Iran Will Be Attacked by May 1, 2007

[Big Smoothy]

I suppose most of you are aware of this.

UN Article 51 is being bantered about and daily references to Iran as the 'bad guy,' are being stated to the press by top officials in the US government.


What do you folks think?


Over to you....

 

[BigDyl]

We must attack Iran, because they perpetrated 911.

 

[Big Smoothy]

We must attack Iran, because they perpetrated 911.

Yeah, it was Iran, and not Iraq, we just learned.

 

[BigDyl]

Yeah, it was Iran, and not Iraq, we just learned.

Yeah, you got a problem with it?

Either you're with us or against us.

 

[BoneCrusher]

Don't forget their WMD's, their threat to America, and the attacks on US solders in Iraq.

 

[Big Smoothy]

Yeah, you got a problem with it?

Either you're with us or against us.

It's not about "us," I can guarantee you that.

And it's not about being with us or against us. That phrase was used by W. Bush shortly after 9/11 and he now regrets it.

Do I have a problem with it? I haven't formed an opnion.

But, DoD and State is against this, as well as most top military officials who've gone on record.

January 27, 2007

Writing for Global Research, General Leonid Ivashov, vice president
of the Academy on Geopolitical Affairs and former Joint Chief of
Staff of the Russian Armies, forecasted an American attack on Iran by
the end of April. General Ivashov presented the neoconservative
reasoning that is the basis for the attack and concluded that the
world's protests cannot stop the US attack on Iran.

There will be shock and indignation, General Ivashov concludes, but
the US will get away with it. He writes:

"Within weeks from now, we will see the informational warfare machine
start working. The public opinion is already under pressure. There
will be a growing anti-Iranian militaristic hysteria, new information
leaks, disinformation, etc.... The probability of a US aggression
against Iran is extremely high. It does remain unclear, though,
whether the US Congress is going to authorize the war. It may take a
provocation to eliminate this obstacle (an attack on Israel or the US
targets including military bases). The scale of the provocation may
be comparable to the 9/11 attack in NY. Then the Congress will
certainly say 'Yes' to the US president."

Here is a link about Iranian capabilities of retaliating, which Iran has stated it will do. This could destabalize the whole region:

Link: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO505A.html

 

[goob]

Great, more American soldier deaths, not to mentioned countless thousands of innocent Iranian women and children.

 

[Pylon]

I can't see it. We don't have enough troops to fight the two fronts we are already on (Afgan and Iraq). Where are the rest of the soldiers coming from?

Please tell me we learned something from listening to the rockhead in DC the last time....

 

[min0 lee]

Not again.........we might as well go raid Korea.

 

[BigDyl]

After Iran comes Canada and France.

 

[goob]

I can't see it. We don't have enough troops to fight the two fronts we are already on (Afgan and Iraq). Where are the rest of the soldiers coming from?
Please tell me we learned something from listening to the rockhead in DC the last time....

That'll be the U.K....

 

[goob]

After Iran comes Canada and France.

And eventually an all out attack on Kiki island to remove the REAL shadow terrorists.......

 

[Andalite]

its sad...so many deaths.....war is bad.....

 

[DOMS]

Great, more American soldier deaths, not to mentioned countless thousands of innocent Iranian women and children.

Not if it's done the correct way. We should simply bomb the shit out of them and not send in a single soldier.

 

[min0 lee]

Not if it's done the correct way. We should simply bomb the shit out of them and not send in a single soldier.

Like the Gulf War, like I expected this last one to be like.

 

[Pylon]

That'll be the U.K....

You think? After what happened with Iraq, and Blair on the way out, I can't see that. But if it is the case, then that means someone else is doing the fighting, which is fine with me.

 

[Bobert11284]

I think with ever growing dissaproval ratings and the democrats moving back on the hill Iran will be left alone. We already screwed Iraq up enough, now that we have civil war, I think moving into Iran would only stretch out our resources. Some experts claim we will be their thru 2010.
And yes... Iraq is in a worse state now than when we went in! Am I unpatriotic for saying that?? I dunno, but I am right!

 

[Pylon]

That's not unpatriotic. Blind support of the war would be. (But if you are informed about the events, and still think it's a good idea, well that's fine too, I guess.)

 

[Bobert11284]

I agree

 

[Big Smoothy]

I think with ever growing dissaproval ratings and the democrats moving back on the hill Iran will be left alone. We already screwed Iraq up enough, now that we have civil war, I think moving into Iran would only stretch out our resources. Some experts claim we will be their thru 2010.
And yes... Iraq is in a worse state now than when we went in! Am I unpatriotic for saying that?? I dunno, but I am right!

First of all you are not UNpatriotic for saying what you said.

Your opinion on Iraq and/or Iran has NOTHING to do with patriotism. Never has; never will.

I read all of the responses.

The potential attack on Iran will NOT involve U.S. soldiers (ground troops). It will be a surgical strike.

The U.S. attack I am not necessarily concerned about.

The potential Iranian response is what I am concerned about.


Keep watching the news. Reading newspapers. And more importantly, following "alternative" yet quality news sources.

You will be hearing about how "bad" Iran is every day, for the next several weeks.

This is intentional.

 

[Witchblade]

Attacking Iran would be even worse for the US than the current war on Iraq.

- The US lack international support.
- It costs too much money.
- The US lack support from its people.
- It costs too many troops.

 

[DOMS]

Attacking Iran would be even worse for the US than the current war on Iraq.

- The US lack international support. - The US wouldn't care
- It costs too much money. - The bombs that will be used have already been made
- The US lack support from its people. - This needs clarification
- It costs too many troops. - It'll be an air strike

Good points though.

 

[goob]

Not if it's done the correct way. We should simply bomb the shit out of them and not send in a single soldier.

Still means innocent Iranian lives lost in the trail of destruction. Even with pin-point accuracy, there's always casualties.

 

[ABCs]

Still means innocent Iranian lives lost in the trail of destruction. Even with pin-point accuracy, there's always casualties.

It's better that we let the genocidal president of Iran get nukes and use them on Isreal. Yup, I vote for that one.

 

[goob]

It's better that we let the genocidal president of Iran get nukes and use them on Isreal. Yup, I vote for that one.

I know your being sarcastic, and I agree that iran has to be stopped before such an event happens, but the irony is that no Israel would almost solve the problems in that region.

I would just rather not see more lives lost due to the idiotic decisions of the Governments involved, although there is no chance of a peaceful resloution.

 

[ABCs]

I know your being sarcastic, and I agree that iran has to be stopped before such an event happens, but the irony is that no Israel would almost solve the problems in that region.

I would just rather not see more lives lost due to the idiotic decisions of the Governments involved, although there is no chance of a peaceful resloution.

And this sentence is what the dear filthy Libs fail to understand. Peace on earth, hug trees, smoke pot. If only that were the case.

 

[goob]

And this sentence is what the dear filthy Libs fail to understand. Peace on earth, hug trees, smoke pot. If only that were the case.

Indeed. Get the antagonistic parties into a room and force them to take exstacy until they've resolved their issues. There's never a solution to problems such as these when raw hatred (and religion) are intertwined. It's thae sad nature of the human race. Civilised? We've got a long road yet to tread, with no map and many branches.....

 

[DOMS]

It's better that we let the genocidal president of Iran get nukes and use them on Isreal. Yup, I vote for that one.

 

[ABCs]

Indeed. Get the antagonistic parties into a room and force them to take exstacy until they've resolved their issues. There's never a solution to problems such as these when raw hatred (and religion) are intertwined. It's thae sad nature of the human race. Civilised? We've got a long road yet to tread, with no map and many branches.....

I follow the road of self security. It's pretty much this simple... someone wants to kill you and/or your allies, you do something about it. These men don't sit and negotiate but the Libs still think they will. It's frigg'n amazing.

 

[BigDyl]

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.