mark my words: Iran is next, after NK, bush will get his little 'holly wars'

pfflampfflam
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
<a href="http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2003/03/10/iran_nuke/index.html"; target="_blank">Iran can't have nuclear reactors, and the press is starting to ramp up its coverage now </a> just so that by next year the populace will be ready to 'go in' to Iran



Bush sees that he is "battling the Evil Axis" in the name of God . . . .
«134567…10

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 182
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    "But wait, pfflam, we can't do that. Iran isn't breaking any laws. They're doing this 'by the books' and with the U.N.'s knowledge. Why would we attack Iran?"
  • Reply 2 of 182
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    "Don't question little man . . . God is guiding my every move"
  • Reply 3 of 182
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    [quote]Originally posted by pfflam:

    <strong><a href="http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2003/03/10/iran_nuke/index.html"; target="_blank">Iran can't have nuclear reactors, and the press is starting to ramp up its coverage now </a> just so that by next year the populace will be ready to 'go in' to Iran



    Bush sees that he is "battling the Evil Axis" in the name of God . . . .</strong><hr></blockquote>



    pfflam your last comment make you look like a childish *ss.



    Do you not believe that the State Dept. and the Pentagon inform the President of matters that raise concern to the security of American and regional affairs?



    Bush did not get into office so he could face these problems the world is facing. The world has brought these challenges to the stage and President Bush as well as others are dealing with the problems directly.



    You communicate more tired and worn out uneducated bigoted rhetoric.



    Get a clue.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 4 of 182
    trailmaster308trailmaster308 Posts: 699member
    Don't you guys know that we don't go to war with countries that actually have weapons. I thought everyone knew that.
  • Reply 5 of 182
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    pfflam haven't you realized yet that you're not allowed to criticize religious people or ideas? It's the new political correctness - say something critical of a religious idea and you're a bigot oppressing the religious victims. [quote]Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook:

    <strong>You communicate more tired and worn out uneducated bigoted rhetoric.



    Get a clue.



    Fellowship</strong><hr></blockquote>
  • Reply 6 of 182
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Yup. Though I would say Iran and Syria are under the same umbrella as Iraq, so in my words, I would say pakistan is next. Musharraf is already warning his people. You hawks do realize pakistan is the 9/11 state sponsor, right? Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.



    [ 03-11-2003: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
  • Reply 7 of 182
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    [quote]Originally posted by BRussell:

    <strong>pfflam haven't you realized yet that you're not allowed to criticize religious people or ideas? It's the new political correctness - say something critical of a religious idea and you're a bigot oppressing the religious victims. </strong><hr></blockquote>



    BRussell, Look up the term bigoted. I have no problem if he criticizes religious people or ideas. I think to bash Bush over and over and over because Bush is a Christian shows a bigoted nature in Pfflam. If anyone else does the same thing I would also see bigotry in them as well.



    One can argue their case without flat-out bigotry unless they really do not have an intellectual point but rather an anger filled rant.



    The Nazis were bigoted in relation to the Jews and I see far too much hostility towards the idea that a President can actually be a believing Christian. People if they are so "liberal" and all should embrace all people, ideas, and religion. But of course "liberals" are not truly what they say they are they judge people worse than any other group.



    Go ahead and make bigoted statements all you like. It just shows your ignorance and hate.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 8 of 182
    colanderofdeathcolanderofdeath Posts: 1,261member
    Who is holly?



    There won't be a war in Syria or Iran. At least not in the next two years.
  • Reply 9 of 182
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath:

    <strong>Who is holly?



    There won't be a war in Syria or Iran. At least not in the next two years.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Well, considering Perle feels that Iraq is a means and syria the end, I think it's clear will will see some sort of change in syria sooner rather than later.
  • Reply 10 of 182
    colanderofdeathcolanderofdeath Posts: 1,261member
    Maybe we can use our puppet govt in Iraq to finish off the Syrians.
  • Reply 11 of 182
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    there will be no war on North Korea.



    But Iran...? well that's a very different issue.
  • Reply 12 of 182
    the installerthe installer Posts: 910member
    [quote]Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook:

    <strong>I think to bash Bush over and over and over because Bush is a Christian shows a bigoted nature in Pfflam.</strong><hr></blockquote>I think to be bashed over and over by Bush with his Christian beliefs... I don't care/mind if he is a Christian, I just wish that he wouldn't push it down our throats so much. He is meant to be a politician, NOT a priest.



    Aren't the religious "convictions" demonstrated by some of our enemies what are causing so many/all the problems (in the first place)?



    - T.I.
  • Reply 13 of 182
    artman @_@artman @_@ Posts: 2,546member




    ...all I got...
  • Reply 14 of 182
    randycat99randycat99 Posts: 1,919member
    If it happens, it happens, but there are plenty of ways it can easily not happen. The time has come to bear that UN resolutions should be taken more seriously, not just as "suggestions". Above all, don't appear to "harbor" or cater to terrorists. The more you appear to be willing to do business with terrorists, the more likely you will incur getting a foot broken off in yo a$$. The time has come to "really" keep your nose clean and focus on modern world reform within your 3rd world country.
  • Reply 15 of 182
    the installerthe installer Posts: 910member
    "I'm the commander, I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation...." ? G. W. Bush



    <a href="http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=111"; target="_blank">http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=111</a>;



    - T.I.



    [ 03-11-2003: Message edited by: The Installer ]</p>
  • Reply 16 of 182
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    [quote]Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath:

    <strong>Maybe we can use our puppet govt in Iraq to finish off the Syrians.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I don't know about 'finish off,' but Perle's primary goal is to change the political situation so syria doesn't challenge israel as much. A Clean Break by Perle et al



    [ 03-11-2003: Message edited by: giant ]</p>
  • Reply 17 of 182
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Iran has a history of funding, training and supplying terrorists. Iran has no need for a nuclear reactor for energy. I read somewhere that the amount of oil they flare off annually would provide more energy than the nuke reactor they have going. So, if the purpose is military grade materials, is the world obliged to do something?



    Iran may be next, but that doesn't mean war against Iran. And it doesn't mean the US acting alone. The world has an interest in what happens there, but the world may feel it should be again ignored. It could mean encouraging the democratic reforms happening now or other diplomatic solutions. So long as they are encouraged not to develop nuclear weapons, it is in the best interests of the western world. Whether the UN or the US acts to achieve this, it would still result in western influence being extended.
  • Reply 18 of 182
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,018member
    This topic is ridiculous. A Holy War is fought for the purpose of advancing one religion and destroying another. Go ahead, someone make that case here. Please.



    What Bush said is that he is guided by God and prays for guidance, wisdom and strength. Yeah, that's a Holy War....or as pfflam says "Holly War". He could at least learn how to friggin' spell his rhetorical nonsense.

    Once again, the Left has no real logic or reason behind its positions. It's all "Bush is a Nazi" or "Bush hates muslims" or "Bush wants the oil". They can't just disagree, they have to verbally assassinate. They have to call the President of the US a war monger or Napolean. The reason they do this is that they have no sane reason for their opposition...it is just their identity to oppose war.



    I have yet to hear a solid, defensible reason NOT to go to war. I have yet to hear one person on the Left to ask HUSSEIN to disarm to avoid war.



    [ 03-11-2003: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
  • Reply 19 of 182
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Would that be the ummm .... Pro-Saddam left
  • Reply 20 of 182
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    [quote]Originally posted by The Installer:

    <strong>"I'm the commander, I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation...." ? G. W. Bush



    <a href="http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=111"; target="_blank">http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=111</a>;



    - T.I.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>





    Of course that's taken out of context but I'm sure the anti-Bush left doesn't care.



    Proper context below.



    Source: CBS new report on Woodward's book "Bush at War".



    <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/17/60minutes/main529657.shtml"; target="_blank">A Rare Glimpse Inside Bush's Cabinet</a>





    [quote]Woodward managed to get the notes from more than 50 National Security Council and War Cabinet meetings, in which, he says, Mr. Bush dominates his more experienced cabinet members Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld - and even Vice President Dick Cheney.



    Woodward says the president told him that when he chairs a meeting he often tries to be provocative. When Woodward asked him if he tells his staff that he is purposely being provocative, Mr. Bush answered: "Of course not. I am the commander, see?"



    President Bush: "I do not need to explain why I say things. - That's the interesting thing about being the President. - Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."<hr></blockquote>



    [ 03-11-2003: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.