Will the US go to War with Iran?

[Mr Punch]

Both are under US controll, and what little shell of governments are there, are only there at our support.

Neither are under US control, and nor the control of their own govts. Similar to Pakistan.

Plus it would be stupid to go into Iran because at least it has a leader... if there's one lesson to be learned from Iraq it's that regime change needs something to change it to. Sometimes it is better the devil you know, than the chaos of a multi-headed single-objective-less terror base.

[Mr Punch]

We learned our own allies the French and the Germans were on Saddam's payroll.

LOL, any more than all the US contractors, arms dealers, 'logistics providers', 'IT companies' (like Blackwater always touted themselves) and construction companies? Bull.

By most rights, we had good reason to invade - but ultimately NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

You had better reasons to invade France... You should listen to us - your main allies - why do you think we've fought them in every century except the last one...?!

[Mr Punch]

Just think before you criticize though- if the US wasn't the US- you'd all be speaking German right now.

Not this old bollocks again? Yes, we know you did a good job in the last war - thanks to your president then who had the guts to stand up to all the rest of your isolationists and take you in there. This comment is a huge insult to ALL of our grandparents: US's included - not many thought like that then - there were REAL ideals and freedom at stake, not spurious reasons and big business.

Plus, I don't know if you remember Churchill, but he believed what he said about never giving up - against the better judgment of our people, though we'd have still stood by his words as our best general. On top of that the Nazis wouldn't have tried to invade the UK: it was never their plan - so all that we did we did for altruism and to minimize the major f-ups we created with our dying empire.

But- the US was the deciding factor then- as it is now. We pay for pretty much all your freedom- I for one would rather the US spend more time dealing internally than externally- but whenever we try to ignore the rest of you ungrateful b@stards- the world goes to heck. So big Daddy US has to bail you all out- and my taxes go up- and I have to hear how terrible we are... blah, blah blah, whine whine whine.

You've never paid for our freedom. Britain is still paying a huge debt incurred from WW2, and this war is also about your companies as a driving economic force above anything else. Your taxes just pay for when those govt-contracted companies f-up and have to go through court or pick up the pieces with the reg army from their gung-ho unregulated actions.

The Americans have continued the legacy left over from British Imperialism, every now and then they have to stomp on somebody who gets out of hand.

With exactly the same stupid tactics! Though, to be fair, the Iraqis, Palestinians and everybody else had been messing themselves and each other up for centuries before we tried to 'help them out' (that last part is tongue in cheek - of course we were in it for ourselves... but some genuinely thought we could bring some stability).

[Mas Judt]

churchill was also the ****er convinced the us to depose Iran's legally elected leader and install the Shah, just so BP could supply the empire with cheap oil, while treating those 'nasty brown people' as slaves. Some altruism...

[MightyB]

I think your tea and crumpets have polluted your brain- that or too much Royal information overload.

Churchil had balls- Nevil- the Brit leader for most of WWII was a supreme wussbag- almost worse than DeGaul. Churchil- a man named Donaldson "Intrepid" (Canadian/Brit), and Admiral Halsey (American) saved Britain even with Nevil in charge- with very strong support from a man named Roosevelt (American). We were funding and supporting the Brits from the start- I mean other than rocks and a little wheat grass- what's there to eat on that rock of an isle you call home? Where's your iron deposits? Where did the bullets and bombs come from? There's some old time life books called the Secret War and another book called A Man Called Intrepid that you should really read... Anyway...

It doesn't matter what you or the rest of the board pretend to think. When something bad happens in the world, what's the universal outcry? It's always "Why or When's America going to help?" It's "What's America going to do?" or "When's America going to get involved?" You don't hear that about Japan, Russia, China, the Netherlands, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany, South Africa, Britain, Ireland, Lichtenstein, Switzerland, Monico, Belgium, Croatia, Liberia, Chile, Brazil, Australia... I mean honestly- do I have to go on? NO, you don't hear it because your a bunch of self centered egotistical wussbags. You don't do crap to help anybody, you whine, you complain, and you're the first to beg- beg America to help. and you don't do a **** thing to help yourselves, you basically all suck and you know it. I don't hear- let's sneak into Hungary- the land of opportunity- or let's go to Portugal- you know the streets there are made of gold- lets go to... no those places suck- no freedom- nothing- our people give more- our people care more- our people are more tolerant- our people are more friendly- our people try to make a difference. You can all go to heck.

