Previous 1 3
Topic: Do we have enough Troops to Invade Iran?
willing2's photo
Thu 09/17/09 01:27 PM
AP NewsBreak: Nuke agency says Iran can make bomb

VIENNA – Experts at the world's top atomic watchdog are in agreement that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a secret report seen by The Associated Press.

The document drafted by senior officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency is the clearest indication yet that the agency's leaders share Washington's views on Iran's weapon-making capabilities.

It appears to be the so-called "secret annex" on Iran's nuclear program that Washington says is being withheld by the IAEA's chief.

The document says Iran has "sufficient information" to build a bomb. It says Iran is likely to "overcome problems" on developing a delivery system.


Ladylid2012's photo
Thu 09/17/09 02:08 PM
gawd, I hope not

willing2's photo
Thu 09/17/09 02:14 PM
Iraq was invaded for a whole lot less.

Ladylid2012's photo
Thu 09/17/09 02:21 PM
maybe so..I don't think we should be there either.

Quietman_2009's photo
Thu 09/17/09 06:56 PM
Edited by Quietman_2009 on Thu 09/17/09 06:56 PM
speaking academically, not to whether we should or not

but just to whether we could

I think we could but it would take every thing we have. And it would require the help of the British and prolly French and Italian and Spanish. and of course Israel

Syria would fight with Iran. And the Sudan and Somalia and Yemen. The Saudis might go either way. And Egypt might go either way. And Pakistan

The Shia and the Sunni don't get along real well. Turkey would probably go with us but if they didnt it could get real ugly

It would definitly be World War 3

the Muslim world against the Western World


Ladylid2012's photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:07 PM

speaking academically, not to whether we should or not

but just to whether we could

I think we could but it would take every thing we have. And it would require the help of the British and prolly French and Italian and Spanish. and of course Israel

Syria would fight with Iran. And the Sudan and Somalia and Yemen. The Saudis might go either way. And Egypt might go either way. And Pakistan

The Shia and the Sunni don't get along real well. Turkey would probably go with us but if they didnt it could get real ugly

It would definitly be World War 3

the Muslim world against the Western World




drinker

no photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:07 PM
Insane is what it would be. JMO

Ladylid2012's photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:10 PM
Yep, insane indeed! Exactly why I don't want my boys registered with the selective service....

Quietman_2009's photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:14 PM
but the scarier part is if Iran develops nuclear weapons they are almost surely to use em to attack Israel. Or give em to Hezbollah or Hamas

Tel Aviv gone in a second

and then of course Israel would counter attack and Tehran would disappear

and in the meantime what would Pakistan do with their nuclear weapons? would they attack India? or American bases?

What would Russia do?

Ladylid2012's photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:17 PM
I don't think Russia would back us...I think the the whole mess would awaken the sleeping bear..

Quietman_2009's photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:20 PM
Edited by Quietman_2009 on Thu 09/17/09 07:21 PM
Russia has oil and construction assets in Iran so they would prolly back them

and use the opportunity to grab Georgia and wipe out the Chechnyans

China would prolly jump on the chance to eliminate the Uighers (muslim ethnic chinese)

either way it would be nasty

thats why we're trying to get them to stop with sanctions

tohyup's photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:28 PM

I'm a peacemaker, I object to any war...maybe makes me a bleeding heart, but not stupid by any means...

You are right . Wars are hell and any decent human should avoid them . Look how many millions of lives were destroyed by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan !. flowerforyou .

Quietman_2009's photo
Thu 09/17/09 07:40 PM
yes it was much better for the Iraqi's under Saddam

and for the Afghans under the Taliban

no photo
Thu 09/17/09 08:03 PM

yes it was much better for the Iraqi's under Saddam

and for the Afghans under the Taliban



Ah yes. I never thought we should have gone to either country frankly, at least not the way we did, but there is that nagging truth that the more inhumanity, and suffering in the world the more reasons for attacks and wars. I still don't know that we accomplished saving people from their own people when it comes to Islam. lately I am not so sure we can save ourselves from OUR own people with all the anxiety and anger out there.

AndrewAV's photo
Thu 09/17/09 08:26 PM


yes it was much better for the Iraqi's under Saddam

and for the Afghans under the Taliban



Ah yes. I never thought we should have gone to either country frankly, at least not the way we did, but there is that nagging truth that the more inhumanity, and suffering in the world the more reasons for attacks and wars. I still don't know that we accomplished saving people from their own people when it comes to Islam. lately I am not so sure we can save ourselves from OUR own people with all the anxiety and anger out there.


the big line here is "the way we did." under current policy, iraq was inevitable if we were to ever be taken seriously. however, we needed to adjust domestic policy in order to prepare for it.


as for the op. yes we can. should we? no. we simply cannot afford it. just because we can do something does not make it a good idea. we cannot afford the bill right now nor the manpower to do it successfully.

