Are You For Or Against A War With Iran/North Korea?

I don't understand how anyone could possibly vote for support of both Iran and North Korea, yet are not in the Military Services in support of the cause.

I love my country, but that's just a typical lazy American.

"Yeah we should bomb the freakin planet cuz there's terrorists everywhere in the world and they're a threat to me"

"Well, don't you think you might consider joining the Military to support the cause since you believe this way."

"Heck no man I ain't joining no military, it's dangerous as heck out there, there's terrorists everywhere in the world and they're a threat to me."

So you want the wars but you want someone ELSE to do it for you, pathetic really. If you believe we should be fighting North Korea, Iran and Iraq at the same time, you need to be enlisted in the military and stop depending on others to give you so called "security" our military is spread thin as it is.







[edit on 24-6-2005 by NoJustice]

There's a huge difference between attacks on selected military targets (which a lot here seem to be supporting) and all out wars (which hardly anyone here seem to be supporting) against those countries.

Originally posted by NoJustice
I don't understand how anyone could possibly vote for support of both Iran and North Korea, yet are not in the Military Services in support of the cause.

I love my country, but that's just a typical lazy American.

"Yeah we should bomb the freakin planet cuz there's terrorists everywhere in the world and they're a threat to me"

"Well, don't you think you might consider joining the Military to support the cause since you believe this way."

"Heck no man I ain't joining no military, it's dangerous as heck out there, there's terrorists everywhere in the world and they're a threat to me."

So you want the wars but you want someone ELSE to do it for you, pathetic really. If you believe we should be fighting North Korea, Iran and Iraq at the same time, you need to be enlisted in the military and stop depending on others to give you so called "security" our military is spread thin as it is.

No coz im not an American

If all diplomatic efforts have been exhausted. If every last measure to avert war has been taken. If the leadership of Iran and/or North Korea are unwilling to give up their pursuit of and stockpiles of nuclear weapons, respectively, then I would support military action.

Anyone who does not agree with the above statement would be the type of person who would never support any war of anykind. War is a terrible, terrible thing. But in the world we live in, sometimes it is a necessity. The world should now know that the United States will stop at nothing when it comes to the protection of its people and its allies. Dictators and tyrants should now be aware, as Khadafi eventually was, that our President means what he says and says what he means. When he says that Iran will NOT have nuclear weapons, he means it. Regardless of your opinion of our commander-in-chief, you must by now know that if he says he is going to do something then there is a very strong chance that he will do such.

Anyone who does not agree with the above statement would be the type of person who would never support any war of anykind. War is a terrible, terrible thing.

Ridiculous.
I supported the war in Afghanistan, I even supported the first Gulf War.

I oppose any attack on Iran and NK simply because they have not attacked us, nor is there any compelling reason to believe they intend to, or are even capable of doing so.

Beginning a war because paranoiacs believe a given country might want to attack us, despite the fact that said country would be committing national suicide by doing so, is simply absurd.

[edit on 6/25/05 by xmotex]

You are either unaware or unwilling to accept that fact that parts of the West Coast of the United States are well within range of North Korean ICBM's. Let's also not forget that Iran has more Hezbollah terror cells here than al Qaida cells.

But, of course, you completely ignored my first paragraph. I said that if all diplomatic efforts have been exhausted, and both countries still refuse to give up their nuclear ambitions and stockpiles, and Iran refuses to give up its sponsorship of terrorism, then I would support military action. That being said, doesn't the thought of the Ayatollah's and Kim Jong Il have nuclear weapons worry you in the least? Hasn't history taught us that appeasement is the path towards defeat?

There is a whole continuum of options between "appeasment" and "preemptive attack" that the extremist Right seems not to (or not to want to) understand.

Do I like the fact that NK has nukes, or that Iran is likely to get them?
Not particularly.

Do I think it automatically means we need to attack them?
Hell no.

NK and Iran both know that launching a nuclear attack on the US, either openly or surrepitously, is likely to result in massive retaliation. They are not going to attack us, because any way you look at it, they are hopelessly outmatched.

In their eyes, nukes are almost certainly a deterrent - against a "preemptive attack" - by us.

I always like to try and make my opinion very clear on such matters....

*Ahem*


Durka Durka Durka. Muhammed Jihad Durka.


....Thank you

Originally posted by Rasputin13
If all diplomatic efforts have been exhausted. If every last measure to avert war has been taken. If the leadership of Iran and/or North Korea are unwilling to give up their pursuit of and stockpiles of nuclear weapons, respectively, then I would support military action.

Anyone who does not agree with the above statement would be the type of person who would never support any war of anykind. War is a terrible, terrible thing. But in the world we live in, sometimes it is a necessity. The world should now know that the United States will stop at nothing when it comes to the protection of its people and its allies. Dictators and tyrants should now be aware, as Khadafi eventually was, that our President means what he says and says what he means. When he says that Iran will NOT have nuclear weapons, he means it. Regardless of your opinion of our commander-in-chief, you must by now know that if he says he is going to do something then there is a very strong chance that he will do such.

Excellent post!

Brilliantly written and explained!

You have voted Rasputin13 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

I_U

Originally posted by xmotex
NK and Iran both know that launching a nuclear attack on the US, either openly or surrepitously, is likely to result in massive retaliation. They are not going to attack us, because any way you look at it, they are hopelessly outmatched. In their eyes, nukes are almost certainly a deterrent - against a "preemptive attack" - by us.

