Sen. Lieberman says force may be needed in Iran

[coastie]

Just wondering, why are you guys feeding the neocon troll? You know that reason and logic don't work on such creatures, right?

Incredibly bored. The Fam is out of town, housework is done, and I have no life

 

[lester1/2jr]

[quote='eproxy"]Just wondering, why are you guys feeding the neocon troll?[/quote]

why aren't you?

I don't agree with arming Saddam, but it is still definitely justified to overthrow the guy for killing hundreds of thousands of people.

You may feel that way but that's not why we went to war. We went to secure his WMD and so Al queda wouldn't have an ally in the middle east in which to use those weapons.

it was ostensibly for defensive, not humanitarian purposes.

And the only one looking for a war are the apocalyptic iranian mullahs.

that's crazy. first of all, they are not apocolyptic, they are desperately holding on to their power because it makes them rich and, well, powerful. They are normal asshole politicians.

and the idea that they are seeking war??? with the united states? we have thousands of nukes. we could vaporize them in a second. they barely have an army. There is no way they could launch any sort of attack on us via military means.

 

[coastie]

that's crazy. first of all, they are not apocolyptic, they are desperately holding on to their power because it makes them rich and, well, powerful. They are normal asshole politicians.

and the idea that they are seeking war??? with the united states? we have thousands of nukes. we could vaporize them in a second. they barely have an army. There is no way they could launch any sort of attack on us via military means.

 

[catdd]

Patriot is still a brainwashed interventionalist. He hasn't caught up with Ron Paul's thinking yet.

 

[SimpleName]

Lieberman really needs to move to Israel. He is obviously obsessed. I don't think even the Israelis are as captured by Iran and the Palestinians as this guy. Time and time again he has fought for the rights of Israel over the safety and protection of the United States. Somebody please challenge this guy. Maybe a Dennis Kucinich time of guy. An honest semi-socialist. At least we can challenge the guy on some merit. Lieberman though, is a nutcase with no priorities other than Israel (and censorship). I simply do not feel safe with this guy pressuring every second of the day to get the US in a war with the entire non-Jewish Middle East. I can live under socialism, but I will surely be dead when I get drafted for his war.

 

[devil21]

I don't agree with arming Saddam, but it is still definitely justified to overthrow the guy for killing hundreds of thousands of people. We, the French, and the British didn't give him weapons knowing he should do such a thing, ...

And the only one looking for a war are the apocalyptic iranian mullahs. War is not desirable, it should be the last option, and all peaceful efforts must be made to stop their nuclear program and stop them from attaining weapons. We can only hope that the secular democratic movement in Iran is successful in the coming years, and that the Mullahs are ousted from power. The only thing preventing friendly relations between us and the people of Iran is their totalitarian government which represses them and threatens us.

So we place the religious mullahs in power, then complain and call them totalitarian when they govern sectarian? Then we call for another regime change back to what the CIA originally overthrew? Do you not see how this is compounding errors upon errors? This whole situation is such a twisted clusterfuck, mainly because of our own actions in subverting their government repeatedly. Haven't we done enough already? I don't care if they get a nuclear weapon personally. However, it's not been proven that they are seeking one and even the nuclear watchdogs and our own intelligence community has stated there is no proof of such a program. You're making a huge assumption about Iran's intentions and such an assumption is not reasoning for military action.

 

[The Patriot]

1.

You didn't ask me that, and, *news flash*, this "destroy other nations fallacy" is once again pure neo-con propaganda, and has been shown to be a deliberate mistranslation and taken out of context for years now. Your entire argument is shut down at this point, but its fun ripping on you.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/norouzi.php?articleid=11025

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-sedaei/the-biggest-lie-told-to-t_b_70248.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

2.

No, you have stated numerous times they would attack us , and for as "crazy" as they are, they're showing an awful lot of restraint...

3.

Yeah, they've proven real credible. It was Army "Intelligence" that got us into this mess in the first place.

As I said, your entire argument is grounded in one of the biggest lies ever told. If Mental Hoops were a game, you'd be fucking Michael jordan

No mistranslation here. Clearly you aren't able to differentiate between multiple quotes. Marg-Bar Israel means death to Israel in Farsi, here is the video.
YouTube - Ahmadinejad: death to Israel

As for that other quote, the pure Farsi translation doesn't make him look any better. In this particular quote, he is calling for more the same, he wants to drive the Israelis from Jerusalem, and have an Arab Jerusalem. This makes sense, since he is on record advocating for the destruction of Israel, as I showed above.

And I never said they would attack us directly, go through my post history. I have always said that they will attack us through terrorist surrogates like Hamas or Hezbollah. IF they were to attack anyone militarily, it would must likely be an Arab Gulf State like Bahrain which they have historically laid claim to. They could use the nuclear weapon as blackmail to stop an intervention and totally disrupt the oil industry thus economically crippling the west.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

For the war mongeringt troll

Don't Start a War With Iran Now!

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD

 

[The Patriot]

I am not for war with Iran now. I am only for striking their nuclear facilities if an when they get nuclear weapons.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

I am not for war with Iran now. I am only for striking their nuclear facilities if an when they get nuclear weapons.

Yeah, that'll never start a war.

 

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

What country would ever be stupid enough to use nukes against another nuclear power? I just don't believe it will ever happen, no matter how many acquire the technology. Joseph Stalin didn't have the balls to do it, and he had more blood on his hands than any other leader who has had access to nuclear technology.

