opposed to sending our troops, I would opt for nukes every time.

Here's an even better plan. How about we stay out of it all together! Let Israel deal with their crazy neighbors and we can focus on killing members of drug cartels on our southern border...

Shu · « **Reply #12 on:** February 23, 2012, 03:19:58 PM »

If Iran does develop a nuke, how much of a threat are they actually?
Do they have any way of delivering it to US shores?
I think a weapon like this would be easily tracked and intercepted before it reaches America.
N Korea has a much better delivery system and are they really a credible threat?
If Iran does develop a nuke, will the Arab league then be terrified of their neighbors and ask for outside assistance?
Way to many variables and Iran does not really have a delivery system to reach the US. Paranoia will not solve anything.
Israel is much more threatened than we are. How many more trillions would you like to pour into the M.E? When does America stop being the world police?
Let Israel be it's own soveriegn nation and quit telling them what to do.

I really think we need to stop playing world police. If we are going to go to war use the entire might of the military and quit doing this limited crap that produces limited results.

The smartest thing we could do is move Israel to our southern border. I doubt the drug cartels would mess with them, and they would be out of the M.E. Problems solved

stubshaft · « **Reply #13 on:** February 23, 2012, 03:37:21 PM »

Quote from: Singleshotsam on February 23, 2012, 04:54:11 AM

Quote
If it requires nukes to stop them as opposed to sending our troops, I would opt for nukes every time.

Here's an even better plan. How about we stay out of it all together! Let Israel deal with their crazy neighbors and we can focus on killing members of drug cartels on our southern border...

That sounds great to me. But jughead want to keep his paws in the middle east. Gotta keep his handlers happy!

lakota · « **Reply #14 on:** February 24, 2012, 05:04:33 AM »

I betting it will be a 2 for 1 deal. If we are going to go to all of the trouble of putting the millitary machine in place to start one needless war we may just as well get our money's worth and fight 2 needless wars while we are in the neighborhood.

teamnelson · « **Reply #15 on:** February 24, 2012, 05:15:30 AM »

Quote from: lakota on February 24, 2012, 05:04:33 AM

I betting it will be a 2 for 1 deal. If we are going to go to all of the trouble of putting the millitary machine in place to start one needless war we may just as well get our money's worth and fight 2 needless wars while we are in the neighborhood.

There's a wise man right there!

Iranian strategy is not to nuke Israel but to mine the Strait of Hormuz, which would cause an international conflict for us oil dependent countries, and possibly percolate a nice escalation where nuking Israel would be "justifiable." Iran is many things, but stupid. Whatever they do, they want the entire Muslim world on their side, so they can only lash out in defense.

And while we're on our way over to clean out the strait, we can drop a carrier off the coast of Syria and provide air support to the Israeli led coalition.

BBF · « **Reply #16 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:22:58 AM »

Quote from: magooch on February 23, 2012, 03:48:18 AM

......................... All I'm saying is that it is imperative that Iran be stopped from attaining offensive weapons of that magnitude. If it requires nukes to stop them as opposed to sending our troops, I would opt for nukes every time.

....

If the Iranian nukes are considered offensive how come the Israeli nukes are defensive??
How do they make/look them different??

Do the nukes know to what group they belong to??

IMO The dunghill of hype is getting taller.

BUGEYE · « **Reply #17 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:29:54 AM »

Quote from: BBF on February 24, 2012, 06:22:58 AM

Quote from: magooch on February 23, 2012, 03:48:18 AM
......................... All I'm saying is that it is imperative that Iran be stopped from attaining offensive weapons of that magnitude. If it requires nukes to stop them as opposed to sending our troops, I would opt for nukes every time.

....

If the Iranian nukes are considered offensive how come the Israeli nukes are defensive??
How do they make/look them different??

Do the nukes know to what group they belong to??

IMO The dunghill of hype is getting taller.

their ayatollah, who actually runs things, said he wanted to eliminate Israel.
I don't recall Israel saying that the muzzies had no right to exist.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #18 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:39:11 AM »

I don't see why we can't get the Turks to invade Syria. They owned it for several hundred years before WWI, same with Iraq. They are Muslim, but more western leaning, and could keep the peace better. They would also be a shield against Iran. They also have the 19th largest economy in the world. They are also one of the few non Arabic speeking Muslim nations.

Conan The Librarian · « **Reply #19 on:** February 24, 2012, 07:01:18 AM »

Guys, there's way to much thinking going into this topic. I think the only thing motivating any of it here is whether it helps or hurts in the next election.

S.S. · « **Reply #20 on:** February 25, 2012, 11:33:42 AM »

Well, after Angelina Jolie's movie, It may be in SERBIA again.
Between Syria and Iran, I say Syria. It is possible that we have
advisors there already.

nw_hunter · « **Reply #21 on:** February 25, 2012, 12:36:47 PM »

Quote from: Conan The Librarian on February 22, 2012, 02:23:46 AM

Which is will be our next war, syria or iran, or both at the same time?

