Bush Threatens To Complete World-Record Quagmire Hat Trick With Invasion Of Iran

[anarres]

Is your point that Iran is not already a "terrorist state"? Hostages anyone?

Umm, yeah they took hostages after you messed around in their affairs all for the cheap price of oil (sound familiar?).

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

Come on that was lame, you either know nothing about it or you think you have the right to topple democratically elected leaders and piss all over someone else's country and then complain when the people rise up against you. Either way your argument sucks.

If you really know as little as it appears you do at least read the briefest of descriptions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Hostage_Crisis

 

[eyrei]

Is your point that Iran is not already a "terrorist state"? Hostages anyone?

Gitmo anyone? Oh wait...they are terrorists because the US says they are...

Always remember the sword cuts both ways...

 

[Savage Discipil]

Gitmo anyone? Oh wait...they are terrorists because the US says they are...

Always remember the sword cuts both ways...

No their terrorists because they catch them doing terrorist acts.

 

[JohnRM]

The U.S. shouldn't invade Iran, alone, and I don't think that they can get anyone to go with them. However, everything should be done to convince Iran to disarm any existing nuclear weapons program. The less nuclear arms in this world, the better. In fact, it would be a nice geasture if the United States and Russia would lead by example and disarm their nuclear weapons program. China, Britain, and France have already said on many occassions that they would follow suit. All you would need to do is put pressure on Israel, Pakistan, and India to disarm and that should not be hard if the world is commited enough.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I've read the complete thread (except for some on-going Cierdan posts; his point was clear).

Which is worse for the interests of the USA? -> Please explain to me why should I, as a non-USAsian care ?

Iran is wise to get nukes. The USA has shown its foreign policy. It's called "preemptive strike". If Iran does not pursuit nukes; the USA will invade sooner or later. So not-having nukes is suicide for Iran.
If Iran does get nukes, the USA will threaten to invade, but might hold back because of the nuclear defense system Iran is capable of then. So to protect yourself from the aggressive attitude the current USA displays in preemptive strikes a nation is nearly forced to obtain a weapon that can actually do something back.

 

[eyrei]

No their terrorists because they catch them doing terrorist acts.

That is why they regularly let some of them go?

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Iran is wise to get nukes. The USA has shown its foreign policy. It's called "preemptive strike". If Iran does not pursuit nukes; the USA will invade sooner or later. So not-having nukes is suicide for Iran.
If Iran does get nukes, the USA will threaten to invade, but might hold back because of the nuclear defense system Iran is capable of then. So to protect yourself from the aggressive attitude the current USA displays in preemptive strikes a nation is nearly forced to obtain a weapon that can actually do something back.

Yep. The USA attitude towards North Korea, and towards India/Pakistan after their nuclear developments, just goes to show that developing nukes is the #1 deterrent to USA intervention in your affairs.

 

[BasketCase]

Counterexample: the Soviet Union. We SERIOUSLY meddled with them. We won, too.

 

[Insane_Panda]

Counterexample: the Soviet Union. We SERIOUSLY meddled with them. We won, too.

In Soviet Russia, weapons development programs cancel YOU!

 

[frekk]

Counterexample: the Soviet Union. We SERIOUSLY meddled with them. We won, too.

Are you saying the communist system was sustainable without American interference?

I rather think they collapsed from within, and it was inevitable.

Besides, comparing the Middle East with Russia has been the classic American mistake. Communism itself was an idea that was borne out of socialist movements in the West - Russia is European, and its civilization is strongly related to ours. The Middle East is an entirely different culture, and does not share so many traditions with us.

 

[Keshik]

Umm, yeah they took hostages after you messed around in their affairs all for the cheap price of oil (sound familiar?).

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

Come on that was lame, you either know nothing about it or you think you have the right to topple democratically elected leaders and piss all over someone else's country and then complain when the people rise up against you. Either way your argument sucks.

If you really know as little as it appears you do at least read the briefest of descriptions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Hostage_Crisis

Is your point that it's o.k. to seize hostages for 444 days and this act is not terrorism? If Iran were the benevolent state you seem to believe it is, they would have simply expelled the Americans and been done with it.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Is your point that it's o.k. to seize hostages for 444 days and this act is not terrorism? If Iran were the benevolent state you seem to believe it is, they would have simply expelled the Americans and been done with it.

If America were a benevolent state, we would have stir-fried the Shah's liver with a spoon.