FoxNews: US planning large scale invasion of Iran

[240 is Back]

I saw this on FOX News but cannot locate it on their website or CNN.  Anyone have info on this?

It seems odd we'd consider war BEFORE we even have gone through the UN process with them, especially when we are already strugling with 2 wars right now. 

Even those who are very pro-war would likely agree the UN process could buy us a little time to maybe finish up afghan and iraq, right?   And the anti-war would have a decent argument that we even let Sadaam get through the UN process first, and he had actually used his WMDs in real life. 

[headhuntersix]

We were not doing anything. I imagine we would notice here. If we start gettting large numbers of Fighter bombers/refueler/transports I'll start to worry. Not to mention the threat level here will skyrocket.

[240 is Back]

We were not doing anything. I imagine we would notice here. If we start gettting large numbers of Fighter bombers/refueler/transports I'll start to worry. Not to mention the threat level here will skyrocket.

I didn't mean the troops - the news was talking about the final stages of "on paper" planning.  Usually takes a few weeks to actually start cooking people. 

[Nordic Superman]

It seems odd we'd consider war BEFORE we even have gone through the UN process with them, especially when we are already strugling with 2 wars right now. 

All the EU does is "threaten" Iran with more deadlines:

"oohh... you're not playing nice? In that case we'll give you ANOTHER DEADLINE! Hahaha you hate deadlines bitches!"

Time to take action, the jigs up.

[The Showstoppa]

I didn't mean the troops - the news was talking about the final stages of "on paper" planning.  Usually takes a few weeks to actually start cooking people. 

Just so you know, we are constantly preparing things "on paper" just to be ready in case of whatever.  I doubt this is anything significant at this point, but good to know they might actually be planning ahead.

[240 is Back]

My point is that it's no accident when FOX News makes a war preparation announcement.  And anyone who thinks it's the US' duty to invade Iran, when we refuse to negotiate with them, is just hungry to kill.

The guy has openly asked for debates and discussions on solutions that work for all.  Our response?  "We won't talk to you.  But we will get war plans ready".

Bush ran for office on a strong isolationist platform, because that's what people wanted.  "We will not be policemen for the world".  Now it seems we're leading the charge to take out Iran to keep Israel happy.  We're barely keeping our head above water in 2 wars, and people want a 3rd? I don't get it.

[sarcasm]

if Bush is honestly considering this he should be impeached but congress would never agree to go to war with Iran anyway.

[240 is Back]

if Bush is honestly considering this he should be impeached but congress would never agree to go to war with Iran anyway.

They would if we were atacked by terrorists, likely right before the Nov elections.

[sarcasm]

They would if we were atacked by terrorists, likely right before the Nov elections.

hahahahaha, sometimes i can't believe how stupid 59 million people in this country are to have voted for this moron.

[240 is Back]

hahahahaha, sometimes i can't believe how stupid 59 million people in this country are to have voted for this moron.

i hope if this is the case... if a new bin laden tape comes out on election eve, or some fake attack happens... i hope those in the media and those in both parties step up and tell the cameras the truth.  People will believe anything they see on tv. 

[anvil]

hahahahaha, sometimes i can't believe how stupid 59 million people in this country are to have voted for this moron.

It was a matter of flipping a coin, look at the pompous jackass that was running against him

[JOHN MATRIX]

if we are going to do Iran, then we need to cut the vietnam-stlye bullshit we've been pulling since korea and get serious. success will require a draft and huge numbers, at least 400,000-500,000 men in an overwhelming ground invasion, not a 30,000man, 'pinpoint airstrike' campaign which does nothing but drags out the war and leads to a funnel of death but doesnt get anything accomplished.
its funny, we could take on germany and japan at the same time, but now we 'cant' handle iraq
either do things right or dont do them at all, enough fucking around.

that said, i dont see ANY reason to attack iran and i do not think the public would support it AT ALL even if there IS another attack.

[240 is Back]

if we are going to do Iran, then we need to cut the vietnam-stlye bullshit we've been pulling since korea and get serious. success will require a draft and huge numbers, at least 400,000-500,000 men in an overwhelming ground invasion, not a 30,000man, 'pinpoint airstrike' campaign which does nothing but drags out the war and leads to a funnel of death but doesnt get anything accomplished.
its funny, we could take on germany and japan at the same time, but now we 'cant' handle iraq
either do things right or dont do them at all, enough fucking around.

that said, i dont see ANY reason to attack iran and i do not think the public would support it AT ALL even if there IS another attack.

I think we're in complete agreement man. 

Also, many in the world believe the govt benefits greatly from instability in the regioon.  Once there is peace over there, we are shown the door.  Defense spending goes to nil.  Bushco stop earning and the PNAC document fails.  So expect another 5 years of war.

[Royalty]

I think we're in complete agreement man. 

  Once there is peace over there, we are shown the door. 

there has been non stop conflict in the middle east thousands of years before the declaration of independence was signed

[240 is Back]

there has been non stop conflict in the middle east thousands of years before the declaration of independence was signed

yep - but we don't belong over there.  If the iranian people don't like their situation, let them deal with it.  Why should one US soldier die for it?

