|
||||||
 |
Recent Posts | Search by username | |
Contact Us | |
Login | |
Register |
 |
 |
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
24HourForums.com > The Top 10 Supported Forums > 24's Political Matters > Will we be at war with Iran before Obama/McCain is sworn in? |
| Moderated by: 24HourNut |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
sirlamre Pioneer100© Member  Official Forum Heretic
|
  |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/29/us.iran/index.html
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Aethelred Pioneer100© Member  Ye Olde Dead King
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that someone needs to deal with Iran before it is too late. However, I am sad to say that I believe President Bush no longer has the will/political capital to do what is right. I also do not see either Obama or McCain as having the will to step up and deal with this problem. Israel may do it (and if they do I hope that the US will at least voice support) but Olmert is also wounded politically and Israel's last war didn't go so well.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
librtyhead Original500© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I believe Israel will be the first to do something with the U.S. backing them. They do not have enough resources to keep up a sustained war without help. Hopefully Iran's own mistreatment of it's people will bring subversion from within. But I see no attack by the U.S. we already look like bullies now.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
wallstreetman Original500© Member Patriot
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Republicans are really getting desperate, they feel a new and bigger war will help them in November!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think Israel is going to bomb Iran. All indications seem to be that Bush doesn't have the support to pull it off at this point. That could change if the Iranians do something remarkably stupid like bombing one of our ships, though. At that point, I think all bets would be off. I think the most likely scenario is Israel attacks Iran, and we get drawn into the conflict. Whether that happens before the end of Bush's presidency is an open question. In the end, I don't think we'll avoid war with Iran with Obama in the White House. He might be able to convince the voting public that world crises can be solved by standing in a circle and holding hands, singing "Kumbaya", but eventually he's got to face reality.
 "It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Israel may do it" I think Israel is going to bomb Iranian nuclear sites and then the ball will be in the Iranian court. The question then becomes will Iran risk a direct all out war with Israel or use their surrogates (Hezbollah and the like) to wage a proxy war as retribution for the attacks?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
sirlamre Pioneer100© Member Official Forum Heretic
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't think we have the military resources to do this now- Not groundpounder take-and-hold-land anyway. Toss a few cruise missles, yes... Enter into something protracted, no. And the odds are pretty high that anything we DO end up will be protracted in one sense or another, or will lead to something else that is protracted.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
sirlamre Pioneer100© Member Official Forum Heretic
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bush continues his attacks into Iran.. In the new cold war between America and Iran, the U.S. appears to be running some limited covert operations across the Iranian border. But according to knowledgeable sources, this effort shares the defect of broader U.S. policy toward Iran -- it is tentative and ill coordinated, and undermines diplomacy without bringing serious pressure on the regime. "Tell us what's your policy with Iran," says one Arab official familiar with the covert program. "Are you going to talk to them, or go to war with them?" This official describes U.S. operations this way: "There are attempts to cause mischief inside Iran and go after the Quds Force. Some things are being done, but not with the seriousness that's needed." The Iranians, by contrast, seem adept at interweaving aggressive operations and diplomacy. The latest example came Tuesday, when Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told journalists here that Iran was examining a new package of incentives from the United States and other permanent members of the U.N. Security Council that could lead to negotiations to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue. He didn't provide specifics, but the accommodating tone is likely to defuse recent tensions a bit, even as the Iranians and their clients continue to push for advantage in Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza. The U.S. covert-action program was revealed this week in The New Yorker by Seymour Hersh. He wrote that late last year, Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress had agreed to a "finding" that authorized up to $400 million for secret operations against Iran, including support of ethnic minorities and opposition groups inside the country. The danger of these cross-border activities was explained to me by one intelligence source. He said the Iranians had recently captured several dissident Iranian operatives who had been recruited by U.S. military officers inside Iraq and then sent into Iran. The Iranians, whose intelligence network inside Iraq is pervasive, surveilled the meeting and then followed the agents across the border and seized them. The U.S. program appears to focus on political action and collection of intelligence, rather than lethal operations. Lethal actions inside Iran may be conducted independently by some groups. There are reports, for example, that Kurdish guerillas have retaliated for Iranian shelling of Kurdistan. The covert program illustrates the larger dilemma facing the Bush administration and its successor -- what to do about an aggressive and increasingly confident Iran? The Iranians make little effort to hide their own covert-action campaigns -- including extensive financial and military support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. The Iranians have used Syria effectively as a platform for these intelligence operations, from political action to paramilitary operations to clandestine terrorism. Israel, which has had limited success in trying to combat these Iranian-backed groups militarily, has recently opted for diplomacy: It agreed last month to a truce with Hamas and a prisoner swap with Hezbollah. Israel is also conducting peace negotiations with Syria, through Turkish intermediaries. Saudi Arabia has taken a tougher stand to oppose what it sees as Iranian meddling in the region. There are reports out of Syria, for example, that the Saudi military attache in Damascus was expelled a few months ago after the Syrians uncovered what they believed was a plot to pay $50 million in subsidies to members of a prominent Syrian tribe. One source said that the money was simply to support the kingdom's longtime tribal friends, rather than organize political opposition to President Bashar al-Assad. But the Saudis have made no secret of their desire for regime change in Syria. The proponents of a tougher U.S. strategy argue that Iran should be confronted everywhere it operates, much as the Reagan administration decided to challenge the Soviet Union, from Afghanistan to Nicaragua. This hard-line faction, usually identified with Vice President Dick Cheney, would like to see a systematic effort to disrupt the Iranian economy, foment internal political opposition and, in general, raise the cost to Iran of its foreign activities. But so far, that argument for a rollback of Iranian power hasn't prevailed inside a divided administration. The Iran question will confront the next administration from Day One, and the basic options probably won't look very different from the current set: Talk or fight, or do something in between?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24HourForums.com > The Top 10 Supported Forums > 24's Political Matters > Will we be at war with Iran before Obama/McCain is sworn in? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Site Supporters | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Posts Of The Day | Mock Forums | WowClassic | |
Themes and most mods done in collaboration with: WowClassic - powerful forum software with the best support service.
We are partners with Forum Owner Services
Powered by - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez
We are partners with Forum Owner Services
Powered by - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez