During WWII, thousands of civilians were killed, both hostile and friendly. Do you believe that we shouldn’t have opposed the Nazi Regime and other Axis powers because of the civilian losses incurred?
The loss of innocent life is always regretable, always. But if the war is just, then we must press on, despite the unfortunate civilian losses. I realize you don’t think the Second Gulf War was just (even I have my doubts sometimes), but do you honestly believe the war was created to gratify President Bush’s ego? Do you think he celebrates the death of those children and other innocents?[/quote]
I wouldn’t go so far as to say he celebrates a child’s death as in he is part of some satanic death cult.
But it seems to me that (political) leaders are often indifferent to the suffering of others, or at least, even if they are, on a personal level, compassionate individuals, as [insert position of X country] they accept death and loss (of others) as politically acceptable/necessary/expedient which brings me back to indifference.
I am 36 years old, I came here when I was 21. Yes, Bush is bad, Bush is wrong, but I wish him no harm. Vote, Vote, Vote, MY POWER IS IN THAT VOTE. Why Bush invaded IRAQ, may never be known. My guess may never be counted, but my thoughts and beliefs will be heard and respected, that is my voice and my democratic power,as an AMERICAN. For which, I am proud to be!!!
Once Bush is out and you have a leader that’s worthy of that pride, then and only then, can you begin to feel like you have a pair. Untill then, take a look at your ‘vote’ and where it landed ya.
Holy Hand Grenade! WTF does that means?
Pick up a book, will ya? Blitzkrieg died on the steppes of Russia in 1941/42.
[/quote]
Check out the first Gulf War. Textbook example of a blitzkrieg in operation.
The OKW couldn’t of done a better job itself.[/quote]
Fair point, but I think the jury is still out on that one. Another 50 years or so and historian will have enough to make a reasonable assesment.
Personally I think that GW1 had many more layers than what the original blitz was intended to be.
At it’s essence the blitz entails the marriage of light infantry, light armor, and mobile artillery on the ground. This force is in excellent communication with air forces, who are there to soften up & demoralize the enemy.
While GW1 had all these elements, it differed. Special forces and covert ops played a huge role, and much more emphasis was placed on air power than in the original blitzkrieg, which was essentially a mobile ground-heavy strategy.
And that’s essentially the point. Why expose your armored pincers to being cut off, when you can just vaporize the shit out of them first?
Myself I’m looking forward to a Iran vs USA Final in Germany this summer. Winner gets to make terms. Howzzat?
You’re all assuming the US will make the first move. That could very well be incorrect.
[quote] Aznar: Khamenei said in 2001 Iran aimed to ‘set Israel alight’
Former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar said Tuesday that Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told him five years ago that “setting Israel on fire” was the first order of business on the Iranian agenda.
Aznar, in Israel as the guest of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, related the story to Major General (Res.) Professor Yitzhak Ben-Israel, who later confirmed to Haaretz that the remarks had been made.
Aznar’s aides refused to give Haaretz the exact quote, but mentioned an article Aznar has written in the past on his meeting with Khamenei.
“He received me politely,” Aznar wrote, “and at the beginning of the meeting he explained to me why Iran must declare war on Israel and the United States until they are completely destroyed. I made only one request of him: that he tell me the time of the planned attack.”[/quote]
[quote=“Comrade Stalin”]You’re all assuming the US will make the first move. That could very well be incorrect.
[quote] Aznar: Khamenei said in 2001 Iran aimed to ‘set Israel alight’
Former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar said Tuesday that Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told him five years ago that “setting Israel on fire” was the first order of business on the Iranian agenda.
Aznar, in Israel as the guest of the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, related the story to Major General (Res.) Professor Yitzhak Ben-Israel, who later confirmed to Haaretz that the remarks had been made.
Aznar’s aides refused to give Haaretz the exact quote, but mentioned an article Aznar has written in the past on his meeting with Khamenei.
“He received me politely,” Aznar wrote, “and at the beginning of the meeting he explained to me why Iran must declare war on Israel and the United States until they are completely destroyed. I made only one request of him: that he tell me the time of the planned attack.”[/quote]
Comrade, please refrain from stirring the pot. Clearly, he was talking about selling the Israelis more affordable oil, so that they could power their power plants and “light up” the city streets in wonderous yellow street lamps, designed by Arab artisans.
[quote=“gao_bo_han”]
During WWII, thousands of civilians were killed, both hostile and friendly. Do you believe that we shouldn’t have opposed the Nazi Regime and other Axis powers because of the civilian losses incurred?
The loss of innocent life is always regretable, always. But if the war is just, then we must press on, despite the unfortunate civilian losses. I realize you don’t think the Second Gulf War was just (even I have my doubts sometimes), but do you honestly believe the war was created to gratify President Bush’s ego? Do you think he celebrates the death of those children and other innocents?[/quote]
Its far from accurate to compare Bush’s invasion of Iraq with WW II.
At least I put up a photo of the dead. Bush refuses to even count them.
I do honestly believe that Bush would be out of his depth in a puddle,
and wants to keep us in a state of perpetual war (um, how long is this
war on terrorism going to last?) so he can erode our civil liberties.
Why the hell are we flushing 500 billion or a trillion dollars through the
military and into Iraq, when the infrastructure and educational system
of the USA is a shambles?
So, do you agree with me that he’s shot his wad in Iraq?
Or do you suggest that we spend another trillion dollars and impose
a draft so we can continue his reckless adventurism in Iran?
From what I hear, Iran would be a much more difficult country to invade,
and would be even more of a quamire than Iraq. For all the money and
lives they waste, the US military should stick to targets it can safely bully,
countries like Grenada or Afghanistan.
Huh? He was not comparing the invasion of Iraq to WW2.
Oh, for pete’s sake. What utter nonsense. Why, apart from the very real threat posed by terrorism, would Bush want to erode our civil liberties? Get real. Civil liberties have been curtailed and restricted in every war. Oh, but I guess we cannot compare such things, eh?
Are you serious? Is this a serious question? What impact on the infrastructure of lower Manhatten did the 911 attacks have?
No.
Why would we need to do that?
Who says we will invade Iran? What are you talking about?
But seriously Toe Tag, what does that crude sound byte you keep repeating even mean? That President Bush engineered the war so that he could feel manly? You’ve got to be joking.
Yeah who says send any Americans at all… let the Isreali take care of it… I’m sure they’d do it gladly… or send in the Canadians… [/quote]
The sad part about this qoute is that many Canadian soldiers would probably jump neck deep into your shit and say “Thank you Mother, may I have another”
Bunch of cocksuckers…most of you.
Name a war other than Iraq where the Canadians said “fuck off, we’ve had enough, make your own bed asshole.”.
Yeah who says send any Americans at all… let the Isreali take care of it… I’m sure they’d do it gladly… or send in the Canadians… [/quote]
The sad part about this qout is that many Canadian soldiers would probably jump neck deep into your shit and say “Thank you Mother, may I have another”
Bunch of cocksuckers…most of you.[/quote]
Fuck your posts are funny. What’s “qout”? When I saw that after the Hillary/Bill picture, I though “gout” because of her thighs.
Anyway, while the States are ate it, why don’t they just invade Iran and North Korea at the same time? Kill two birds with one stone, so to speak.
Invade Iran. Maybe they should invade Iran the same day that China invades Taiwan.
Dude, in the morning when you wake up and say to yourself “WTF”…Remember this post because I haven’t the faintest clue what you’re tryin to say. I think you saw the term “c*cksucker” and took offence. It isn’t my problem that you enjoy tickling your tonsils. Stay on track, badboy.
I didn’t see any “cack sucker” term. Just saw “qout”. I thought “gout” 'because, well… I think you meant “coup”. Not sure. Anyway, I thought “qout” was funny because I saw Hillary’s legs and thought about a lot of beer drinkers back home who got the gout from drinking too heavily and it creates a fattening effect, etc on your limbs.
You may, however, be offended by something else. I don’t know. I told you that I thought your posts were funny. Sorry to compliment you.
I don’t know if this is in tune with the elevated discourse on this thread, but n interesting report on ethnic unrest in Iran (note coverage courtesy of al-Jazeera)
Repression of Arabs fuels unrest in Iran - World - The Washington Times
[quote=“M0NSTER”] Yeah who says send any Americans at all… let the Isreali take care of it… I’m sure they’d do it gladly… or send in the Canadians…
The sad part about this qoute is that many Canadian soldiers would probably jump neck deep into your shit and say “Thank you Mother, may I have another”[/quote]
Thats the whole point… instead of following everyoine else around do something contructive and go it alone. You invade Iran and the world will applaud you for your foresight
Who says we will invade Iran? What are you talking about? [/quote]
Sorry Captain genius, the title of the thread is “When will the US invade Iran”, if you can remove your head from wherever you stuck it and read it.
Why would it cost that much? Well, we’ve already spend $500 billion on the Bush regime’s Iraq adventure, as a rule of thumb. I’m sure any day now they’ll be greeting us with flowers as liberators! Why would an Iran adventure be any cheaper?
We might need to do that to keep us in a state of perpetual war and keep the military industrial complex happy. Some might like to do that to prevent them from developing nukes like Israel has. Of course it would be the mother of all bonehead moves by the Bush regime, but he may top himself yet.
But the point is, this is moot. By trumping up phony WMD charges against Iran, and by miring us in a guerilla war we can never win, Bush has ended up making it impossible to invade Iran (and Iran knows it), and made us far less secure. The issue is moot. And if we do, I’ll be there to say, I told you so.
