whateverdude Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Iran attack Israeli is finishing up plans. Third week in August looks about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Netanyahu's a bad motherflucker. Bye Bye Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 as long as we stay the HELL out of it, they can do what they want. Oh, and gas prices are gonna SUCK!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Netanyahu's a bad motherflucker. Bye Bye Iran. Do you think it stops there? No response from Russia or China? This won't end well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Do you think it stops there? No response from Russia or China? This won't end well... I agree " This wont end well" The whole middle east will explode. And eventually, we'll get sucked into it. Ugly ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Very interesting developments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 I agree " This wont end well" The whole middle east will explode. And eventually, we'll get sucked into it. Ugly ****. Ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Not sure Americans have a taste for much more war in the Middle East...wonder what BO would do if this happens before November and what this would do to the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Not sure Americans have a taste for much more war in the Middle East...wonder what BO would do if this happens before November and what this would do to the election. It would certainly be a quite potent dynamic. Could go either way, could be a unifying galvanizing sort of an event for the president or it could be very negative for him as well. The problem with this is that the two previous unifying war related events was right after 9/11 and there was alot of support for Americans going into Afghanistan and the killing of Bin Laden. Both of them were easily defined and not too difficult to justify the decisions for the actions. In this case, there is no clear cut victory. The best that could happen is that they disable the nuclear facilities and delay the process. This is not a mission that would include the ousting of their leaders, and the likelyhood of their being some sort of protracted lashback is quite high. The risks for Obama is that the Israelis and Iran and it's proxy's trade fire for an extended period of time, in the meantime gasoline prices go up anywhere from 50 cents at a very minimum to as high as $5 a gallon. The country is already war fatigued and are in no mood to see higher gasoline prices, specially now considering that the economy could very well dip down to below 1.5% GDP growth. My guess is that Obama would do a 180, have a nationally televised speech, as he should, and speak of the dire need to stop Iran from getting Nuclear capabilities and begin justifying the need to be proactive about the situation. That would be my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 ...wonder what BO would do if this happens before November.... One of the reasons I dislike the idea of four more years of Obama is because as I pondered your very relevant question, the first answer that popped into my head was "BO will do whatever is most politically beneficial to him first." Yes, I know, most politicians look at most situations as they relate to their political career, but some things require more. And there nothing about BO that suggests he's up to that task. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 One of the reasons I dislike the idea of four more years of Obama is because as I pondered your very relevant question, the first answer that popped into my head was "BO will do whatever is most politically beneficial to him first." Yes, I know, most politicians look at most situations as they relate to their political career, but some things require more. And there nothing about BO that suggests he's up to that task. BTW, I'm not even sure I what I would support. Jumping headfirst into Iran vs. Israel sounds frightening. Ignoring it sounds frightening. It would be bad no matter what and require some serious diplomatic work to keep it from escalating fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 BTW, I'm not even sure I what I would support. Jumping headfirst into Iran vs. Israel sounds frightening. Ignoring it sounds frightening. It would be bad no matter what and require some serious diplomatic work to keep it from escalating fast. Escalating?? Hell I'd like to have some diplomats in this country that can keep it from happening. Good !@#$ing luck on that huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 BTW, I'm not even sure I what I would support. Jumping headfirst into Iran vs. Israel sounds frightening. Ignoring it sounds frightening. It would be bad no matter what and require some serious diplomatic work to keep it from escalating fast. Not to worry. Hillary, in typical Clinton fashion, will do her best "Remain calm! All is well!" Kevin Bacon impression... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 One of the reasons I dislike the idea of four more years of Obama is because as I pondered your very relevant question, the first answer that popped into my head was "BO will do whatever is most politically beneficial to him first." Yes, I know, most politicians look at most situations as they relate to their political career, but some things require more. And there nothing about BO that suggests he's up to that task. Not saying you're wrong, but here's an honest question: All things being equal, who would be more likely to put their political career ahead of the best interests of the nation -- a President with no more elections left? Or a first termer looking for a second? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Not saying you're wrong, but here's an honest question: All things being equal, who would be more likely to put their political career ahead of the best interests of the nation -- a President with no more elections left? Or a first termer looking for a second? How about next time we try to elect someone who doesn't even make this question worth considering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Not saying you're wrong, but here's an honest question: All things being equal, who would be more likely to put their political career ahead of the best interests of the nation -- a President with no more elections left? Or a first termer looking for a second? Well, we already know that the one guy will put his political career ahead of the best interests of the nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 How about next time we try to elect someone who doesn't even make this question worth considering? Do you think there is such a person in politics today? Honestly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 Do you think there is such a person in politics today? Honestly? Wouldn't matter even if there was. Too many people on both sides of the aisle wasting time for their own self-interests to get the effort of a single person passed. Look at the debt commission and Paul Ryan's budget.The only two attempts at addressing our debt and deficit, something most sane people realize is a horrific, yet inevitable timebomb. Perfect plans? Of course not. But a place for discussions to begin. But we can't have that because it's easier to demonize each other. Three years and no budget. Three freaking years. Why? No one knows. No one cares. No one even discusses it. Could these people BE more selfish? We can pick on individual items all day and have our political spats, but we all need to work together to get rid of the old folks and bring in some new. Tea party did that and have been ridiculed mercilessly, but they stand to do it again, and if we're lucky we'll get enough new blood to at least cut the wasteful spending. Still I always go back to the one true litmus test in my life: if having people fly our own planes into our own buildings and kill 3000 of our own citizens isn't enough to bring us together for more than a few moments, I don't carry a lot of hope for much else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Wouldn't matter even if there was. Too many people on both sides of the aisle wasting time for their own self-interests to get the effort of a single person passed. Look at the debt commission and Paul Ryan's budget.The only two attempts at addressing our debt and deficit, something most sane people realize is a horrific, yet inevitable timebomb. Perfect plans? Of course not. But a place for discussions to begin. But we can't have that because it's easier to demonize each other. Three years and no budget. Three freaking years. Why? No one knows. No one cares. No one even discusses it. Could these people BE more selfish? We can pick on individual items all day and have our political spats, but we all need to work together to get rid of the old folks and bring in some new. Tea party did that and have been ridiculed mercilessly, but they stand to do it again, and if we're lucky we'll get enough new blood to at least cut the wasteful spending. Still I always go back to the one true litmus test in my life: if having people fly our own planes into our own buildings and kill 3000 of our own citizens isn't enough to bring us together for more than a few moments, I don't carry a lot of hope for much else. I'm with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 (edited) "The West is convinced that Tehran's real objective is to build an atomic bomb - something which the Jewish state will never accept because its leaders consider a nuclear armed-Iran a threat to its very existence." What a crock of s**t. "both Mofaz and Netanyahu deny that Iran was mentioned in the coalition negotiations." More BS "President Mahmoud Abbas even went so far as to predict in an interview with Reuters last week that it would be "the end of the world". It's really flowing, now. Israelis particularly fear retaliation from Iran's proxy militias - the Hezbollah guerrillas in southern Lebanon and the Hamas fighters in the Gaza Strip. Both are believed to possess large arsenals of rockets which could hit major Israeli towns and cities. Ha ha ha!!! That made me laugh. "Netanyahu admires the British wartime premier because he saw the true dangers posed by Nazi Germany to the world at a time when many other politicians argued for appeasing Hitler. The parallels with modern-day Iran are obvious and Netanyahu is explicit about the dangers he believes are posed by militant Islam: as he puts it, its convulsive power, its cult of death and its ideological zeal." REALLY???? Edited May 19, 2012 by NoJustice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts