another reason we back Israel - June 7th 1981

[IK0N]

unofficially 20

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Give me a freaking break.

Cool. You're the first Canadian Jew I've met. I knew there were some. Heck ... lots came over before and after the war. Just never met one. Nice to meetcha.

[Thrawn]

I'll have you know that I have lots of friends that are jews, so I think I can speak for them when I say blah blah blah.

[FUNKED1]

Originally posted by babek-
Maybe it would be more effective to ask the foreign nations who help Iran in their nuclear program to stop the support.

Like Russia, China, Northkorea, France, Germany and so on.

Rogue nations are hard to control.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by FUNKED1
Rogue nations are hard to control.

Indeed, and oranges are orange.  

[FUNKED1]

SHUDDUP YOU SOFOMROMRONMORAN!!!
EXPWERPWOIRWTAERMTWEREWARMIMU NT

[babek-]

On the one side they are called "rogue nations" on the other hand they are called our civilized allies in the war against the terror.

So there is the real problem.

Russia for example has delivered to Sudan a whole bunch of new jet fighters - like MiG29 while in the same time the sudanese government is butchering their african minority.

So - problems could be not solved by military actions.
It didnt worked in Afghanistan or Iraq.
It wont work in Iran.

Only by raising pressure to those nations who deliver technology know-how and hardware to Iran you can stop the iranian nuclear project.

And this is the point where policy is coming in and makes a simple analysis very complicated.

[anonymous]

Originally posted by babek-
On the one side they are called "rogue nations" on the other hand they are called our civilized allies in the war against the terror.

So there is the real problem.

Russia for example has delivered to Sudan a whole bunch of new jet fighters - like MiG29 while in the same time the sudanese government is butchering their african minority.

So - problems could be not solved by military actions.
It didnt worked in Afghanistan or Iraq.
It wont work in Iran.

Only by raising pressure to those nations who deliver technology know-how and hardware to Iran you can stop the iranian nuclear project.

And this is the point where policy is coming in and makes a simple analysis very complicated.

didnt work? whats your definition of work? you make no sense.

[FUNKED1]

Yeah how did it not work?  
In Iraq we removed a brutal dictator and prevented him from ever achieving his goals of developing WMD and invading his neighbors.  Plus we ended the UN sanctions and prevented further decades of Saddam torturing and murdering his own people.
In Afghanistan we destroyed the home base of Al Qaeda, killed or captured most of their people, and removed a barbaric Muslim dictatorship.
How did these actions "not work" again?
I hope any action against Iran "doesn't work" also.  That would probably mean removal of yet another barbaric muslim junta and permanent destruction of their ability to wage nuclear terrorism against the west.

[Thrawn]

I hope any action against Iran "doesn't work" also.  That would probably mean removal of yet another barbaric muslim junta and permanent destruction of their ability to wage nuclear terrorism against the west. [/B]

Dear Mr tool.  Your administration lied to you for the reasons going to that war.  And it blew it's wad on it.  Even in a best case senario, regarding removing SH.  The wad = still blown.  At great cost the the American people, who did not have a choice whether or not to elect their head of state on such a platform.  

Iran and North Korea and just about every other two bit dictatorship are free to act as they see fit for at least (what?) the next ten years because the wad = blown?  Cripes, the US can not and could not afford to go to war with Iraq.  You had to go futher into debt to do so.  

And please don't bring up the Lybia ****.  Lybia hasn't been a threat to the west for ages now.  Your government has no ****ing money!  450 billion deficit.  You can ***** about the incredible about of spending they are doing and how it's bad and not a revenue stream issue, but they are (at the end of the day) still doing it!  No money, can't afford war, can't afford a next war.  Capiche?

[NUKE]

LOL, Bush lied... too funny.

I guess France, Russia, Britain, the UN all lied too.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by NUKE
LOL, Bush lied... too funny.

I guess France, Russia, Britain, the UN all lied too.

Nuke, do you think a mobile weapons factory is a WMD?  Is a facility for the creation of WMD an actual deployable weapon of mass destrution?

[GRUNHERZ]

So because of Iraq North Korea can do whatever it wants provided it does it in 10 years? Why? Because you think we couldnt fight them if they invaded the south. Right...

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
So because of Iraq North Korea can do whatever it wants provided it does it in 10 years? Why? Because you think we couldnt fight them if they invaded the south. Right...

Grun do you think a mobile weapons factory is a WMD? Is a facility for the creation of WMD an actual deployable weapon of mass destrution?

To answer your question.  Of course the US can fight North Korea, but the Zulus could also fight the British at Rorkes Drift.  Could the US fisably attain their goals?

Now please answer my preceding question.

[Thrawn]

Brave Sir Robin ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!