Congress gave Bush authority to bomb Iran today?

[headhuntersix]

Yeah, I think their religious stuff is awful.  But when it comes to survival, the Iranian leaders are no different than the Russians, Pakistan/India or Iraq under Hussein:  Nobody wants to be obliterated by a nuclear attack.  These governmental leaders are rational to grasp that concept.

I mean if India and Pakistan can live together w/ nuclear weapons, there must be some validity to the idea that self-preservation trumps religious/political craziness.  We have to remember to keep our opponent's rhetoric to its own arena.

Iran..as a country wants to survive...but they aren't above allowing somebody nuclear materials..planning and support to conduct attacks on their neighbors or the US. Thats why they're dangerous..thats why Bin Laden is dangerous. We've entered a new type of war..or actually revisting the default state or war for thousands of years. Religious war.
Iran is a major supporter of terrorism...armed with nuclear weapons..or materials..they become that much more a problem...they need to go. The "how" is up for debate. I'm not thrilled with bombing because its going to cause alot of problems for us in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[CQ]

Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Iran....I wonder how long it will be till my little island gets declared some terrorist cell and we get bombed to oblivion.

If I ever stop posting permanently - you all know why

[Decker]

Iran..as a country wants to survive...but they aren't above allowing somebody nuclear materials..planning and support to conduct attacks on their neighbors or the US. Thats why they're dangerous..thats why Bin Laden is dangerous. We've entered a new type of war..or actually revisting the default state or war for thousands of years. Religious war.
Iran is a major supporter of terrorism...armed with nuclear weapons..or materials..they become that much more a problem...they need to go. The "how" is up for debate. I'm not thrilled with bombing because its going to cause alot of problems for us in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I don't buy that.  I want to see the proof that Iran's support of terrorism is any different than any other country in the middle east. 

I also think that it is incredibly arrogant for the US to lope into a foreign country, start kicking ass and taking over sovereignties, and then criticize neighboring countries displaying any inclination at self-preservation from similar illegal attacks.

I disagree with your contention that Iran has any inclination to attack the US.  That runs counter to my theory that they value their own survival. 

I think even in this situation, MAD is still functional.

Bombing Iran will further destabalize the middle east.  Muslims worldwide will hate the US.  Al Qaeda's ranks will swell.  And a growing hatred of america worldwide will put us in a jeopardy we have not yet considered.  Our enemies will take more and more desperate measures b/c they have nothing to lose.  There's no carrot at the end of the Bush foreign policy stick.

You know what comes of desperation?  Suicide attackers.  They have nothing to live for other than revenge.

[headhuntersix]

I'm sure ur fine..besides we'd never bomb a warm...lush tropical paradise, where once we invaded, we could enjoy ourselves. I'm sure its very nice there, the women are pretty and accessible...no bizarre religious practices, plenty of booze right? Until u become a desert, full of bugs and practice a shitbag religion where hot chicks and beer is outlawed..u have nothing to worry about. We only invade shitholes

[headhuntersix]

I don't buy that.  I want to see the proof that Iran's support of terrorism is any different than any other country in the middle east. 

I also think that it is incredibly arrogant for the US to lope into a foreign country, start kicking ass and taking over sovereignties, and then criticize neighboring countries displaying any inclination at self-preservation from similar illegal attacks.

I disagree with your contention that Iran has any inclination to attack the US.  That runs counter to my theory that they value their own survival. 

I think even in this situation, MAD is still functional.

Bombing Iran will further destabalize the middle east.  Muslims worldwide will hate the US.  Al Qaeda's ranks will swell.  And a growing hatred of america worldwide will put us in a jeopardy we have not yet considered.  Our enemies will take more and more desperate measures b/c they have nothing to lose.  There's no carrot at the end of the Bush foreign policy stick.

You know what comes of desperation?  Suicide attackers.  They have nothing to live for other than revenge.

These people have been conducting suicide attacks long before we invaded Iraq....many of these people have always hated the West. Why after 8 years of Clinton BS and appeasement....did we get 911. Iran wants to survive..but if it can support terrorism as it has since 1979...without become directly involved it will. But now its nukes instead of hijacked planes. As far as other countries..true. But some aren't State sponsers...folks come from Jordan, UAE, etc etc but aren't trained and funded by the government. Iran and Syria give direct and indirect support to these groups. Saudi Arabia? Depending on who u talk to...they play both sides.

[Decker]

These people have been conducting suicide attacks long before we invaded Iraq....many of these people have always hated the West. Why after 8 years of Clinton BS and appeasement....did we get 911. Iran wants to survive..but if it can support terrorism as it has since 1979...without become directly involved it will. But now its nukes instead of hijacked planes. As far as other countries..true. But some aren't State sponsers...folks come from Jordan, UAE, etc etc but aren't trained and funded by the government. Iran and Syria give direct and indirect support to these groups. Saudi Arabia? Depending on who u talk to...they play both sides.