no photo
Thu 09/17/09 09:12 PM



yes it was much better for the Iraqi's under Saddam

and for the Afghans under the Taliban



Ah yes. I never thought we should have gone to either country frankly, at least not the way we did, but there is that nagging truth that the more inhumanity, and suffering in the world the more reasons for attacks and wars. I still don't know that we accomplished saving people from their own people when it comes to Islam. lately I am not so sure we can save ourselves from OUR own people with all the anxiety and anger out there.


the big line here is "the way we did." under current policy, iraq was inevitable if we were to ever be taken seriously. however, we needed to adjust domestic policy in order to prepare for it.


as for the op. yes we can. should we? no. we simply cannot afford it. just because we can do something does not make it a good idea. we cannot afford the bill right now nor the manpower to do it successfully.


If we can afford the wars were are in believe me Washington and the Military would find the money if they were so intent. However I don't see any way we could win unless we wiped out all countries that could retaliate at the very same time and damn quickly.

The radical fundamentalists around the world and in our own country might love to see it happen to usher in the end times, but it sure would cause even more war all over the world considering the associations Iran has economically and otherwise. I could be wrong but I shutter to think of it.

heavenlyboy34's photo
Thu 09/17/09 09:15 PM
wow, Tolstoy had it right. The psychology of the nation-state has really messed up people's morality and perspective! noway tears frustrated

heavenlyboy34's photo
Thu 09/17/09 09:17 PM




yes it was much better for the Iraqi's under Saddam

and for the Afghans under the Taliban



Ah yes. I never thought we should have gone to either country frankly, at least not the way we did, but there is that nagging truth that the more inhumanity, and suffering in the world the more reasons for attacks and wars. I still don't know that we accomplished saving people from their own people when it comes to Islam. lately I am not so sure we can save ourselves from OUR own people with all the anxiety and anger out there.


the big line here is "the way we did." under current policy, iraq was inevitable if we were to ever be taken seriously. however, we needed to adjust domestic policy in order to prepare for it.


as for the op. yes we can. should we? no. we simply cannot afford it. just because we can do something does not make it a good idea. we cannot afford the bill right now nor the manpower to do it successfully.


If we can afford the wars were are in believe me Washington and the Military would find the money if they were so intent. However I don't see any way we could win unless we wiped out all countries that could retaliate at the very same time and damn quickly.

The radical fundamentalists around the world and in our own country might love to see it happen to usher in the end times, but it sure would cause even more war all over the world considering the associations Iran has economically and otherwise. I could be wrong but I shutter to think of it.


You've hit on the problem-we CAN'T afford war. The FED prints the money and sends the debt to future generations or Congress borrows from foreigners. There literally is NO wealth in the private sector-just debt.:cry: frustrated

AdventureBegins's photo
Thu 09/17/09 09:26 PM
Why would anyone want to invade Iran?

What a silly thought.

such an invasion would trigger the use of the stupid weapons...

Duh.

If they have 'leaked' this much the truth is far worse.

They do try to keep us somewhat in the dark on these things.

AndrewAV's photo
Thu 09/17/09 09:29 PM





yes it was much better for the Iraqi's under Saddam

and for the Afghans under the Taliban



Ah yes. I never thought we should have gone to either country frankly, at least not the way we did, but there is that nagging truth that the more inhumanity, and suffering in the world the more reasons for attacks and wars. I still don't know that we accomplished saving people from their own people when it comes to Islam. lately I am not so sure we can save ourselves from OUR own people with all the anxiety and anger out there.


the big line here is "the way we did." under current policy, iraq was inevitable if we were to ever be taken seriously. however, we needed to adjust domestic policy in order to prepare for it.


as for the op. yes we can. should we? no. we simply cannot afford it. just because we can do something does not make it a good idea. we cannot afford the bill right now nor the manpower to do it successfully.


If we can afford the wars were are in believe me Washington and the Military would find the money if they were so intent. However I don't see any way we could win unless we wiped out all countries that could retaliate at the very same time and damn quickly.

The radical fundamentalists around the world and in our own country might love to see it happen to usher in the end times, but it sure would cause even more war all over the world considering the associations Iran has economically and otherwise. I could be wrong but I shutter to think of it.


You've hit on the problem-we CAN'T afford war. The FED prints the money and sends the debt to future generations or Congress borrows from foreigners. There literally is NO wealth in the private sector-just debt.:cry: frustrated


quickie correction: i believe you meant public sector. the private sector holds material items that hold value so separate from the worthless paper, they still have wealth in greater proportion to debt in many cases. the government, however, does not.

the truth is, affording something does not mean pay on credit. if someone says afford a house, what they really mean is affording the mortgage payment. same case here. we cannot afford a war as we've been more into the red every year for over a century. at this point, it's "the additional debt will not destroy us."

however, it is ever growing to the point where it will.

Previous 1 3