Possible war with Iran

• pmoney25

  

  http://m.yahoo.com/w/news_america/biden-nothing-off-table-iran-d-c-terror-111811820.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=us&.lang=en-us
  
  
  So here we go, looks like we are gearing up for another war. Hopefully this can be settled without war however there a few senators already out there saying its time to attack.
• I Wear Pants

  There are a few Senators that are fucking retarded then.
• majorspark

  

  Looks like the banks have given Obama the order to start up the war machine. Obviously they have gotten to a couple senators as well. They will eventually get to the rest.
• fish82

  

  Not happening.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  Honestly I doubt the whole story. If Iran wanted to assassinate someone, they could send someone from over there for free to strap a bomb to himself and do it with no paper trail. Why would they need to be sending traceable wire transfers to a Mexican druglord to do the job for them?
  
  You have former FBI and CIA guys doubting the credibility of the whole thing. You know this bloodthirsty government has been dying to go to war with Iran for years now. The economy on the verge of collapse and they need something to rally the sheep around before the crowds in the streets turn violent. Obama wants to get reelected, so he wants some of those Bush post 9/11 approval ratings, and they believe war stimulates the economy anyway. The neoconservatives and the democrats and the banksters are all banging the drums and now all they need is the media to build up public opinion. Once you see a poll where a majority of Americans support war with Iran the invasion will begin.
• tk421

  

  so much for Obama promising to end the wars. We might end up with war #4 under his watch.
• Footwedge

  Another war? Oh boy....this is just so exciting. Time to put up my flag again on my front porch.
• tk421

  

  Am I the only one who isn't buying the plot by Iran? Way to convenient, this has US designed written all over it.
• BoatShoes

  tk421;932681 wrote:Am I the only one who isn't buying the plot by Iran? Way to convenient, this has US designed written all over it.

  Clearly Obama and the Dems made it up to try and create justification for the required deficit spending needed to turn around the economy and of course to create a sense of unity behind him so that he can get re-elected and continue his quest to impress his neo-colonialist worldviews on the free world. It's obvious.
• dwccrew

  

  I'm doubting this entire "plot". I also doubt we go to war with Iran.
• jhay78

  

  Some have conspiracy-theorized that Holder hatched this make-believe plot to deflect attention away from the Fast and Furious program, for which he was recently subpoenaed. However, there are too many individuals from too many departments, and from too many levels of the justice department, involved to make this appear out of thin air.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  jhay78;932958 wrote:Some have conspiracy-theorized that Holder hatched this make-believe plot to deflect attention away from the Fast and Furious program, for which he was recently subpoenaed. However, there are too many individuals from too many departments, and from too many levels of the justice department, involved to make this appear out of thin air.

  I doubt they would make this up to cover up for Holder. They are making it up to drum up support to start another war.
• majorspark

  

  dwccrew;932801 wrote:I'm doubting this entire "plot". I also doubt we go to war with Iran.

  This. I have my doubts about the plot. Even if true it does not rise to the level of war. Nor would it gain the support of the public. Even if we would have thwarted the attack on Pearl Harbor we would have been hard pressed to get the public to support all out war. The only way the people would support a war with Iran would be following a massive blatant attack by them on this country. The bar is very high for this war weary nation. Unless of course the bankers order it.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Wag the dog. Obama is first and foremost a politician -- in fact, it's probably the only thing he's competent at being. Divert attention from all the messes here at home, the economy, the mounting debt, potential scandals, and get media and eyes focused on the bully down the block.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Was it directly from Iran, probably not. It was probably a rouge faction of al Quds given the political rift in the country (Supreme leader vs. President). The rouge probably got the idea from the American, who got the green light form either someone high up in the Iranian government, but not as high up as needed to put all the resources behind it. Nor did the officials have the proper training to carry out the attempt.
  
  It also doesn't surprise me, as Iran has been doing things like this in the region over the past few months-see the uprising in Bahrain, the apparent killing of another Saudi in Pakistan and keeping the Syrian government in power.
  
  Will we go to war over this, no. If anything, it will just beef up the Gulf states armed forces, and lead the Saudis to put more pressure on the Iranians. It will also hurt the Iranians in economic sanctions, and isolate them a little more. But, over time, things will settle down like they usually do.
  
  I do have a few colleagues in Government that are a little alarmed by the whole thing though.
  
  Still, it all does read like a movie, and thank heaven for our DEA agents in Mexico.
• password

  

  Writerbuckeye;933244 wrote:Wag the dog. Obama is first and foremost a politician -- in fact, it's probably the only thing he's competent at being. Divert attention from all the messes here at home, the economy, the mounting debt, potential scandals, and get media and eyes focused on the bully down the block.

  Finally someone understands Obama.
• BGFalcons82

  

  Well well well. Obama sees an opportunity to help out in Uganda with American blood - http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/small-us-force-to-deploy-to-uganda-aid-fight-against-lords-resistance-army/2011/10/14/gIQAyDOvkL_story.html
  
  I wonder....what are our national interests? Does Uganda have billions of oil reserves to protect? Do they have nukes? Are the Al Quedas hiding there? Is there another turncoat American hiding in the bush that needs assassinated?
  
