IF U.S went to war with IRAN

[{X}Echo419]

ya'll write way to much shit in your posts

[ShooterMcGavin]

Sadaam was harboring terrorists. That doesn't mean every Iraqi(sp) citizen is a terrorist. Carpet bombing for as long as possible would result in record civilian cazualties not to mention even worse publicity. The same goes for Iran. Last I checked, an M1 requires 55 gals just to crank or something ungodly like that, let alone stay running. The fact of the matter is, THEY ATTACKED US. The war on terror is a hypothetical term. "declaring war on terrorist factions and the nations that harbor them" is more accurate. We didn't chase down the fleeing WMD's because we wouldn't be able to link them back to Sadaam and his gang. Russia provides close to all arms being used in the Middle East conflicts on the insurgency side. What country over there is going to turn down free WMDs? Entering another country without permission could be misconstrued(sp) as an act of war. Wars faught on multiple fronts are strategically unsound and even harder to conduct. Look at WWII and Germany. The strategic reserve isn't going to effect pump prices, but it's still gas and it's all we can do for now. If we pulled out of Iraq without completing our mission(Which was/is freeing the Iraqi people, establishing a national government, and granting them a means to defend themselves) all lose faith. Throwing the Iraqi people to the wolves isn't going to end this conflict. In-fact, it could very well worsen it. Abandoning Iraq now would cause the Iraqi people to lose faith. That produces another enemy for the US. Iraq is also the front for this war. Fighting over there keeps the fighting from coming over here. IMHO I think we were too soft. You bring a good point to the table as to why Bush couldn't donate funds. I'm not sure I can answer that. As for luck being the deciding factor on the halt of terrorist attacks on US soil. I wonder how we caught that guy at GATech? Airport security could be tighter. Liberals arguing for the rights of terrorists doesn't help that situation at all though. There are those that say we should protect ourselves and our allies at any and all costs. There are also those that say we should do it in the realm of legality so as to retain the values and freedoms our nation was founded on. My problem with that is that we are fighting a guerilla war with open war concepts. Make no mistake. we are going through the crucible. I only wonder if we will still be here when it's over.

i was not suggesting carpet-bombing entire cities, simply that we could use surgical strikes to target what needs to be targeted (yes i know you can argue that he will stash kids and women there or whatever but that would be blood on his hands, and at least there's only a certain number of people you can stash at any given warehouse or whatever). see when you say "they attacked us" it just sounds bad...who is they exactly? you are talking about a few (proportionately speaking) islamic extremists in the midst of an entire country that did not wish to be engulfed in a war (yes, i do realize the shit saddam did). and once again, tasking ourselves with freeing the iraqi people and helping them set up a democracy, i mean when did it become our job to make sure the world is free? i never said we shouldn't protect ourselves, but i don't see that being done or at least being done the right way when we're always immersed in a conflict in someone elses backyard, the whole pre-emptive thing seems to be taken a bit far.

and you played down what i had to say about the gas crisis a good bit, i mean did you or did you not get what i was getting at asking you how much oil it took to run a tank or any other military vehicles? do you not believe that oil can be much better used back at home? and you're right, not adding to the strategic reserve is "all we can do now" but honestly, that's like saying you're going to fight a large fire with a bucket because the fire truck is on the other side of town watering someones lawn. it's all you can do right now and it's better than nothing, but it's one shitty alternative and it's damn sad that it's what we're reduced to.

well i think the case of the guy from GT that just got arrested is but one straw from a mountain of hay, not saying it's not a good thing but hell we don't even know what building they were planning on destroying or have enough information to know how big exactly of a catch he really is. and i'm glad you agree that tsa is not doing enough other than making people strip down every time just to get on a damn plane. i honestly believe if someone out there wanted to attack us again, they can succeed, and isn't that a loss for us in this war on terror? after all this homeland security shit and the wars and all that, i still do not feel any safer than right after 9/11, and if you go out and ask others (as news and other sources have before), i'm sure you'll find plenty of people that believe and feel the same way as myself.

and please don't attempt to group me as "just another liberal". i rather dislike being generalized along with the at large population seeing as how i'm not a democrat, i'm not a republican, and i share both conservative and liberal views. for instance i don't believe in rights for terrorists, i believe in the death penalty...but at the same time i believe this administration (which happens to be republican and pretty conservative) has done a shitty job at steering this country through this crucible you speak of. and given the fact that they're the ones that led us into it, i find that highly unacceptable.

