[BitStream]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12252300/

These new reports of the US drawing up war plans for Iran .. what does everyone think?

'Wild speculation' or truth?

Acting on them is another story -- should Iran be stopped of going nuclear even if it means force? Are they even trying to go nuclear?

(I have my own opinions, but thought I would just start the topic first)

[Robin_NL]

Well I have read a few things about Iran anno 2006 and I can assure you this:Thank God I'm not living in that country...

[docbolo]

IMHO, Any country that publicly declares that the holocaust was a fairytale should be blown to smitherines. Blown up so bad that archeologists will never know there was human life there.

I'd happily press the red button on those roaches.

Just my .02, not necessarily right.

[deutschmann59]

Well this story was all over google news yesterday. But today, everyone in washington is down-playing the "planning" and they're saying this is all just routine planning.

I believe we are stepping up the planning, that may very well develop into military action. Docbolo is right. We don't need people like this in charge of a country. While "some" arab nations are at least trying to compromise with the US and Israel, Iran is leading the way in trying to start World War III (which, in my opinion, I think we are very close to).

Of course, some historians will say we were even closer to a "world war III" during the cuban missle crisis during the cold war, but thankfully that was averted. Some even call the period between 1945-1989 world war III, and if there is another global war, it will be world war IV.

Well whatever. Iran has got to be stopped. We can't have the same people that say Israel should be wiped of the map and the holocaust wasn't real have control of nuclear weapons.

[Oz]

Need more oil

[tl_boy]

A country should not be wiped off the earth because its president makes those ridiculous comments. The Iranian citizens are more progressive than most other people of Islamic nations (I know that does not mean much to us, but in the global context, it does). Iranians are not arabs, and they are not Sunni Muslims.

They, along with the Jordanians and Turks, are probably the 3 most moderate groups of Islamic people. Ahmedijedad is a religious mystic, nut job. There's no doubt about that, but to say wipe out the country is more nuts than those that said the same about Iraq a few years ago. And I think most will agree the attack on Iraq has been an utter failure.

The problem is that everyone has pride, and everyone is nationalistic. Iranians, Americans, even Timbuktu-ans. If the leader of a country takes charge, and the people are, for the most part passive, as in the U.S. (we are passive people when it comes to politics), and as in Iran, and that leader makes ridiculous comments (Ahmedijedad), or has a ridiculous foreign policy (George W.), it is always the average citizen that suffers, isn't it?

The fact is, if we were not the single most powerful nation in the history of the universe, we would not be able to get away with half the sh*t we do. We would have probably been invaded by now, several times, and you and I would have suffered while our leaders were hiding in nuclear bomb protected bunkers, whether we supported those leaders or not. But we are the most powerful nation in history, ever, and we are using that power [rightfully or not]. Iranian citizens are not so fortunate.

[Oz]

Originally Posted by tl_boy

A country should not be wiped off the earth because its president makes those ridiculous comments. The Iranian citizens are more progressive than most other people of Islamic nations (I know that does not mean much to us, but in the global context, it does). Iranians are not arabs, and they are not Sunni Muslims.

They, along with the Jordanians and Turks, are probably the 3 most moderate groups of Islamic people. Ahmedijedad is a religious mystic, nut job. There's no doubt about that, but to say wipe out the country is more nuts than those that said the same about Iraq a few years ago. And I think most will agree the attack on Iraq has been an utter failure.

The problem is that everyone has pride, and everyone is nationalistic. Iranians, Americans, even Timbuktu-ans. If the leader of a country takes charge, and the people are, for the most part passive, as in the U.S. (we are passive people when it comes to politics), and as in Iran, and that leader makes ridiculous comments (Ahmedijedad), or has a ridiculous foreign policy (George W.), it is always the average citizen that suffers, isn't it?

The fact is, if we were not the single most powerful nation in the history of the universe, we would not be able to get away with half the sh*t we do. We would have probably been invaded by now, several times, and you and I would have suffered while our leaders were hiding in nuclear bomb protected bunkers, whether we supported those leaders or not. But we are the most powerful nation in history, ever, and we are using that power [rightfully or not]. Iranian citizens are not so fortunate.

One of the better political replies I have read here for a while...

[deutschmann59]

Iran makes the announcement today: "we have nukes"

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1832146

[tl_boy]

Eerily remniscient of the Iraq situation a couple years back. Don't like the direction this is going. Ahmedijdad (sp?) needs to stfu.

[donger274]

Is anyone like me and dont know a thing of whats going on in Iraq or afganistan.. i was pretty confused, 911 looking for osama and now were attacking iraq... hmmm what ever happened to the first job . can someone brief me on what happened ther ein the past 5 years

[E90X3]

Originally Posted by tl_boy

A country should not be wiped off the earth because its president makes those ridiculous comments. The Iranian citizens are more progressive than most other people of Islamic nations (I know that does not mean much to us, but in the global context, it does). Iranians are not arabs, and they are not Sunni Muslims.

They, along with the Jordanians and Turks, are probably the 3 most moderate groups of Islamic people. Ahmedijedad is a religious mystic, nut job. There's no doubt about that, but to say wipe out the country is more nuts than those that said the same about Iraq a few years ago. And I think most will agree the attack on Iraq has been an utter failure.

The problem is that everyone has pride, and everyone is nationalistic. Iranians, Americans, even Timbuktu-ans. If the leader of a country takes charge, and the people are, for the most part passive, as in the U.S. (we are passive people when it comes to politics), and as in Iran, and that leader makes ridiculous comments (Ahmedijedad), or has a ridiculous foreign policy (George W.), it is always the average citizen that suffers, isn't it?

The fact is, if we were not the single most powerful nation in the history of the universe, we would not be able to get away with half the sh*t we do. We would have probably been invaded by now, several times, and you and I would have suffered while our leaders were hiding in nuclear bomb protected bunkers, whether we supported those leaders or not. But we are the most powerful nation in history, ever, and we are using that power [rightfully or not]. Iranian citizens are not so fortunate.

well said......

[vega77]

There won't be a ground war against Iran. First, the people in the Bush admin. who wanted to fight Iraq actually planned it in the early 90's.. (Wolfowitz, Cheney, Perle). Look up Project for a New American Century. These people had a vendetta against Saddam, since we didn't finish him off in '91. It was never about 9-11 - that was used as an excuse to finish off Saddam. Second, our troops are still bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. We need at least another 150k troops for an invasion of Iran. We simply can't do it in the foreseeable future, unless we have a massive draft, which is unlikely. Third, Bush is very unpopular right now, because of Iraq.. so much so that he couldn't get the mandate for an actual invasion. The only military option that exists is airstrikes. I still don't see that happening, but that's the only military option that's possible.

[deutschmann59]

Originally Posted by vega77

There won't be a ground war against Iran. First, the people in the Bush admin. who wanted to fight Iraq actually planned it in the early 90's.. (Wolfowitz, Cheney, Perle). Look up Project for a New American Century. These people had a vendetta against Saddam, since we didn't finish him off in '91. It was never about 9-11 - that was used as an excuse to finish off Saddam. Second, our troops are still bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan. We need at least another 150k troops for an invasion of Iran. We simply can't do it in the foreseeable future, unless we have a massive draft, which is unlikely. Third, Bush is very unpopular right now, because of Iraq.. so much so that he couldn't get the mandate for an actual invasion. The only military option that exists is airstrikes. I still don't see that happening, but that's the only military option that's possible.

I completely agree with everything you said here.

[Imperial]

vega77 and tl_boy - kudos to both of you on your responses. I couldn't have said it better myself!

[Powertools]

iran ..war ...