We'll do what we want in Iran- because we'll have to. With the exception of Israel, you all don't have the balls to do what needs to be done. Now go back to your tabloids and do nothing but complain about America - you're all really good at doing that.

Wusses- Darn I'm glad I'm an American.

[Mas Judt]

We tend to think of Britain as the place that produced Churchill (who was a great wartime leader and called the Soviet threat while Roosevelt had his head up his @ss. You guys had Churchill we had that tool Roosevelt) -but Churchill was also an imperialist who treated non-white cultures very poorly.

Nobody is perfect, but at least we always try to do better.

[Mr Punch]

churchill was also the ****er convinced the us to depose Iran's legally elected leader and install the Shah, just so BP could supply the empire with cheap oil, while treating those 'nasty brown people' as slaves. Some altruism...

Oh yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you there at all (except maybe I don't know how much convincing the US needed - we were pretty close in the top echelons after all and still are) ... But it wasn't black and white, and never is in these cases.

For example, of course it was natural for the British Empire to behave as it did for its own ends, but I'm no revisionist on the horrors of that empire. But also, there were a lot of people (in govt, religious institutions and in companies - though fewer of the latter) who genuinely believed that what they were doing was good.

We get a lot of blame for slavery, because the govt supported the East India company - whilst forgetting that we almost bankrupted our navy several times literally physically stopping other slavers after we banned it. And of course, this also had selfish reasons, but you can't deny there were many genuine altruistic ones too.

Pretty much ALL of the same things can be said about the US now. There's good and bad to all nation-building and empire-maintaining.

Which is why statements about the US (or any country) being the saviours of the world always make me laugh.

[Mr Punch]

I think your tea and crumpets have polluted your brain- that or too much Royal information overload.

There's not really any need for racist stereotypes is there? I don't drink tea (or much alcohol before you start not that either is a particularly laughable trait is it? ), I can't get crumpets (unfortunately), and I've always been anti-royal and never listened to 'royal information' as most of us don't. I don't live in the UK.

You've not actually addressed any of my points, and few of my points even contradict yours - you've just gone off into rant mode. I didn't accuse the US of holding back or not funding us, I just said we're still paying so don't take it as altruism.

We were funding and supporting the Brits from the start- I mean other than rocks and a little wheat grass- what's there to eat on that rock of an isle you call home?

Silly statement: we still provide over 60% of our food needs in incredibly fertile soil. In the war we had it tight, and had rationing and were pretty well bankrupt - but we were still going on. And yes, that's partly because of your help - I haven't denied that.

Where's your iron deposits?

Still have some now... of course the war was hard - it was for everyone, but if necessary we'd have gone the way the Japanese did and melted down our heirlooms to continue.

Where did the bullets and bombs come from?

Show me where I denied your help? I'm just saying that your statement is an insult to all our grandparents - but that's fine, cos you seem like a rude little **** anyway. You helped us a lot - as we helped and are helping you a lot, and as we always helped each other a lot in modern history. You've gotta get over this comic-book superhero mentality, 'Mighty' B.

It doesn't matter what you or the rest of the board pretend to think. When something bad happens in the world, what's the universal outcry? It's always "Why or When's America going to help?" It's "What's America going to do?" or "When's America going to get involved?"

LOL! WTF world do you live in (oh that's right - you've never spent any time out of your country among normal citizens of any other country have you?!)? More like "WTF are those retards gonna do now?!" - not saying I agree with that sentiment, but that's more like what I hear all the time - even here in Japan which is an even closer ally to you guys than my country (and usually very polite!)!

I mean honestly- do I have to go on?

No, please don't!

NO, you don't hear it because your a bunch of self centered egotistical wussbags.

LOL at the bolded, after your rant! Look in the mirror, ambassador!

You don't do crap to help anybody,

Now you can **** off b!tch, we're allies you ****, why can't YOU get that into YOUR THICK HEAD and stop whingeing at me and us?! We've commited proportionally more of our small army and financial resources to both Iraq and Afghanistan than any other country (at risk to other security interests) - partly becasue we're always allies, like it or not, partly because of business interests (like you and partly because some of us believe we can help the people there (like some of you).

LOL at you sniffing at our news sources, d!ckhead - YOU need to get real and get some news outside of CNN.

[Mr Punch]

How would we spread thinner? We are already there with a military build up. It's not like we would have to find more resources to do it, the resources are ALREADY in place.

You are already spread too thinly in Iraq. Haven't you read the news in the last three years? Most generals said that this would be the case and was the case right from before the invasion. You don't have the resources to sustain an attack.

