I was against the invasion and occupation of Iraq because there wasn't evidence of WMDs so Iraq was no threat to the US.

However, there is strong evidence that Iran is near to the capability of having nuclear weapons and that is simply not acceptable, and is a direct threat to our allies Israel, Turkey, and European countries.

The only hope now to avoid war with Iran is the pie in the sky notion that the students are going to rise up in democratic revolt against the Iranian mullahs in power.

This ain't gonna happen!

The only reason Iraq now has elections is because they were violentally invaded and occupied.

Why give the Iranians any more time to build up their stength and possibly have active nukes before we attack?

Attack now!

The sooner this dirty business is handled, the sooner we can have more and better Iranian restaurants in America.

BTW: I am serious. I favor war with Iran. We should have ignored Iraq, it was a tactical mistake to get bogged down there.

An invasion of Iran would be a colossal logistical nightmare.
If you don't know that yet TQ then you haven't been doing your homework!

70% of the Iranian population is under 30 years old and they are already sick of the fanatic mullahs. The liberation of Iran will be an inside job. Just relax sit back and watch!

In the end we will all be conquered by cell phones, satellite tv and the internet. It's just a matter of time.
TQ you are already doomed you just don't know it.

Hmmm.
I am sure I am doomed, but that is besides the point.
The mullahs will not go down that easy; that is your blind radical right wing pie in sky ideology thinking.
I should have been more specific, not outright invasion of the population, rather surgical strikes on the nuke sites, again and again, until they give it up.
They cannot be allowed to have nukes, period.

We should do anything that is necessary to stop Iran from gaining a nuclear arsenal. I agree with that basic sentiment. However right now invasion would not be ideal. Instead, should Iran-EU rleations break down, we should simply bomb Iranian Nuclear facilities and bide our time, hoping to lend US support to any Anti-Mullah uprising that may foment among the general populace.

I would also argue that it was not a tactical mistake to become involved in the occupation of Iraq. It was however, a tactical mistake to go into Iraq with anything but overwhelming force. We should have sent millions, not hundreds of thousands, of men to Iraq.

I am honestly pleasantly surprised, TQ, that you do not favor allowing the Mullahs to have nukes.

You guys were BIG HAWKS when it came to NO THREAT Iraq, but when faced with real threats like Iran and North Korean, y'all turn into wait and see PUSSIES!

Hillary Clinton would not wait and see.
INVADE! We have the hardware, let's use it!

I was a hawk on Iraq for a few main reasons.

A.) Make an example out of Saddam

B.) Give ourselves strong tactical Middle East postion

C.) Further the Bush Doctrine's plan of Tactical Mideast Democratization

And I would be just as big a hawk on Iran, if one key fact was not still there

The war in Iraq is not over. We need to win one war before getting involved in another. For now we should stick to, if necessary, surgical military strikes against Iranian Nuclear Facilities.

Interesting that NONE of those reasons was stated by war criminal bush to sell the war to Americans.
The war in Iran and IT IS COMING, is going to be much more clear cut.
And I am also serious, Hillary Clinton, when she is president, and she is going to be president, is going to be a REAL HAWK.

I would think we will be seeing Israeli F16's in the skies over Iran before they develop a nuclear arsenal. Right now we are putting an international diplomatic squeeze on them.
Forget about the US actually invading Iran.


BTW as far as the "Liberation of Iraq" is concerned the CNN footage of Saddam dancing and celebrating 9/11 is all we needed! IMHO!

Actually Democratizing Iraq was mentioned many-a-time by Bush in the build up to the war in Iraq

Revisionist history.
###### liars.
LOOK AT THE TAPES of bush before the invasion!

Listen to any of the various speeches he made in the build up to the War in Iraq.

He always devoted a good portion of the speeches to bringing democracy to Iraq.

That is lie.
The war could never have been sold to Americans on that basis!
That was part of the post invasion justifaction for the major muck up of it turning out there were no WMDs.
Your people are deluded.

You are implying that Bush did not do a lot of talking about the moral righteousness of Democratizing Iraq?

YOU are a historical revisionist.

People who were there and are not BLINDED by their belief in bushism KNOW THE TRUTH!

Know the Truth?

You're just blatantly lying. He oozed with pro-democracy rhetoric before the war.

The war was sold on FEAR of there being a direct IMMINENT threat from Iraq on the US.
That was a lie and bush knew it.
They knew that was the only way to get the stupid American people to go along.

In the cases of Iran and North Korea, we SHOULD be AFRAID. These countries are direct threats. However, with North Korea, it is too late to invade. We should not make the same mistake with Iran. Invade BEFORE it is too late.

You who readily characterize the American People as stupid and call the United States a "Nation of Caligulas" are the last person we should be turning to when asking about how best to protect ourselves.

I find it very interesting that Old Guard Socialists who claim they care so deeply for the plight of the common man are the first to rave about his stupidity and ignorance.

Crafty dodge.
But the reality is that any people might have been fooled by the classic Nazi-esque fear tactics and lies used by bush.
So, better to say, stupid people who happen to be Americans, who happen to have the misfortune to live in the time of a twisted leader.

Crafty dodge?

"America is not a nation of Mother Theresas. More like a nation of Caligulas." -ThaiQuila

"They knew it was the only way to get the stupid American people to go along." -ThaiQuilla

Not only do you not understand how best to protect the United States, you do not have the protection of the United States at heart. You hate America, and you hate the American people.



A great book by Thomas Sowell on how the Political Left patronizes the common American, and pretends to be interested only in saving them from the "evil coporations" when really, at heart, TQ's ilk have only disgust for the Average American.

How can you presume to know so much about me?

You constantly broadcast you're hatred for America and Americans via a online politics forum called The Bear Pit. This forum can be found at the following address:

www.bearpit.net

Some of my best friends are Americans.
You just don't get me.
I am more patriotic than you are, I am certain.
Like I said: INVADE IRAN!

Yes very patriotic.That is why you compared the average American to Caligula, one of the most brutal figures in the history of the world.

You quote me out of context of that old string. Very weak.

Out of context, you say.

What exactly was the context then, that you compared the Average American to Caesar Caligula in?

I give up.
I admit it.
I do think the "average" American is an idiot.
But they are my idiots, as it is my fate to also be an American.
Given that, I can't see how we can tolerate Iran having nukes.

We cannot tolerate Iran having nukes.

We do not need to go to full scale war however. It would be easy as pie to simply fly over a handful of B2s and turn any and all Iranian Nuclear Facilities into so many particles of dust.

For more on this, see the IDF's bombing of Iraqi Nuclear Facilities in the 1980s.

Yes Invade Iran. I would love to see this happen. Why?

Because I want to see the US decline, under a burden of debt and political stupidity, into chaos.

You can't support your military as it is. Your expenditure in Iraq is unsustainable. Americans are afraid to enlist. They are too comfortable and they don't want to die for a pointless war of 'My religious right fundamentalist penis is bigger then your religious right fundamentalist penis'.

So please please, Invade Iran. I need a good laugh and those shock and awe 2 million a peice missiles make purty flashes on my TV.

Ikon

In another thread I expressed doubt about you're knowledge of foreign policy and economics. The post you have made in this thread confirms those doubts.

Bob,

I try to ignore your right wing ignorant nauseous diatribe, but I need to tell you that your ideology has actually made you semi retarded.

You support israel, the root cause of all terrorism in the mid-east and the world, then you vomit claims of CNN showing dancing arabs, when it was proven that they used old footage from 1991. The zionist jews know exactly how stupid the emotional american right wing morons are..... so that's why it worked on you!

It's so hilariously ironic that you use the same justification for the Islamic Empire's annexation of the Holy Land that you so condemn many Americans for using to justify US actions in Iraq.

It really is a gutbuster.

Islamic Empires did not drop bombs on civilians, nor did they butcher women and children like the Mongols and Crusaders. The Mid-east prospered under islamic rule.

These are facts, and you are a babbling fool!

Okay Os.

So if the US were to invade Canada where you live. And the US made Canada a subserviant province. The US did not actually kill any civilians (NO civilians died in the US invasion of Canada) but the US made all natural born Canadians second class citizens and forced them to pay a tax for being Canadian, that would be A-OK in you're book?

By the logic you are using, it would have to be.

Oh and BTW, the muslims did not drop bombs on Civilians. They did however use large siege engines to raid huge stones and rocks down on the people inside the cities. It is the medieval equivalent.

1. If USA offered its citizens a better life, why not? We are over taxed here anyway! But the world knows that USA is criminal and would never do such (good) things, therefore USrael will be resisted and defeated one day soon!

I see.

You have a very messed up view of the world.

Also, life in the Islamic Empire improved for citizens, assuming they converted to Islam.

If you wanted to stay a Christian or a Jew, sorry! You are a second class citizen now! Oh, and you have to pay a tax for not being Muslim.

No, Islamic Empires improved live for ALL (read the history). Jews and Christians were no treated as "second class" according to the Euro-christian ideology.

No, they quite simply were second class citizens.

There status as "People of the book" gave them the right not to be slaughtered. However as non-Muslims they were treated as second class.

The Islamic Empire was a good thing for Muslims, and nobody else.

With Christians



Moreover, what increases the greatness of the Islamic achievements concerning tolerance, equality and justice is that Islam does not ignore other religions as secular countries have done. In addition, this equality and justice do not disregard the Islamic reference as the secularists tended to do. The Islamic constitution of al-Madinah asserted this Islamic reference: "When there are differences, disputes or struggles among the people of al-Madinah about anything, the matter will be referred for a decision to Allah and to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)."



When the Islamic state extended to include the Christians of Najran, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) sent them a letter in which he assured them of pluralism, freedom, Islamic tolerance, equality and justice.



The Pact of Najran included the following:



* Full protection is accorded from Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon him) to the Christian inhabitants of Najran regarding their life, land, nationhood, property and wealth, even to those who are residing as their dependants in the vicinity of Najran and to those living outside the country, their priests, monks, churches, and

everything, whether great or small.



* No bishop or monk will be removed from his office. The intention being that no change in any form of every one will be made (the status quo shall be maintained).



* They will neither be subjected to military service nor be treated harshly.



* They will not be dealt with unjustly.



* I (prophet Muhammad) shall protect them and safeguard their religion, churches, places of worship, the houses of their monks, their belongings and their tourist places wherever they are, in the same way as I protect my Islamic nation and myself.



* None of their buildings will be adjacent to the Muslim's Mosques or houses.



* None of them will pay Kharaj (1) or Jizyah (2) except those who have an inheritance of land that has a specific tax to be paid to the Sultan. Such being the case, they shall be required to pay as their counterparts without injustice, unfairness or excess. Muslims should not put on them a burden greater than they have strength to bear concerning cultivation.



* None of them should be compelled to fight alongside Muslims against their enemies as they were promised to be protected by the Muslims and not vice versa. Furthermore, Muslims shall protect

them wherever they are.



* None of them should be compelled to provide Muslims during battles with soldiers, money, weapons or horses. If some of them do so voluntarily, they should be thanked and rewarded.



* None of them should be compelled to embrace Islam and Muslims should not argue with them unless it is in a way that is better; with good words and manners. Muslims should lower to them the wing of mercy and keep them from harm wherever they are.



* None of them should be compelled concerning marriage; they should not be compelled to marry their daughters to Muslims. They should not be blamed if they refuse the suitor, as it is their absolute right to reject or to accept voluntarily.



* If a Muslim gets married to a Christian woman, he should be content with her Christianity and should not prevent her from performing her religious rituals. If he prevents and compels her to do something opposing her religion, then he will be of those who disobey Allah and His Prophet and he will be amongst the liars.



* If they need assistance concerning reconstruction of their churches, hermitages or any thing else regarding their interests, the Muslims should help and assist them without seeking compensation in order to support the interests of their religion as a favor from Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon him).



* Muslims should keep my promise, as I promised them to protect and safeguard all their belongings. Furthermore, they have the same rights and the same duties as Muslims.



Actually, the people of current times, who do not know the reality of Islam, are overwhelmingly amazed because of the Islamic generosity, equality, justice and tolerance towards those of other religions fourteen centuries ago. Undoubtedly, their amazement will increase when they come to know that Islam does not ask others to return this generosity and tolerance.



1. A tax or tribute on land. This was originally applied to a land tribute from non-Muslim tribes.



2. Head-tax imposed by Islam on the people of the Scripture when they are under Muslim rule.

So everyone who dies at the hands of an islamofacist suicide bomber deserves their fate in your opinion I see.

It is the babbling fool who tries to rationalize or minimize the current atrocities committed in the name of Islam.

"islamofacist suicide bomber".... you see, this is my point.... right wing lunatics have no proof they even exist, yet that talk about is as the basis of their ideology

What proof do you have that they do NOT exist? The Burden of Proof is on you for the assertion that Islamic Sucide Bombers do not exist, not on us.

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m12022&l=i&size=1&hd=0

You posted this before. It is an unsubstantiated claim that two Iraqis made with nothing backing them up that was reported by this site, a fringe Radical Islamic website with no credibility whatsoever.

http://warfolly.vzz.net/sickstrategies.html

Oh look, another website carried the story! That changes the fact that the claims are 100% unsubstantiated!

Oh wait, no it doesn't.

What a joke