Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So i dont know whom else i can talk about this with, so i figure, this is the lounge and anything goes... and since im not affiliated with any political or military boards... this one might give an interesting perspective...

so i'm sure most people have heard a little of the frustrations with Iran, and Isreal... and that Isreal wants to bomb Iran Nuclear facilities, and the US and G8 want to stop Iran's Uranium enrichment program...

today Iran fired off 9 TBM's(tactical ballistic missles) some long range, some short range, one that was new, that had the capacity of holding a 1 ton warhead. not sure if that was a long or short range missle... I'm sure i'll know in a few days... but nothing i have written here, is confidential and can be found at almost any news source...

anywho, i bring this up, because I'd like to see peoples reaction to this... many i have talked to, said who cares what they do... and others have said that they beleive they ought to be stopped...

next thing i was rather upset about, is obama and mcCain started discussing their opinions and what they'd do... Obama, seems to hide behind the term "Diplomacy" which could mean everything from sending letters to nuclear warfare. and McCain had mentioned that Europe needed a anti-missle system to defend itself... (well accept the fact, Kuwait is in Asia and other countries surrounding Iran, there is already an anti missile system in place, so to me sounds like he is unfamiliar with what is already going on... not so good for a supposide commander in cheif)

also, McCain jokes about "killing them with cigarettes"... to me this statement is very, not racist but, something unorthadox, so far the discussions arent about killing anyone, and thats not the goal... the goal is to make peace with them, and prevent weapons of mass discruction to end up in unsafe hands. To me it seems that statement is very trigger happy...

okay... any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Israel gets stuck doing a lot of America's heavy lifting in the Middle East.

2) Britain, France and the U.S. did the world a disservice by looking the other way in 1948. Sure, the Jews were

treated badly by the Axis powers, but did they have the right to snatch land that hadn't been theirs for 2,000 years?

Be careful how you answer that question: the 'first Nations peoples' are listening. Where do we draw the line?

3) The Palestinians deserve a homeland of their own, too.

4) Many Arab leaders no longer call for the extermination of Israel, but rather insist on a Palestinian homeland.

:duck:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how Bush says that diplomacy with Iran is appeasement, but has used diplomacy successfuly with Libya and North Korea in the past couple of years. The military themselves say that opening a front in Iran is a terrible idea, because it would stretch the military way too thin, and it would ruin the recent progress in Iraq. When the head of the Joint Chiefs and the Sec of Defense say something is not a good idea, shouldn't Cheney listen? Bush's hypocrisy is just amazing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is going to be a mess no matter which way you look at it...

Something tells me it own't be quiet for long.....

Yes, this is going to be messy... I have a lot of Jewish friends and work for a company founded by Israeli immigrants, so I've heard quite an earful lately about the Iran situation...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's going to get ugly...but the land doesn't in a way belong to Isreal.

However, there is a lot of empty land in the middle east, and in one sense if the Muslims/Palestinians had just decided to "make nice" they might have gotten a lot of development capital off of selling things to the Jews.

However, I would bet Dollars to Donuts that Israel won't be around in about 50 to 75 years.

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

yea it'll be messy, i dont necessarily care about the drama of isreal, im just concerned of iran and its violent nature...

thats the only reason im here in kuwait, is to baby sit iran... and what do you do, when that 2-3 year old grabs a butcher knife and starts running at his baby sitter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

as long as we're in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are the aggressors from their POV. Preemptive war is an oxymoron!

1) Israel gets stuck doing a lot of America's heavy lifting in the Middle East.

2) Britain, France and the U.S. did the world a disservice by looking the other way in 1948. Sure, the Jews were

treated badly by the Axis powers, but did they have the right to snatch land that hadn't been theirs for 2,000 years?

Be careful how you answer that question: the 'first Nations peoples' are listening. Where do we draw the line?

3) The Palestinians deserve a homeland of their own, too.

4) Many Arab leaders no longer call for the extermination of Israel, but rather insist on a Palestinian homeland.

1) uh..kinda. more like we're their parent and have to sit down with them to hold talks with their neighbors... isreal has many nukes.. no one is going to start big $h! with them

2)please. breaking up the ottoman empire was the worst thing "we" did after ww1 in the area.

3)yes. Israel needs to let the palestinians be fairly included in the state, if it's to survive in way it is now.

4)prolly, IDK.

Bush's hypocrisy is just amazing.

yes, but it shouldn't be... it's kinda expected, right? along with how wimpy the dem's are to be the "opposition party". there is opposition to this trend, hoping the ranks increase in this coming election for senators and reps, cause most likely the president "we" pick won't be any big change ( provided a miracle doesn't happen. )

Link to post
Share on other sites
yea it'll be messy, i dont necessarily care about the drama of isreal, im just concerned of iran and its violent nature...

thats the only reason im here in kuwait, is to baby sit iran... and what do you do, when that 2-3 year old grabs a butcher knife and starts running at his baby sitter?

you know... I can't agree. cause are we baby sitting germany, UK, france, japan.... we have bases there and i don't think we baby sit them. our bases hurt us and prevent reform in those countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
...

2)please. breaking up the ottoman empire was the worst thing "we" did after ww1 in the area.

...

Yeah... cuz those Ottoman leaders sure were nice people and all. All they wanted was one big Muslim empire. Who cares about the non-Muslims that were "in their way"...

Link to post
Share on other sites
you know... I can't agree. cause are we baby sitting germany, UK, france, japan.... we have bases there and i don't think we baby sit them. our bases hurt us and prevent reform in those countries.

i dont really care if you agree... i told you my job here in kuwait... is to baby sit iran... if irans missiles hit their targets, the blame would be in my chain of command... nothing on earth can out run our guided missles

Link to post
Share on other sites
you know... I can't agree. cause are we baby sitting germany, UK, france, japan.... we have bases there and i don't think we baby sit them. our bases hurt us and prevent reform in those countries.

Um, what 'reform' is needed today in the UK, Germany, France, Japan? (I know we have bases in Italy, not aware of any in France). Those countries are all in good shape...

Link to post
Share on other sites
umm maybe, if we have another federal blood for oil program... or, Iraq part III?

Or if we go to war w/ Iran, it would be another money pit for the US like Afghanistan and Iraq have been, not to mention the human cost..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it will get messy.

But, I don't think we will step into it directly - unless they force our hand.

See, Israel will not tolerate a nuclear Iran no matter what we say. If Israel fells that a real threat exists, there will be craters in specific parts of Iran in a big hurry. When Sadaam got too close to it, Israel bombed his facilities into oblivion. They will do the same to Iran if that country overplays its hand.

We will get the blame of course, but the chances of us actually engaging Iran in a pre-emptive

way are slim to none.

Of course this will be yet another excuse to drive oil prices up even higher.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Iran's motives are not to destroy Israel, or to lead to a war with the 'West' at all. Instead, Iran is trying to become the center of power in the Middle East, a position currently held by Saudi Arabia. Both countries absolutely hate each others guts for a variety of reasons, a main one being their religions; Saudi Arabia is mainly populated by Sunni Muslims, and Iran is Shiite.

Right now, many political and business dealings are done through Saudi Arabia. Essentially, if you want something done in the region, the people who will do it for you are the Saudi's. With this power, Saudi Arabi is seen as the representative nation for the Arab population, and Iran would like to take that crown. Iran's rhetoric towards the West, and Israel is similar to Egypt's attitude during the Nasser era. Nasser gave stirring speeches about uniting the Arab world under the banner of Pan-Arabism which would overcome Israel; however, it was merely a domestic, and foreign policy ploy in order to get respect on the world stage as Nasser really had no desire to wage war with Israel at all, because he knew Egypt would not have a chance in hell of winning, and they would lose even more territory to the Israeli's.

In my opinion, Iran is merely repeating history. Ahmadinejad has adopted a populist stance which is confrontational, and bombastic... but he is a paper tiger. He appeals to both Pan-Arabs, and the Pan-Islamic crowds, much like his predecessors Nasser, and Hasan al Bana. Iran has no desire for a war with anyone. Trade between Iran and the United States has grown almost ten fold under Bush. It still pales in comparison to trade with China or Canada, but it's still money.

The uranium enrichment is just one way to rally Arab's around Iran, because it allows Iran to puff out its chest and look tough. The leaders of Iran are smart enough to know that if they do launch a nuclear missile, or allow a terrorist organization to get their hands on one, the Middle East will be a sheet of glass within a day. Plus, on the bright side... Iran hates al-Qaeda because al-Qaeda is full of Sunni's, and we all know how well those Shiites, and Sunni's get along. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah... cuz those Ottoman leaders sure were nice people and all. All they wanted was one big Muslim empire. Who cares about the non-Muslims that were "in their way"...

yes, but empires typically crumble under their own weight. we didn't need to dismantle it after they lost. turkey is supposed to be secular ran, and now they're in the news about a possible muslim government overtaking.

i dont really care if you agree... i told you my job here in kuwait... is to baby sit iran... if irans missiles hit their targets, the blame would be in my chain of command... nothing on earth can out run our guided missles

ok, but unless they attack us over there, there is no reason to retaliate.

Um, what 'reform' is needed today in the UK, Germany, France, Japan? (I know we have bases in Italy, not aware of any in France). Those countries are all in good shape...

UK, the middle class is being thinned because of taxes and living expenses ,while we pay their gov't for keeping the land (AKA free money for some land). ok, maybe not in france, but i'd not be surprised if we did. we have base( s ) in isreal, the middle east and we subsidize their gov't... instead of needing economic reform to make up for the money we give them. if you suddenly were making 10% less at your job , you'd have to prolly do something different, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i practice Shiite myself.

when i leave the car keys in the house and try to get in the car, i say 'OH SHIITE! i forgot the effing keys again!'

thanks, i'm here all week.

can anyone tell me if this in any way affects the Camaro or Zeta programs?

don't forget to tip the waitress, thanks.

that middle east is a effed up place. can't we just blow them off the face of the earth?

I believe Iran's motives are not to destroy Israel, or to lead to a war with the 'West' at all. Instead, Iran is trying to become the center of power in the Middle East, a position currently held by Saudi Arabia. Both countries absolutely hate each others guts for a variety of reasons, a main one being their religions; Saudi Arabia is mainly populated by Sunni Muslims, and Iran is Shiite.

Right now, many political and business dealings are done through Saudi Arabia. Essentially, if you want something done in the region, the people who will do it for you are the Saudi's. With this power, Saudi Arabi is seen as the representative nation for the Arab population, and Iran would like to take that crown. Iran's rhetoric towards the West, and Israel is similar to Egypt's attitude during the Nasser era. Nasser gave stirring speeches about uniting the Arab world under the banner of Pan-Arabism which would overcome Israel; however, it was merely a domestic, and foreign policy ploy in order to get respect on the world stage as Nasser really had no desire to wage war with Israel at all, because he knew Egypt would not have a chance in hell of winning, and they would lose even more territory to the Israeli's.

In my opinion, Iran is merely repeating history. Ahmadinejad has adopted a populist stance which is confrontational, and bombastic... but he is a paper tiger. He appeals to both Pan-Arabs, and the Pan-Islamic crowds, much like his predecessors Nasser, and Hasan al Bana. Iran has no desire for a war with anyone. Trade between Iran and the United States has grown almost ten fold under Bush. It still pales in comparison to trade with China or Canada, but it's still money.

The uranium enrichment is just one way to rally Arab's around Iran, because it allows Iran to puff out its chest and look tough. The leaders of Iran are smart enough to know that if they do launch a nuclear missile, or allow a terrorist organization to get their hands on one, the Middle East will be a sheet of glass within a day. Plus, on the bright side... Iran hates al-Qaeda because al-Qaeda is full of Sunni's, and we all know how well those Shiites, and Sunni's get along. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally, I disapprove of the Iranian government's desire to establish Muslim states throughout the middle East. Church and state should be separate.

I can not believe any information regarding their desires to make nuclear weapons. The Bush administration is totally corrupt when it comes to foreign policy. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and Iran probably doesnt have them either. I need to wait until we get a new administration and new intelligence on Iran before I could even consider if we should be worried about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Generally, I disapprove of the Iranian government's desire to establish Muslim states throughout the middle East. Church and state should be separate.

I can not believe any information regarding their desires to make nuclear weapons. The Bush administration is totally corrupt when it comes to foreign policy. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and Iran probably doesnt have them either. I need to wait until we get a new administration and new intelligence on Iran before I could even consider if we should be worried about them.

ohh this is untrue! there was a picture that was found in the news a few days ago... a picture dated before the war started of the united states moving iraqi uranium around some 550 metric tons...

but the problem was, iran was going to invade iraq, and saddam wanted to sound powerful so he told insiders that he had weapons... this did two things, made iran back down because if we are strong against the united states, they must be strong enough to defend against iran... but saddam before he died announced he never imagine bush to attack as he did... he was assuming a clinton style air strike for a few days, and that was it... so it was okay to accept that a few things get blown up to sound strong against iran... well some 5 years later, iran still wants violence...

you are probably right about the bush administration, as he is connected with oil and the vice president is tied financially with contractors involved with the war... so both have made themselves very profitable as president...

ohh well... all im saying is if iran goes balistic, i will probably end up dead, due to the nature of my job

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if radioactive gasoline gets better mpg than regular?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sware, that entire region should be wiped off the face of the earth. All of those trigger-happy psychos just make the world a more tense place than it needs to be. I remember some group of them became so made over a European comic strip they burned flags and shot guns pointlessly in the air...over a drawing? Please.

Link to post
Share on other sites
true saw that on nbc this morning... wonder if there is a way to make those missles turn on their owners...

umm maybe ours, i dont know if their missiles are guided... i think they basically just use fancy rockets.. not any technology there...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I sware, that entire region should be wiped off the face of the earth. All of those trigger-happy psychos just make the world a more tense place than it needs to be.

Are we talking about Muslim Extremists, or Evangelical Christians? I often get the two confused. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting how our country has aided so many counteries and how many we have rebuilt at the tax payers expense. I have 4 generations of marines and while I support my fellow brothers and sisters in the armed forces, I see no need for us to have bases any longer in other counteries. We might as well save billions that could go to pay off our national debt, solidify the Social Security and work to build our country stronger internally, fix the roads, infastructure, etc. Look at how Japan has become one of the riches nations after they made the mistake of trying to be imperial and bombed us. We then kicked their ass, rebuilt their country and they then said they would beat us economically. They have very little national debt in comparison to the USA and are very strong with no Military bases in the world. They have even said they would like us to leave Okinawa.

All in All, there is no wild west any more, no need to be the Big Bully as Bush loves to be and reward his war mongering friends that put him in Office. Focus on where we were headed in 2000 when we had a budget surplus, was paying off national debt and could have fixed Social Security and other issues. We have sold out so much of our country and it is time to take care of our self and the needs of our fellow americans. let the rest of the world finally step up and deal with some of the crap going on in the 3rd world hell holes. let them kill themselves, why should our fellow americans die, as long as they sell us their oil and other products we choose to purchase, use them up and let them figure out how to finally stop be controlled by religous idiot leaders and get educated to be better universal citizens.

Time to fix America, Sadly I do not see to much happening even after the election with Socialist Obama or Spend Happy religous nut McCain. Both are lousy choices, Hopefully their VP's will be strong contenders as you never know how long either of them will be around. Really we need to just fire all members of both parties and elect new people who are not bought by big Corporate America.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to creat a Pax-Americana: build a big wall around North America and screw the rest of them! We have everything we need right here - cheap labor Mexico, lots of oil and all the mineral wealth we need. Not to mention 25% of the world's fresh water!

I'm only half kidding. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to fix America, Sadly I do not see to much happening even after the election with Socialist Obama or Spend Happy religous nut McCain. Both are lousy choices, Hopefully their VP's will be strong contenders as you never know how long either of them will be around. Really we need to just fire all members of both parties and elect new people who are not bought by big Corporate America.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Time to fix America, Sadly I do not see to much happening even after the election with Socialist Obama or Spend Happy religous nut McCain. Both are lousy choices, Hopefully their VP's will be strong contenders as you never know how long either of them will be around. Really we need to just fire all members of both parties and elect new people who are not bought by big Corporate America.

I'm optimistic that an Obama presidency would be better for the US than the same old same old neocon BS from McCain..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Time to creat a Pax-Americana: build a big wall around North America and screw the rest of them! We have everything we need right here - cheap labor Mexico, lots of oil and all the mineral wealth we need. Not to mention 25% of the world's fresh water!

I'm only half kidding. :rolleyes:

I've wondered before if a NAU (North American Union, like the EU) would work...unify the money, laws, etc between Canada, the US and Mexico, make English, French, and Spanish the official languages and Futbol, Football, and Hockey the official sports... :) Would help reduce the illegal immigration problem in the US..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting how our country has aided so many countries and how many we have rebuilt at the tax payers expense........

Really we need to just fire all members of both parties and elect new people who are not bought by big Corporate America.

YES! but...McCain doesn't seem very religious to me.

I'm optimistic that an Obama presidency would be better for the US than the same old same old neocon BS from McCain..

both are terrible choices for different reasons.

I've wondered before if a NAU (North American Union, like the EU) would work...unify the money, laws, etc between Canada, the US and Mexico, make English, French, and Spanish the official languages and Futbol, Football, and Hockey the official sports... :) Would help reduce the illegal immigration problem in the US..

god no. that is scary. if they don't become states, i'm 300000% against it. that idea is why immigration is horrible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't want to go to deep into this subject cause I will get in trouble, I believe we should resort back to isolationism and get our nose out of it. lets still trade with the both of them but let them work it out if Israel wants to kick there ass a little let them. Now if they want to take them over well lets get the UN to back the US to calm Israel down.

As for Nuke's I think there is no reason to have them. Its really ours and USSR's fault but you cant go back. They want them to use as an negotiation piece, that's all. I think they are smart enough to realize M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) Trust me Theses guys are smart and dedicated. I fought with a couple and been beat up by a couple and used as a hostage. They Know everything we know they just don't have the Capital or resources.

Missile Defense Systems=Smoke and Mirrors. I think they are there for Moral and to brag about. I mean something that is going mach 2 is hard to stop. The Patriot Missile system was an Utter Failure at first with like a 15% success rate? Besides I guarantee what we got now is too sophisticated to stop a low technology rocket. Like How a Biplane sunk the Bismark The Nazi's Best Ship. It was to technologically advanced to shoot down a bi plane but it swatted down top of the line ally planes in seconds.

Maybe I'm Old school but I say we should avoid this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
YES! but...McCain doesn't seem very religious to me.

He seems moderate, though he's been cozying up to the nutjobs lately..(the intolerant evangelical lunatics).

Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't want to go to deep into this subject cause I will get in trouble, I believe we should resort back to isolationism and get our nose out of it. lets still trade with the both of them but let them work it out if Israel wants to kick there ass a little let them. Now if they want to take them over well lets get the UN to back the US to calm Israel down.

that's not isolationism. you speak of non interventionism.

He seems moderate, though he's been cozying up to the nutjobs lately..(the intolerant evangelical lunatics).

prolly, but you could have said that about obama when he was passing off his old pastors remarks as nothing serious. McCain fled Hagee's? backing quickly a month or 2 ago.

just trying to keep an equal opportunity dissing fest here. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've wondered before if a NAU (North American Union, like the EU) would work...unify the money, laws, etc between Canada, the US and Mexico, make English, French, and Spanish the official languages and Futbol, Football, and Hockey the official sports... :) Would help reduce the illegal immigration problem in the US..

It may sound funny, but if you really look at the resources, manpower and talent in North America (I'd include Central America and the West Indies, too), with a population of nearly half a billion, huge oil reserves, nearly 1/3 of the world's uranium, a goodly chunk of the nickel, copper, and potash (Ah, there's a big one - India is already trying to get its clammy hands on chunks of Saskatchewan), plus millions of untapped acres of forest and arable land - we truly could seal our borders tomorrow and let the rest of the world sort out their own troubles.

Truly, they need us more than we need them.

Let's see how France and Germany vote on the UN without the US to back them up. Let's see China and India support their nearly 3 billions without our potash, nickel, copper, etc.

It's an interesting idea to ponder.........

Link to post
Share on other sites
It may sound funny, but if you really look at the resources, manpower and talent in North America (I'd include Central America and the West Indies, too), with a population of nearly half a billion, huge oil reserves, nearly 1/3 of the world's uranium, a goodly chunk of the nickel, copper, and potash (Ah, there's a big one - India is already trying to get its clammy hands on chunks of Saskatchewan), plus millions of untapped acres of forest and arable land - we truly could seal our borders tomorrow and let the rest of the world sort out their own troubles.

Truly, they need us more than we need them.

Let's see how France and Germany vote on the UN without the US to back them up. Let's see China and India support their nearly 3 billions without our potash, nickel, copper, etc.

It's an interesting idea to ponder.........

This smells like an OPEC situation to me. Indeed it is interesting to ponder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Iran with nukes is a scary proposition.... No.Korea also.

2. Israel needs to sink or swim on their own. We should

STOP being the world's baby sitter, like YESTERDAY. It

only gets us true enemies but wins us no true allies.

3. If Isreal is so much more sophisticated and mature than

the rest of the $ithole known as the middle east, then why

the hell are they still playing by the "eye-for-eye" rules

from the old testament as if it was 2008 B.C. Killing a bunch

of innocent Palestenians by millitary strike IS NO LESS

TERRORISM than a Palestenian blowing up a bomb & killing

a bunch of innocent Israelis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
that's not isolationism. you speak of non interventionism.

Your right.

However I view isolationism as we mind our own business until it affects us or potentially harms us. Kind of like Before WWII.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm optimistic that an Obama presidency would be better for the US than the same old same old neocon BS from McCain.

143 days in office; his ENTIRE professional experience. That's 6 months. Can he even turn on the lights in the oval office by himself ?? The worst potential CiC in my lifetime.

>>"...Socialist Obama or Spend Happy religous nut McCain..."<<

I'm much more comfortable with a non-radical, non-racist religious nut.

BTW, BO had proposed 1 trillion in new spending with no plan on how to cover it- sounds plenty 'happy' to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1. Iran with nukes is a scary proposition.... No.Korea also.

2. Israel needs to sink or swim on their own. We should

STOP being the world's baby sitter, like YESTERDAY. It

only gets us true enemies but wins us no true allies.

3. If Isreal is so much more sophisticated and mature than

the rest of the $ithole known as the middle east, then why

the hell are they still playing by the "eye-for-eye" rules

from the old testament as if it was 2008 B.C. Killing a bunch

of innocent Palestenians by millitary strike IS NO LESS

TERRORISM than a Palestenian blowing up a bomb & killing

a bunch of innocent Israelis.

Have you ever tried to reason with the Ayatollah? Read 'America Alone.' Mark Steyn has spent a lot of time in Europe and the Arab world. Althought there are many Arab 'moderates,' they have little or no say in what goes on. You have to understand that literally MILLIONS of Arab 'moderates' have emigrated out of those countries over the past 20 years or so and are now living here.

Conciliation and mediation are viewed as signs of weakness. If it wasn't for the damn oil, it would be nice to dig a big mote around the entire Middle East and just let them all kill each other off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
143 days in office; his ENTIRE professional experience. That's 6 months. Can he even turn on the lights in the oval office by himself ?? The worst potential CiC in my lifetime.

Considering the worst CIC in history is in the White House now, BO will be a huge improvement.

Edited by moltar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like every CiC in history, there have been good points & bad for each one.

I'll tell you this RE Bush tho- I didn't vote for him and I still would not if given the chance again. Answer your question sufficiently?

Doesn't mean the 'other' party is the right answer, either (esp this year). Maybe if the economy was flying high, maybe taking a wild chance on an inexperienced radical unknown would be worth the risk. But what IS known is very unnerving, and is shaking out to very restrictive, very intrusive and very expensive. Now's simply not the time merely to 'make history'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Like every CiC in history, there have been good points & bad for each one.

I'll tell you this RE Bush tho- I didn't vote for him and I still would not if given the chance again. Answer your question sufficiently?

Doesn't mean the 'other' party is the right answer, either (esp this year). Maybe if the economy was flying high, maybe taking a wild chance on an inexperienced radical unknown would be worth the risk. But what IS known is very unnerving, and is shaking out to very restrictive, very intrusive and very expensive. Now's simply not the time merely to 'make history'.

The problem is McCain is a tired old man that should be retired and playing golf...he represents more the same neocon BS that we've had the last 7 years...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe American coverage of McCain is different, but our media generally portrays him as a moderate, and a maverick. Plus, it's often I'll hear or read about how McCain has labeled the religious right as 'agents of intolerance' , among other things. Heck, McCain even looks, and sounds less 'conservative' than our Conservative government.

In fact, I think Obama is much like Bush in that he wears his religion on his sleeve.

Back to Iran... now it's looking like the Republican Guard did a good ol' Photoshop of their missile launch, rubbing out a missile that failed to fire. It also sounds like Iran overstated the amount of missiles fired. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Killing a bunch of innocent Palestenians by millitary strike IS NO LESS

TERRORISM than a Palestenian blowing up a bomb & killing

a bunch of innocent Israelis.

well since it's state santioned by their "war dept"... that's war, but i basically agree

Your right.

However I view isolationism as we mind our own business until it affects us or potentially harms us. Kind of like Before WWII.

if you're trading and interacting with other countries in diplomacy. it can't be called isolationism. starting wars, and sanctioning countries is more isolating than the "mind your own business" mind set

143 days in office; his ENTIRE professional experience. That's 6 months. Can he even turn on the lights in the oval office by himself ?? The worst potential CiC in my lifetime.

>>"...Socialist Obama or Spend Happy religous nut McCain..."<<

I'm much more comfortable with a non-radical, non-racist religious nut.

BTW, BO had proposed 1 trillion in new spending with no plan on how to cover it- sounds plenty 'happy' to me.

obama is a lawyer, right? Obama says he's a christian but nothing he says, that i've heard about, is christian, so who's nutty now?

BO prolly thinks 1 trillion would be transfered from the war effort since he wants to get ..combat troops out, i think 1 or 2 battalions /month

The problem is McCain is a tired old man that should be retired and playing golf...he represents more the same neocon BS that we've had the last 7 years...

for the past couple years, yes. some of his views were conservative before recently. like when he wanted trials for gitmo people back in 03. but again, niether candidate has held firm idea ground from what i know.

sorry if i seem a little off to day, all wisdom teeth removed earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is McCain is a tired old man that should be retired and playing golf...he represents more the same neocon BS that we've had the last 7 years...

They say 70 is the new 60! ;) I don't know how "tired" McCain is; his 1000-page health report said he was in great shape.

The problem w/ obama is he's an elitist radical with strong associations with racists, he has a LOT of growing up & learning to do {>>"don't worry about immigrants learning English, they'll learn it... you should be worried about your children learning Spanish! --BO"<<A guy retired from the print pool where my wife works, after 12 years in this country he still had to give his goodby speech in Spanish- doesn't know a word of English yet! Way to be on top of issues!}, tho I doubt anyone with his length of historical associations is capable of personal change- he's indoctrinated. Already some are referring to BO economically as 'an extension of the Carter years'... tho he's been hard enough/inconsistant enough to pin down as to specifics/stance to really support that theory. Take his earpiece out/ his teleprompter away and he stutters, stammers and gaffs alarmingly. Who really knows which ways BO will go?? The prepared stuff sounds good but it's all empty, shifty rhetoric.

Again- no one in this economy can afford his proposals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Obama will pull the troups out 2 battalions a month, we'll still be here for quite some time... whats a batallion maybe 1k soldiers? and there are 120-160k of us here?

Send me home! lol...

no reason rotations cant be 6 months or 12 months... but being here for 15 is too long, too much of a strain...

Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is McCain is a tired old man that should be retired and playing golf...he represents more the same neocon BS that we've had the last 7 years...

McCain is a conservative without the "neo", to paint him with the same brush as that crowd is just inaccurate. In fact, they don't like him.

The way I see it is that we will be better off no matter which candidate wins. Of course, that's not saying much given the current reality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
McCain is a conservative without the "neo", to paint him with the same brush as that crowd is just inaccurate. In fact, they don't like him.

