Iran: A Bridge too Far?

[RDixon]

Originally Posted by Mazer

It's a far better option than invasion. Besides, it's about time the Navy had something to do.

Is there any better way to contain Iran?

yes, yes there is.
leave them alone.
if they do something; then wipe em off the earth.
what is the deal with all the "pre-emptive" fear anyway?
oh yeah, i forgot, that is what your cult leaders tell you to think...
base your actions on things that MAY happen and you get to decide what MAY happen.
thank God your kind is now out of power in DC.

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by RDixon

yes, yes there is.
leave them alone.
if they do something; then wipe em off the earth.
what is the deal with all the "pre-emptive" fear anyway?
oh yeah, i forgot, that is what your cult leaders tell you to think...
base your actions on things that MAY happen and you get to decide what MAY happen.
thank God your kind is now out of power in DC.

Other than my snarky comment about the Navy, I haven't suggested any preemptive action. You've gone the other way completely. Wipe them off the earth? There's no need for that either. I'm talking about containment, not obliteration. You think the neocons just want to invade? Well believe you me, they're looking for alternatives as well, not just because the Dems won a symbolic victory in Washington, but because it is impossible to invade Iran.

Anyway, the neocons are not my kind. I'm more of a libertarian if you remember.

[multi]

oh come now Mazer.. you have supported everything the neocons have done so far

[Sinner]

Originally Posted by RDixon

yes, yes there is.
leave them alone.
if they do something; then wipe em off the earth.
what is the deal with all the "pre-emptive" fear anyway?
oh yeah, i forgot, that is what your cult leaders tell you to think...
base your actions on things that MAY happen and you get to decide what MAY happen.
thank God your kind is now out of power in DC.

Appeasement and abandonment will not work, it never has and it never will. That is what the world did with Germany and Hitler in the 30’s. Winston Churchill was the only leader brave enough to stand up against Hitler before WWII began, but he was alone and the world let WWII happen. In December there was a election in Iran and the moderate conservative’s won big, which means the moderates are tired of their President provoking the West while ignoring the horrible conditions inside his own country. That's a huge slap in the face to him personally, but it proves that the people of Iran aren't buying into their leader's apocalyptic agenda. So really it is the radicals in the country who are pushing for a confrontation with the West, not the average citizens. The best thing that can happen is the Iranian people change their own destiny, which I personally think most want. The worst thing the USA and the world could do is give up on Iraq. The USA must let the Iraqi and Iranian people know they are behind them no matter the cost, to bring democracy to their countries. You cannot say, we will help you but if the tuff gets going you are on your own. If the Iranian people see that seed of democracy planted right next door why wouldn’t they rise up and fight for those same freedoms! It takes sacrifice, it took a civil war in the USA to give Blacks the same freedoms all others had. Big Change is not easy, it is often deadly, who knows how America would be if Lincoln quit his efforts when the tuff got going. I know some will say Iraq is not Americas fight, and I say you made it your fight and America will have to stick with it. If the USA leaves Iraq, Iran will become a bigger problem and War will happen, there is no doubt in my mind, as some one said, Israel will not allow Iran to become a bigger threat to them, and an attack by Israel is attack from the USA in the minds of the radicals in the Middle East.

September 26, 1938. That's just three days before Prime Minister Chamberlain signed the infamous Munich agreement with Hitler; an agreement that, to this day, stands as a shining example of how appeasement does not work.

With Chamberlain visiting Hitler in a futile effort to save the peace, it was Winston Churchill who stood up and appealed directly to the United States to get involved. Listen closely to his words on that day...

"If the Government and people of the USA have a word to speak for the salvation of the world, now is the time and now is the last time when words will be of any use...It will indeed be a tragedy if this last effort is not made in the only way in which it may be effective to save mankind from martyrdom."

Nine days later, after the Munich Agreement had been signed and the world cheered, Churchill spoke again...

"I will...begin by saying the most unpopular and most unwelcome thing...what everybody would like to ignore or forget but which must nevertheless be stated, namely, that we have sustained a total and unmitigated defeat..."

At the time he made that speech in the House of Commons, Churchill could count on one hand the number of friends he had in Parliament. Who will stand up today and willingly face that same kind of abandonment and alienation? I will; and I hope you will, but which of our leaders has the guts to say what no one wants to hear: There is no appeasing those who do not want to be appeased. Whether or not we want to go to war is irrelevant; the war is already on -- the only question is if we'll fight back now or wait for the next December 7th.

Will history repeat itself?

[multi]

so the US should never leave Iraq?
because you will not enforce democracy on them any other way

Churchill used to trace his Zionism back to the days of the Balfour Declaration, describing himself as "an old Zionist." His attitude toward Zionism remained as passionate and as explicit following his return to Ten Downing Street in 1951. Now, however, with the State of Israel firmly in place, the images he entertained became perhaps more vivid, more colorful, and as ever imbued with historical resonance.

Thus, in June 1954, Churchill stated to journalists in the United States, "I am a Zionist, let me make that clear. I was one of the original ones after the Balfour Declaration and I have worked faithfully for it." This was merely the introduction. He went on: "I think it is a most wonderful thing that this community should have established itself so effectively, turning the desert into fertile gardens and thriving townships, and should have afforded refuge to millions of their co-religionists who suffered so fearfully under Hitler, and not only under Hitler, persecution. I think it is a wonderful thing." In a conversation with Israel's Ambassador in London, Eliyahu Elath, Churchill referred to Israel's population as "the sons of the prophets dwelling in Zion."

this fucker was a complete asshole... get real

because of him and Rothschild that there is such a problem there in the first place

As Colonial Secretary, he virtually cut off Trans-Jordan from the Palestine Mandated territory (1921), and in the Churchill White Paper (1922) formulated what he believed would remain the basis of Anglo Jewish cooperation. His subsequent attacks against the measures proposed in the Passfield White Paper of 1939 were based on the premise that they constituted a breach of an agreed policy expressed in his own White Paper.

[Sinner]

Originally Posted by multi

so the US should never leave Iraq?
because you will not enforce democracy on them any other way

Well it depends on what you mean by the USA should never leave. Did the USA really ever leave Japan or West Germany, (Germany today), after WWII?? 60 years later the USA does have interest in these countries. Are things there awful because of it?

And I am not forcing Democracy on anybody.

[multi]

I didn't mean to infer that you were personaly..

but the west and it previous incarnation has been enforcing democracy on a large portion of the human race for the last few hundered years
usually leaving some civil war in it's wake

history does have a habit of repeating itself. To ignore the lessons of history is to be doomed to repeat it.

[RDixon]

it's not the 1930s and Iran is not even close in comparison to Germany.
that argument not only doesn't fly, it sinks too.

Iran has done nothing to me or the USA and I do not believe they have plans to attack me or my country.

If they do attack us then we WILL make their country uninhabatible for a few thousand years.
I know this, you know it, and most important, Iran knows it.

Cheney & Bush are frothing at the mouth wanting to invade Iran for Israel but there is a big fly in the wrench and monkey in the ointment.
After their Iraq justifications proved to be ALL LIES, we the american people will not allow another illegal war. period, end of story.

they can rattle their sabers all they want but Bush & Cheney are both paper ducks now. the best they can hope for is to stall the withdrawel of troops from the lost war in Iraq until Bush leaves office.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by RDixon

it's not the 1930s and Iran is not even close in comparison to Germany.
that argument not only doesn't fly, it sinks too.

Iran has done nothing to me or the USA and I do not believe they have plans to attack me or my country.

If they do attack us then we WILL make their country uninhabatible for a few thousand years.
I know this, you know it, and most important, Iran knows it.

Cheney & Bush are frothing at the mouth wanting to invade Iran for Israel but there is a big fly in the wrench and monkey in the ointment.
After their Iraq justifications proved to be ALL LIES, we the american people will not allow another illegal war. period, end of story.

they can rattle their sabers all they want but Bush & Cheney are both paper ducks now. the best they can hope for is to stall the withdrawel of troops from the lost war in Iraq until Bush leaves office.

hope you're right but the Prez seems hellbent for a constitutional confrontation.

