War with Iran? Never heard of it.

[The Schnoo]

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2004/cr050604b.htm

excerpt follows:
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this ill-conceived and ill-timed legislation. Let’s not fool ourselves: this concurrent resolution leads us down the road to war against Iran. It creates a precedent for future escalation, as did similar legislation endorsing “regime change” in Iraq back in 1998.

I find it incomprehensible that as the failure of our Iraq policy becomes more evident - even to its most determined advocates -we here are approving the same kind of policy toward Iran. With Iraq becoming more of a problem daily, the solution as envisioned by this legislation is to look for yet another fight. And we should not fool ourselves: this legislation sets the stage for direct conflict with Iran. The resolution “calls upon all State Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), including the United States, to use all appropriate means to deter, dissuade, and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons…” Note the phrase “…use all appropriate means….”
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently someone spoke out recently against a bill that would cause us to go to war with Iran sometime down the road, strangely enough that someone was a Republican FROM TEXAS!

Yeah, I've never heard of this bill either, apparently only 2 other people spoke out against this bill.. kind of odd.


-The Schnoo

[The Schnoo]

http://nyc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/93431/index.php

A follow up link about this resolution, if anyone is interested.

-The Schnoo

[tobedawg]

Well... It's not like they really need to let us know when there are plans to go to war anyway.. I mean, those pesky Anti-War protestors is what's causing the U.S. War in Iraq to go on for as long as it has..

In all seriousness, 376-3(??!!) I know at least a handful of house members that should be fired over this.. DEMOCRAT and REPUBLICAN!! This is getting fucking ridiculous..

NOTE TO DEMOCRATS: You'll keep losing Elections until you grow back your balls!

[The Schnoo]

Because if I am elected Jesus in 2004, I promise to build a tank, but not just any tank, a tank that uses the souls of the damned as ammunition. And lo I doth plan to roll this tank through all the heathan lands of the horrible "moos-lim" and crush the interlopers in their very own back yards.

I'm The Schnoo and I approve this message.

-The Schnoo

[Duemellon]

Originally posted by Frost
Vote for Schnoo!!!

cause we have to kill our enemies!!! we rn't killin our enemies, we'r protectin ourselvs.

waaaaay ahead of time.

[The Mad Hater]

shut up.

MY EARS!

[classicgrrl]

Originally posted by Frost
what a christian nation we have!

i'm sure that's what jesus would do!

you are a funny funny man...

[The Schnoo]

Well fuck me sideways.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040615-055649-4707r.htm

article follows:
Iran massing troops on Iraq border

Beirut, Lebanon, Jun. 15 (UPI) -- Iran reportedly is readying troops to move into Iraq if U.S. troops pull out, leaving a security vacuum.

The Saudi daily Al-Sharq al-Awsat, monitored in Beirut, reports Iran has massed four battalions at the border.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat quoted "reliable Iraqi sources" as saying, "Iran moved part of its regular military forces towards the Iraqi border in the southern sector at a time its military intelligence agents were operating inside Iraqi territory."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Funny, I seem to remember them saying something similar about Iraqi troops on the Saudi Arabian border to get troops into that country... turned out to be a huge lie...

Oh yes, I do indeed remember this. here (http://www.representativepress.org/LiesAboutIraq.html) is an article about just that.

More war for us probably.

-The Schnoo

[BigSugar]

Iran, known to possess and be building nuclear reactors, announced last week that they will proceed in violation of their agreements to build the reactors and "join the nuclear community". this means unregulated plutonium (can you say "weapons grade"? sure, i knew you could") will soon be in the hands of hard line islamic militants who hate america (ie: Iran) who support and fund islamic terrorist organizations (ie: Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Qaeda, etc...).

sound fun?

but i guess we should wait for NYC to be incinerated before we take a hard line against such a looming threat. You all do realize that should a nuclear weapon be used on US soil (or multiple weapons, god forbid), we would immediately respond by turning the "greater middle east" to a smooth sheet of glass, right? is that what you want? or would you rather we take a hard diplomatic line now, BEFORE it comes to that?

[Duemellon]

ah, the expectd reply...

kill them bfore they kill us.

WTF ever happnd to inclusion, not agression or exclusion? Why do u think they're doin the whole nuclear thing? Just to blo up the US? Don't b so blindd by fear & power greed that u can't accept competition, or identify someone becomin a peer instead of ur peon.