And if you think Iran is 'your back yard' you need a geography lesson!

I voted 'no' but that is more a hope than a logical decision.

[David Jamieson]

Bush and Cheney would like to, but if Iraq is a quagmire, Iran would be a total disaster. I don't think the USA wants to go to war with Iran despite that the government might like to and has indeed made overtures to the same idea.

I think the USA would "break" under the pressure of another war front in the middle east.

the power struggle there is between Israel and everyone else.

What can we do but support Israel? Not much really, and that's what we are doing...which seems to have not done much to change the fortunes of many in t region.

[Sal Canzonieri]

No matter what the American people want or the rest of the world, if they are going to do it is because someone involved is going to make a lot of short term money.
"They" could not care less of the impossibility of winning, the huge loss of life, property, and money, and the huge drain on the economy it will bring.

Ulterior motives are the deciding factors, and we are powerless to make it change.

Surely, it will bring on major consequences, Iran is fully capable of retaliatory things of their own in the gulf area, with the advent of WWIII most likely.

Israel wants "them" to do it, and for that reason, they will, regardless of what it does to America in the long run, they don't give a s-h-i-t about people at all.

All the behind the scenes deals we are not privy to and ultimately we have no way to stop them without finally demanding their impeachment, but once it happens, then what? Too late to impeach these insane selfish criminals.

It's an impossible to win task (win what? who knows), but that is not going to stop them if they made their deals already.

That's the reality of it. America has been taken over by criminals since the 80s really, we just work here, by permission. As long as we are needed to generate more tax money, we are allowed to be here, soon as we are not needed even for that, martial law will be imposed over from pretext, and in the labor camps we die.

[Shaolin Wookie]

I say: Let's do it!!!!!


Ameeeerica! **** yeah!! Here we come again to save the muther****ing day-ah!!! Ameeerica! **** yeah!! Freedom is the only way!

Terrorists, your game is through, and now you're gonna answer to: America!!!!!!!

[David Jamieson]

Iran also isn't suffering from 12 years of UN sanctions like Iraq was before the unilateral attack and subsequent occupation.

they are quite strong from a military standpoint and have state of the art mess you up tech like many other powerful nations that do not pose a threat.

Iran would like to see islamic power in the middle east and an end to imperialism from the western world that started at the fall of the ottoman empire. Can you blame them realy? I mean what does it take but to put yourself in their shoes for a minute.

Imagine if you will a standing islamic army in maryland that is there to rebuild your country because it is run by infidels?

The middle east has had a standing foreign army in it for a long time.

This is the beef of fundamentalist Islam, all the splinter groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah etc etc.

the whole Israel and being unrecognized is totally secondary to all of this.

you simply can't put a standing army into someone else country and expect everything to be peachy with the people.

so long as there are foreign soldier boots on their sovereign lands, there will not be peace in the middle east. plain and simple and I think they've been saying that since the 60's when they first blew up those empty planes in libya or wherever it was when modern terrorism made it's debut.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Iran also isn't suffering from 12 years of UN sanctions like Iraq was before the unilateral attack and subsequent occupation.

they are quite strong from a military standpoint and have state of the art mess you up tech like many other powerful nations that do not pose a threat.

Iran would like to see islamic power in the middle east and an end to imperialism from the western world that started at the fall of the ottoman empire. Can you blame them realy? I mean what does it take but to put yourself in their shoes for a minute.

Imagine if you will a standing islamic army in maryland that is there to rebuild your country because it is run by infidels?

The middle east has had a standing foreign army in it for a long time.

This is the beef of fundamentalist Islam, all the splinter groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah etc etc.

the whole Israel and being unrecognized is totally secondary to all of this.

you simply can't put a standing army into someone else country and expect everything to be peachy with the people.

so long as there are foreign soldier boots on their sovereign lands, there will not be peace in the middle east. plain and simple and I think they've been saying that since the 60's when they first blew up those empty planes in libya or wherever it was when modern terrorism made it's debut.

Word.

But if we were going to attack Iran (oh, I hope we don't and November 2008 springs up before Bush ****s us up even more), we ought to wait until Ramadan. It'd be a clean sweep. Only, we'd be in a world of hurt afterwards, and we'd be worse than infidels.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I still say we should be focusing on Mexico. It won't be much longer before much of Mexico is a ghost town anyway. With most of thier population here, my guess is they would welcome a US invasion. We could probably do it by sending 3 cub scouts with BB guns.