Another War!

[bododie]

No, Maam. I served in the 1st cav after Vietnam, and was fortunate enough not to have to see combat because we weren't fighting anyone at the time. But had we gotten ourselves into yet another quagmire at that time, you can rest assured that I would have been their covering you're arse. And you?

I think you answered your own question when you said "Maam". However, if it makes you feel better, if I had been of age, which I missed by two years, and male, I would have been #84 in the first draft. You don't have to preach to me about Viet Nam. Those vets, including you now, are my personal project in life to help. I had friends and one uncle who didn't come home.

This "engagement", a word I'll use since semantics matters to Washington, is very different than Nam. These guys weren't drafted, and there is nothing in the Constitution or anywhere else that says everyone is "entitled" to the same kind of life and wealth. There is only the opportunity to make it for yourself in any way you can. If someone had to join the military to get benefits that would help them in life, then at least in this country you have that opportunity.

 

[orogenicman]

I think you answered your own question when you said "Maam". However, if it makes you feel better, if I had been of age, which I missed by two years, and male, I would have been #84 in the first draft. You don't have to preach to me about Viet Nam. Those vets, including you now, are my personal project in life to help. I had friends and one uncle who didn't come home.

This "engagement", a word I'll use since semantics matters to Washington, is very different than Nam. These guys weren't drafted, and there is nothing in the Constitution or anywhere else that says everyone is "entitled" to the same kind of life and wealth. There is only the opportunity to make it for yourself in any way you can. If someone had to join the military to get benefits that would help them in life, then at least in this country you have that opportunity.

Sorry. You seemed like a maam. My mistake. It's not about who is entitled. Perhaps those who were born with a platinum spoon up their back sides have an issue with entitlements. I believe in helping my fellow man in any way that I can. And boy are there a lot of people who need help. Just look at what is going on today with the flooding and devastation in Pakistan. If that makes me a bleeding heart liberal, then I'm proud to be called one. At least I'm not a hypocritical Christian who talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. Oh, and just in case you didn't know, Jesus was a liberal.

 

[bododie]

I am a woman dear. And my idea of religion is as follows: I don't subscribe in total to any manmade religious concepts and simply choose to have "faith" in a "God". I feel no need to "walk a walk" that man decided I should walk. I simply do no harm to another human being, and can live with that. I do believe that Jesus had a better message and approach than Muhammad. Jesus wasn't a Christian either.....

By the same token as Jesus was a liberal, do you condemn those who were conscientious objectors because they too were "liberals" in the sense that Jesus was?

What exactly constitutes walking the walk?

 

[orogenicman]

I am a woman dear. And my idea of religion is as follows: I don't subscribe in total to any manmade religious concepts and simply choose to have "faith" in a "God". I feel no need to "walk a walk" that man decided I should walk. I simply do no harm to another human being, and can live with that. I do believe that Jesus had a better message and approach than Muhammad. Jesus wasn't a Christian either.....

By the same token as Jesus was a liberal, do you condemn those who were conscientious objectors because they too were "liberals" in the sense that Jesus was?

What exactly constitutes walking the walk?

I thought you were, so I was a bit confused by your response to me calling you maam.

By walk the walk, Christianity professes that people should sympathize with the plight of others and help one's fellow man. But then, we see these god-awful attacks by some evangelical Christians that are anything but Christian in nature. It makes me want to throw up.

As for better or worse messages, I don't believe it is a competition, but then, I'm not a Christian, at least not any more.

 

[steveox]

Israel might attack Iran. I believe it would be a fatal mistake. After their utterly disastrous war with Hezbullah, they can ill afford another, much broader one, either economically, politically, or strategically. So they will more likely lean on their political big brother (the U.S.) to do it for them, or else just wait for the evangelical right in this country to declare it the prelude to the coming apocalypse, and demand yet another idiotic war their over-priviledged children won't have to fight and die in.

I believe they will now. Benjamin Netanyahu even said ,If no one takes action against them then we will.,, So far the world has ignored taking action against IRAN and the UN isnt doing enough. Just like they allow Russia to get away with supplying nuclear fuel to IRAN.

 

[orogenicman]

I believe they will now. Benjamin Netanyahu even said ,If no one takes action against them then we will.,, So far the world has ignored taking action against IRAN and the UN isnt doing enough. Just like they allow Russia to get away with supplying nuclear fuel to IRAN.

First off, any fuel Russia might be supplying to Iran cannot be converted to high enrichment. Secondly, Iran has their own natural uranium resources, and has been mining and refining it all along, under the watchful eye of the IAEA, I might add.

Finally, Israel quite possibly will strike Iran. Whether they should is another question altogether. Iran is not Saddam Hussein's Iraq. While we have all but destroyed that country, Iran has been quite busy when it comes to arming itself and training its military. No one, let me repeat, no one is going to simply walk into Tehran and dethrone the Ayatollahs like we did Saddam Hussein. Unlike with Iraq, the Iranians will likely fight you to the last man. And to what end, I might add, would anyone need to invade Iran? Unless Iran openly attacks Israel or another country with their own military, I see no justification for starting yet another pointless bloodbath in the Middle East.

