So when do we invade Iran?

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
I more concerned about US having nukes, since it's the only nation who ever used them and have a bad habbit -at first to shoot than ask questions.

I believe history will show that we do talk to people before we shoot them full of holes.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
1) Chechnyan rebels do not exist.

Ok, how about Chechnyan patriots?

Originally posted by Serb
2) It's a crazy, unreal scenario.

So is Iran with nukes.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Verto
The Soviets lost the Cold War.

Big deal.

I just like saying that everytime Stalinbot is around.

The reply from Stalinbot will be: "we will bury you".

[Serb]

Originally posted by Vince278


I believe history will show that we do talk to people before we shoot them full of holes.

Will show? Is it your desire? Thus you commit your previous and current diplomatic approach was and still different?

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
Nope. Your invasion in Iraq is illegal by definition.

How so?

Originally posted by Serb
They attack military targets?

Sorry, I really can't answer that without insulting the Russian army.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Vince278


Ok, how about Chechnyan patriots?

They don't have any of your crappy SAM missiles.

So is Iran with nukes.

Not exactly. The scenario where Iran have nukes is much more believable, than scenario where Iran is giving his nukes to Chechen terrorists.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
The reply from Stalinbot will be: "we will bury you".

What are you going to bury us with? Porn? Mail order brides? Inexpensive red flags? Propaganda pamphlets? Export quality vodka? Swimsuit photos of Brezhnev ( )?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Vince278


How so?

Read UN charter.
Your invasion in Iraq is blatant and unprovoked agression, which violates this basic international law.

Sorry, I really can't answer that without insulting the Russian army.

Really? Or perhaps you can't provide an example where they strike a military target. They prefer to kill children and women, 'cuase soldiers would kick their pitty arses like they always did.
And as for insults, do you really want to compare combat capabilities of two armies, considering your performance in Iraq?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Vince278


What are you going to bury us with? Porn? Mail order brides? Inexpensive red flags? Propaganda pamphlets? Export quality vodka? Swimsuit photos of Brezhnev ( )?

Soil.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
Will show? Is it your desire? Thus you commit your previous and current diplomatic approach was and still different?

Worked for Iraq.

We are still talking to North Korea and Iran (amongst others).

Originally posted by Serb
They don't have any of your crappy SAM missiles.

They don't need any help and we wouldn't help them anyway.

Originally posted by Serb
Your invasion in Iraq is blatant and unprovoked agression

It was neither blatant nor unprovoked. Nor was anyone surprised.

Originally posted by Serb
Really? Or perhaps you can't provide an example where they strike a military target. They prefer to kill children and women, 'cuase soldiers would kick their pitty arses like they always did.

Read this.

"Many of the losses could have been avoided in Chechnya with better discipline, professionalism and responsibility." - Putin.

Originally posted by Serb
And as for insults, do you really want to compare combat capabilities of two armies, considering your performance in Iraq?

Sounds like an excellent idea for another thread.

Originally posted by Serb
Soil.

No, thank-you. Our own soil, like other things, is of a higher quality and more fertile.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Vince278
Worked for Iraq.

You must be kidding.

We are still talking to North Korea and Iran (amongst others).

Because, NK already have nukes and Iran could have one soon. You have invaded Iraq using WMD as a smoke screen and at the same time you "talked" with NK. Hypocrites. Had you really wanted to get rid the world of WMD you would started with NK. But no, you've invaded Iraq, because you knew they don't have any WMD, and thus your risks will be minimal.

They don't need any help and we wouldn't help them anyway.

They indeed do not need any, because they are hopeless, but you do help them.

It was neither blatant nor unprovoked. Nor was anyone surprised.

Not surprised doesn't mean blatant or unprovoked. Your invasion in Iraq was a clear violation of UN charter, thus it makes it CRIMINAL.

Read this.

And what about that?

http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-index.htm

http://www.crimesofwar.org/onnews/news-fallujah3.html

http://www.mediamonitors.net/gowans22.html

"Many of the losses could have been avoided in Chechnya with better discipline, professionalism and responsibility." - Putin.

True, but it doesn't mean you are doing better in Iraq.

Sounds like an excellent idea for another thread.

Don't think so. I wouldn't survive your heart attack caused by my posts.

No, thank-you. Our own soil, like other things, is of a higher quality and more fertile.

Who said we will bury you with our own soil? It will be your soil, of course.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Vince278
Read this.

This piece of crapp deserves its own post.
What a sh!tty propaganda.
How such unprofessional and undisciplined army could have done better than your "professional" (freindly fire anyone?) and "disciplined" (Abu-Grave anyone?) US Army STILL DOING IN IRAQ?

If you are so f*cking great, so f*cking professional, so f*cking disciplined, so f*cking advanced and so f*cking amazing, then WHAT THE F*CK are you still doing there? And why the hell Chechnya in comparison with Iraq is the safest place on Earth?

I loved the way how they combined 12 000 KIA figure pulled out their arses with the first war. And btw, Budanov is still in jail, because he was founf guilty.
LIE, LIE, and one more time LIE.
Not that I expected something else.
Total sh!t.


Thanks, I feel much better now.
Have a nice day.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
You must be kidding.

We did try diplomacy first. Through the UN also.

Originally posted by Serb
Because, NK already have nukes and Iran could have one soon.

One at a time.

Originally posted by Serb
They indeed do not need any, because they are hopeless,

They've been "hopeless" for about a decade or so.

Originally posted by Serb
Not surprised doesn't mean blatant or unprovoked. Your invasion in Iraq was a clear violation of UN charter, thus it makes it CRIMINAL.

Wonder why nobody followed up on that?

Originally posted by Serb
And what about that?

http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-index.htm

http://www.crimesofwar.org/onnews/news-fallujah3.html

http://www.mediamonitors.net/gowans22.html

That's alot to read all at once. Let me make some popcorn first and a mug of hot cocoa (with marshmallows of course ).

Originally posted by Serb
True, but it doesn't mean you are doing better in Iraq.

Comparably, yes we are.

Originally posted by Serb
Don't think so. I wouldn't survive your heart attack caused by my posts.

Thanks.
It would have been a fun thread.

Originally posted by Serb
Who said we will bury you with our own soil? It will be your soil, of course.

Bring your own shovel.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by Serb
Thanks, I feel much better now.
Have a nice day.

Watch your blood pressure.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I know this isn't a serious thread, but I would be interested in discussing America's military options vis-a-vis Iran. Would airstrikes do enough damage to set the Iranian weapons program back significantly?

Yes, you don't have to get everything to set them back years.

If so, does America let Israel do it or do they join in? If not, what are the other options?

Israel will do it with or without American support or consent if they think the mullahs are close to getting a bomb. The other main option is an unidentified or black force. But almost impossible to keep secret after the event.

There's been some talk of a limited invasion to overthrow the Iranian regime and destroy the nuclear sites, then a quick withdrawal to avoid the nation-building that has been the difficult part in Iraq. How likely is that?

unlikely - you don't have to invade to take out the nuclear facilities. The most likely outcome is a widening of the war in Iraq with Iran getting behind the Shiites and unleashing Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The easiest solution, of course, would be to do as Thorn suggested and threaten to nuke Iran's weapons production sites if they don't end their program and actually follow through on the threat if need be.

Er no, that is far from the easiest opition.

That would be brutally effective (especially if we've perfected those nuclear bunker busters people got up in arms with), but I seriously doubt that's an option that's on the table. Even Bush doesn't have balls that big...

Or even he isn't that stupid? er, wait a minute...