[AtifSajid]

Israel will take care of Iran before we need to worry about them.

You got your countries wrong there??

[MitsuEvo6]

mitsu, u obviously didn't understand what i was goin for. i did not say today's army is incapable of fighting in urban environments, but if i give u the option of fighting a real war on a battlefield, where u know exactly who ur enemies are, or to fight in a city where u have no idea if the kid walkin down the street is a suicide bomber, or if the next car that stops at the checkpoint has in ied, what would u honestly prefer? my point was that it's a shitty thing to make our army have to fight this type of a war.

your right, I was not understandin whst you wrote. However, the days of seein your enemy are over. The world realizes the US's military power and see that gaurilla tactics are what works. At the beginin of the war, they were dressed in uniforms or wore colors as identification, but they abandoned that as soon as they saw how they had no power to stand toe to toe with us.

[HyPer50]

You got your countries wrong there??

Not sure what you mean Atif. What I was saying is that, Israel knows that if Iran is able to get nuclear weapons, nothing is stopping them from attacking Israel, therefore I think Israel is going to stop them before they have completed there program. Just how I've felt for quite awhile now.

[ShooterMcGavin]

your right, I was not understandin whst you wrote. However, the days of seein your enemy are over. The world realizes the US's military power and see that gaurilla tactics are what works. At the beginin of the war, they were dressed in uniforms or wore colors as identification, but they abandoned that as soon as they saw how they had no power to stand toe to toe with us.

absolutely, but you still did not respond as to which you would prefer if were given the choice. i never once stated you didn't train for it and wouldn't be able to deal with it, just that it's obviously more difficult and results in more casualties then you would otherwise sustain, am i wrong?

[Xan]

i was not suggesting carpet-bombing entire cities, simply that we could use surgical strikes to target what needs to be targeted (yes i know you can argue that he will stash kids and women there or whatever but that would be blood on his hands, and at least there's only a certain number of people you can stash at any given warehouse or whatever). see when you say "they attacked us" it just sounds bad...who is they exactly? you are talking about a few (proportionately speaking) islamic extremists in the midst of an entire country that did not wish to be engulfed in a war (yes, i do realize the shit saddam did). and once again, tasking ourselves with freeing the iraqi people and helping them set up a democracy, i mean when did it become our job to make sure the world is free? i never said we shouldn't protect ourselves, but i don't see that being done or at least being done the right way when we're always immersed in a conflict in someone elses backyard, the whole pre-emptive thing seems to be taken a bit far.

and you played down what i had to say about the gas crisis a good bit, i mean did you or did you not get what i was getting at asking you how much oil it took to run a tank or any other military vehicles? do you not believe that oil can be much better used back at home? and you're right, not adding to the strategic reserve is "all we can do now" but honestly, that's like saying you're going to fight a large fire with a bucket because the fire truck is on the other side of town watering someones lawn. it's all you can do right now and it's better than nothing, but it's one shitty alternative and it's damn sad that it's what we're reduced to.

well i think the case of the guy from GT that just got arrested is but one straw from a mountain of hay, not saying it's not a good thing but hell we don't even know what building they were planning on destroying or have enough information to know how big exactly of a catch he really is. and i'm glad you agree that tsa is not doing enough other than making people strip down every time just to get on a damn plane. i honestly believe if someone out there wanted to attack us again, they can succeed, and isn't that a loss for us in this war on terror? after all this homeland security shit and the wars and all that, i still do not feel any safer than right after 9/11, and if you go out and ask others (as news and other sources have before), i'm sure you'll find plenty of people that believe and feel the same way as myself.

and please don't attempt to group me as "just another liberal". i rather dislike being generalized along with the at large population seeing as how i'm not a democrat, i'm not a republican, and i share both conservative and liberal views. for instance i don't believe in rights for terrorists, i believe in the death penalty...but at the same time i believe this administration (which happens to be republican and pretty conservative) has done a shitty job at steering this country through this crucible you speak of. and given the fact that they're the ones that led us into it, i find that highly unacceptable.

Bin Laden and his men attacked us(or at least they claim responsibility for it). We initially went after Bin Laden, Al Quida, and their affiliates. I will however admit that it was rather naive of Bush and his administration to think this war would be won in a week. Terrorism is an idea and it is attracting new recruits as we speak, but taking the fight to them has kept it from coming over here IMO.

Strategic strikes would'nt have worked in this conflict. Targeting people is alot trickier than a weapons cache. It's true that Sadaam would have women and children guard these facilities. It's also true that the liberal media would turn this into the bombing of "innocent civilians" whether they had the facts or not(Look at the mine disaster in West Virginia). That would be the first and last time that would happen. None of the "blood on the hands" would reflect back to Sadaam.

I totally understood what you meant about saving gas by pulling out the tanks and APC's. The simple facts are these. Armor is needed in guerilla warfare due to the fact that a flak(sp) jacket won't stop an RPG. Look at Somalia for instance. Had Clinton sent in one armored unit I would almost guarantee that our casualties would have been cut in half. Tanks save lives and they should stay there until the fight is over IMO. Besides, how do we even know that bringing them home to save gas would effect prices at the pump?

I didn't mean to group you as a Liberal per say. However, you do share Liberal points of view on the topic at hand. As you stated earlier. You looked at the " facts as they were presented to you(as did I) and drew your own conclusion(as did I). Our primary difference is that I think the cause for fighting is "noble" on our behalf. It is the responsibility of the strong to fight for those who can't fight for themselves. I'm not in the military. I probably never will be, but I respect a man who is willing to volunteer to fight for something he believes in. Anyone who puts their life on the line to protect someone they've never met, but they do it souley(sp) because it's "the right thing" gets mad props from me.

Bush's administration didn't lead us into this. The hyjackers that destroyed the world trader center and killed 2000 innocent people did.

You know. I like arguing with you Lude. You don't get all pissy and start the name calling and shit. I respect that alot.

[ShooterMcGavin]

Bin Laden and his men attacked us(or at least they claim responsibility for it). We initially went after Bin Laden, Al Quida, and their affiliates. I will however admit that it was rather naive of Bush and his administration to think this war would be won in a week. Terrorism is an idea and it is attracting new recruits as we speak, but taking the fight to them has kept it from coming over here IMO.

Strategic strikes would'nt have worked in this conflict. Targeting people is alot trickier than a weapons cache. It's true that Sadaam would have women and children guard these facilities. It's also true that the liberal media would turn this into the bombing of "innocent civilians" whether they had the facts or not(Look at the mine disaster in West Virginia). That would be the first and last time that would happen. None of the "blood on the hands" would reflect back to Sadaam.

I totally understood what you meant about saving gas by pulling out the tanks and APC's. The simple facts are these. Armor is needed in guerilla warfare due to the fact that a flak(sp) jacket won't stop an RPG. Look at Somalia for instance. Had Clinton sent in one armored unit I would almost guarantee that our casualties would have been cut in half. Tanks save lives and they should stay there until the fight is over IMO. Besides, how do we even know that bringing them home to save gas would effect prices at the pump?

I didn't mean to group you as a Liberal per say. However, you do share Liberal points of view on the topic at hand. As you stated earlier. You looked at the " facts as they were presented to you(as did I) and drew your own conclusion(as did I). Our primary difference is that I think the cause for fighting is "noble" on our behalf. It is the responsibility of the strong to fight for those who can't fight for themselves. I'm not in the military. I probably never will be, but I respect a man who is willing to volunteer to fight for something he believes in. Anyone who puts their life on the line to protect someone they've never met, but they do it souley(sp) because it's "the right thing" gets mad props from me.

Bush's administration didn't lead us into this. The hyjackers that destroyed the world trader center and killed 2000 innocent people did.

You know. I like arguing with you Lude. You don't get all pissy and start the name calling and shit. I respect that alot.

i agree, it was al qaeda that cast the first stone (well, more like a giant boulder but whatever), and i agree wholeheartedly that we should get that bastard. however, while i do realize saddam harbors terrorists, the war AT THE TIME was not with him and his regime. there are many countries that harbor terrorists, and it really wasn't the right time to go after any of them. you spoke not long ago about what a poor choice it would be to fight a war on multiple fronts, do you not think that is partly what we have done already by attacking iraq before all the scores were settled in afghanistan and al qaeda?

the point about the tanks and apcs you might have taken too literally. it wasn't that i was suggesting pulling some out because our men and women who are putting their lives on the line need them over there. i was simply pointing out that if we did not get into this war in the FIRST PLACE, there wouldn't even be an issue at all and we'd be saving shit-tons of oil for our domestic consumption. but now that we are fully immersed in the shit storm that is policing and trying to right the ship in iraq, we have no choice but to keep all those gas guzzling machines over there until everything is said and done (god willing we see it in our lifetimes).

