Documentation! Then the sell job will begin. But as much as some dislike what is going on in Iran, especially the younger Iranians, once the first American boot touches Iranian sand, we will have made everyone in the nation a nationalist.

Sabers get louder and louder.


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some Democratic presidential candidates worried on Thursday the White House had begun a march to war by declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorism supporter while a top Republican said "bombardment" of Iran should be an option.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney took a hard-line stance against Iran after the U.S. State Department imposed sanctions on the Revolutionary Guard in a bid to pressure Tehran to stop enriching uranium.

Washington also accuses Iran of supplying explosive devices to Iraqi militants that are being used to kill U.S. and Iraqi troops.


LINK

I wish I had more to say about the subject. I think the threat of Iran is exaggerated, maybe not as much as Iraq was, but it is exaggerated nevertheless.

There are too many bad factors for me to believe that a nasty war isn't going to happen over the next couple years.

You are accurate, I mean look at the front runner candidates, Rudy will gives us perpetual war and Clinton is just as much a hawk as Bush, or any other neocon.

The new resolution on the Rev. Guard is worded as to to used to justify action. 52% of public think that you should hit Iran. I would say it is building a good case.


More than half of likely voters in the United States would support a U.S. military strike against Iran to prevent it from building a nuclear weapon, according to a poll released Monday.

The poll found 53 percent of Americans believe it is likely the United States will be involved in a military strike against Iran before the November 2008 presidential election.

The nationwide telephone survey, conducted by polling firm Zogby International, found 52 percent of U.S. adults interviewed would support such a strike.


LINK

52% of American voters don't have a clue as to the impact of an attack on Iran either. I'd like to hear their reply if they were asked if they would enlist if we were to go to war with Iran.

Tumbleweed wrote:52% of American voters don't have a clue as to the impact of an attack on Iran either. I'd like to hear their reply if they were asked if they would enlist if we were to go to war with Iran.

I think if we go to war with Iran there will be no doubt that a draft will be implemented.

Hello, Canada. ^_^

Hi Izzy. Good to hear from you.

I agree that Iran has to be dealt with at some point ,but this rush to attack them is being hyped up by the war mongers itching for a fight..

We should clean up a few of our ongoing messes before developing a new one. IMO.

Hi guys! Bush has tried his arsenal of crap, sanctions, threats and machismo, but he has not tried the one thing that would possibly work--direct one on one talks with Iran.

Think for a moment...

Why would we unilaterally attack Iran? Have they attacked us? Is an attack imminent? Do they pose an immediate danger?

You people are thinking like bush. If Iran is to be attacked, we cannot act alone and get ourselves into another quagmire.

Go ahead, tell me why we should attack Iran in 6 months.

CHUQ wrote:Hi guys! Bush has tried his arsenal of crap, sanctions, threats and machismo, but he has not tried the one thing that would possibly work--direct one on one talks with Iran.

Cowboy bush won't do that. He would have to throw his spurs and six shooters away. He would feel naked!

JimH52 wrote:Think for a moment...

Why would we unilaterally attack Iran? Have they attacked us? Is an attack imminent? Do they pose an immediate danger?

You people are thinking like bush. If Iran is to be attacked, we cannot act alone and get ourselves into another quagmire.

Go ahead, tell me why we should attack Iran in 6 months.

First--because Bush may want it. second--in a way they have attacked us, back in1979. third, that is the $64 question. lastly--that depends on who and what ytou choose to believe. The admin is trying really hard to make Iran appear to be a major threat.

Much more major than countries that HAVE nuclear weapons that are against us.

Typical CYA! They voted for it before they voted against it. sound familiar?


Thirty US senators wrote to President George W. Bush Thursday, warning he had no authority to launch military action against Iran, and expressing concern about the administration's "provocative" rhetoric.

The senators, 29 Democrats and one independent, urged the resolution of disputes with the Islamic Republic through diplomacy.

"We wish to emphasize that no congressional authority exists for unilateral military action against Iran," the letter signed by senators including presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Joseph Biden said.

The letter warned that a resolution passed by the Senate in September, calling for the designation of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist group, should not be used as a pretext for war.


LINK

CHUQ, tell me that you are not saying an incident that happened in 1979 is reason to go to war. Perhap bush would like to believe that but it isn't. He better be worried about his buddy in Pakistan. That country is about to blow up.