War with Iran?

[looney]

Oh and the UN said there were WMD unaccounted for as well.


still waiting for the leftwing prophosised middle eastern meltdown.

The only meltdown was in your pants as Bush pulled another 4 years.

Btw

Faranheight 9/11 on channel 4 jan 27th. Whatever happened to Michael Moore?

 

[REDLAND]

For Information read target. For a pre-emptive strike. Oh and the yanks will go along with it as it will be an airborne opperation.

Iran has Nuclear capabilities, even America will think twice about pre-emptive strikes on them !!

 

[readingstockport]

Farenheight 9/11 is one of the most overrated films I have seen last year. Good message, badly presented.

And I never supported the soviets I assur you. Just like I never supported Saddam unlike rather too many on the right who now try to hide or deny that unpalatable fact.

As for the meltdown. Wake up and smell the coffee. Iraq is a disaster. Large parts of the country are effectively out of American/allied control and Baghdad is gradually going the same way. Afghanistan is a mess with the government writ running for no more than about 10 mile outside of Khabul.

It's a mess looney, you only make yourself look more foolish by trying to deny it.

 

[Superseagull]

Iran has Nuclear capabilities, even America will think twice about pre-emptive strikes on them !!

Iraq was thought to have tons of chemical, biological and maybe a crude nuclear bomb but the yanks did not seem to worried about attacking it!

 

[REDLAND]

Iraq was thought to have tons of chemical, biological and maybe a crude nuclear bomb but the yanks did not seem to worried about attacking it!

Rubbish America whould not have attacked Iraq if it thought it would have a serious go back. Iran HAS nuclear capabilities and chemical suits don't protect you against that sort of weapon !!!

 

[looney]

Iran has Nuclear capabilities, even America will think twice about pre-emptive strikes on them !!

The strikes are to prevent them developing nukes.


Iraq is a disaster. Large parts of the country are effectively out of American/allied control and Baghdad is gradually going the same way. Afghanistan is a mess with the government writ running for no more than about 10 mile outside of Khabul.

It's a mess looney, you only make yourself look more foolish by trying to deny it.

I'm not denying that, in fact Its what I expected, but what I am saying is that in the long run the insurgents will lose, they are losing ground. the Iraqi infrastructure amd armedforces are growing and improving. It hasn't all gone backwards so I suggest you pull your head out of the Independent and stop praying that terrorists will take over Iraq. It aint going to happen however much you hope for it.

 

[looney]

Rubbish America whould not have attacked Iraq if it thought it would have a serious go back. Iran HAS nuclear capabilities and chemical suits don't protect you against that sort of weapon !!!

Yes it would and yes it will. You dont really understand neo-cons do you? They beleive in Freedom, they will not bow to tyrants or their lackies.

 

[captainmorganrum]

The United States forces in the Middle East are far too stretched in Iraq to contemplate a full scale invasion of Iran - as some have said (God, I'm agreeing with Looney) it will be 'surgical' air strikes only in Iran.
I don't believe Iran does yet have offensive nuclear capabilities.

Will the US wait for broad international consensus? - will it f***

This one isn't in my name either

 

[looney]

Will the US wait for a nation that calls it the Great Satan and sponsors terrorism to develope a nuclear capability?


will the US wait for the UN to give its concent?


Hah, dream on.

 

[captainmorganrum]

What I want to know is....
When the Soviets had nukes, the west needed them as a 'deterrent'.

Fair enough.

But when Israel has nukes why can't Iran develop them as a deterrent too.

Do what I say, not do what I do.

I'm not dreaming Looney, it's a feckin nightmare this!

 

[REDLAND]

What I want to know is....
When the Soviets had nukes, the west needed them as a 'deterrent'.

Fair enough.

But when Israel has nukes why can't Iran develop them as a deterrent too.

Do what I say, not do what I do.

I'm not dreaming Looney, it's a feckin nightmare this!

Coz America defines the World order !!

 

[captainmorganrum]

Coz America defines the World order !!

Oh yeah, silly me.

 

[looney]

Oh and finally.

I never suported the war on a WMD arguement. It was based on the arguement that Saddam is a tyrant who murders home and abroad at will and is a potential LT threat.


WMD was a good bite to seduce the masses. Most people cant follow technical arguements including quite a few here so it was simlplified.

Personally I would have promoted the war on the reasons above and let you gutless scumbags defend your favoured tyrants then have the joy of pointing that out.

Still tis history now, well apart from East Persia.

 

[captainmorganrum]

Oh and finally.
I never suported the war on a WMD arguement. It was based on the arguement that Saddam is a tyrant who murders home and abroad at will and is a potential LT threat.

A bit like Bush then?

 

[looney]

What I want to know is....
When the Soviets had nukes, the west needed them as a 'deterrent'.

Fair enough.

But when Israel has nukes why can't Iran develop them as a deterrent too.

Do what I say, not do what I do.

I'm not dreaming Looney, it's a feckin nightmare this!

Because cold war nukes, balistic, are tracable to source by radar. Those smuggled by terrorists are not.

If Israel is nuked who should it retaliate against? Should it nuke the main suspect or just sit there waiting for the next one?

 

[looney]

What if we are nuked by a non-balistic source? what should blair do? Nuke dublin? Let the chavs choose their enemy on the street?


Kind fucks up your arguements doesnt it?

 

[readingstockport]

I'm not denying that, in fact Its what I expected, but what I am saying is that in the long run the insurgents will lose, they are losing ground. the Iraqi infrastructure amd armedforces are growing and improving.

Bull. The iraqi 'armed forces' and police are totally infiltrated by the 'insurgents'.
What was it happened at Fallujah again, oh yes. The US put the iraqi forces in control and they all promptly turned their weapons over to the insurgency and joined them. hence the f***ing mess that there is in that city now.

Get you head out of wherever it is you have it and face the truth looney. You were conned then and they're conning you now.

 

[Simster]

WMD was a good bite to seduce the masses. Most people cant follow technical arguements including quite a few here so it was simlplified.

Well please simplify a bit more, because your posts come across as nothing short of complete gibberish. Also, try to defend yourself by sticking to the points being raised. Earlier on, someone suggested you had been a right wing sheep for swallowing the WMD argument and you attempted to defend yourself with a bunch of f***ing NOISE.

 

[captainmorganrum]

Most likely to nuke Israel is the US in a friendly fire farce!

 

[readingstockport]

So that would be the tyrant that most on the left opposed from day one whilst most of your fellow right wing travellers like shrub, thatcher and rumsfeld enthusiastically supported him then would it?

Come on looney, give up. With every extra pile of tripe you post you show yourself up to be an even bigger hypocrtie and stooge.