Iran

C

Cancel7

Banned
I went to a lecture given by Scott Ritter last night. It kind of saddened me.

He believes the bush administration is going to bomb Iran by spring of 08. And it was interesting what he said about that, because this is the conclusion I have come to. It was about the peace movement saying that they have been effective because now 70% of Americans are against the Iraqi war. And what he said was, 70% of Americans are not against the Iraqi war, they are against losing the war. And what happens when you lose? You want to make up for it. I think that he is right.

This is exactly what I was saying about Iran, that I believe it’s the new Gulf War I. We fought that war under the Powell Doctrine, and it gave us our manhood back, as a country. (not me, but the majority). And now that we have suffered a debacle in Iraq, we as a country have the same feelings we had after Vietnam, until Gulf War I gave us a shot of Viagra.

That is why, even with 70% of Americans against the Iraqi war, there will not be that high of a percentage against an attack on Iran. A lot of those Americans, want a “win”. And if bush says he can give it to them, they’ll go with it. And they won’t care what the bill in brown lives is. They never have. It’s “not a number that interests me (them) very much, frankly.”

I don’t like this country very much anymore.
 
This is exactly what I was saying about Iran, that I believe it’s the new Gulf War I. We fought that war under the Powell Doctrine, and it gave us our manhood back, as a country. (not me, but the majority). And now that we have suffered a debacle in Iraq, we as a country have the same feelings we had after Vietnam, until Gulf War I gave us a shot of Viagra.



Its partly a function of our esteemed fourth estate. The american media has fallen down on the job again. It refuses to challenge the claims of the adminstration.

Just go to any political message board, like this one. Watch Scott Pelley's 60 minutes interview with the Iranian President. There is simply an assumption that Iran is not only actively building a nuclear bomb. But, that Iran is a direct threat to the american homeland. Many people buy this bullshit. The MSM isn't telling them anything different or questioning it. Many necons I engage with are operating under the assumption that Iran IS building a bomb. Even though the IAEA inspectors say there is currently no evidence of that.
 
Cypress said:
This is exactly what I was saying about Iran, that I believe it’s the new Gulf War I. We fought that war under the Powell Doctrine, and it gave us our manhood back, as a country. (not me, but the majority). And now that we have suffered a debacle in Iraq, we as a country have the same feelings we had after Vietnam, until Gulf War I gave us a shot of Viagra.



Its partly a function of our esteemed fourth estate. The american media has fallen down on the job again. It refuses to challenge the claims of the adminstration.

Just go to any political message board, like this one. Watch Scott Pelley's 60 minutes interview with the Iranian President. There is simply an assumption that Iran is not only actively building a nuclear bomb. But, that Iran is a direct threat to the american homeland. Many people buy this bullshit. The MSM isn't telling them anything different or questioning it. Many necons I engage with are operating under the assumption that Iran IS building a bomb. Even though the IAEA inspectors say there is currently no evidence of that.
Click to expand...

I'm tired of blaming the media.

The people are fools. And they like war, as long as we're "winning".

I don't disagree about the media, but...it doesn't cut it as an excuse anymore. It's the people.
 
Darla said:
I'm tired of blaming the media.

The people are fools. And they like war, as long as we're "winning".

I don't disagree about the media, but...it doesn't cut it as an excuse anymore. It's the people.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that there is a subset of americans that have a bloodlust for war. But, I also think the US government - with the active participation of the MSM - manipulates public opinion. Manufacturing higher numbers favoring war. Right now, there's not a lot of enthusiasm for war - outside the audiences that attend GOP presidential debates:


NY Times/CBS Poll, September 2007

“Which comes closer to your opinion? Iran is a threat to the United States that requires military action now. Iran is a threat that can be contained with diplomacy now. OR, Iran is not a threat to the United States at this time."

Military Action Now: 9%
Diplomacy Now: 59%
Not a Threat: 24%
 
IRAN is allot different then Iraq. Much more rugged landscape.


Iran is ringed virtually 360 degrees by towering mountains, and even if they were passable by artillery units, unstable salt flats and high desert wastelands stand between those mountains and Tehran, the capital. The Great Salt Desert outside Tehran is hundreds of miles of dry lakebeds that ooze a black sticky mud that's a lot like quicksand. It won't support tanks and artillery.


No chance in hell we ever go in on the ground.
 
I like Ritter a lot and I admire his courage for speaking out against the war even before it began.

I've also said many times that the problem with America isn't George Bush, the media, or the neocons .. the problem with America is Americans. We are an invented people.

However, I disagree that the impending Bush attack on Iran is set in stone. Russia and Putin are taking an increasingly aggressive stand against any military attack on Iran, and the Shanghai Cooperative Organization, which includes China, have committed that no member will allow the US to base operations from their country or allow US to fly its airspace. With the current situation in Turkey, who knows how that's going to pan out particularly against the backdrop of the House Resolution about genocide against the Kurds .. which is not going to pass. The Chinese are also pissed about Bush's Resolution on the Dalai Lama.

If Turkey actually invades Iraq going after the Kurds, it puts the Bush Administration in an even more tenuous situation. After all, the neocons have used the Kurds to go after Saddam and if they leave them hanging if Turkey attacks they'll lose them as an ally .. but the neocons are having to walk on eggs in dealing with turkey.

Whomever inherits this mess as the next president will need to be heavy in diplomacy and not address these issues strickly from the perspective of Tel Aviv .. which Hillary Clinton cannot be counted on to do.
 
"If Turkey actually invades Iraq going after the Kurds, it puts the Bush Administration in an even more tenuous situation. After all, the neocons have used the Kurds to go after Saddam and if they leave them hanging if Turkey attacks they'll lose them as an ally .. but the neocons are having to walk on eggs in dealing with turkey."

QFT.... kind of hard when two US allies are in conflict with one another.
 
blackascoal said:
I like Ritter a lot and I admire his courage for speaking out against the war even before it began.

I've also said many times that the problem with America isn't George Bush, the media, or the neocons .. the problem with America is Americans. We are an invented people.

However, I disagree that the impending Bush attack on Iran is set in stone. Russia and Putin are taking an increasingly aggressive stand against any military attack on Iran, and the Shanghai Cooperative Organization, which includes China, have committed that no member will allow the US to base operations from their country or allow US to fly its airspace. With the current situation in Turkey, who knows how that's going to pan out particularly against the backdrop of the House Resolution about genocide against the Kurds .. which is not going to pass. The Chinese are also pissed about Bush's Resolution on the Dalai Lama.

If Turkey actually invades Iraq going after the Kurds, it puts the Bush Administration in an even more tenuous situation. After all, the neocons have used the Kurds to go after Saddam and if they leave them hanging if Turkey attacks they'll lose them as an ally .. but the neocons are having to walk on eggs in dealing with turkey.

Whomever inherits this mess as the next president will need to be heavy in diplomacy and not address these issues strickly from the perspective of Tel Aviv .. which Hillary Clinton cannot be counted on to do.
Click to expand...


I don't think it's written in stone (Ritter does though, yes), I just think it is more likely than unlikely.

But that is good news about the Shanghai Cooperative Organization. I very much hope it doesn't happen.

If it doesn't, it won't be the American people who stop it.
 
Darla said:
I don't think it's written in stone (Ritter does though, yes), I just think it is more likely than unlikely.

But that is good news about the Shanghai Cooperative Organization. I very much hope it doesn't happen.

If it doesn't, it won't be the American people who stop it.
Click to expand...

Truer words have never been spoken.
 
And how will Russia figure in if we attack Iran ? Another cold war or worse ?
all things considered Russia can beat us in a ground war right now. We are pretty much fully extended on the ground.
 
Darla said:
I went to a lecture given by Scott Ritter last night. It kind of saddened me.

He believes the bush administration is going to bomb Iran by spring of 08. And it was interesting what he said about that, because this is the conclusion I have come to. It was about the peace movement saying that they have been effective because now 70% of Americans are against the Iraqi war. And what he said was, 70% of Americans are not against the Iraqi war, they are against losing the war. And what happens when you lose? You want to make up for it. I think that he is right.

This is exactly what I was saying about Iran, that I believe it’s the new Gulf War I. We fought that war under the Powell Doctrine, and it gave us our manhood back, as a country. (not me, but the majority). And now that we have suffered a debacle in Iraq, we as a country have the same feelings we had after Vietnam, until Gulf War I gave us a shot of Viagra.

That is why, even with 70% of Americans against the Iraqi war, there will not be that high of a percentage against an attack on Iran. A lot of those Americans, want a “win”. And if bush says he can give it to them, they’ll go with it. And they won’t care what the bill in brown lives is. They never have. It’s “not a number that interests me (them) very much, frankly.”

I don’t like this country very much anymore.
Click to expand...
Iranians are aryan, hence they are not "brown".
 
If we do go to war with Iran it will be a huge mistake. There would never have been a need to do anything ourselves in Iran when there were so many willing to take up arms in their own cause with a bit of help from some friends...

If we do go, it will likely only be faceless bombing.
 
Yeah, and China may take some action as well. They don't want their oil interrupted.

I think USCit is likely right and in future history books these wars will be called the "Oil Wars".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top