 

[BigRob]

Actually if ANY of you knew anything about Iran, or human nature for that matter when its ideology differs from your own, you might understand that the rest of the Middle East dislikes Iran almost as much as they all dislike the existence of Israel.

I think most people posting have understood that for a very long time already. It is no secret that much of the Middle East dislikes Iran.

Iran is over 90% Shia, while the rest of the Middle East, other than Iraq is predominantly Sunni. Since we all know that Islam is such a benevolent religion, and one nostril hates the other, I imagine the rest of the Middle East will descend on a weakened Iran like....
jackals? Iran does have a great deal of wealth for the taking.

Where exactly are you getting off that "Iran is in a weakened state?"

Is Russia going to help? Probably, as soon as they figure out how to feed their people, as usual, because the grain crop is dust due to the fires.

Russia is going to help us stop Iran? Russia is helping them get their nuclear plant up and running, Russia is selling them advanced arms, and Russia is blocking meaningful action through the UN. Some help.

Is China going to help? Do you think China doesn't want Iran's wealth? Do you think China needs or will listen to the Ayatollah? yep.

China just wants a stable oil market. War with Iran would upset that. China however additionally has blocked any meaningful action from the UN as well. They have not been overly helpful.

Mahmoud the monkey faced muslim is tolling the death knell for Iran with his blathering rhetoric.

Not really.

 

[Gipper]

The war winds are blowing...

War preparations are reported by debkafile's military sources in Tehran and Damascus, debkafile's military sources report.
In Tehran, Iran's Revolutionary Guards announced Friday, Aug. 20: "IRGC is in full readiness to encounter firmly with the stupidity of the US and the Zionist regime."

In Damascus, Syrian prime minister Naji al-Otari gathered his ministers and heads of security and emergency services Thursday and ordered them to place all their services on immediate war readiness.
And sources close to the Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas quoted him as saying that direct talks with Israel were not in the offing because "a big military surprise awaits the Middle East."
On Thursday, too, Tehran pitched its threat level high by warning that any attack on Iran's nuclear sites would be met by the IRGC "targeting the interests of the enemies in any part of the world."
Some Iranian sources have suggested that Israel's obsessive preoccupation with the Galant scandal (over a forged document designed to influence the choice of the next Israeli chief of staff) is a smokescreen for masking preparations for an imminent attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

In the United States, respected commentators this week talked and wrote openly about a possible war over Iran's progress toward a nuclear bomb capability.
Former US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, who has excellent connections in Washington and Jerusalem, wrote: "The United States is more likely than Israel to launch an attack on Iran."
Lawrence Eagleburger, former US Secretary of State, had this to say about the activation of Iran's first reactor at Bushehr Saturday, Aug. 21: "The world's going to war over this. If Iran gets the weapon it's going to use it."

He urged an attack on Iran before it obtained a bomb.
Some other US experts suggest the world powers would wait longer than 11 months before weighing an attack, whereas informed American sources are talking for the first time in 14 months about a possible US-led multilateral Western attack on Iran which, according to debkafile's military sources, would be in conjunction with Germany, Britain and France.
In the first week of June, 2009, those sources note, US, UK and French forces carried out a joint exercise at the French Canjuers training facility near Toulon, simulating a marine attack with close air support on Iranian ground targets
http://www.debka.com/article/8983/

How ironic it would be if BO approves an attack on Iran. One can only imagine how the kooky anti-war left will respond.

 

[steveox]

China nor Russia will not take action against Israel if they do attack IRAN. Cause Israel is U.S ally. If they do strike Israel then U.S would do something.

 

[marcellus]

China nor Russia will not take action against Israel if they do attack IRAN. Cause Israel is U.S ally. If they do strike Israel then U.S would do something.

Americans shouldn"t be the mercenaries of Israel.

 

[Apathy]

You're a canadian its not your place to say what americans should or should not be.

 

[Apathy]

Get a life.

 

[marcellus]

Another war means a world war..
The pandora box of Iran could be a big surprise.
A nuclear war...US with 200.000 soldiers in the
M.E. ,among 1 billion and an half muslims ,
what will happen to them.
Europeans with the nuclear dust won"t be happy.
Iran can afford to lose one million dead .
Can Israel?
All Jews will leave Israel.
Who wants Jews ?
How Americans will react with 20.000 of its soldiers killed.
Will they keep responsible the Jews?
Pogroms ?

Who knows ?

 

[steveox]

Jews are responsibile for the downfall of the economy and diversity social issues. Hitler knew what he was talking about he was trying to tell you something and the world didnt want to listen.

 

[marcellus]

Jews are responsibile for the downfall of the economy and diversity social issues. Hitler knew what he was talking about he was trying to tell you something and the world didnt want to listen.

Hitler"s predictions in 1942....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPpEQuatcTU