So now a new war against Iran ?

Iran as a threat is a joke...

Firstly, even if they are going for nuclear weapons experts have projected that they will not reach capabilities for around 8 to 10 years.. Even then those will be generation 1 nuclear weapons where they could reach no one with it...

Secondly, MAD.. No person would risk their power with an attack they could gain NOTHING FROM.. Regardless of how "mad" you people think Iranian or the North Korean ruler is.. They simply are not.. This is a political strategy of Chicken.. Where the country tries to force others with empty threats to get money.. North Korea did this EXACT same thing in the 90's.. Say if Iran did attack Israel or United States.. You want to know what would happen? At the very least the president would lose his entire power, at the most the country main city would cease to exist due to nuclear retaliation...

Thirdly, nuclear weapons are the past.. What we need to be worried about is biologically engineered viruses which are much easier to make and can be much deadilier.. Some of the biggest plagues in history were highly contagious, but they had a 20% fatality rate which was considered immense.. Now put in perspective that such things can be enhanced to go to a whooping 50% or above, that would devestate a population far more then any nuclear bomb...

The only real reason for the United States to go into Iran is economic gain.. Make no mistake we are indirectly responsible for Iran's leadership.. After all the CIA overthrew the last democratically elected president, and put into power the Shah (another brutal dictator) in the 60s.. Make no mistake about how we are some how not getting any money from Iraq.. The companies contracted over there are making RECORD PROFITS, those profits are then partially distributing to the lobbyiests.. There is no "American Government Company", its a captalistic market people.. And the businesses contracted over there are making record profits.

sSubZerOo

You shouldn't trust the 'expert' opinions of the analysts, they're probably building/ have built refining facilities underground, without our knowledge. Either way, once Iran can refine Uranium (takes much longer to get enough plutonium, which is used in the really big bombs) they can either utilize it in a mid range scud which could be fired on anywhere in the middle east or a more likely scenario is the use of a so-called 'dirty bomb'. Dirty bombs are small nuclear devices, kept in a bag and most likely detonated by a suicide bomber. Dirty bombs could decimate an army base in Iraq or a few civlian blocks in Pakistan or Israel. Though I have to say, the bigger threat at the moment is Pakistan because they already have nuclear weapons and are currently in a time of political unrest.

[QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"]

...So US is threating iran for a war !! WTF with this country its like satan toke all over it and using it against other nations by opening un-finished wars . Really i dontsee a real reason for this war other than madness and hatred against the humanity ! aint they already stucked with iraq now ?When will they be even with this madness?!

Now dont say its about the nuclear program ... the Iranian nuclear program was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace programthen later on in the late of 2006-2007 the U.S. and some other nations officials allege the program covers an attempt to acquire nuclear weapons which somehow i assume its another way to start a war .

WhOOmpa260

also, iran sponsors terrorists, including hezbollah, hamas, and possibly al-qaeda. an actual invasion would be wholly impractical. however, an airstrike against their nuclear facilities would be much more practical, as there is a good chance that not a single american soldier would die in an aerial campaign.

Ok , its practical for them to airstrike thier facilities and a great chance for U.S army to survive from death... imagine how bad the area around will be polluted... there will be lost's by nations not several persons (soldiers) ,innocent people will pay for this Low-risky-attack from U.S . Generally why this anger ? so they built it underground ! what then ? maybe its safer that way so then incase maybe an nuclear substance's leaks so there wont be much damages for the nature. why creating these delustions just to be an excuse for this war!

Iran wont do anything only if U.S obliged it to ! And do you think iran have the guts to touch any U.S land ? they're nothing compared to U.S army they're making some statements about raiding with nuclear just as an psychical war against america to stop'em from the mess they'er committing in the middle-east ... i realy wouldn't blame the presedent of iran for risking his people and country just to stop this bs from bush. They're trying to takefull control over middle-east by puting down the biggest force in that area!Thatswhatsgoinon.

[QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"]

... So US is threating iran for a war !! WTF with this country its like satan toke all over it and using it against other nations by opening un-finished wars . Really i dontsee a real reason for this war other than madness and hatred against the humanity ! aint they already stucked with iraq now ?When will they be even with this madness?!

Now dont say its about the nuclear program ... the Iranian nuclear program was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace programthen later on in the late of 2006-2007 the U.S. and some other nations officials allege the program covers an attempt to acquire nuclear weapons which somehow i assume its another way to start a war .

WhOOmpa260

also, iran sponsors terrorists, including hezbollah, hamas, and possibly al-qaeda. an actual invasion would be wholly impractical. however, an airstrike against their nuclear facilities would be much more practical, as there is a good chance that not a single american soldier would die in an aerial campaign.

Ok , its practical for them to airstrike thier facilities and a great chance for U.S army to survive from death... imagine how bad the area around will be polluted... there will be lost's by nations not several persons (soldiers) ,innocent people will pay for this Low-risky-attack from U.S . Generally why this anger ? so they built it underground ! what then ? maybe its safer that way so then incase maybe an nuclear substance's leaks so there wont be much damages for the nature. why creating these delustions just to be an excuse for this war!

Iran wont do anything only if U.S obliged it to ! And do you think iran have the guts to touch any U.S land ? they're nothing compared to U.S army they're making some statements about raiding with nuclear just as an psychical war against america to stop'em from the mess they'er committing in the middle-east ... i realy wouldn't blame the presedent of iran for risking his people and country just to stop this bs from bush. They're trying to takefull control over middle-east by puting down the biggest force in that area!Thatswhatsgoinon.

The Iranian army is actually very formidable. They have been building up their arms unopposed for many years now and with a million or so well trained troops, it could get very hairy. It's not like America is the only power in the world with a decent army, then again, American analysts predicted hundreds of thousands of American deaths during the first Iraq war, and that was far from the truth.

About the air strike thing - I think an army such as Iran's would rather die in a suicidal nuclear melt down, rather then lose control of their reactors to a Coalition force. So in that regard, an air strike would be more feasible and appropriate. I don't know exactly whether an air strike could send nuclear pollution into the air or not but I do know the Israelis bombed a Nuclear Facility in the 1980's without any disaster (not sure if the plant was operational yet, though). Basically I think the Iranians will resort to destroying their reactors during an invasion anyway so an air strike is a better option.

You shouldn't read too much into those discovery channel docs that are pro western and especially pro-America, which say "this tank is the best" ... "this rifle is the best" ... "this missile is unstoppable", you should hold it with a pinch of salt. There are actually other countries in the world with weapons and armies which can inflict massive damage on an invading force. Invading has to be mentioned because your correct with one part of your statement, no country in the world can deploy an army for an invasion as quickly as the US but in an invading scenario, such as Iran, the advantage is gone because America would be invading, not Iran. I'll leave you with with this idea...

Underestimating your enemy means underestimating yourself. Underestimating yourself means hope for your enemy.

Iran as a threat is a joke...

Firstly, even if they are going for nuclear weapons experts have projected that they will not reach capabilities for around 8 to 10 years.. Even then those will be generation 1 nuclear weapons where they could reach no one with it...

sSubZerOo

Then North Korea.X360PS3AMD05

No. Hell no. War with Iran, currently, would be moronic. The military cannot handle a major war with Iran at this time. That'd stetch things too far. It's just not realistic.

This coming from the most hawkish person you'd know.

[QUOTE="Impulsive20"][QUOTE="amob"]

[QUOTE="ninjacat11"]Iran hasn't done much of anything against America. Why would we invade them?masters89

lol, wut? Get a history book dude.

A history book made by americans....

Look its war for oil everyone with a brain knows that!

absolutely , they're taking over the world for that .

People who cite "War for Oil" have no understanding of the world.

No-one is foolish enough to claim there is no animosity towards the United States from Iranians. The Iran Hostage Crisis, anyone?

[QUOTE="WhOOmpa260"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"]

...So US is threating iran for a war !! WTF with this country its like satan toke all over it and using it against other nations by opening un-finished wars . Really i dontsee a real reason for this war other than madness and hatred against the humanity ! aint they already stucked with iraq now ?When will they be even with this madness?!

Now dont say its about the nuclear program ... the Iranian nuclear program was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace programthen later on in the late of 2006-2007 the U.S. and some other nations officials allege the program covers an attempt to acquire nuclear weapons which somehow i assume its another way to start a war .

verparanoidpers

also, iran sponsors terrorists, including hezbollah, hamas, and possibly al-qaeda. an actual invasion would be wholly impractical. however, an airstrike against their nuclear facilities would be much more practical, as there is a good chance that not a single american soldier would die in an aerial campaign.

Ok , its practical for them to airstrike thier facilities and a great chance for U.S army to survive from death... imagine how bad the area around will be polluted... there will be lost's by nations not several persons (soldiers) ,innocent people will pay for this Low-risky-attack from U.S . Generally why this anger ? so they built it underground ! what then ? maybe its safer that way so then incase maybe an nuclear substance's leaks so there wont be much damages for the nature. why creating these delustions just to be an excuse for this war!

Iran wont do anything only if U.S obliged it to ! And do you think iran have the guts to touch any U.S land ? they're nothing compared to U.S army they're making some statements about raiding with nuclear just as an psychical war against america to stop'em from the mess they'er committing in the middle-east ... i realy wouldn't blame the presedent of iran for risking his people and country just to stop this bs from bush. They're trying to takefull control over middle-east by puting down the biggest force in that area!Thatswhatsgoinon.

[QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="masters89"]

... So US is threating iran for a war !! WTF with this country its like satan toke all over it and using it against other nations by opening un-finished wars . Really i dontsee a real reason for this war other than madness and hatred against the humanity ! aint they already stucked with iraq now ?When will they be even with this madness?!

Now dont say its about the nuclear program ... the Iranian nuclear program was launched in the 1950s with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace programthen later on in the late of 2006-2007 the U.S. and some other nations officials allege the program covers an attempt to acquire nuclear weapons which somehow i assume its another way to start a war .

WhOOmpa260

also, iran sponsors terrorists, including hezbollah, hamas, and possibly al-qaeda. an actual invasion would be wholly impractical. however, an airstrike against their nuclear facilities would be much more practical, as there is a good chance that not a single american soldier would die in an aerial campaign.

Ok , its practical for them to airstrike thier facilities and a great chance for U.S army to survive from death... imagine how bad the area around will be polluted... there will be lost's by nations not several persons (soldiers) ,innocent people will pay for this Low-risky-attack from U.S . Generally why this anger ? so they built it underground ! what then ? maybe its safer that way so then incase maybe an nuclear substance's leaks so there wont be much damages for the nature. why creating these delustions just to be an excuse for this war!

Iran wont do anything only if U.S obliged it to ! And do you think iran have the guts to touch any U.S land ? they're nothing compared to U.S army they're making some statements about raiding with nuclear just as an psychical war against america to stop'em from the mess they'er committing in the middle-east ... i realy wouldn't blame the presedent of iran for risking his people and country just to stop this bs from bush. They're trying to takefull control over middle-east by puting down the biggest force in that area!Thatswhatsgoinon.

The Iranian army is actually very formidable. They have been building up their arms unopposed for many years now and with a million or so well trained troops, it could get very hairy. It's not like America is the only power in the world with a decent army, then again, American analysts predicted hundreds of thousands of American deaths during the first Iraq war, and that was far from the truth.

About the air strike thing - I think an army such as Iran's would rather die in a suicidal nuclear melt down, rather then lose control of their reactors to a Coalition force. So in that regard, an air strike would be more feasible and appropriate. I don't know exactly whether an air strike could send nuclear pollution into the air or not but I do know the Israelis bombed a Nuclear Facility in the 1980's without any disaster (not sure if the plant was operational yet, though). Basically I think the Iranians will resort to destroying their reactors during an invasion anyway so an air strike is a better option.

You shouldn't read too much into those discovery channel docs that are pro western and especially pro-America, which say "this tank is the best" ... "this rifle is the best" ... "this missile is unstoppable", you should hold it with a pinch of salt. There are actually other countries in the world with weapons and armies which can inflict massive damage on an invading force. Invading has to be mentioned because your correct with one part of your statement, no country in the world can deploy an army for an invasion as quickly as the US but in an invading scenario, such as Iran, the advantage is gone because America would be invading, not Iran. I'll leave you with with this idea...

Underestimating your enemy means underestimating yourself. Underestimating yourself means hope for your enemy.

Iran as a threat is a joke...

Firstly, even if they are going for nuclear weapons experts have projected that they will not reach capabilities for around 8 to 10 years.. Even then those will be generation 1 nuclear weapons where they could reach no one with it...

sSubZerOo

Yes very true, but Russia is just as bad.. They have sold such things to multiple countries.. Lets also not forget people that dirty bombs do not require nuclear capabilities and really nearly any country or person can get it with enough money.. THere is nothing that can be justified to it.. Both Russia AND China support IRan, thats 2 out of the 5 security coucnle in the UN, it will never pass in the UN what so ever.. The point is in the end there is no evidence he would do this, I have stated earlier countries such as Iran and N Korea have done this in the past where their leader acts like he is mad so countries back down or cave in to give money.. N Korea did this EXACT same thing with the US and UK in the 90s.. Kim gave us the idea that he was absoultely mad... THis is called chicken politics, for the most part I think the US has in their heads that they think they are playing th eprisoner game instead...

Top that a dirty bomb is nothing.. I have already said that viruses are the new fear of the future.. Where any country with the right experts can createa extremely dangerous virus that could do more damage then any single nuclear weapon.

verparanoidper - It is true that Iraq had the upper hand over Iran in their war, however Iran have since rearmed themselves with newer weapons, just recently, Russia sold 250 Sukhoi-30 fighters at a cost to the Iranian government of 1 billion dollars. The Sukhoi-30 btw is a highly advanced fighter and is comparable to the F18, the most widely used USAF aircraft launched from carriers. And yes, Desert Storm is a great example of America's Shock and awe tactics and I totally agree that it was a very decisive victory, however, Iran is a different beast. As previously said, Iran may already have nuclear weapons as well as biological and chemical stores, and their willingness to use them is in fact greater then Iraq's. In fact Iran's motivation to engage Coalition forces is already being felt around the region, where terrorists are not only using Iranian weapons but are also being trained by Iranian special forces. So, like I've said a few times, don't underestimate your enemy.

Subzero- Yes, biological warfare is a serious threat but it is very hard for terrorists to implement its use because of the cost and logistics of transporting not only a sufficient amount of the pathogen but also the equipment to aerosolise it. So currently, biological and chemical weapons aren't a major threat, unless imployed by a country with enough resources. BUT when invading Iran, the Coalition forces would use sufficient protective gear, so actually nuclear weapons pose a larger threat in this situation.

We'll have to go to war with Iran eventually. Hell eventually we'll just end up blowing up the whole middle east it's inevitable. Every time we leave something bad happens whose origins is in their country. Also Iran is currently training suicide bombers then sending them into Iraq to hit our soldiers. That's why there nuclear program is starting to worry uso_sausage

Everything you just said is wrong.

Our leaders aren't stupid enough to start another war.

wait america has actually declared war on Iran?muppet1010

Not yet...be patient...lol

verparanoidper - It is true that Iraq had the upper hand over Iran in their war, however Iran have since rearmed themselves with newer weapons, just recently, Russia sold 250 Sukhoi-30 fighters at a cost to the Iranian government of 1 billion dollars. The Sukhoi-30 btw is a highly advanced fighter and is comparable to the F18, the most widely used USAF aircraft launched from carriers. And yes, Desert Storm is a great example of America's Shock and awe tactics and I totally agree that it was a very decisive victory, however, Iran is a different beast. As previously said, Iran may already have nuclear weapons as well as biological and chemical stores, and their willingness to use them is in fact greater then Iraq's. In fact Iran's motivation to engage Coalition forces is already being felt around the region, where terrorists are not only using Iranian weapons but are also being trained by Iranian special forces. So, like I've said a few times, don't underestimate your enemy.

Subzero- Yes, biological warfare is a serious threat but it is very hard for terrorists to implement its use because of the cost and logistics of transporting not only a sufficient amount of the pathogen but also the equipment to aerosolise it. So currently, biological and chemical weapons aren't a major threat, unless imployed by a country with enough resources. BUT when invading Iran, the Coalition forces would use sufficient protective gear, so actually nuclear weapons pose a larger threat in this situation.

WhOOmpa260

those planes cant do s*** once we blow them up while their still on the ground. second, their armies, as ive said, cant do s*** once their command, control, communications, and logistics assets are taken out. they'll have no choice but to surrender. get over it, its a fact that no army in the world (except for maybe the armies of western europe) can ever hope to match the US military.once we have complete, uncontested domination of the skies, itsdamn-near impossible to wage a ground war when your tanks are being taken out byour attack jets and helicopters

first off, don't post if you don't have facts. don't just assume bush is picking wars, or that iraq was innocently invaded, and that iran is also innocent, because they are not.

we gave hussein weapons a long time ago to fight kuwait, so we knew iraq had weapons of mass destruction, we gave them to him. yes, iraq has been a costly war, but necessary against terrorism. do the majority of americans believe it was worth it? no. do i? not the way it was handled. i believe in fighting terrorism, but it is really sad to see us have few/no support from the united nations and to have lost so many americans in the effort.

hopefully there is no new war with iran or anywhere such as korea, and when there is, whether in a few years or in 50 years, we are backed by several other countries if not the entire united nations.

terrorists would love to get their hands on a nuclear weapon, and they would love to kill americans including everyone in this forum. they are so eager to do this, they have been brainwashed to kill themselves in the process. and the way they can get weapons is with money, and they have a lot as well as connections, such as with iran.

yes we helped start nulcear research in iran a looooong time ago, it is only a matter of time before iran does have the technology they want, and that we don't want them to have, followed by other countries as well. the good thing is there is only a few countries right now that actually have technology to send a nuclear missle a far enough distance ot hurt us. terrorists, if had access, couldn't launch a missle to the united states, they would have to find another way to bring it here and detonate it. meaning yes, biological viruses are also a threat, as they are harmful, easy to carry, kill a lot of people, and easy to hide.

hopefully there is no war, and more countries support anti-terrorism, but handle it in a more peaceful way. not that anything has been handled too poorly, it's more of a dissapointment that there are so many people (terrorists) out there that want to kill americans and europeans, rather than the dissapointment in the counterterrorism being handled. people just blaim the counterterrorism for our difficulties (blaiming bush) rather than blaiming the people creating the problem (terrorists)

K I'm nota fan of Iran. The prez seems to thinking hanging gay people is a swell idea, and I'm not cool with that.

However, now is not the time to be waging another war. Good Lord, we can barely handle the one we're in.

[QUOTE="masters89"][QUOTE="Impulsive20"][QUOTE="amob"]

[QUOTE="ninjacat11"]Iran hasn't done much of anything against America. Why would we invade them?ElZilcho90

lol, wut? Get a history book dude.

A history book made by americans....

Look its war for oil everyone with a brain knows that!

absolutely , they're taking over the world for that .

People who cite "War for Oil" have no understanding of the world.

No-one is foolish enough to claim there is no animosity towards the United States from Iranians. The Iran Hostage Crisis, anyone?

And the opposite is correct.

[QUOTE="WhOOmpa260"]

verparanoidper - It is true that Iraq had the upper hand over Iran in their war, however Iran have since rearmed themselves with newer weapons, just recently, Russia sold 250 Sukhoi-30 fighters at a cost to the Iranian government of 1 billion dollars. The Sukhoi-30 btw is a highly advanced fighter and is comparable to the F18, the most widely used USAF aircraft launched from carriers. And yes, Desert Storm is a great example of America's Shock and awe tactics and I totally agree that it was a very decisive victory, however, Iran is a different beast. As previously said, Iran may already have nuclear weapons as well as biological and chemical stores, and their willingness to use them is in fact greater then Iraq's. In fact Iran's motivation to engage Coalition forces is already being felt around the region, where terrorists are not only using Iranian weapons but are also being trained by Iranian special forces. So, like I've said a few times, don't underestimate your enemy.

Subzero- Yes, biological warfare is a serious threat but it is very hard for terrorists to implement its use because of the cost and logistics of transporting not only a sufficient amount of the pathogen but also the equipment to aerosolise it. So currently, biological and chemical weapons aren't a major threat, unless imployed by a country with enough resources. BUT when invading Iran, the Coalition forces would use sufficient protective gear, so actually nuclear weapons pose a larger threat in this situation.

verparanoidpers

those planes cant do s*** once we blow them up while their still on the ground. second, their armies, as ive said, cant do s*** once their command, control, communications, and logistics assets are taken out. they'll have no choice but to surrender. get over it, its a fact that no army in the world (except for maybe the armies of western europe) can ever hope to match the US military.once we have complete, uncontested domination of the skies, itsdamn-near impossible to wage a ground war when your tanks are being taken out byour attack jets and helicopters

Let's get something straight, I don't think any army in the world (western or otherwise) can match and beat the United States in a war. I am saying that your 'america is invincible' attitude isn't accurate and I am trying to give you valid reasons why, however you may have seen so much propaganda about american superiority that you either aren't reading what a type or just disregard it. You need to try and understand that there are weapons which can kill and they aren't only used by the United States.

And that battle plan of yours, to go in and destroy all their tanks and aircaft is far from sound and by no means full-proof. I can point you in the direction of the Yom kippur war in Israel, where the Egyptian air force surprised the israelis and blasted most of their air force to dust, yet the determined Israelis ended up defeating the Egyptian invading force and actually annexed the Gaza Strip from Egypt. So, as has already been seen in history, destroying a countries air force will not always gain victory.

[QUOTE="verparanoidpers"][QUOTE="WhOOmpa260"]

verparanoidper - It is true that Iraq had the upper hand over Iran in their war, however Iran have since rearmed themselves with newer weapons, just recently, Russia sold 250 Sukhoi-30 fighters at a cost to the Iranian government of 1 billion dollars. The Sukhoi-30 btw is a highly advanced fighter and is comparable to the F18, the most widely used USAF aircraft launched from carriers. And yes, Desert Storm is a great example of America's Shock and awe tactics and I totally agree that it was a very decisive victory, however, Iran is a different beast. As previously said, Iran may already have nuclear weapons as well as biological and chemical stores, and their willingness to use them is in fact greater then Iraq's. In fact Iran's motivation to engage Coalition forces is already being felt around the region, where terrorists are not only using Iranian weapons but are also being trained by Iranian special forces. So, like I've said a few times, don't underestimate your enemy.

Subzero- Yes, biological warfare is a serious threat but it is very hard for terrorists to implement its use because of the cost and logistics of transporting not only a sufficient amount of the pathogen but also the equipment to aerosolise it. So currently, biological and chemical weapons aren't a major threat, unless imployed by a country with enough resources. BUT when invading Iran, the Coalition forces would use sufficient protective gear, so actually nuclear weapons pose a larger threat in this situation.

WhOOmpa260

those planes cant do s*** once we blow them up while their still on the ground. second, their armies, as ive said, cant do s*** once their command, control, communications, and logistics assets are taken out. they'll have no choice but to surrender. get over it, its a fact that no army in the world (except for maybe the armies of western europe) can ever hope to match the US military.once we have complete, uncontested domination of the skies, itsdamn-near impossible to wage a ground war when your tanks are being taken out byour attack jets and helicopters

Let's get something straight, I don't think any army in the world (western or otherwise) can match and beat the United States in a war. I am saying that your 'america is invincible' attitude isn't accurate and I am trying to give you valid reasons why, however you may have seen so much propaganda about american superiority that you either aren't reading what a type or just disregard it. You need to try and understand that there are weapons which can kill and they aren't only used by the United States.

And that battle plan of yours, to go in and destroy all their tanks and aircaft is far from sound and by no means full-proof. I can point you in the direction of the Yom kippur war in Israel, where the Egyptian air force surprised the israelis and blasted most of their air force to dust, yet the determined Israelis ended up defeating the Egyptian invading force and actually annexed the Gaza Strip from Egypt. So, as has already been seen in history, destroying a countries air force will not always gain victory.

the American air force is larger than all the air forces for every country in the world combined

The iranians are buildign their uranium enrichment facilities underground. now why do you suppose that they would build them UNDERGROUND?

also, iran sponsors terrorists, including hezbollah, hamas, and possibly al-qaeda. an actual invasion would be wholly impractical. however, an airstrike against their nuclear facilities would be much more practical, as there is a good chance that not a single american soldier would die in an aerial campaign. verparanoidpers

ah, reminiscent of a certain country during the cold war...

I think an outrightwar with Iran would completely destroy any global support the US has. It would most definitely be the last straw.

[QUOTE="verparanoidpers"]The iranians are buildign their uranium enrichment facilities underground. now why do you suppose that they would build them UNDERGROUND?

also, iran sponsors terrorists, including hezbollah, hamas, and possibly al-qaeda. an actual invasion would be wholly impractical. however, an airstrike against their nuclear facilities would be much more practical, as there is a good chance that not a single american soldier would die in an aerial campaign. bradleybhoy

ah, reminiscent of a certain country during the cold war...

I think an outrightwar with Iran would completely destroy any global support the US has. It would most definitely be the last straw.

Lets not forget how much of that supposed intelligence can we even trust? The United States government seemed certain that Iraq supported terrorism and none such evidence has ever been found.. As it stands the US has infact gave countries such as iran more reason to get nuclear weapons.. Lets face it if you have a over aggressive country all over you calling you theaxis of evil even threatening you with tactical nukes.. Wtf are you going to do? Specially when this country has already broken UN sanctions by giving both Israel and India nuclear weapons.. The Us in my has pretty much committed diplomatic suicide, where no one really can trust them for their word.. Seeing as they seem to only uphold any UN laws when its in their best interests.. Dirty bombs were mentioned earlier on, but you do not need nuclear capabilites to create a dirty bomb...

IF anything its a very legitimate reason to say that Iran wants nuclear weapons to insure they can protect them selves from countries such as the United States which may invade them.. Lets face it people Iraq never attacked us, nor did we have any set grounds through UN law.. More or less the war could have been seen very illegal.. In the end we will never in a million years invade Iran.. If we do it will be the largest mistake out there.. Not only can we not hold Iraq, but Iran has the support of Russia and China..

1950's- us helps iran with nuclear program

1980's- us gives weapons to taliban to fight soviets

1980's- us gives weapons of mass destruction to iraq(saddam) to fight war with iran

lesson learned= us only looks after their interests. doesn't care if the person is a dictator will give them weapons as long as they got $$$$

1950's- us helps iran with nuclear program

1980's- us gives weapons to taliban to fight soviets

1980's- us gives weapons of mass destruction to iraq(saddam) to fight war with iran

lesson learned= us only looks after their interests. doesn't care if the person is a dictator will give them weapons as long as they got $$$$

Crusher89

Every country is like that.

Well Iraq had weapons of mass destruction also, and we found out how that went. First of all Bush should be in jail right now because he invaded a different country because he FELT like they had some weapons, the guy is dumb as a rock. Now afterhe proved that Iraq had WMD he starts to blame Iran also, I cant stand the dude, rather have a women in the office than him.deniiiii21

You are a moron... Bush doesn't control everything you no hes not god.... he cant invade a country by himself.

1950's- us helps iran with nuclear program

1980's- us gives weapons to taliban to fight soviets

1980's- us gives weapons of mass destruction to iraq(saddam) to fight war with iran

lesson learned= us only looks after their interests. doesn't care if the person is a dictator will give them weapons as long as they got $$$$

Crusher89

+USA supported Islamist against leftists to stop Soviets from influencing Iran thus causing the Islamic revolution in Iran which USA wants to sack today.

USA supported right wing all over the ME..checens,Iraqis,Iranians...I live in Turkey.USA supported right wing in Turkey and this caused a right wing coup in 1980s which crashed left.We're still fighting this right wing problem today.

[QUOTE="deniiiii21"]Well Iraq had weapons of mass destruction also, and we found out how that went. First of all Bush should be in jail right now because he invaded a different country because he FELT like they had some weapons, the guy is dumb as a rock. Now afterhe proved that Iraq had WMD he starts to blame Iran also, I cant stand the dude, rather have a women in the office than him.Matts07

You are a moron... Bush doesn't control everything you no hes not god.... he cant invade a country by himself.

The only moronhere is bush, who cant think of anything but banana " border="0" />