RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company?

RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

WyrdRich -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:20:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver As for ending the cold war, he is seen as just happening to be the President at the time. Without Gorbachov and co. in the Kremilin, it just wouldn't have happened. That may well be the view now, but I think history will judge him more honestly. Lots of people found him easy to dislike and some of his policies were downright dumb. Reagan chose to apply pressure to the Kremlin when others wanted a different approach. It worked.

Amaros -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:26:54 AM)
We may already be at war with Iran: http://www.slate.com/id/2157489/fr/flyout

meatcleaver -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:37:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyrdRich Reagan chose to apply pressure to the Kremlin when others wanted a different approach. It worked. Reagan happened to be in office when new people were gaining power in the Kremlin who had long since realised Russia had to change to survive. He got nothing out of the old guard in the Kremlin who were fortunately for the west dropping like flies. Brezhnev's successors Andropov and Chernenko, had barely 2 years between them in the top job. This also caused uncertainty in the USSR that was merely luck for the west, though this uncertainty could have made Russia more aggressive rather than concilitory. When Gorbechev came to power, he was already known in the west to be a possible reformer. If Andropov and Chernenko managed to last 4-5 years in the top job, it would have been Clinton who could have boasted about destroying the USSR. But it would have been a boast and no more. Russia had a crap economy that was rotting away from the inside and tried to keep an over strength military to keep an aggressively postured USA at bay, this was sucked the life blood out of the USSR. Reagan might be seen by rightwing Americans as responsible for the demise of the USSR but he is barely mentioned anywhere else in the world for its demise. Even Lenin said the USSR was an experiment doomed to fail.

MzMia -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:39:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Amaros We may already be at war with Iran: http://www.slate.com/id/2157489/fr/flyout I think its pretty much a done deal, its just a question of when and who the hell is going to help us?

meatcleaver -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:40:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Amaros We may already be at war with Iran: http://www.slate.com/id/2157489/fr/flyout Highly likely. Bush has little choice, fight Iran or pack up and go home.

TexasMaam -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:45:40 AM)
WyrdRich: BRAVO! It amazes Me that the public does not realize that we are fighting a war against Syria and Iran on the soil of Iraq. Unless we protect our economic interests in the Middle East by establishing and maintaining military presence there to counter Iran's radical insurgents on THAT side of the globe, we are going to face the reality of Iranian and Syrian control of Middle Eastern Oil supplies, and soon. As harsh as it is to accept that this war is as much about oil supplies as it is about Iraqui freedom, we could hardly have blown our way into Iran and set up shop there. Much better to encourage setting up a democratic state in Iraq that might have a shot at withstanding the Iranian onslaught than we would have had by taking on Iran directly. I think we can all thank Donald Rumsfeld for pussyfooting around to begin with. Yes, I do believe that 20K troops now is like applying a bandaid to a severed artery. Bush should have taken this approach from the outset. Now, we are about 100K troops short and 4 years too late. But, better late than never; especially if there's a snowball's chance in hell that it might stem the tide of Iranian expansion into Iraq. Let's send the 20K troops and hope to God and Allah that Israel will have the cahunas to strike Iran's nuclear production sites before Iran can progress any further with their plans to decimate the entire planet. In truth, there is not ONE Arab on this planet who's worth a single young American soldier's life over there, but the consequences of pulling out of Iraq now would be catastrophic. I view these events with such a heavy heart. I hope Bush's latest commitment will get *something* headed in the right direction. If it doesn't, we can expect to see a third World War in the Middle East, with nuclear warheads being batted about from North Korea to Iran like bandminton birds. Speaking of weapons of Mass Destruction, I'm still convinced that Saddam sent his weapons back to Syria long before we touched Iraqui soil, yes, back to Syria, where he purchased them from the Russians, to begin with. History will tell. TM

meatcleaver -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:52:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TexasMaam Unless we protect our economic interests in the Middle East by establishing and maintaining military presence there to counter Iran's radical insurgents on THAT side of the globe, we are going to face the reality of Iranian and Syrian control of Middle Eastern Oil supplies, and soon. Do you and any Americans that think like you realise that Iraqi and Iranian oil does not belong to America? How would you like it if Russia or China decided to look after their economic interests in Alaska?

meatcleaver -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 11:54:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TexasMaam Speaking of weapons of Mass Destruction, I'm still convinced that Saddam sent his weapons back to Syria long before we touched Iraqui soil, yes, back to Syria, where he purchased them from the Russians, to begin with. If this wasn't just justification to go around the world and kill innocent people I don't know what is.

WyrdRich -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 12:03:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Russia had a crap economy that was rotting away from the inside and tried to keep an over strength military to keep an aggressively postured USA at bay, this was sucked the life blood out of the USSR. And that aggressively postured USA was led by...?

TexasMaam -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 12:13:52 PM)
I didn't say it was justification for war, only that such was My opinion of the original WMD brouhaha. I'll tell you what's justification for war: suddenly having to park your car because you can't get fuel. Because that means the trucks and semis that deliver food and commodities to our national supply chain will all be parked, too. I can get by on a few chickens, my garden and a milk cow because I live out here in the country. When fuel slows to a crawl and YOUR grocery store is empty, what do YOU plan to have for dinner? TM

farglebargle -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 12:24:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TexasMaam I didn't say it was justification for war, only that such was My opinion of the original WMD brouhaha. I'll tell you what's justification for war: suddenly having to park your car because you can't get fuel. Because that means the trucks and semis that deliver food and commodities to our national supply chain will all be parked, too. I can get by on a few chickens, my garden and a milk cow because I live out here in the country. When fuel slows to a crawl and YOUR grocery store is empty, what do YOU plan to have for dinner? TM Remember all them railway cars? Diesel electric prime movers will work just fine on hemp oil.

farglebargle -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 12:26:04 PM)
quote: Highly likely. Bush has little choice, fight Iran or pack up and go home. I'm not recalling precisely when Congress gave him any money to do that.

Amaros -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 12:36:41 PM)
Back to Iraq for a moment - what is missing is any kind of strategy other than throwing more troops at the problem - not the strategy that is going to appeal to any possible allies, whatever you call it. http://www.slate.com/id/2156085/fr/flyout

Amaros -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 12:43:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyrdRich quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Russia had a crap economy that was rotting away from the inside and tried to keep an over strength military to keep an aggressively postured USA at bay, this was sucked the life blood out of the USSR. And that aggressively postured USA was led by...? Early on I think it was David Stockman, although most analysts figure it was probobly George Bush and the same Texas cabal that have been impressing us with their deft handling of foreign and domestic affairs for the past six years, who took over after Stockman recanted, and were probobly handling things all along. Greenspan had a certain amount of input. It is however, widely understood that Reagan mostly napped for 8 years, waking up for the occasional photo op.

WyrdRich -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 12:55:54 PM)
It's not so much the added troops as the changes in Rules of Engagement. I haven't found any specifics on what precisely those changes may be, it's tactical information and properly considered classified (probably will get printed in the NY Times soon anyway). It may be too late. I hope not.

meatcleaver -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 1:09:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TexasMaam I didn't say it was justification for war, only that such was My opinion of the original WMD brouhaha. I'll tell you what's justification for war: suddenly having to park your car because you can't get fuel. Because that means the trucks and semis that deliver food and commodities to our national supply chain will all be parked, too. I can get by on a few chickens, my garden and a milk cow because I live out here in the country. When fuel slows to a crawl and YOUR grocery store is empty, what do YOU plan to have for dinner? TM Since the average American uses twice as much fuel as the average European and 13 times as much as the average Chinese, how about economising? However, if you don't have fuel of your own and you can't afford to buy any, how about doing what they do in the third world, do with out. If the US can't manage its resources it doesn't give it the right to steal other people's resources. I think most thinking Americans realise that. I'll add that the same goes for every other developed country.

TexasMaam -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 1:23:59 PM)
I think a vehicle that gets 42 mpg is enconomizing pretty well, thank you very much. You are in error to assume I do not economize. I also have solar panels, compost piles and water recycling implemented here, so you know not what you condemn, meatcleaver. I am not one of the endless unwashed US MASSES who stupidly purchased SUV's in the decades following the fuel shortages of the 1970's and US Excess has long been one of My personal pet peeves. I am not one of the billionaire CEO's of the US automobile industry big six who decided that SUV's were the direction to go. I am not one of the Enron moguls who plundered the coffers of the electrically dependent just to throw my own obscene toga parties. I am just one little person on one little plot of ground who understands that the need for fuel will continue to drive our international policies, whether intelligently or not, and who wishes dearly that our government had heeded the warnings of those of us who never wanted to become dependent upon OPEC in the first place. Why do you make every single post a personal attack? What is it that drives you so to personally insult anyone you come into contact with on the boards? Conservation begins at home: You could conserve some fuel of your own if you'd refrain from the flaming you indulge yourself in. That was punny; I just couldn't resist. : pppppppppppppppppppppppppp TM

seeksfemslave -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 2:01:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL meatcleaver If the US can't manage its resources it doesn't give it the right to steal other people's resources. I think most thinking Americans realise that. If you mean OIL then were it not for US expertise the oil would still be in the ground. ....wouldn't it ? You really have most peculiar attitudes MC, you are very well informed on historical matters, but appear to see only one side on almost everything, funnily enough its NOT your own side !

dcnovice -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 2:04:53 PM)
quote: I'll tell you what's justification for war: suddenly having to park your car because you can't get fuel. Because that means the trucks and semis that deliver food and commodities to our national supply chain will all be parked, too. That alone is justification for war? Wow.

meatcleaver -> RE: Who is going to help us take on Iran and company? (1/14/2007 2:23:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave quote: ORIGINAL meatcleaver If the US can't manage its resources it doesn't give it the right to steal other people's resources. I think most thinking Americans realise that. If you mean OIL then were it not for US expertise the oil would still be in the ground. ....wouldn't it ? You really have most peculiar attitudes MC, you are very well informed on historical matters, but appear to see only one side on almost everything, funnily enough its NOT your own side ! Actually no. The US is not the only country with oil technology and even if it was, it doesn't give them the right to other people's resources. They have the right to offer their expertise in extracting the oil for a price, it is then up to the owners of the resources if they want to pay that price. As for who the owners of the resources sell their resources to is another matter for another deal. I think your attitude that someone has the right to someone's resources because they can extract it is highly perculiar.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125