[Sinner]

Originally Posted by RDixon

it's not the 1930s and Iran is not even close in comparison to Germany. that argument not only doesn't fly, it sinks too.

Iran has done nothing to me or the USA and I do not believe they have plans to attack me or my country.

If they do attack us then we WILL make their country uninhabatible for a few thousand years.

Well then we will have to disagree, because if you really look at the situations, Iran is in somewhat the same situation Germany was in, in 1938. One difference is Hitler tried to keep is plans a secret and the only country willing to say Germany was a threat to the World was England, or I should say Churchill and a few of his party members. In Iran it is no secret, Iran is building nuclear weapons and has said they attend to wipe Israel off the map, oh and you do know they call America the Great Satan right? Yeah right, you have nothing to worry about. Why would some Muslim Extremist who considers the USA the Great Satan what to hurt Americans. Sure the bleeding hearts will say he is bluffing, but really how do you know he is bluffing, how can you take that chance? President Tom says one thing to the world like at the UN and then goes home and tells his people the opposite and threatens the world. Take a look at Iran, look at the cartoons they show their kids or their so called “Investigated Reports”, Iran broadcast one explaining how Coca-cola, the big America company invests billions of dollars into Israel so they can invade Iran and kill everyone. Of course it is absolutely ridiculous, put that is just the tip of the iceberg of what Iran is selling their citizens. Maybe it will take another 9/11 to get people to realize the scope of Iran and the Middle East, I think the next attack, WHEN it happens will be much bigger.

Whether they want to be in that position or not?

I don't like the way you live so I bust into your house, break all your stuff, and put you in a position to live the way I think you should. And leave a few of my weight lifting buddies living with you to make sure you don't revert to your old erroneous ways.
According to your way of thinking, I am with in my rights to do that and expect you to bake cakes for me in thanks.

Who are you talking about? Who didn’t want democracy? The insurgents? The Terrorist? The Dictators? The citizens?

I think one of those four did want democracy, guess which one.

The rest of your post is non-sense.

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by multi

oh come now Mazer.. you have supported everything the neocons have done so far

I have up to this point, but I have to concede that there have not been enough troops sent to Iraq and this minimalist strategy seems to be taking a toll, not just on public opinion (which really doesn't matter during wartime) but on the ability of the Army to secure Baghdad. It's probably time for a more conventional approach.

I can still remember a time when almost every American supported the neocons and Bush's approval rating was better than 85%.

Originally Posted by multi

the west and it previous incarnation has been enforcing democracy on a large portion of the human race for the last few hundered years
usually leaving some civil war in it's wake

I think what you're suggesting is technically impossible. We've certainly tried to defend democracy from totalitarianism with varying effect. You see, the great thing about democracy is that the voters have the right to relinquish their rights if that's what they want to do. Not surprisingly no nation has ever done so voluntarily, so we try to keep outside forces from causing democracies to collapse. If that's what you're complaining about then I wonder how you can stand to live in a democratic nation like Australia. Are you suggesting that people do not deserve the responsibilities we offer to them by fighting off their enemies?

We can't really give democracy to people, all we can do is put them in the position to govern themselves. We hope they will do so wisely, but if they can't then it's because of their own intolerance and prejudice. You can blame the people who offered them the opportunity to be free all you want, but in the end a democratic nation has to collectively determine its own future, and the all the credit and the blame for their actions lies with them.

[RDixon]

Originally Posted by Mazer

We can't really give democracy to people, all we can do is put them in the position to govern themselves.

Whether they want to be in that position or not?

I don't like the way you live so I bust into your house, break all your stuff, and put you in a position to live the way I think you should. And leave a few of my weight lifting buddies living with you to make sure you don't revert to your old erroneous ways.
According to your way of thinking, I am with in my rights to do that and expect you to bake cakes for me in thanks.