Welcome to PatsFans.com

Pentagon officials consider sending message to defiant Tehran

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Holy Diver, Dec 19, 2006.

  1. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/121906T.shtml

    Here we go again. It was only a few months ago that we were sending multiple strike forces to the gulf ( http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=LIN20061009&articleId=3430 ). This ramped up Iran's military agenda, and increased tension in the gulf. I asked you all before what your thoughts were, and it seemed the majority of us were correct when we suggested that this was mere muscle flexing by our military.

    I ask:


    Is more muscle flexing crying wolf?

    Do we want Iran to fire the first shot so we can take out their nuclear (nucULAR, for you neocons) facilities?

    Are we building the force to protect Oil and natural gas lines from the Caspian sea and Afghanistan?

    but I guess the biggest question......

    Do you trust this administration with military actions anymore?
  2. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    is there any question? no, we don't trust them... they want to provoke and prod and jab until Iran throws the first real punch...

    there's absolutely no doubt about it... perhaps they'll sacrifice an aircraft carrier in the region to "earn US support" for war this time...

    at this rate, we'll all be paying dearly for the global consequences perpetrated by the war enthusiasts of the PNAC...
  3. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    37,940
    Likes Received:
    276
    Ratings:
    +549 / 4 / -12

    #87 Jersey

    Whatever Bush chooses to do with Iran I'm sure will play into what Iran wanted Bush to do ... just like Iraq.
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,971
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +175 / 5 / -22

    Here is what I do not understand, Iran is lead by a tyrant, do you think that these ships & manuevers will be broadcast over the airwaves for the Common Iranian to see?? Most folks in Iran do not get the scale or magnitude of what is out there and will not understand our great statement.. If you think a war with Iraq was expensive and had a high cost, you ain't seen nothing yet.

    Iraq may be the Waterloo of the US, but going to Iran will definitely be it.
  5. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    If you trust them at this point, you might be suffering from abused spouse syndrome or something like it, where the wife gets beaten, the husband says he's sorry, and the wife goes back to him a fourth time. How anyone can trust these traitors is beyond me.

    We are absolutely involved in the ME and SW Asia for the control of oil by our oil corporations. The reserves of the Caspian Basin have not even been accurately identified yet, and they are already the 2nd largest find in the world. Access is a problem and the geopolitical games we're seeing now are prelude to a greater conflict in the future because of our artificial addiction to fossil fuels. Millions will die so we can continue to manufacture disposable computers, jet to Cabo for Valentines Day and drive our SUV's to work for 180 minutes each day. It's what we've been sold as our "way of life".

    We are trying to draw Iran into a fight or worse. Iran will be the last straw for the Muslim countries, as the finally wake up and realize that their civilization, as it were, is about to be eliminated. India, China, and Russia will be engaged in as yet unknown alliances. These animals in the oilcorps/government don't care about bringing on Armageddon. They're already going to hell before it happens.
  6. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +295 / 4 / -2

    Show me an administration you've ever trusted?

    Incase most of you haven't noticed, but the most recent political topic regarding the Iraq war is a troop increase. For political purposes, they are describing it as a "surge". Anyhow, any of you paying attention know that I have been saying a troop "surge" was a distinct possibility for months now, and is exactly what I would do were I in charge. Well, it's looking like it might happen. The build up in the Gulf is in relation to this, and is all part of the politics needed to bring merrit to the coalitions negotiating strength. This is why all the dots connect:

    The ISG report says to talk to Iran and Syria. Total joke. Why would they help us? They wouldn't, unless they felt a need to, or benefited in some way. Iran is puppeting the Shi'ite militia's, namely Al-Sadr and the Mehdi Army. So if you are the US, how do you bring leverage to your negotiating position? Well, you do so by ramping up troop totals, ramping up your naval presence, have the CIA facilitate Amenijhad prostests, and put forth the whispers of an assault on pro-Iranian forces in Iraq, Al-Sadr. Should Iran not care, which I don't think they will, you move in and smash Al-Sadr and his militia. Doing so would weaken Iranian influence, strengthen the Iraqi government, and would help improve the security situation in and around Baghdad.

    My 2 cents anyhow.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>