And why would we be in either one?

We shouldn't be!
There is a REAL threat to us consumers of mind bending drugs though!
You would think, a country with the sophisticated weaponry and Intel of the USA would be able to target and take out the leaders of the Columbia and Mexico drug cartel's, send in SEAL & Special Force teams to complete the mission and return home in time for Dinner and a movie.

If we're going to invade another country, lets invade one that's a real present danger to us, and lives nearby.
What am I thinking?We do have an OP going on now as we speak!What's it called? Operation Gun Runner?

teamnelson · « **Reply #22 on:** February 25, 2012, 12:40:04 PM »

This clip has got me worried:
http://www.thememriblog.org/iran/blog_personal/en/41784.htm
Iran is training female ninjas.

S.S. · « **Reply #23 on:** February 26, 2012, 12:39:52 PM »

yes, and they are given drugs to make their monthly cycles last longer

Imagine one of these women with the knowledge of the sword!
YIKES !

Loreana Bobbit from hell !!!

BBF · « **Reply #24 on:** February 27, 2012, 05:53:10 PM »

Quote from: pastorp on February 22, 2012, 12:45:19 PM

How did we justify Japan being bombed to end WW2? Sometimes it costs some lives to save a lot more.

Regards,

By having a total blockade you could have achieved the same.

Duke0313 · « **Reply #25 on:** February 27, 2012, 07:07:59 PM »

The "annointed one" will arrange some sort of international intervention in Syria and will then make some sort of move on Iran in Sept. or Oct. to assure his re-election.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #26 on:** February 28, 2012, 02:16:33 AM »

BBF, we essentially had a blockade from about 1943 on with subs and bombers. In 1944 most of Japans imports from SE Asia and China were sunk. They were getting some things through with their subs. We knew Russia was going to enter the war against Japan. We also knew if they did, they would have taken China and all of Korea because they had more army manpower. Our manpower was split between the army, navy, army air corp, and marines, with most being army and navy. We also had been fighting for 3-1/2 years and most men wanted to go home. Japan, because of their nature and culture, would not have surrendered. They still had some air production and were sinking ships with their kamakazis. Estimates were that we were going to loose 1 million men by continueing to fight, not counting how many Japanese men and civilians were going to be killed. A few thousand with the two bombs we used, saved lives, and ended the war sooner.

Swampman · « **Reply #27 on:** February 28, 2012, 02:51:05 AM »

Quote from: Conan The Librarian on February 22, 2012, 02:23:46 AM

Which is will be our next war, syria or iran, or both at the same time?

And why would we be in either one?

As long as the Sryians are killing each other we should leave them alone. The Iranians are causing gas prices to rise and that hurts my pocket book. Something needs to be done.

BBF · « **Reply #28 on:** February 28, 2012, 05:15:45 PM »

It is the useless sanctions that causes gasoline prices to rise and the continuing warmonger talk about bombing Iran.

I have a solution for Iran to put a halt to any bombing threats.

Invite nuclear scientists from China, N. Korea and Russia to spent time on the various sites. Publish these visits in your news and let us see if the possibility of killing prominent citizens of the above mentioned countries will stop this aggression.

BTW there is no reason why Iran couldn't fly some AWAT's (?) in the Med or having CAP ability over their country.

teamnelson · « **Reply #29 on:** February 29, 2012, 12:58:51 AM »

Quote from: BBF on February 28, 2012, 05:15:45 PM

It is the useless sanctions that causes gasoline prices to rise and the continuing warmonger talk about bombing Iran.

I have a solution for Iran to put a halt to any bombing threats.

Invite nuclear scientists from China, N. Korea and Russia to spent time on the various sites. Publish these visits in your news and let us see if the possibility of killing prominent citizens of the above mentioned countries will stop this aggression.

BTW there is no reason why Iran couldn't fly some AWAT's (?) in the Med or having CAP ability over their country.

For me, the same principle that gives us the 2A gives Iran or any other nation the right to keep and bear arms ... the 2A isn't a right given, its a liberty protected. If I truly believe that all men are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, then that means ALL men, whether they live in the US or not. If you believe the 2A is all the firearms legislation necessary, then you must agree. So I really do not have an issue with any sovereign nation keeping and bearing arms ... EXCEPT (make sure the EXCEPT is in the cut and paste later)

EXCEPT, as also in our nation, when the exercise of someone else's liberty encroaches on the liberty of others. I don't care if my neighbor has a Mod2 .50 cal machine gun, except when he points it at my house, my children in the yard, and makes threats to wipe my family out. Then he's in violation of the social contract. Iran has published on numerous times a willingness to use their nuke weapons on Israel, usually in conjunction with a lesser trigger event - in other words, if I clip my neighbor's mailbox, he'll mow my kids down in the yard.

So I have no problem with any sovereign nation possessing any arms they want, until such time as they become a credible threat to me and mine. Israel can take care of that problem if it comes to it ... I'm worried about them blocking the public access/easement to my fuel pump.