Is Iran Next??

Is Iran the next target on the War on "Terror" (Terror meaning The Middle East...)

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/040719/1/3lst4.html

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

This is fucked up. No one knows what the truth is anymore.

What about Saudi Arabia??? Oh wait...we wouldn't want to piss off Bush's investors.

 

It seems all Bush needs to do now is say "This country was involved in 9/11" and he'll have the whole country following him, a large percentage of the country still believes sadaam was involved in 9/11, SHEEP i tell you, they are all SHEEP!!!!

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

Theres no way US can invade and stay in Iran like it does in Iraq. Would be worse than Iraq. Internationally and domestically. No way. Not a single one. Kein. Zein.

 

It would take a large scale draft to hang onto Iraq and invade Iran. Give it a few years...

 

Plus, the US's respect would go to shit, an people would be blowin themselves up every 2.5 seconds.

 

Everything we've said to Iran has been pretty light, we couldn't start a war with Iran without the Ayatollah declaring a holy war. Bush won't do anything besides try to talk tough, and maybe some sanctions.

 

When I heard the news about a possible connection between Iran and al-Queda, I thought it was hilarious - but in a sick way. I'm sure Bush would love to wage war against Iran, but I don't that'll happen considering the world would be in a lot bigger mess.

 

"As to direct connections with September the 11th, we're digging into the facts to determine if there was one," Bush said as he met with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos in the Oval Office.

hmm I wonder if these'll be the same kinda facts like the WMD "facts" he had.

"His comments came after the acting director of the US Central Intelligence Agency said some of the hijackers who carried out the attacks passed through Iran but that Washington had no evidence that Tehran backed the strikes."

what the hell does this have to do with anything? The attackers were taught how to fly at Amerikan flight schools. Any connection there?

"Acting Director (John) McLaughlin said there was no direct connection between Iran and the attacks of September the 11th. We will continute to look and see if the Iranians were involved," said Bush.

watch as Bush himself finds "facts" that show Iran was involved. Just watch....


this is just great. :$

 

They have no reason to go into Iran. There is not much recorded active terrorist activities in there, no big economical reserves (other than gold, which is too well protected in Swiss banks), and the international community wouldn't approve it. They need to find a new dictator.

 

North Korea would be a good target.

 

Yes, but I truly do not believe that the Koreans are dumb enough to purposely provoke the US into a war with them... no matter how much they desperatly want to prove the US wrong, and let the international community see the US as "Evil".

 

I say bomb the cell phone industry. Shifty bastards.

 

Bush is not in a good situation here, saying that Iran may have had to do with 9/11, because...

1. If there is in fact a connection and Bush does not invade, then he looks like an idiot because he invaded a country (Iraq) that had nothing to do with 9/11, and then a country that WAS involved got away scott Free

2. If there is a connection and he DOES invade, because the american people will not stand for his bullshit anymore, he put us into two wars in the last 4 years, we don't want another.

ANd of course if there isnt a connection, we won't invade, but ohhh wait, Iraq had no connection, and he didn't have a problem going in there...I guess we will just have to wait and see

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

Thing is, their army could actually defend the country. It would be a real war, not just a march to Pyongyang with a few ambushes and attacks along the road. Plus, Kim Jong Il would never just let us dock our ships in the Sea of Japan (I think that's what it's called) while building up our foces right on their doorstep like Saddam did.

 

Iran has plenty of terrorist connections, they have oil, and they are definitely building a nuclear reactor and appear to be building nuclear weapons as well. Are we talking about the same Iran?

 

did i ever mention herein how i think that we invaded and took over iraq and afghanistan SPECIFICALLY because they're were the "easy" targets? that we went their first because the infrastructure of those countries was such a wreck that extablishing a us troop friendly base would be easier there, and more locationally strategic for attacking the real enemies of bush? as well as iraq being full of oil that we'll need to stage a war. and therefore terrorist groups would naturally continue to attack our installations, since they know that iraq and afghanistan are just staging points. that's my theory, anyway.

 

Iraq sold us oil before the war. In fact some American vehicles and airplanes probably entered Iraq using fuel refined from Iraqi oil. There has been no change in our access to oil.

 

yeah, but it's right there and we're defending it for the future when we attack other ME countries. this way they can't cut us off from future supplies.

you know, i'm just pulling this outta my ass. but it all sounds pretty good to me.