View Story | 68 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
seeing as how neither Dems or Repub Nutzis are in a hurry to get out of Iraq or Afghanistan, all the while threatening Iran- of course they want more war and will ultimately attempt to concoct a way to get Americans on board.
Why would we even be talking about Iran otherwise? Until there is proof that their nuclear program is anything other than geared for energy production as verified by the IAEA who in the hell are we to do anything, war, sanctions, covert actions geared at regime change or otherwise?
Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)
by borkitekt on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:46:20 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
they don't need nuclear missiles to take out the U.S. bases in Iraq. Our warfighters are sitting ducks. Besides, I suspect that the missile defense they want to set up isn't going to be any good against "in coming" from next door.
I can't imagine why Gates took the trouble to piss off the Air Force yesterday. (sorry for the non-sequitur)
How do you tell a predator from a protector? The predator will eat you sooner rather than later.
by hannah on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 07:08:57 AM PDT
if we got out of countries where we don't belong in the first place.
by corvo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 07:13:39 AM PDT
I need to work on clarifying when I'm presenting some other perspective than my own.
The missile/radar installations in Iraq have been a great concern to me because there was never any way, even if the Iraqis were totally welcoming, that Russia and China were going to put up with fourteen or six USAF bases on the southern edge of Asia. The hubris of the Central Command and the gigantic spy installation in the "embassy" is just unbelievable--that someone would think that would be accepted. Because they put up with the lumbering ICBMs in Turkey?
by hannah on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 07:34:18 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 68 comments