We've heard hardline rhetoric mainly from the neo-cons, looking for support to invade Iran. Now with the report from the National Intelligence Estimate stating that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003, its seems that intelligence is being hyped up again by this administration to make its case. I'd like to hear from those who think invasion of Iran is a good idea. I'd like the members out there to refrain from answering if there best answer is to "kick some ass".







Edited for content, dc3 Moderator

This post has been edited by dc3: Dec 8 2007, 01:24 AM

Actually, doesn't the information in the new NIE show that invasion would be less likely?

How can the Dems crap all over the Intel on Iraq and WMDs as false, trumped up, exaggerated, etc. Then hold this one on Iran as gospel? You can't have it both ways.

The intel on Iraq was overhyped and its been proven. No WMDs. That's about as inaccurate as you can get. As for the intel on Iran, it's as close to an educated guess as you can get when done by the NIE, which is a pool of intelligence gathered by 16 different agencies. Can it be inaccurate, sure. Not much intelligence can be categorized as a "slam dunk". The real disconnect here is that Bush's latest excuse is that his advisors failed to inform him of this intelligence. Everyone inside the beltway knows that this is either ineptitude at the highest levels of gov't or an outright lie. Despite the information in hand, Bush refused to tone down the rhetoric on Iran and his handlers probably empowered him to do so. Do you think Nicolas Sarkozy, the newly elected PM of France is going to stand up w/ the Pres again? Do you think any leader from the EU ever will again? How about the global community? Sarkozy got his political head chopped off for standing w Bush. Meanwhile Putin is standing in the corner laughing, saying "I told you so." No one's trying to have it both ways. It'd just be nice to have the leader of the free world look presidential instead of some spoiled schoolboy who has to have his way all the time. This is W's last hurrah. Whatever effectiveness he could've had his last year in office is gone.

Yes, this new intel takes invasion off the table, absolutely. In fact it calls for a complete turnaround in policy. Unfortunately the only way to handle it is thru diplomacy, something sadly lacking in this White House.

Yes, you can when the MSM is on your side.

I would love to see Iran invaded, but the U.S. simply does not have the resources. In my opinion, what we have to do is strenghten relationsships with France, Russia and China. France firstly, because their new president, Sarkozy, is very pro-American. Then we can put strong economic sanctions on Iran. We can also incite propoganda in Iran, in order to elect a pro-American leader. Once we stabilize the situation in Iraq, we can build a solid military presence there to threaten Iran. And then we can finally with (French, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Australian, Israeli, Canadian, British, etc.) support, we can prepare for a possible military attack. Which should, strategically, start with a massive airstrike.

Zik,
What do we do if we decide to invade Iran and discover that China, Russia, North Africa, and some South American nations i.e. Cuba, Venezuela are standing with Iran and not us?
With all due Respect
Jo4Peace

Maybe they're just trying to stop Knucklehead from making another blunder..
Jeezy Peets.. Sometimes I swear, Our poor excuse for a president opens his mouth just long enough to switch feet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well put Jo... In fact, I think it is more likely than not.. They suspended their nuke activity...!!!! I'm trully suprised we have so many warmongers in here.... Hearing all this "let's invade Iran" crap scares the hell out of me... I'm starting to think maybe Pat Buchanan is right...!! Maybe America is on the path to self destruction..! If he manages to invade Iran, I will personally start a revolt against our country....... Maybe we should read the constitution

You have a valid point, I can not argue with that Joe. But that is why I put an emphasis on France assisting us. And also why I said we shouldn't invade, because we don't have the resources. But I do think China and Russia would side with us, solely for diplomatic reasons as well as having no interest in seeing a third world war. And this is why Iran is such a problem. There is no nearly perfect solution.

With all due Respect Zik,
I am not seeking a perfect solution just a rational workable plan to pull back from the edge of this cliff, we seem to be willing to jump off of.
Russia is moving Naval personnel in areas where our countries meet (Alaska) Do you think this is for our protection? China sends us defective poisonous products (toothpaste, dog food, children toys) is that solely diplomatic behavior? France, Britain, Australia leaders, distance themselves from their alliance with our country because of Mr. George W Bush so that they could get elected in their respective countries. So if we found ourselves in a difficult situation and especially if we still have the same leaders, which nation will come to our aide even if it means they get hit? With our unilateral positions and 'Bring It On' Bravado
Respectfully
Jo4Peace

Well Joe, thats my point exactly. In order to be in a good position to take on Iran, we need to be in a good position. So as mentioned before, we have to improve relations with France, Russia and China. And, by the way, I doubt China sent use faulty products as an act of war. Because, that is simply ridiculous.

Zikla,
Your argument to build up support for an invasion is what's simply ridiculous. You're borderline delusional on so many levels if you think that's gonna work. All the warmongers out there must be financially independent b/c an invasion would send gas prices well over $5/gal. and if you don't believe me just look @ what happened recently w/ all the volatility that resulted w/ W's heated rhetoric on Iran. It drove oil prices to its highest levels this year. That's why the leader of the free world has to choose his words carefully. But I digress.

1. France will never stand w/ this president ever again. Sarkozy put himself on an island w/ George w/ his ardent support of him. Today they both look like idiots, at least politically in Nick's case.

2. Russia will never, ever support an invasion. You can bet the farm on that. Putin's record has always backed Iran b/c it helps Russia economically. Why would he jeopardize that? Remember the G8 summit in Russia over the summer? That's where our Prez looked into Putin's soul like some kinda karmic, psycho-intellectual & saw a man of integrity. What a laugh!
That man of integrity then turned around and gave Ahmadinajead his full & unfailing support when he visited the UN in NY. He basically spit in W's face. Instead of looking into his soul, he should've looked into his record.

3. China has the largest emerging market in the world growing @ a 10% clip a year. That will only continue to grow once a formal Chinese banking system is established. Just to give you an idea, our economy averages growth at about 3-4% a yr. Think about all the activity & advancements that occurs in our daily lives from technology & its availability to us. Now triple it. That's what happens in the everyday life of the Chinese. And what is all that based on? PETROLEUM. Yesterday they were communicating w/ pigeons. This morning they're getting up to buy iPhones.

Once again, as I said before, we must put economic and political sanctions against Iran before an invasion. As well as gain support among the Iranian people. And so far, everybody has been rtiicizng my ideas and solutions, but none have put forth any solutions of their own.

Good Day Zik,
The thread ask the question 'Who wants to invade Iran'? I don't want to invade Iran I don't want to put economic sanctions against that country to punish it's people for supporting their government. I don't want to foment instability in anybodies country political or otherwise.
Mk made some good points, pointing out the facts on the ground so I will just add that I believe the recent acts by China could be looked at as an act of economic war. It certainly is a way to stick their finger in our eye and point up the question: How can you be a super power when you rely on outsourcing for your bullets, your armor, your energy, and your way of life; China and Japan combined holds approximately one trillion dollars of our debt? We don't put the cost of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan on the books (operating budget) instead Mr. George W. makes periodical supplemental budget request to pay for the war, we borrow that money from other countries. Is this practice okay with you?
We fought the cold war for a generation or more with the old Soviet Union (power base still remains in Russia), and never fired a shot, claimed victory when the Berlin wall came down. Point we didn't have to invade that country.
Zik, I am not being critical of you I just want to have a open conversation an exchange of ideas and views, it's the reason I visit ThoughtVent, so far I have found for the most part the people who visit this virtual community speak clearly and sometimes loudly but never over the top offensive.
So please continue to share your ideas and critique mine.
Respectfully
Jo4Peace