  Here it is:

  “This is an advise and assist mission,” said Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council. “It’s an indication of our support for the ongoing regional effort to confront this threat.”

  Advise and assist. Wow. That's surely a national interest. He's putting volunteer Americans in harm's way because of purely political reasons.
  I should expect to see the anti-war crowd mobilizing and marching on Washington to protest this President. Right?
• believer

  

  BGFalcons82;934085 wrote:Advise and assist. Wow. That's surely a national interest. He's putting volunteer Americans in harm's way because of purely political reasons.
  I should expect to see the anti-war crowd mobilizing and marching on Washington to protest this President. Right?

  Only war-mongering Republican presidents use the military for political reasons. Peace-loving Democratic presidents use the military for humanitarian advise & assist missions. See the difference?
• jhay78

  

  BGFalcons82;934085 wrote:Well well well. Obama sees an opportunity to help out in Uganda with American blood - http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/small-us-force-to-deploy-to-uganda-aid-fight-against-lords-resistance-army/2011/10/14/gIQAyDOvkL_story.html
  
  I wonder....what are our national interests? Does Uganda have billions of oil reserves to protect? Do they have nukes? Are the Al Quedas hiding there? Is there another turncoat American hiding in the bush that needs assassinated?
  
  Here it is:
  
  
  Advise and assist. Wow. That's surely a national interest. He's putting volunteer Americans in harm's way because of purely political reasons.
  I should expect to see the anti-war crowd mobilizing and marching on Washington to protest this President. Right?

  Why he didn't involve Congress in that one I'll never know. It's not like he's ever tried to implement policy on his own without any checks from the other branches of government. :thumbdown:
• majorspark

  

  jhay78;934183 wrote:Why he didn't involve Congress in that one I'll never know. It's not like he's ever tried to implement policy on his own without any checks from the other branches of government. :thumbdown:

  He has the constitutional authority to deploy troops on his own. He is the Commander in Chief. That said the troops are being placed in a combat zone. The troops are equipt for combat. They are supposedly taking part in an "advisory" role in a combat mission. There is a significant risk that these troops could be killed, captured, or trapped behind enemy lines during this mission. Thus necessitating a greater involvement of our armed forced to address those situations.
  
  An official declaration of war is not needed for this type of mission. This is not a war. But the idea that the President would not directly involve congress when deployment of US troops is made in a combat zone is unconscionable. Even more unconscionable he is ordering them to participate in a combat mission. A letter dumped Friday afternoon on congress? That's it? It risks war you must involve congress. Congress should not let this stand. They need to show themselves the equal branch of power. Congressional democrats stand up. Republican Presidents will pull this shit too. Or you can wait until you are boxed in a corner because 10 US troops are dead, three are captured, and five are trapped behind enemy lines or missing in the jungle. Pretty hard to cut funding then.
• majorspark

  

  majorspark;932514 wrote:Looks like the banks have given Obama the order to start up the war machine. Obviously they have gotten to a couple senators as well. They will eventually get to the rest.

  This was my attempt at a little political satire by the way. Footwedge told me the banks order us to war. I found it ridiculous. So I made a few satirical posts on this thread.
• majorspark

  

  BGFalcons82;934085 wrote:I wonder....what are our national interests? Does Uganda have billions of oil reserves to protect? Do they have nukes? Are the Al Quedas hiding there? Is there another turncoat American hiding in the bush that needs assassinated?

  Well its not just Uganda. The directive of the president allows them to operate in South Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Central African Republic.
  
  The president was not real clear as to what our national interests are. However these Central African nations do have significant guaranteed oil reserves. Speculation is they have even more. Given stable infrastructures and an infusion of capital for exploration. New and vast oil reserves are expected to be uncovered. These 100 troops are just an initial investment. Ridding the earth of this loon Joseph Kony is a good thing. But it comes with strings attached for these nations. They will be in our debt.
• believer

  

  majorspark;935180 wrote:They will be in our debt.

  More accurately the American taxpayer will be in more debt and the nations we're assisting will quickly forget they are in our debt.
• iclfan2

  

  Our country makes no sense. Tons of insurgents are attacking soldiers in afghanistan, from Pakistan, yet we are worried about Iran? How does that make sense. If we plan on fighting some more Hajis, Pakistan is by far the more dangerous to our own people. Politics should have no room in protecting our men.
  
  Edit to add an article about the Oct. 7th attack on a US base near the border with Pakistan. Saw this on fbook as a high school friend is at the base in the article and participated in the defense of it. http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/a-closer-look-at-the-haqqani-anniversary-attack-on-american-afghan-outposts/?scp=1&sq=a+closer+look+at+the+haqqani+anniversary&st=cse
• believer

  

  iclfan2;935427 wrote:Politics should have no room in protecting our men.

  I don't think you'll get any argument from our Korean and Vietnam vets.