Iran and U.S. Elections

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794289850&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Just wondering is there anyone on here who doubts that the republicans will attack Iran before the U.S. Elections?

They would need to get the cash from a Democratic Congress, which as you know, just funded some more of the Iraq war.

Let's see, two years ago we were promised change. Since then, we are STILL in Iraq, but at least the economy is doing worse.

No, we're not going into Iran. Whether we should or not, no one in Washington has any moral legitimacy anymore.

Well Mike I fear you misunderestimate Bush and cro.

They will not do it directly.

The Israelis will initiate it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080621/wl_mideast_afp/mideastpoliticsusisraelirannuclear_080621111926

Then we will be compelled to come to their aid.

We will have a propoganda campaign the likes of which we have not seen.

They will fill the public full of this drivel how the Iranians want to destroy Israel and kill all Jews etc.

Just wait and see.

It is the republicans' only hope.

Obama has opened up a fifteen point lead already.

Well, then let's just inaugurate him.

Well I would rather see that than to see your bunch plunge us into a real war.

But I know enough about republicans and their lust for power that I realize they will not go quietly or gently into the good night.

I see you got off that Hillary bandwagon about as fast as you got off the Edwards on Sherm.

By the way, what country is 'The repuclicans' and do they have a military set to attack Iran?

Sherm is talking nonsense again. There will be no U.S. attack against Iran.

Randall did you read my link in the earlier post?

Which one? The one where ElBaradei vows to resign if Iran is attacked? (That's the best argument I've yet heard for bombing Iran, by the way.)

You do this every two years: Claim the evil Republicans will launch some crazy war and bamboozle the public and turn them against peace-loving Democrats. There will be no U.S. attack against Iran, Sherm.

I read your link Sherm and I have a question for you.

If Israel and Iran were to enter into conflict, which side should the US support?

Why should the U.S. support either "side"?

Aaron I dont think even you are naive enough to believe Israel will up and bomb Iran without any U.S. collusion.

Randall if you don't believe the republicans play domestic politics with foreign policy you did not get your money's worth from all that education.

Course I was more idealistic when I was your age too so I partly understand your defending them.

While Israel may very well consult the US before any attack against Iran, I don't believe for a second the US has the ability to prohibit them from attacking if they make up their mind or feel they have a legitimate reason to attack Iran.

Of course your girl Hillary said that the US should attack Iran if they attacked Israel. So did your new boy Obama.

Other then it is current US policy Frank, any reason I state would be my opinion.

Why should me not take sides?

Aaron wrote:Other then it is current US policy Frank, any reason I state would be my opinion.

Really? Is it U.S. "policy" to take sides in other countries' wars?

Why should me not take sides?

I would think that the default position should be non-intervention is the wars of other nations.

So again, why should we take sides?

shermangeneral wrote:Aaron I dont think even you are naive enough to believe Israel will up and bomb Iran without any U.S. collusion.

Randall if you don't believe the republicans play domestic politics with foreign policy you did not get your money's worth from all that education.

Course I was more idealistic when I was your age too so I partly understand your defending them.

Playing domestic politics with foreign policy and bombing Iran are two different things, Sherm. The Republicans may do the first, but they aren't going to do the second, despite the fevered predictions from Sirius Left.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:Other then it is current US policy Frank, any reason I state would be my opinion.

Really? Is it U.S. "policy" to take sides in other countries' wars?

We weren't talking about other countries wars, were we Frank!!!

We were talking about Israel specifically, weren't we Frank!!!

Your pretty good at trying to confuse the issue and using someone's words out of context, aren't you Frank!!!

If you want to talk about other countries, just say so but bear in mind Frank, that I'll request specifics.

Now do you want to start over with your questions Frank as they specifically relate to what we were talking about, which is reasons why the US would support Israel in a conflict with Iran or do you want to continue to attempt to confuse the issue?

Balls in your court Frank. Hop to it!!!!!!!!!!

We weren't talking about other countries wars, were we Frank!!!

Yes, we were. We were talking about what the U.S. would/should do if Israel and Iran went to war. Please try to keep up.

I'll try Frank.

You ask why the Us would/should support Israel. I pointed out that it is the current US foreign policy.

Now your supposed to tell me why we shouldn't support Israel.

I'll be waiting.

What I had said was:

ziggy wrote:Why should the U.S. support either "side"?

And part of your reply was:

We weren't talking about other countries wars, were we Frank!!!

So are you saying that Israel and the U.S. are but one country?

As to why we should not support Isreal, Stephanie has, many times here, made that case far better than I. So, as they say in House of Commons , I refer my honorable friend to the answer she gave some days ago.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794292053&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

shermangeneral ahead of the curve yet again! I should have known you had inside info...

ziggy wrote:What I had said was:

ziggy wrote:Why should the U.S. support either "side"?

And part of your reply was:

We weren't talking about other countries wars, were we Frank!!!

So are you saying that Israel and the U.S. are but one country?

As to why we should not support Isreal, Stephanie has, many times here, made that case far better than I. So, as they say in House of Commons , I refer my honorable friend to the answer she gave some days ago.

I do believe you've taken two different responses and attempted to show them as one Frank. That's being at the least, deceitful, isn't it Frank!!!

I'm not discussing this with Stephanie as she's in Flatwoods. I'm sure she will render her opinion when she returns and at that point, I will gladly discuss this with her. For now, the conversation is between you and I Frank so try to stay focused and on point here, ok!!!

You ask why should we support 'either' side. I gave you a very valid reason for which you had no answer. Your responses have been an attempted subject change, weasel worded answers, twisting my responses to make it appear I’m saying something I’m not and overall dishonesty.

As this is all par for the course with you, I’m not surprised. And I realize it’s pointless to ask, but I’ll give it one more try.

Do you or do you not have a straight forward, valid response to a very simple question?

Or is your continued attempts of deceit and dishonesty that you have so frequently displayed the only manner in which you can respond?

ziggy wrote:Why should the U.S. support either "side"?

We shouldn't.

It isn't our business.

It wouldn't be our war, Israel isn't ours to defend and Iran isn't ours to defend.

We can't afford to. Militarily we're spread too think, as is crystal freaking clear given recent events in Afghanistan. Monetarily our unbelievable debt, our dollar is in the hopper, inflation is rising, and jobs are scarce and we're having enough difficulty getting OPEC to produce more oil without participating in an Israeli attack and/or invasion and/or occupation of an OPEC member nation.

Well Steph I would like to rush to your defense so we could skip off into the sunset but I cannot.

I believe we are duty bound by treaty to come to the aid of Israel.

An entangling alliance so to speak.

ohio county wrote:http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794292053&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

shermangeneral ahead of the curve yet again! I should have known you had inside info...

I'm confused Jimmy. Didn't all the NEA's last year say that Iran was not striving for Nuclear technology? Someone forgot to tell the IAEA Director General.

"If you do a military strike, it will mean that Iran, if it is not already making nuclear weapons, will launch a crash course to build nuclear weapons with the blessing of all Iranians, even those in the West," he predicted.

ElBaradei's comments came on the same day as The New York Times reported that the IAF carried out a major military drill during the first week of June that US sources say was apparently a rehearsal for a potential attack on Iran's nuclear sites.