Why we should not leave Iraq

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
It's been explained & now the proof is in the pudding (that is a really stupid expression)

Washington Times said:
Iran massing troops on Iraq border



Beirut, Lebanon, Jun. 15 (UPI) -- Iran reportedly is readying troops to move into Iraq if U.S. troops pull out, leaving a security vacuum.

The Saudi daily Al-Sharq al-Awsat, monitored in Beirut, reports Iran has massed four battalions at the border.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat quoted "reliable Iraqi sources" as saying, "Iran moved part of its regular military forces towards the Iraqi border in the southern sector at a time its military intelligence agents were operating inside Iraqi territory."
Click to expand...
 
ah yes, the "reliable Iraqi sources" :eek:

i'm convinced. :rolleyes:

i'm pretty sure iran knows that, if they invade iraq after the US troops get out, chances are that the US troops will come back as hard. a fight they cannot win... not all nations are THAT retarded; they might be, but with enough international pressure, they'll think twice before doing anything stupid.
 
Shadowfax said:
ah yes, the "reliable Iraqi sources" :eek:

i'm convinced. :rolleyes:

i'm pretty sure iran knows that, if they invade iraq after the US troops get out, chances are that the US troops will come back as hard. a fight they cannot win... not all nations are THAT retarded; they might be, but with enough international pressure, they'll think twice before doing anything stupid.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the fact that with Iran refusing to stop their Nuclear programs ,the US is looking for a reason to move on Tehran.
 
We could just as likely be occupying Syria and Iran in a year or two's time. I wouldn't be surprised in the least.
 
Why we should not surrender!

Reagan quoted "Mr. Democrat himself," Al Smith, for the proposition that the Democratic Party was no longer the party of Jefferson, Jackson and Cleveland, but was now the party of Marx, Lenin and Stalin. (And that was 30 years before they tried to push Hillarycare on us.)
 
We could send an army of Liberals and Hollywood celebrities to launch a massive assault of feminism and social activism on their archaic medieval culture.
 
markjs said:
We could just as likely be occupying Syria and Iran in a year or two's time. I wouldn't be surprised in the least.
Click to expand...

No need to enter Iran - if we can just give enough moral support they'll do it themselves. Syria on the other hand ranks right up there with Saudi Arabia for needin' to be reformed.
 
and of course it's totally up to the US to decide which country has to be reformed right?


how arrogant.
 
The rules are known. Stop supporting terrorists, join the effort to eradicate terrorism, and you're not going to have problems. Continue to support terrorists, and you're on the reform list.

Some folks still don't get that.

How obtuse.
 
and some people just forget that the US is not the country who can solely set the international rules.
i don't encourage any terrorist support, but invading every country that does isn't going to solve it either.

yes, even the US will run out of resources, and even more, out of money. of course american soldiers will die in the progress, causing public outcry in your own country.

so, ask yourself: to what extend do we fight terrorism? and what price do we pay?
 
To what extent do you fight terrorism? You're joking, right? To imply that any level is acceptable is adsurd. Specifically targetting innocent civilians to support a political end is wrong. Period.

I believe that answers your second question as well.
 
so you seriously think it is possible to totally root out terrorism completely? that's not a realistic view, is it? there will ALWAYS be people who will not agree with the way the world is, and they will fight for their beliefs.
i'm not implying that any level of terrorism is acceptable, but i am implying that it's not possible to make this world terrorism-free.
hence the questions, to what extend and to what price?
 
Terrorist Genocide!
At "All" cost I say.

yeah I'm half cripple, and probably don't have a chance of getting in,
but if the draft were reenacted, (mind you I'm not in favor of it at this time),
and they called I'd gladly report asap.
 
Well since i'm a "self contain" conspiracy theorist, and operative planner.... :D

My plan would be ....
Let things cool down a bit, (as much as possible given the current war status)
and it may take a year or 2, while strengthening home defenses all the while,
then do some major covert assassinations when the hidden leaders show there faces.

P.S. This has work before. (with some of the european terrorist groups I think)
 
Gonz said:
To the end & no price is too high
Click to expand...

despite HomeLAN's sarcasm...allright. no price is to high you say? after the billions and billions of dollars the US spent in Iraq, I'm quite sure they just can not afford another few wars. money runs out, sooner or later, even with the US. fight terrorism ok, but needless to say that economical collapse of the US has greater impact than terrorism. may sound harsh, but just think for one minute what happens when the US economy collapses...?

but of course, you will say that won't happen. but then again, the US goverment won't let that happen, because if they see that they are running out of money, they will stop their global war on terrorism.
 
You didn't ask for the position of the US government, or did you? I answered for my own.

Option A) allow the terrorists to continue attacking as they please & ruin the worlds economy;

or

Option B) kill as many terrorists as possible now, making them all feel the heat & letting them know there is no place to run & no place to hide, forcing their hand.

No, terrorism will never disappear entirely. Terrorists however may.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top