That's what's wrong/w our US's world view. Everyone is our bitch, not our friend. Even our friends are our bitches! Jump GB jump! We're goin to war, if u r our friend, u'd go to!

See, Iran gets nuclear power. They eventually get ICBMs. They can now claim a state of Mutually Assurred Mass Destruction. Sure, we can wipe them out in 3 hrs & they can only take out NJ & San Bernadino, but that's a lot of life to b threatend/w.

Is that state of rivalry what we really want? That's what we claimd we wantd durin the cold war... parity. Now that these up-&-commin nations want parity, we're tryin to keep them down. That makes more enemies than friends.

The way we're gonna ensure the Iranians will blow up Witchita is by doing everythin we can to prevent them from technological advancement by sanctions, isolation, aggression, & disassociation.

[BigSugar]

LOL. talk about "expected replies". only mine is based on reality.

Mutual Assured Destruction Theory only works if both sides can totally destroy each other. Soooooooo, if Iran can only destroy NJ and Witchita, then by definition you are completely wrong. but of course, that's nothing new to you.....you're wrong a lot.

and the answer is yes, if i don't trust Iran to not give weapons grade plutonium to terrorists, then they don't get to play in the nuclear game. end of story. same goes for N. Korea, Syria, Lebenon, Libya, and any other terrorist supporting regime.

[aqualou]

Originally posted by Frost
where are all the bush supporters at?

that's what's cracking me up.

you'd think if they thought for themselves, they'd comment on stuff like this, questioning what was going on and wondering.

...or something

Did the GOP come up with a policy on this. As soon as they do, then repubs and dems can figure out what they're suppose to think.

[Wolverine]

U.S. hegemony may be nice. ;)

However, you better pray to your maker we have people of moral and ethical character and integrity that appear to be sorely lacking in most of our leaders for the last 40+ years...

[Duemellon]

Originally posted by BigSugar
LOL. talk about "expected replies". only mine is based on reality.

Mutual Assured Destruction Theory only works if both sides can totally destroy each other.but I said, Mutually Assure Mass Destruction. Note the difference.

The point is, altho Iran, if they had nuclear ICBMs, would only b able to get NJ & KS, but that would b enuf for us not to invade them by ground & enuf for us not to do a nuclear strike.

Get it?

If the strongest tech they hav is mechanizd army & fast marine travel, then they can't possibly deturr us from invading them, nuking them, or just being "w3 pwn u" all the time.

See? It's kinda like the scene from a movie I saw where there was a mob. A big ass mob comin to lynch someone in the Wild-Wild-West movie. The sherrif of the town was outnumberd & outgunned by them, but said he would not giv into them.

The "leader" of the lynchmob steppd up & confrontd the sherrif, basically sayin that there was only one of him and dozens of them. The sherrif put his gun to the guy's face and said:

"U'r right, but u die."

See how that works? Even tho the sherrif would'v lost the battle, the lynchmob was more concernd about losing one of their own than continuing further.

Again, that's why some ppl cited that we havn't invadd N.Kor. They could take out Hawaii.and the answer is yes, if i don't trust Iran to not give weapons grade plutonium to terrorists, then they don't get to play in the nuclear game. end of story. same goes for N. Korea, Syria, Lebenon, Libya, and any other terrorist supporting regime. why r u content to hav so many enemies?

ask urself that question. Why is the US so fuckin fine/w havin so many enemies who feel the need to arm themselvs/w nukes?

[BigSugar]

Right Due, b/c MAD theory of the cold war relied on hand grenades and bullets......it's the "Mass" part of your post that made it so much better. again, you're not making sense. i'm sure that to some military strategists, losing NJ and KS would be acceptable losses in a nuclear war. so that tosses your Mutual Assured Mass Destruction theory in the wash too. MAD theory relies on TOTAL destruction, not partial. MAMD theory is just your little construct that has no basis in the real world. please play again.

