US special forces 'inside Iran'

[The Mad Monk]

If they have people scouting around in Iran, or intend to, these would be the guys.

[Ted Striker]

well, yeah

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Don't roll your eyes at me.

You make an arrogant remark pointing out the obvious you get an appropriate response.

punk

Why are you being so belligerant?

[notyoueither]

You've been away a while, Monk.

[Jon Miller]

we shoudln't fight iran

that is just imperialsim from Vush and company

we are already over extended as it is

unless we have a druff

:Lhmm?:

Jon Miller

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Jaguar

Iran = Iraq x 2

Iran = Iraq x Iraq

[Jon Miller]

I think it is likely to be harder

even if there are more people who will welcome us

in any case, unless we are rescueing a popultaeion, any countrey with cities will be hard

Jon Miller

[Dr Strangelove]

One problem with sending spec-ops recon teams into Iran is that if they get caught it will be the Iran Hostage incident all over again. Would the Iranians keep them long enough to embarrass Bush's potential GOP presidential successor in the 2008 election? You'd better believe that they would. Maybe Carter will live to see his revenge upon Reagan?

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
One problem with sending spec-ops recon teams into Iran is that if they get caught it will be the Iran Hostage incident all over again. Would the Iranians keep them long enough to embarrass Bush's potential GOP presidential successor in the 2008 election? You'd better believe that they would. Maybe Carter will live to see his revenge upon Reagan?

I hope you are not saying that it would be a good thing. Having any Americans, special ops or not, caught and taken hostage is never a good thing.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Ned


The existence of strongmen does not mean that we put them there as your crazy leftists state repeatedly, nauseously. Their continued existence does not require an immediate invasion by the US, as your stupid note implies. The US is the world's best hope of freedom and human rights. You know it, but say the opposite. Why? Because you are a leftist.

Look at the pretty strawman!

I know we didn't bring those men to power, Ned. But because they are useful to us in some way, they are not put on the "axis of evil" or "outposts of tyranny" lists. Musharraf for support for our efforts in Afganistan, and as the alternative to Islamists who might win an election. Mubarak because we cut a deal to get Egypt to make peace with Israel and again the issue of the alternative. Q because he is the example we can show those who don't want to get in line: see, do as we demand and we will reward you.

I do not support the idea of invading every dictatorship, Ned. That's YOUR SIDE! You know, the idea of spreading freedom and democracy by using our military to knock off a dictactor? Or had you forgotten W's secondary reason for the Iraq war?

But of course, the inconsistency is that whereas "freedom and democracy" are used (in part) as justifications of such action, it is only done in a place that is useful/strategic to us. As such, "freedom and democracy," should it actually be a result of US military action (dubious, to say the least), is basically a positive side effect. It's a farce, Ned.

And no, Ned, I do not "know" that we're the world's best hope of freedom and human rights. The sheer arrogance of that statement is amazing. Well, not really, I've grown used to it from people like you.

Call me a leftist all you want, Neddy, but remember that such terms are always relative. I see you as a lunatic fringe rightwinger. You see me as a leftist. The political center of the nation lies between us - though it has been shifting in your direction, to our great loss, IMO.

-Arrian

[GePap]

Our options against Iran are weaker today after our invasion of Iraq than they were before it, not only because of the diplomatic damage of the Iraq war, and the immense burden placed on our military just to keep Iraq quiet, but because of the fact that Iran has gained influence in Iraq and can, if it wants to really, create significant problems for the US there.

A military strike against nuclear facilities would probably be incomplete- it would be diffcult at best to get all materials, probably impossible- and the ability to remove any knowledge they may have already 0.

The basic question in Iran is what our relation to their regime will be, and how long that regime will last given the forces unleashed by the revolution of '79.

[Ned]

Arrian, a sensible post, finally. The three strongmen you mentioned are not our responsibility as you point out. So, why is the oppression of their people, to the extent it exists, our fault?

The likes of Michael Moore often state that unless we are willing to invade "friendly" dictatorships, we have no right to say that the reason we invade an unfriendly dictatorship is to spread democracy. Well, this kind of logic is a bunch of crap because it completely ignores the fact that we are constantly presuring friendly regimes to move towards democracy, and object strongly and at times deny trade benefits to friendly regimes that abuse their citizens. But, these facts are ignored by the left in their mindless efforts to paint America in as worse light as possible.

As to America being the best hope for freedom in the world, this is true. We even tried to get the Euro's to handle Milosevic by themselves. They failed and came begging. There is noone else to stop genocide and aggressive regimes in the world. That is why we are the best hope for freedom and democracy for the oppressed. That you fail to understand this is apalling, but oh so typicial of the anti-American left.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Ned
Cruddy, supporting Dictators? Like Saddam and Mullah Omar? You have today's America completely backassward; and you know it. The world knows it. It is only the radical left that continues to spread the lies that liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq are not about liberty, but about OIL and American Imperialism. You guys who keep saying this nonsense must be having a hard time saying this crap with a straight face. Even the most committed of the lunatic fringe left must know that what they are saying is pure BS.

The US being against Islam? You really have never heard George Bush speak, have you. All you do is repeat your propaganda endlessly until you think that everybody believes you.

This constant lying and propaganda from the left is just a bit much, don't you think?

How much freedom and democracy are in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Egypt, compared to Iran?

All friends of GWB.

And the US is BY DEFINITION anti-Islam if it is pro Israel. Not my reading... but it certainly is the Muslim reading of the situation.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Cruddy


How much freedom and democracy are in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Egypt, compared to Iran?

All friends of GWB.

And the US is BY DEFINITION anti-Islam if it is pro Israel. Not my reading... but it certainly is the Muslim reading of the situation.

OMG YOU ARE LUNATIC FRINGE LEFT !#!#!

boy the Nedaverse is an interesting place.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Well, this kind of logic is a bunch of crap because it completely ignores the fact that we are constantly presuring friendly regimes to move towards democracy,