Originally posted by RE: BlaxicanExactly, that's what dude's referring to.
Didn't we already have troops in Afghanistan? Obama's just upping the ante. I think what dude's referring to is that as long as Obama's president, we won't be sending nukes or troops into Iran.
Obama will never invade a country unless they themselves have declared/launched all-out war. As it is, there's no country that could compete with the U.S. conventionally and also have something to gain by war with it. Should Iran do something, it'll be driven by fanaticism, not the desire for economic gain. They would attack Israel, and Israel would wipe the floor with them before the U.S. arrives. Or, they would nuke Israel, which would perpetuate a nuclear ass-kicking from the West and possibly China/Russia.
Whatever Iran does, they'll spell their own destruction. Ahmadinejad and his ilk aren't crafty enough, and don't possess the longevity to take on the global community and come out better for it.
As for Obama, he'll take flak for either being "too soft" on Iran, or (and this is unlikely), being "too zealous" in assuring American imperial interests. He'll be politically boned either way, unless Iran kamikazes.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Exactly, that's what dude's referring to.Obama will never invade a country unless they themselves have declared/launched all-out war. As it is, there's no country that could compete with the U.S. conventionally and also have something to gain by war with it. Should Iran do something, it'll be driven by fanaticism, not the desire for economic gain. They would attack Israel, and Israel would wipe the floor with them before the U.S. arrives. Or, they would nuke Israel, which would perpetuate a nuclear ass-kicking from the West and possibly China/Russia.
Whatever Iran does, they'll spell their own destruction. Ahmadinejad and his ilk aren't crafty enough, and don't possess the longevity to take on the global community and come out better for it.
As for Obama, he'll take flak for either being "too soft" on Iran, or (and this is unlikely), being "too zealous" in assuring American imperial interests. He'll be politically boned either way, unless Iran kamikazes.
I think N. Korea might push just a little too much.
Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
The problem is, Israel wouldn't go on the defensive. They would never allow a first strike by Iran. They'll destroy Iran if and when Iran gets full nuclear capabilities and Obama would have no choice but to support it, otherwise it's political suicide.
This is it exactly. Israel absolutely will not let Iran have nukes. The very next thing that would happen in Israel would be a suicide bomber smuggling one in a suitcase, and Israel doesn't have enough land-mass to let that happen.
Originally posted by truejedi
This is it exactly. Israel absolutely will not let Iran have nukes. The very next thing that would happen in Israel would be a suicide bomber smuggling one in a suitcase, and Israel doesn't have enough land-mass to let that happen.
Israel is pretty damn efficient in containing suicide bombings. You should see their airport, we could learn a thing or two.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/09/09/castro-admits-cubas-communism-doesnt-work/?test=latestnews
Castro has lost his mind.
Originally posted by Dr McBeefingtonWith good reason; he's old as ****.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/09/09/castro-admits-cubas-communism-doesnt-work/?test=latestnewsCastro has lost his mind.
My problem isn't really with what he's saying, because he's right, communism sucks, and Cuba kind of sucks. What I'm curious about is if he's being genuine.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/09/10/old-friend-challenges-bin-laden/?test=latestnews
Finally, another Muslim says what we've all been thinking.