The way I see it is that we will be better off no matter which candidate wins. Of course, that's not saying much given the current reality.

you may be right, but his voting record in the past ~2 years have been right in line with what bush "wanted". he was outspoken against what was going on with detainees ~5 years ago, but he changed. he's a maverick, but not one that can hold the same opinion for more than a couple years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

McCain's opinion isn't going to matter nearly as much as his VP's, be honest 72 year old men, no matter how healthy their 1200 page medical records say they are, are going to be worn down by the highest pressure job in the world. If he had known that Bush would have a 25% approval rating 4 months before the general election, he may have held his ground instead of moving off to the right. Instead he took a calculated risk, moved closer to Bush to get cozy with the far-right, and now he's a very suspect figure in the eyes of moderates and liberals.

Obama's VP is going to be just as important because he is going to need someone standing over his shoulder, taking some of the responsibility, like Dick Cheney, only not evil.

What does this have to do with Iran? Very little, since both candidates are (hopefully) smart enough to see that the armed forces are stretched thin and unless Iran makes a direct attack on America or American interests, there is no reason to attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not want to get into political discussions. But I have to say it once.

Please do not get into Iran. Let us just keep out from the mess, let the European folks, and other Asians who feel it is a rogue, mongrel, terrible, satanic nation take care of the situation. Like Satty said the troops are stressed, our economy is going down the toilet, our infrastructure is on a verge of an overhaul. For once let us concentrate inside rather than outside.

US's position in Middle East is a hyperbole, on one side it supports Israel, yet on the other side it does not want to fester oil rich nations, all of them are against Israel. By keeping no stance policy, we put Iran into dillemma by acting against what they perceive we would react, that is the worst position for the enemy to be in. By reacting to every action they make, we become predictable, and even though we have tremendous capability and technology, if the enemy is inside our head, we have made victory a difficult path.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is an account of henry rollins going to Iran about 1 year ago i think....

not the one i was thinking of but.

@ http://www.shakefire.com/interviews/henryrollins.html

I would probably sit down with (Iranian President) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and go “Ok, we understand why you hate us, because we financed Saddam taking you out. Do you understand why we are scared of you? Can you see that? Can you see that when you talk about Israel like that, you offend, bum and outrage a lot of people with the capabilities to squash your f@#king country like a cockroach? Do you get that? Do you realize that we can come in tomorrow and take all your &#036;h&#33; and f@#k your wife? Do you realize that? Good. Hate to do it, don’t want to do it. If you want nuclear power, great. Let’s get the IAEA in, the UN and all of that because there are a whole lot of countries in the world that are terrified of you guys but I don’t want your children freezing in the winter because I like your kids because, you know, they are not anything like you.”

So, I would be trying to sit down with these countries that Condoleeza Rice has drawn lines in the sand with and go “Look. Let’s go back to the intellectual approach of negotiation and hearing each other out and let’s become part of the planet again.” I know that sounds a little Hippee-dippee and liberal but when Ahmadinejad says “bring in the UN. Let’s do it by the book” and Condoleeza Rice says “We are done talking” and John Bolton starts pulling stuff out of his ass saying “Well, you know, they have a ballistic missile program.” You just made that up, dude! They don’t have one that you know of, or if you are asked to comment on it, you say that you don’t know, so what’s it going to be? You can’t lie to everyone all the time because there are some smart people out there that are going to call you out. But, with this Teflon administration, they get called out all the time. And, this is what makes me mad because in my low station on the food chain, I’m held accountable for every bounced check, every appointment I’m late to, believe me. And, these guys just do all kinds of stuff. We already proved that you lied about Iraq. How the hell do you think we are going to go in with you into Iran? I know why we are going into Iran. We want the northern border with Turkmenistan, Caspian gas and oil. That’s my theory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Rollins, but usually don't agree with his lib political tendancies. Still, I'd be willing to put him in as an international ambassador for a trial run. He has common sense in spades.

Would LOVE to see a chart/ list/ account of exactly when, where & how many barrels of oil we've gotten into our cache' from fighting in Afghan/Iraq.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...