 

[coastie]

No mistranslation here. Clearly you aren't able to differentiate between multiple quotes. Marg-Bar Israel means death to Israel in Farsi, here is the video.
YouTube - Ahmadinejad: death to Israel

As for that other quote, the pure Farsi translation doesn't make him look any better. In this particular quote, he is calling for more the same, he wants to drive the Israelis from Jerusalem, and have an Arab Jerusalem. This makes sense, since he is on record advocating for the destruction of Israel, as I showed above.

And I never said they would attack us directly, go through my post history. I have always said that they will attack us through terrorist surrogates like Hamas or Hezbollah. IF they were to attack anyone militarily, it would must likely be an Arab Gulf State like Bahrain which they have historically laid claim to. They could use the nuclear weapon as blackmail to stop an intervention and totally disrupt the oil industry thus economically crippling the west.

he wants to drive the Israelis from Jerusalem, and have an Arab Jerusalem. This makes sense, since he is on record advocating for the destruction of Israel,

And this our business, how?

They could use the nuclear weapon as blackmail to stop an intervention and totally disrupt the oil industry thus economically crippling the west.

And thus economically crippling themselves, yeah, that"ll show us

Like I said, strap up, cowboy, go defend Israel my freedoms from Iran

 

[coastie]

//

 

[american.swan]

So somehow it's lawful to "use force" against Iran, yet using force against Congress isn't lawful.

 

[christinag]

Force may be indeed punishing Uber statistic trot may be people'd through out him of the country

 

[lester1/2jr]

And I never said they would attack us directly, go through my post history. I have always said that they will attack us through terrorist surrogates like Hamas or Hezbollah.

you think hamaz or hezbollah is going to attack the continenal united states?? I still don't understand what you are talking about. they don't have armies either. hezbollah barely held their ground againmst israel whose army is a fraction of ours.

IF they were to attack anyone militarily, it would must likely be an Arab Gulf State like Bahrain which they have historically laid claim to. They could use the nuclear weapon as blackmail to stop an intervention and totally disrupt the oil industry thus economically crippling the west.

Iran is going to attack bahrain?? I've never heard that in my entire life.

as far as crippling the oil industry, they seems like a good resason to leave them alone more than anything else. Does anyone here want to pay 10 dollars a gallon for the foreseeable future to prevent Iran from possibly maybe getting a nuclear bomb, with which they could do nothign they couldn't do with a bunch of regular bombs?

 

[The Patriot]

And this our business, how?




And thus economically crippling themselves, yeah, that"ll show us

Like I said, strap up, cowboy, go defend Israel my freedoms from Iran

Because we should defend our allies, and stand against those who wish to destroy nations and violently drive people from their countries. But I am glad you are indirectly admitting the intentions of Ahmedenijad. I will leave you with this quote, from great Conservative Edmund Burke.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

 

[The Patriot]

you think hamaz or hezbollah is going to attack the continenal united states?? I still don't understand what you are talking about. they don't have armies either. hezbollah barely held their ground againmst israel whose army is a fraction of ours.




Iran is going to attack bahrain?? I've never heard that in my entire life.

as far as crippling the oil industry, they seems like a good resason to leave them alone more than anything else. Does anyone here want to pay 10 dollars a gallon for the foreseeable future to prevent Iran from possibly maybe getting a nuclear bomb, with which they could do nothign they couldn't do with a bunch of regular bombs?

Sure, Al Qaeda attacked the Continental united states. I never said with but certainly with cells. No one ever said anything about a land invasion accept for you, which is absurd.

 

[coastie]

Because we should defend our allies, and stand against those who wish to destroy nations and violently drive people from their countries. But I am glad you are indirectly admitting the intentions of Ahmedenijad. I will leave you with this quote, from great Conservative Edmund Burke.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Does the highlighted portion of your statement not sound an awful like what our government is doing? How are you so blind to this?

And what "evil" is there, exactly with Iran?

How are we the "good men" here? We have been interfering with their affairs longer than I've been alive(and you?).


OUR OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES say they don't have and are not making a nuke...HELLLLLLOOOOOO???? Or lemme guess, Hamas infiltrated them, too.

 

[Zippyjuan]

I can understand Iran wanting to get a nuclear weapon. Countries with nuclear weapons don't usually get invaded. The US has invaded and is at war in two countries on both sides of Iran. We declared them to be part of the "Axis of Evil" even though they offered to help us with the Afghan war in the wake of 9/11. A nuclear weapon would be a source of national pride and a source of power and influence within the region. Even not actually having a weapon but letting people think you may have one will endow you with these benefits.

They need nuclear power- their stated goal of their nuclear program. Yes, they are an oil exporting country but with their growing domestic demand, they have less available for export and oil is their primary source of revenue. Replacing domestic demand with nuclear power frees up more for export.

Two things I doubt. One that the US would attack Iran to keep them from getting a nuclear weapon. Iran is vastly larger than Iraq and Afghanistan combined and their nuclear program is dispearsed throughout the country. Taking it all out would be difficult- any attack would only be a temporarys setback and would likely lead to a skyrocketing price of oil which would not be good for the global economic situation. And two- that even if Iran went nuclear that they would actually use it. The only county to ever use one against another country is the United States. Any moral support they may gain from Arab nation for having one would be lost if they actually used it.

Another point- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cannot run for the presidency again after his current term is over. He will not be president by the time Iran gets the bomb. Whether anybody better or worse takes over is unknown but he is losing popularity even among the hardliners so it is likely a (relatively) more moderate will follow.