[Deedee]

240 - a little off topic but you might find these interesting places to visit

Truthout - http://www.truthout.org/index.htm

Media Matters for America - http://mediamatters.org/

[JOHN MATRIX]

I think we're in complete agreement man. 

Also, many in the world believe the govt benefits greatly from instability in the regioon.  Once there is peace over there, we are shown the door.  Defense spending goes to nil.  Bushco stop earning and the PNAC document fails.  So expect another 5 years of war.

it sickens me to see such an utter waste of life due to the simple fact that the politicians are so concerned with appearance. we could have crushed the vietcong like a bug, but they were scared to fully commit, so what happened? we sent over just enough to keep them dying. they should have (not that they should have been sent there at all) been straightforward about it from the beginning; once you commit to something like that, you have to be ready to commit 100%. we could have send a huge force over there and cleaned them up within a year easy...but the politicians were to afraid of 'how it would appear' and other such bullshit so instead they sent just enough to maintain a steady stream of dying that lasted for 10 years without accomplishing ANYTHING.

its the same thing with iraq now. they are too afraid they will 'be viewed as an occupying force' (which is exactly what they are  ) and worried about 'what people will think' ect ect and now the same thing happens...dragged out, constant stream of deaths, NOTHING accomplished....

now they want to go after iran. iran is about twice as daunting as iraq, and i have no doubt that they will approach it in the same way, a small force which stays for years, loses thousands of men because of political indecisiveness, wishy-washy, little games, and accomplishes NOTHING.

[240 is Back]

I guess I jst can't understand why we're so darn eager to take on Iran.  They've talked tough and they're learning nuclear functions.  Well, there are neighbors a lot closer to them with a lot more motive to eliminate their nuclear capability.  I see NO reason why ISR can't take them out jsut as easily as we could.  And we have plenty of dictators around the world who badtalk us.  You don't see us begging for war with Venezuela, Cuba, or N Korea.  Of course, that's because they're not sitting on black gold...

[liberty]

I think the problem is that Irans uranium enrichment is taking place well underground.
Not even our conventional bunker buster bombs can penetrate deep enough to take out the area in question.Its going to be a big problem in the near future.

[240 is Back]

I think the problem is that Irans uranium enrichment is taking place well underground.
Not even our conventional bunker buster bombs can penetrate deep enough to take out the area in question.Its going to be a big problem in the near future.

Israel's men could do the digging then. 

We're barely keeping our head above water in the other conflicts, and we wanna take on a beast that bigger than the other 2 combined? Yikes.

Plus, the only info I hear on Iran comes from my govt, which has told some serious lies over the last 5 years.  At the very least, 911 didn't happen as they said.  At the very least, the man on the Osama videotape was not the same osama we've seen for the 10 years before.  If I was a parent, I'd like to see some solid proof before sending my sons to die over there.

So when the UN comes out with something tangible about iran's efforts, i'll listen.  But right now, we have the WH beating the war drums, Iran begging for a public discussion/debate that we won't accept.

Imagine if there was a guy holding your family hostage, and he wanted to talk, and you said "No, I'd just prefer a messy gunfight".  I mean, no need for diplomacy here?

[gmflex]

if Bush is honestly considering this he should be impeached but congress would never agree to go to war with Iran anyway.

I agree..
All bush did was put a defict on all of our taxes dollars..
Man i miss clinton

[240 is Back]

Man i miss clinton

Clinton was, as a person, garbage.  A liar, a phony, and a scumbag.  I think even most dems will agree that personally, the man had a lot of flaws.  IMO his worst moment was holding the bible facing outward after being caught getting a BJ by the nation.  Just to show off that he found God.

However, Bush I's legacy was giving Iraq permission to invade Kuwait, then starting a war with them.  The peace was formed by forming a nice relationship with the saudis, which grew from 92 to 2001, when Bush II took the oath and lo and behold... we start war in Iraq right back up.

Three times I've given my vote to a bush, so it's hard to face these facts. Clinton was a pussy and definitely sold us short on some things, but there were no large scale wars with 3000 deaths like we have here. 

We are going to be in a middle eastern war for AT LEAST through the end of 2008.  Then the new guy will have to take over.  Will it be Condi/Rudy/Jeb, meaning 4 more years of war? Or will it be McCain/Clinton/Biden to just maybe get us out?

[Nordic Superman]

Or will it be McCain/Clinton/Biden to just maybe get us out?

What about if (read: when) they don't "get us out"?

What will you say then Mr. 240 or Conspiracy?

[240 is Back]

What about if (read: when) they don't "get us out"?
What will you say then Mr. 240 or Conspiracy?

Hey, they might not.  But I KNOW that Jeb, Condi, and Rudy, all in bed with the 911 stink, will keep things as they are, without a doubt. 

I believe that most people in power try to do the right thing for the people they represent.  hell, for the next 100 years of US economic strength, a 10-year war might be better for us in the long run.  But that's the utilitarian standpoint.  And one whose effects are a certain texas family getting rich as hell, oil staying God, and more men dying.

[Hugo Chavez]

All the EU does is "threaten" Iran with more deadlines:

"oohh... you're not playing nice? In that case we'll give you ANOTHER DEADLINE! Hahaha you hate deadlines bitches!"

Time to take action, the jigs up.

Nordic,... Have you served or are you just another chickenhawk?