strategic strikes once again is but an alternative, never said how good or bad. in fact, it still goes back to the fact that we should not have acted on iraq when we did.

i'm not arguing how noble this war may be, i can clearly see the other side of the argument for fighting for iraqi freedom and democracy. however, this immediately has me questioning WHY we need engage in these noble and respectable actions when there are plenty of people in our own country who could use help. not to mention, when does it end? when will we ever fix our own problems before reaching out the world to save its people? because like we'd mentioned, africa sure could use some help (hell they could've used help for decades).

and i don't even consider this as an argument, more like a debate, something that two intelligent (party demonstrated by ones ability to write clearly, something which others on here cannot do) and self respecting human beings can engage in without resorting to red herring tactics and personal attacks. kudos to you

[Xan]

i agree, it was al qaeda that cast the first stone (well, more like a giant boulder but whatever), and i agree wholeheartedly that we should get that bastard. however, while i do realize saddam harbors terrorists, the war AT THE TIME was not with him and his regime. there are many countries that harbor terrorists, and it really wasn't the right time to go after any of them. you spoke not long ago about what a poor choice it would be to fight a war on multiple fronts, do you not think that is partly what we have done already by attacking iraq before all the scores were settled in afghanistan and al qaeda?

the point about the tanks and apcs you might have taken too literally. it wasn't that i was suggesting pulling some out because our men and women who are putting their lives on the line need them over there. i was simply pointing out that if we did not get into this war in the FIRST PLACE, there wouldn't even be an issue at all and we'd be saving shit-tons of oil for our domestic consumption. but now that we are fully immersed in the shit storm that is policing and trying to right the ship in iraq, we have no choice but to keep all those gas guzzling machines over there until everything is said and done (god willing we see it in our lifetimes).

strategic strikes once again is but an alternative, never said how good or bad. in fact, it still goes back to the fact that we should not have acted on iraq when we did.

i'm not arguing how noble this war may be, i can clearly see the other side of the argument for fighting for iraqi freedom and democracy. however, this immediately has me questioning WHY we need engage in these noble and respectable actions when there are plenty of people in our own country who could use help. not to mention, when does it end? when will we ever fix our own problems before reaching out the world to save its people? because like we'd mentioned, africa sure could use some help (hell they could've used help for decades).

and i don't even consider this as an argument, more like a debate, something that two intelligent (party demonstrated by ones ability to write clearly, something which others on here cannot do) and self respecting human beings can engage in without resorting to red herring tactics and personal attacks. kudos to you

Are we still fighting in Afghanistan? I was under the impression that the Taliban and Al Quida fled into Iraq. Sadaam gave them refuge. We said "stop that. Don't harbor terrorists or we will invade." He was disinclined to oblige our request. So we went it. That's how I saw it unfold anyway. Maybe I missed something. We should begin pulling out fairly soon I believe(Within the next 2-3 years) The Iraqi army is starting to take shape and they should be more than able to police themselves.

As far as gas goes, I feel we would be better off if Katrina hadn't come through and screwed our Gulf coast production. That being said, one can't predict the future. Gas wasn't $3.50/gal in 01'. I heard on the news last night that they are putting a bill through congress that, if passed, would allow digging for oil in Alaska. Only problem there is that it could take years to see an effect at the pump. Sure, if we hadn't gone to war, there would be more gas to go around. Oil however isn't a renewable resource and the prices would still end up climbing 4-5 years down the road.

Looking back, Maybe we should have waited on invading Iraq. I'm not going to say it was a stupid move, but given the intelligence at the time. It seemed to me to be the most logical one.

We help Africa plenty. We sell them the guns they use to kill each other.

On a more serious note. A co-worker of mines son was visiting Africa(not sure which part) when a bunch of black guys beat him to death for his laptop. That place is fucked up.

[ShooterMcGavin]

Are we still fighting in Afghanistan? I was under the impression that the Taliban and Al Quida fled into Iraq. Sadaam gave them refuge. We said "stop that. Don't harbor terrorists or we will invade." He was disinclined to oblige our request. So we went it. That's how I saw it unfold anyway. Maybe I missed something. We should begin pulling out fairly soon I believe(Within the next 2-3 years) The Iraqi army is starting to take shape and they should be more than able to police themselves.

As far as gas goes, I feel we would be better off if Katrina hadn't come through and screwed our Gulf coast production. That being said, one can't predict the future. Gas wasn't $3.50/gal in 01'. I heard on the news last night that they are putting a bill through congress that, if passed, would allow digging for oil in Alaska. Only problem there is that it could take years to see an effect at the pump. Sure, if we hadn't gone to war, there would be more gas to go around. Oil however isn't a renewable resource and the prices would still end up climbing 4-5 years down the road.

Looking back, Maybe we should have waited on invading Iraq. I'm not going to say it was a stupid move, but given the intelligence at the time. It seemed to me to be the most logical one.

We help Africa plenty. We sell them the guns they use to kill each other.

On a more serious note. A co-worker of mines son was visiting Africa(not sure which part) when a bunch of black guys beat him to death for his laptop. That place is fucked up.

i am pretty sure that we still have some troops left in afghanistan, as well as special forces teams out in the mountains still between there and pakistan still hunting for bin laden and his crew. and honestly, i don't know how good of shape iraq will be even a couple yrs down the road. i believe that they can and will raise an army and a govt, but the infighting and terrorist acts i really don't see coming to an end (see al sadr's newly released video from this weekend? that guy doesn't make it seem at all like he's planning on stopping). so it still pisses me off that unfortunately, there will still be losses ahead for our troops over there.

you're right about katrina, it got us real good at a bad time. however, you'll recall that gas was already high last summer before the hurrican ever hit. and while i agree that it being a limited resource and prices are bound to go up, i don't feel the administration is doing enough to help it (ie getting a grip on oil companies, i mean it's ridiculous that exxon should have the highest profit for a company EVER when everyone is suffering at the pump, and please, no lectures needed about free trade and capitalism, some of what they're doing is just ridiculous).

and we don't help africa enough, russia has just as much of a hand if not more in providing them the munitions for their wars. on a serious note, that place is indeed fucked up and i'm sorry to hear about your coworkers loss. once again though, it proves that there are a seemingly endless list of places that could truly use our help.

[Xan]

i am pretty sure that we still have some troops left in afghanistan, as well as special forces teams out in the mountains still between there and pakistan still hunting for bin laden and his crew. and honestly, i don't know how good of shape iraq will be even a couple yrs down the road. i believe that they can and will raise an army and a govt, but the infighting and terrorist acts i really don't see coming to an end (see al sadr's newly released video from this weekend? that guy doesn't make it seem at all like he's planning on stopping). so it still pisses me off that unfortunately, there will still be losses ahead for our troops over there.

you're right about katrina, it got us real good at a bad time. however, you'll recall that gas was already high last summer before the hurrican ever hit. and while i agree that it being a limited resource and prices are bound to go up, i don't feel the administration is doing enough to help it (ie getting a grip on oil companies, i mean it's ridiculous that exxon should have the highest profit for a company EVER when everyone is suffering at the pump, and please, no lectures needed about free trade and capitalism, some of what they're doing is just ridiculous).

and we don't help africa enough, russia has just as much of a hand if not more in providing them the munitions for their wars. on a serious note, that place is indeed fucked up and i'm sorry to hear about your coworkers loss. once again though, it proves that there are a seemingly endless list of places that could truly use our help.

They've started an investigation into Exxon and shit to stop the price gouging. I don't see how we could stop an independent organization from charging whatever the hell they feel like for their product.

It's true that there are many places around the globe that could use our support. Iraq had a prior interest in the form of Sadaam and the terrorist factions(and yes. Even oil). I don't see how best to approach a situation like Africa. From everything I've heard, it's total chaos down there, but it's not effecting us ATM I don't think. These days it seems like the old "they need our help" excuse isn't reason enough for most people to justify jumping into conflict. Maybe liberating Iraq is the by-product of the war and not the reason for it.

[ShooterMcGavin]

and as well as they should investigate. to me though part of what pisses me off is the fact that bush's administration has been giving nothing but one break after another to all big companies, not just the oil ones, and it's hurt our economy (there's plenty of facts out there to prove this). i just hope it's not another one of those investigations that turn up no real results/solutions and just becomes another waste of taxpayers money.

you're right, africa is just fuckin themselves right now and every developed nation out there knows it's potential suicide to send in real help and real troops.

and i can't agree more with your notion that liberating iraq was not a primary objective, that's what makes this invasion in my mind so ludicrous and unnecessary. in fact i don't think in this case, the ends can ever justify the means.

[Xan]

It's kind of like we went in and busted everything up. Now we are obligated to help out with the reconstruction. Hmm. I relapse...

[MitsuEvo6]

yes, i'd rather have a war where they all line up, and we smart bomb the piss outta them, but that aint gonna happen. I'm almost sure nobody will go back to that kind of war after seein the way the attacks on US troops in iraq have been successful. Sucks, but its true. And yes, we still have soldiers in Afgan

[sina518]

i was born in iran so if i was america i would go and bomb the shit out of that place. thats one fucked up country and i can care less for it

i accidently posted under b@d@pple so that was me that said all thAt not him. his name was just signed in and i didnt realise it

[Julio]

7 pages of bullshit and I can count the smart posters in this thread in one hand.

sad..sad...sad.

[Brut]

fuck no, its ridiculous even the thought of going to war. if we do, IM GOIN TO CANADA! lol

Im doing the same thing lol

[Slow Motion]

I want these bad decision that our government is making to stop......sometime war is nesassary but its not a cure to bad deligation, poor judgements and decisions...and the line between the rich and poor in america is getting thicker and thicker by the day.
What can we possibly do....the government is blaming others in government and not resolving anything.......Just my view IA.

[AFSil80]

I've been sayin' since last year that Israel is going to take Iran out. And I really believe that. Iran having nukes is a much bigger threat to Israel than it is to us. And seeing as how Israel doesn't have the world breathing down there neck like the US does, I still feel it's going to come down to Israel preemptively defending itself.

My thoughts exactly.

And I don't think most people realize this, but Israel is NOT as kind as we are if they are to invade. I hate saying this, but unlike the US, Israel does not beat around the bush.

[Scgrandprix]

All I ever hear about is people bitching that the US is policing the world and crap. Ya we are trying to keep the peace. Liberia, Haiti, Kuwait in 1990-1991, and shit ton of other places, and people often bitch about things like that. Then when something happens to their country they are the first to jump up and say why hasnt the US come to our aid yet? Its why we wont get involved in Africa, that place is so backwards that if we went there and tried to help people would ending blaming all of Africas problems on us. The US always works for its own interests, and we try not to do anything that goes against our own interests. Now we are calling on the world to do something about Iran before shit gets outta hand. No one wants to fucking step up to the plate, and we are to busy to currently handle the situation because we are in Iraq. If they get a Nuke and use it on another country once again it will come to why didnt the US do something about this earlier? Im so sick of the Hypocritical bullshit in the US and the world. You love the US you hate the US make up your fucking minds.

[{X}Echo419]

All I ever hear about is people bitching that the US is policing the world and crap. Ya we are trying to keep the peace. Liberia, Haiti, Kuwait in 1990-1991, and shit ton of other places, and people often bitch about things like that. Then when something happens to their country they are the first to jump up and say why hasnt the US come to our aid yet? Its why we wont get involved in Africa, that place is so backwards that if we went there and tried to help people would ending blaming all of Africas problems on us. The US always works for its own interests, and we try not to do anything that goes against our own interests. Now we are calling on the world to do something about Iran before shit gets outta hand. No one wants to fucking step up to the plate, and we are to busy to currently handle the situation because we are in Iraq. If they get a Nuke and use it on another country once again it will come to why didnt the US do something about this earlier? Im so sick of the Hypocritical bullshit in the US and the world. You love the US you hate the US make up your fucking minds.

I said that in Model UN in highschool and I almost got stabbed.
you Sir are right on. damned if we do damned if we don't.

[devinwebb907]

i havent kept up with this in a good month to a month and a half so i put wtf is going on, but going to war with iran would be alot of dead [middle easterners?] and a lot of dead americans. no good.

[Z33_kid]

wouldnt be good if we went to war with Iran. Might just start more bloodshed n death & where on a low on soldiers our military line is getting thinner theyll start randomly getting people to go to war not good at all. Making the U.S. a open target sorry to say but this is true

[GTScoob]

7 pages of bullshit and I can count the smart posters in this thread in one hand.

sad..sad...sad.

Agreed.

It's too late for me to write a good response. I'm taking a course on the Ethics of International Affairs right now and we've been doing a lot of debating about this topic. If this thread is still active in another day I'll post up my opinion.

[{X}Echo419]

wouldnt be good if we went to war with Iran. Might just start more bloodshed n death & where on a low on soldiers our military line is getting thinner theyll start randomly getting people to go to war not good at all. Making the U.S. a open target sorry to say but this is true

you have 30+ years of military budget cut back backs by democrates in Washington to thank for that.