I would agree with that in the case of North Korea, in the case of Iran I would agree with the position that it is not blooody likely the Iranian government would give a launch command, but that an individual islamic nutcase would not push a little red button if sitting at one or that a bunch of islamic nutcases in the army would not hand one over to a terrorist group I am not so sure of. Then again, Pakistan is a precedent that even that may not be very probable.

If you don't live in America where the press has completely lost it's integrety you would see this war differently.

America is fighting a perpetual war. This war can never be won Iraqi freedom fighters will never stop and Iran has threatened to go to all out war with America if they set one foot on their soil or if one missile is launched. This is the begining of the long overdue third world war. America is delibreratly ignoring the rest of the world because it benifits their failing economy to capture Iraq's oil and capture the middle east as a strategical strong hold to attack Asian countries like China,N. Korea and middle eastern countries like Iran,Syria and Pakistan I soon think will got to war with America.

With the Chinese economy flourishing and same with other Asian countries due to lots of raw materials and cheap labour America can't compete anymore. The war on terror is a war for money because America failed it's people by letting it's govt. spend out of control. Even Canada (where I live) is seeing America as a withering super power heading fast into a third world status. Over 70% of the world sees America as being a threat to world economics and freedom. JFK was truly the last popular president of the U.S. now I see Dubya and he says things like this (example) " Iraq needs to be liberated cause...we need to liberate it".

America is doomed and your liberties are being taken away soon there will be a draft and you will go to die in the Eurasian war. A war in which America will try to cripple the rest of the world in the name of God and Jesus Christ. What makes Canada great is the fact that our military is now almost non-existant and yet we have not had our buildings bombed and our people threatened.

The only people who say we are in danger if we don't comply with their demands is America. You all should realize that the rest of us sees America as someone who needs to stop this sensless genocide and fix their own problems and repair their integrety which has been damaged and completely lost in a lot of respects. If America wasn't so god damn corrupt and gung ho for war none of this would have happened.

I am just telling America how the rest of the world feels about them Canada has pretty much had it with the pushy controlling attitude of America so before you people start gettin in an uproar over what I am saying remember this everyone is entitled to the right of conscious thought and opinion no matter what others may feel and as long as you don't hurt anyone else.

Say no to the war for your own sake and for everyone elses America doesn't have to be so uptight and thats the problem America has a superiority complex and the country has been conditioned to the point of Nazi germany as in terms of a Nationalistic way of thinking.

The reason I'm not for war in NK is because it would go nuclear, as will every war from here on.


Peace

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun
Durka Durka Durka. Muhammed Jihad Durka.

Ehhhhhh..........Durka, Durka, Durka.

Originally posted by punkmonkey14
The reason I'm not for war in NK is because it would go nuclear, as will every war from here on.


Peace

But the US nuking NK would show the likes of Iran and Syria that they mean buisness.

No more wars after the US nukes Kim.....

Originally posted by Rasputin13
You are either unaware or unwilling to accept that fact that parts of the West Coast of the United States are well within range of North Korean ICBM's.

Actually, at most they can reach parts of Alaska. Missiles with longer range have only been at most engine tested, but never actually test fired.

www.fas.org...

Originally posted by Simon666
Actually, at most they can reach parts of Alaska. Missiles with longer range have only been at most engine tested, but never actually test fired.

Havent they got planes to deliver a nuke to the west?

Im sure they could slip one through before Bush blew them off the face of the Earth.

They do not need to hit America to do massive amounts of damage. You know that oil you love oh so much? Those bases in the Middle East and Asia?

They are all well within range.

Originally posted by Odium
They do not need to hit America to do massive amounts of damage. You know that oil you love oh so much? Those bases in the Middle East and Asia?

They are all well within range.

Very true!

Also if they hit a USAF base in the east it would have a massive effect in the US.

They could re-shape Geo-Politics by destroying Japan, South Korea and/or Singapore. As well as stopping a lot of the Worlds Oil by hitting Saudi Arabi and Kim would not care if he thought he was going to die and neither would his Generals if Nuclear Weapons were launched at them. Even by hitting Alaska the same affect could happen.

After all, their is no point in over throwing Kim when you'll die no matter what.

It really is foolish to think using Nuclear Weapons is a good thing.

I think it is hard for anyone to have an opinion on the subject with out all the info. We are only given bits and pieces of what is going on. I think that is what frustrates us so much.

For instance, my understanding is that NK and Iran have or are developing nukes for protection. All and all they just want to be left alone. They like their countries the way they are and do not want to change. Bush has made several comments about how he wants their countries to be ran. If some country was insisting that we became a communist country and we believed that they would try by any means necessary to make us a communist country, we would be beefing up our weapons too. However, that might not be the case. We do not have all the information on the subject. All we know is what the media tells us. I for one do not trust everything the media says. I would like for the president himself to tell us what is going on, and why he thinks they are such a threat. The fact that he is not doing that, quite honestly, makes me feel like he thinks we are a bunch of morons or something. I would love to be able to back up our president on any action he takes, unfortunatly, he never tells us what is going on so I cant do that. He just needs to understand this is America, and America belongs to the people not him. The information on why we are going to war should be made crystal clear to us. An army of people who know what they are fighting for and believe in the cause, is stronger than an Army of robots who dont have a clue.