Yes, the palestinians, when cornered, with little alternative, by Israel, resorted to suicide bombings. 

The US helped prop up the ruthless dictator Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi--the Shah of Iran.  So they have a reason to hate us right there:  we fucked with them first making them suffer decades of torment at the hands of a cruel leader. 

How would you like it if Canada overthrew Ronald Reagan and installed Jimmy Carter as lifelong president?

Terrorism is a problem that you cannot bomb away.  It is really that simple.

Battling terrorism is complex but possible.

Bombing Iran will solve no problems that the US claims to exist but it will increase our problems tenfold. 

[rockyfortune]

if cananda overthrew bush and installed wayne gretzky as president forever i'd be ok with it...no, really, i would...

[headhuntersix]

For the next 25 years, the Shah of Iran stood fast as the United States' closest ally in the Third World, to a degree that would have shocked the independent and neutral Mossadegh. The Shah literally placed his country at the disposal of US military and intelligence organizations to be used as a cold-war weapon, a window and a door to the Soviet Union-electronic listening and radar posts were set up near the Soviet border; American aircraft used Iran as a base to launch surveillance flights over the Soviet Union; espionage agents were infiltrated across the border; various American military installations dotted the Iranian landscape. Iran was viewed as a vital link in the chain being forged by the United States to "contain" the Soviet Union. In a telegram to the British Acting Foreign Secretary in September, Dulles said: "I think if we can in coordination move quickly and effectively in Iran we would close the most dangerous gap in the line from Europe to South Asia.'' In February 1955, Iran became a member of the Baghdad Pact, set up by the United States, in Dulles's words, "to create a solid band of resistance against the Soviet Union....

Its not about fair its about whats in our strategic best interest. Had we had better or more farsighted individuals in government, not worried about the Soviets or Vietnam, we could have easily pushed for reforms withing Iran and avoided the Islamic Revolution and Jimmy Carters subsequent policy blunders. But we didn't and while u can blame the US, the point is we need to deal with Iran now and figure out how to neutralize it.

[Decker]

For the next 25 years, the Shah of Iran stood fast as the United States' closest ally in the Third World, to a degree that would have shocked the independent and neutral Mossadegh. The Shah literally placed his country at the disposal of US military and intelligence organizations to be used as a cold-war weapon, a window and a door to the Soviet Union-electronic listening and radar posts were set up near the Soviet border; American aircraft used Iran as a base to launch surveillance flights over the Soviet Union; espionage agents were infiltrated across the border; various American military installations dotted the Iranian landscape. Iran was viewed as a vital link in the chain being forged by the United States to "contain" the Soviet Union. In a telegram to the British Acting Foreign Secretary in September, Dulles said: "I think if we can in coordination move quickly and effectively in Iran we would close the most dangerous gap in the line from Europe to South Asia.'' In February 1955, Iran became a member of the Baghdad Pact, set up by the United States, in Dulles's words, "to create a solid band of resistance against the Soviet Union....

Its not about fair its about whats in our strategic best interest. Had we had better or more farsighted individuals in government, not worried about the Soviets or Vietnam, we could have easily pushed for reforms withing Iran and avoided the Islamic Revolution and Jimmy Carters subsequent policy blunders. But we didn't and while u can blame the US, the point is we need to deal with Iran now and figure out how to neutralize it.

I'm not blaming the US.  You questioned how the Iranians could hate the West and I pointed out one fact that we helped undermine and overthrow their country's own government.

It's good to see the discredited "Domino Theory" was governing our foreign policy planning back in the day.

[headhuntersix]

Actually the Brits put us up to it because they wanted their nationalized oil company back....It benefited us nicely for awhile. U can point fingers all over the place...but since I'm an American I'll point em at Europe. Iran/Iraq/Vietnam...all messes left over from Colonial Europe. If we over threw the Iranina government once we can do it again.

[Dos Equis]

Do you remember that the policy of the Russians a few years ago was the destruction of capitalist America?  How did Reagan handle that?

He called them evil, built up the military and engaged our opponents at the discussion table.

According to most republican supporters, Reagan ended the cold war.

Did he have to bomb the Russians into oblivion to achieve victory?  No.

Here we have a historical proof that military might and diplomatic efforts achieve the desired result.

Why bomb when we don't have to?

Russia and the cold war isn't a model.  We essentially bankrupted the former Soviet Union in the arms race.  We cannot use that tactic with Iran. 

I'm not saying we have to bomb.

[headhuntersix]

No...but I think we can do something to destabilize the government. Is the disinchantment with the current regime big enough for an overthrough? What happens in Iran after we bomb? I can tell u what happens outside of Iran.

[Decker]

Actually the Brits put us up to it because they wanted their nationalized oil company back....It benefited us nicely for awhile. U can point fingers all over the place...but since I'm an American I'll point em at Europe. Iran/Iraq/Vietnam...all messes left over from Colonial Europe. If we over threw the Iranina government once we can do it again.

I know it was a joint effort w/ the Brits.  I was just commenting on Dulles's quote.

[Decker]

Russia and the cold war isn't a model.  We essentially bankrupted the former Soviet Union in the arms race.  We cannot use that tactic with Iran. 

I'm not saying we have to bomb.

I am pointing out that in the face of rhetorical flourishes on both sides "death to the evil enemy", negotiation and the threat of nuclear annihilation carried the day.

That is apt for Iran too.

[Decker]

Let's face it too, we are a nation of limited resources.  Now we are to embark on a third war?

Where's the cash/troops etc going to come from...the Chinese (Iranian ally) who already own much of our national debt?

[militarymuscle69]

That is a fruitless task.  We don't even know where all the nuclear facilities are located--above or below ground.

If I'm not mistaken, we have survived the Soviet nuclear threat for over 60 years with those bits of paper and meetings.

Why?

B/c of MAD.  Mutual Assured Destruction.

That is the club and the treaties, conferences and such keep us from using that club.

Ummm actually we controlled the Russia threat by circling B-52s over their head for 20+ years around the clock. it had nothing to do with paper. While they would have had to launch rockets at us during the cold war, we had Buffs in the air that would have dropped bombs so fast they never would have see their rocket hit ground.

[Decker]

Ummm actually we controlled the Russia threat by circling B-52s over their head for 20+ years around the clock. it had nothing to do with paper. While they would have had to launch rockets at us during the cold war, we had Buffs in the air that would have dropped bombs so fast they never would have see their rocket hit ground.

Glad to see you read the part of my post re MAD.

[militarymuscle69]

Glad to see you read the part of my post re MAD.

believe me, MAD is ground into our heads in the Air Force...that, and not treaties...keeps countries from Russia from trying to do shit. if we took that option off the table then guess what...so from time to time it requires us to show our strength for people (Iran) who have forgotten

[Decker]

believe me, MAD is ground into our heads in the Air Force...that, and not treaties...keeps countries from Russia from trying to do shit. if we took that option off the table then guess what...so from time to time it requires us to show our strength for people (Iran) who have forgotten

Reagan's diplomacy with the Russians, along with MAD, helped with the Soviet Union's downfall.  The treaties reference is part of the diplomacy vehicle that we were talking about.

Show our strength to Iran?  That's ridiculous.  Why not just "announce our presence with authority!"  They know full well that the US can obliterate the country.

That's not forgotten.  And after the shortsighted Bush/neocon use of brute force (with contempt for any intelligent solution), the US's troubles will only be beginning.  We'll call that an opinion.

[OzmO]

Bombing Iran, might even be a worse decision than invading Iraq.

[Dos Equis]

I am pointing out that in the face of rhetorical flourishes on both sides "death to the evil enemy", negotiation and the threat of nuclear annihilation carried the day.

That is apt for Iran too.

I'm all for negotiation and threats, but what if those don't work? 

[240 is Back]

I'm all for negotiation and threats, but what if those don't work? 

Sanctions.


We starve them like we did Iraq.  We destroyed Iraq's economy from 93 to 2003 thru economic sanctions.  Iran's economy is in the dumps already despite all that oil.  Squeeze them.  Their population will suffer and they'll elect moderates.  It can happen in Iran.  Saddam was a dictator so it couldn't happen there. 

[OzmO]

I'm all for negotiation and threats, but what if those don't work? 

Let's find out first.

[Decker]

I'm all for negotiation and threats, but what if those don't work? 

It depends on what you mean by "if those don't work?"

"Don't work" is in reference to what?  An attack on the US?

[Dos Equis]

It depends on what you mean by "if those don't work?"

"Don't work" is in reference to what?  An attack on the US?

We know a few things:  (1) Iran has been supplying insurgents who are attacking and killing Americans, (2) they have called for the destruction of Israel (one of our allies) and the U.S. for decades, and (3) they are attempting to obtain WMDs.  So, they have effectively already attacked the U.S. and they are a threat to the U.S. 

I think whatever action we take (diplomacy, military, etc.) would have to include Iran discontinuing whatever support they are providing to insurgents and dismantling their nuclear program.