[The Schnoo]

The point isn't that Iran want's nuclear power, they have said it from a long time ago, only NOW they have gone the diplomatic way of getting it. Opening their borders, talking to the US and their neighbors, more or less cooperating with the international community hoping that they will get to sit at the big boy table. I don't think that just because Iran is in the middle east it wants nuclear weapons to blow us up, just because people see a nameless, faceless villain as being of middle eastern descent does not mean that they all want weapons to kill us because they "hate our freedom", so quit acting like they do. But that is the typically republican stance, I'm not saying the left is any better they can't get over their blubbering to form a stance, but the typically republican response is always "do we have to see new york in a mushroom cloud before you understand?"... No, we don't, that's the answer, and no, we probably won't. There's a large difference between diplomacy and telling people that a country is massing troops at its borders so you have a reason to occupy that country longer and possibly INVADE ANOTHER COUNTRY WITHOUT ANY PROOF (http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5438743) OF WRONG DOING TOWARDS OUR OWN WELL BEING (http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=16438). It's retarded, it's a bad world view, do you wanna know why people in the middle east hate us (http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=764&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0&POSTNUKESID=248c6d9f6627d38b05ac4a67bb8972ed)? Well there are some good reasons (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/index.php), but I think a main reason it's come to a head only in the last few years is because of Bush, his cabinet, and the horrible foreign policy of this nation... Yeah, it was bad before, but we tried to mix some good in with it and let people know we weren't really trying to be assholes it just looked that way. Nowadays we have troops dying in a war that is completely unjust and was completely uncalled for, pre-emptive strike? Riiiight. Oil? more than likely. Considering that we're getting upset now because we are having a harder and harder time shipping the shit from Iraq to here since insurgents are blowing up the pipeline and such. Who would have thought, a bunch of people in a country we supposedly "liberated" don't like that we are STEALING THEIR ONLY NATURAL RESOURCE... Well unless you plan to tell them to go fuck themselves and make some glass animals out of all that sand, maybe they could sell that shit to king's island's gift shop. If you can look at what your president has done (http://www.thousandreasons.org/) and still be behind him, that's your decision, I mean, you're fucking sick, but that's your decision.

-The Schnoo

[Duemellon]

Originally posted by BigSugar
MAMD theory is just your little construct that has no basis in the real world. please play again. wow. Listn to urself. So bent on discrediting my point u can't even see how it works.

I gav u an xampl, but u still brushd it aside b/c it's not the model u'r usd to seein.

Let's try again:
Let's say Iran is able to create 10 ICBMs that can reach the continental US.

In the event they launch all their missles, I assume this would be the result:

2 on Hawaii (destroy a major port for the Eastern world)
1 on Alaska targettin Nome (availability, ease of target)
2 on CA (major ports, population)
1 on SA (major ports, population, near a probable ally: Canada)
1 on DC (duh)
2 on NY (duh)
1 on FL (eh, i just thru this one in. There's prob a better target)

Acceptible losses right? more than 20,000,000 ppl?

Sure, their losses will b like 69mil as well as fallout death for their neighbors. But is 20mm enuf for u?

Now, if Iran never gets ICBMs & is stuck/w land & air basd ground troop invasion, how r they gonna reach the US? They'd hav to find a sympathetic port of launch & then transfer to some place closer to the US thru a sympathetic port of launch over here. Like Cuba? (as if they'd get involvd)

Remember, that's if they don't get ICBMs. If they hav bomber-deliverd, or short range nuks, they still need land-basd invasions.

As for terrorists? How many nukes hav we sold to terrorists? Which ones hav we sold to anyone else? We didn't sell the ones we deemed necessary for defense, right? It'd b like selling someone else our only gun, right? That doesn't make sense. Iraq, /w it's small arsenal of nukes wouldn't b able to afford to sell them, or hand them to terrorists to make some sociopolitical point. They need them for their own dominance of the mideast.

let them get bombs. Plz. Instead of ostricizing them, introduce ourselves as mentors, friends, & such.

[angryj5]

Originally posted by Duemellon
let them get bombs. Plz. Instead of ostricizing them, introduce ourselves as mentors, friends, & such.


do you realize what you just said?! come on now! white christians being friends with arabs?! what the?! who the?! they dont even worship our god! OUR GOD! OUR GOD! we dont want to be their friends, unless we can exploit em, of course. But dont forget they have another god, and thats always bad, god said so himself in the ten commandments.

[yoshomon]

The ruling elite in Iran dun want to cuddle up to the US. A big part of the ideological lie they feed their people is their supposed opposition to america.