Gee...

Current Events » in reply to re: a hypothetical

Gee...

Donald — 10/3/2006 1:08:44 PM (archived)

TOM: "I believe the most likely form of use of force against Iran would be sanctions..."

MY REPLY: Gee...isn't that what we were doing in Iraq before George Bush screwed the pooch?

TOM: "...I doubt that anyone really thinks that going to war with Iran would suddenly make the Republicans the most popular kids on the block unless they're smoking something."

MY REPLY: We agree. The deployment of the Eisenhower is not a sign that an attack on Iran is imminent. We'd need a lot more firepower than that to tackle the Iranians. And, I doubt that even the Republicans are nutty enough to think we could unilaterally start a third front of war in the Middle East. Then agian....they did elect George Bush.

The whole thread (30 posts)

US Navy sends armada of ships to the Persian Gulf, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower - Lindy - 10/3/2006 12:38:41 AM
- re: US Navy sends armada of ships to the Persian Gulf, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower - Rob - 12/21/2006 6:52:34 PM
- re: US Navy sends armada of ships to the Persian Gulf, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower - RNE - 10/3/2006 5:05:31 PM
  - Well, what do I know? - Lindy - 10/3/2006 8:37:31 PM
- Remember what happened to the Armada. - ER - 10/3/2006 1:22:53 PM
  - If just the destination part of the story is true... - alcaray - 10/3/2006 4:17:07 PM
    - re: If just the destination part of the story is true... - ER - 10/3/2006 5:46:59 PM
  - Thanks for the insider's view - Lindy - 10/3/2006 2:57:13 PM
  - Touche on the last line. (n/t) - azstrummer - 10/3/2006 1:57:46 PM
- re: Eisenhower - Tom Brosz - 10/3/2006 3:08:42 AM
  - a hypothetical - azstrummer - 10/3/2006 5:15:10 AM
    - re: another hypothetical - Scott Evil - 10/3/2006 2:19:49 PM
    - Who would go to war with Iran with only two carrier battle groups? - Lee - 10/3/2006 7:31:29 AM
      - Yep, just like we did with the Iraqis, Afghanis and Vietnamese. (n/t) - ER - 10/3/2006 12:53:35 PM
        
        I recall people arguing that we took Iraq too fast. - Scott Evil - 10/3/2006 2:16:08 PM
        
        "Taken" Iraq? Define that, if you will. - Bowser - 10/3/2006 2:33:55 PM
        
        What a lame attempt at argumentation... - Scott Evil - 10/3/2006 2:37:01 PM
        
        Heh, heh. Good thing I don't suggest you are in school!!! - Bowser - 10/3/2006 3:43:48 PM
    - re: a hypothetical - Tom Brosz - 10/3/2006 5:23:11 AM
      - A well measured response. Thanks (n/t) - azstrummer - 10/3/2006 1:55:48 PM
        
        Which didn't answer your question, by the way. (n/t) - Bowser - 10/3/2006 3:44:45 PM
        
        re: Which didn't answer your question, by the way. - azstrummer - 10/3/2006 5:27:19 PM
        
        re: answer - Tom Brosz - 10/3/2006 6:40:49 PM
        
        Thanks again. - azstrummer - 10/3/2006 9:58:45 PM
        
        Outrage - Tom Brosz - 10/4/2006 12:03:11 AM
        
        re: Outrage - Lindy - 10/4/2006 12:31:14 AM
      - Gee... - Donald - 10/3/2006 1:08:44 PM
        
        re: Actually, we wouldn't be opening a third front in the Middle East. - Scott Evil - 10/3/2006 2:23:00 PM
        
        It's a matter of interpretation... - ER - 10/3/2006 3:19:29 PM
        
        It's rhetorical Scott... - Donald - 10/3/2006 3:01:06 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (30 posts)