Comments on: Washington's Debate: What To Do With Iran?

Tensions Rise As A New Report Claims The Pentagon Is Redrawing Strike Plans Against Iran

[galloglaigh]

Read this news article from Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) about the meeting they sponsored in NY with Iran''''s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and more than 100 religious leaders from the U.S. and Canada.
Posted by mary343 at 07:39 PM : Oct 01, 2007
- - - - - - - -

I read that article right after Ahmadinejad was at Columbia. It was a very interesting article and I applaud the efforts of the Mennonites and Quackers to try to bring peace. However, Ahmadinejad was only slightly more subdued and no more "informative" than when he was at Columbia and on 60 Minutes.

Ahmadinejad is NOT to be trusted. But that doesn''t mean BushCo should wage another pre-emptive strike when the other pre-emptive strike has been waged for over four years now and is draining our military resources. And it''s draining our economy. Our children and grand-children will be paying for "Bush''s War" for years and years.

Geezzz, the U.S. military is training SAILORS as infantry. I wonder what tankersmash thinks about that!! It''s probably ok with him as long as there are no LIBERALS and no ***, or trees to hug!!

...training SAILORS as infantry!! How desparate is THAT?

[vincan-2009]

The crazies, as the president and vice president are known, are busy planning at the present time and for no telling how long to attack Iran. Admiral Fallon is the man who says no way will we attack Iran. This is the man who is right and we should put all our effort behind him. We are in a weakened position and will need a long time to recover from this bogus war in Iraq. No way in the world can we go to war with the entire middle east as Bush and Cheney seem to want.

[galloglaigh]

Don''''t try to argue military history with me you tree hugger liberal. ...4 years in college ...now an Army officer...

Posted by tankersmash at 02:28 PM : Oct 01, 2007
---------------------

Don''t argue military history with you?? LOL!! You didn''t have to respond.

You should have taken some anger management classes in college, dude.

If you didn''t want me to argue military history with YOU, why did you respond to my post? And since you responded why didn''t you argue your point instead of waging a childish personal attack on me? Is that what army officers do? Act like angry children and attack people who disagree with them? You certainly don''t represent the "officer ranks" very well.

Four years of college history? You don''t exhibit the historical acumen of someone who studied history for four years. Your response to any questions that require thought is to wage a personal attack.

Many of us concluded weeks ago that you are most likely NOT an army officer and probably not even in the military. Just another "keyboard warrior."

Was the president mentioned in your army oath? Again, how did that oath go?

OBTW: Since you are so anti-democratic, what, in your view, would be an ideal party philosophy to "counter" the republican party?

In addition, 28 years in the U.S. military defending your right to be angry at liberals, and the world in general.

And I''m not a liberal.

[damnedrelign]

The combined results of religious fanaticism as a political tool, and/or using or commandeering "awesome" religious fear, along with inculcation of hate into the young minds of Moslem children to engage in their "religious duties" of martyrdom, would be considered madness by all those who are decent, rational, and non-violent.
Should "rights" to teach such acts of murder and destruction be taken away from parents and adults who teach such madness to their own children? A clear YES is the answer.
The mindset created in Iran and by similar Islamic fascists is a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THE ENTIRE WORLD.
Iran must be stopped TODAY WITH RELATIVELY LOW COST.
Those who think that permitting a nuclear and militarily stronger Iran to spread more of its "influence", simply are not aware of how bad things will be. Hell on earth would indeed become realized!

[mary343]

Read this news article from Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) about the meeting they sponsored in NY with Iran''s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and more than 100 religious leaders from the U.S. and Canada.

http://mcc.org/news/news/article.html?id=256

[mary343]

Read this news article from Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) about the meeting they sponsored in NY with Iran''s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and more than 100 religious leaders from the U.S. and Canada.

http://mcc.org/news/news/article.html?id=256

[mary343]

Read this news article from Mennonite Central Committee (MCC) about the meeting they sponsored in NY with Iran''s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and more than 100 religious leaders from the U.S. and Canada.

http://mcc.org/news/news/article.html?id=256

[tankersmash]

Posted by galloglaigh

Don''t try to argue military history with me you tree hugger liberal. I studied it for 4 years in college and am now an Army officer...isn''t there a queer rights parade or a coward anti-war march for people like you should be at right now liberal?

[clestes-2009]

What to do with Iran??

That''s easy,

1. stop fcking around with their politics, which we have been doing since 1953

2. let the IAEA do their job.

Iran is willing to have inspections and answer all outstanding questions about their nuclear program. By Nov of this year, the IAEA will know what Iran is up to.

As much as the Bush/Cheney admin does not want to admit this, Iran has EVERY RIGHT under INTERNATIONAL LAW to have a nuclear energy program. As long as they agree to its being monitored, they are WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS.

Most estimates say Iran won''t have a bomb anywhere from the earliest 3 years from now to 10 years from now. Since it takes a minimum of 3-4 years to develop a program, they cannot have one now and they cannot develop one in 2 months.

Stop fanning the flames of war and let the IAEA do their job.

[galloglaigh]

What about the fact the FDR responded to Pearl Harbor by joining the Brits on the Europian Front? The Germans never attacked us directly but did attack our ships carrying supplies to the Brits and our other allies...do you call this attacking US interests? Of course you do, and if you don''''t, you''''re a bigger moron than I first thought.
Posted by tankersmash at 11:12 AM : Oct 01, 2007
-------------------------

LOL!!! Go study history. It was two separate wars until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and four days later the Germans declared war on the U.S. We responded by joining the war in Europe and declaring war with Japan and both wars became one war.

Germany was well on its way to conquering Europe and cutting off Britian, however they suffered tremendous losses to the USSR. Had they not brought the USSR into the war it might have had a different outcome, or, at the very least, it would have continued much longer.

The Germans DID attack us; they were sinking our ships in the Gulf of Mexico, and elsewhere.

LOL!!! You should study history before you open mouth and insert foot.