Iran, nukes, medium range missles, subs, cruisers ...

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by cz75luver

And you watch/listen/follow Fox News because . . . ? They hired Sarah Palin as a commentator for Chist's sake. Need I say more???

YES, please say more ... Loose focus of the topic, and instead focus on me

[Dieselkanic]

Originally Posted by elliotriley

I don't think it's a threat to US National Security. What intelligence tells you it is? It may be a threat to Isreal though, or even the region. But... as I stated before Israel could take care of themselves and I'm not entirely convinced that it would be a threat to the region. Pakistan transports their nukes in unmarked vans and has elements within their ranks that supported Bin Laden and other groups, but we don't start a war with them.

Here's an interesting fact, in the early 80s Israel bombed facilities in Iraq because they perceived a threat. The United States Congress voted to basically tell them that they had gone too far and to back off. There was a man that did not vote to tell Israel that and went against the many Republicans, Ron Paul.

I agree that you can find experts for anything, that's a true statement. However, the facts are what they are, fact. The fact is that Israel could, by themselves, take care of Iran. The fact is that Israel has a few allies within the region that would help them. The fact is the only evidence that states that Iran is makeing a nuke is speculative (the same type of evidence that stated Iraq had WMD). The fact is that we can no longer afford to be an empire nor can we afford another war. Our military is spread thin and our troops are ready to come home. Listen, I'm not all out anti-war. If the congress thinks there is a threat to national security they can declare war. It's simple and its constitutional.

There is a reason that Ron Paul get's 50% of military monetary support while Obama gets 28% and the other candidates only 22%.

Two of the sources I cited are ex-terrorists. I do think they know more about radical Islam and Iran than you and I or RonPaul. And it isn't so much about 'intelligence', it's about how they think. They will live in huts with dirt floors if it gives them a chance to kill some of us. They count it glory if they die killing us. Very much the polar opposite of the US.

Why do you carry a gun (if you do), do you have hard intelligence someone is out to get you? Or is it because you know there is evil in the world and there is a chance you may face it one day? Similar principle of why we should be concerned about Iran, except we know they are evil. And a nuke is just a bit more devasting to the US than the bad dude's piece you may or may not face some day. So the prudent thing to do is to prevent it form happening.


As far as the military people supporting RonPaul, you gave the reason yourself. They're sick and tired of being deployed and RP promises to bring them home. So yeah, they support him. I might too if I didn't see the big picture.

[ArmyGuy45]

Originally Posted by cz75luver

Reading your posts and those of your wife, you carry a concealed weapon. Why? Has a person threatened you or your wife to cause grave bodily harm or death and is it reasonable to believe they would soon? If not, then you don't need to CC a weapon.

Has Iran invaded our coast?

I carry because "enemies" are already here. Plenty of people here on our soil, both American and not, want to harm me and my family. Leave Iran were it needs to be, Iran. If they muster something to attack us then make them an ashtray.

[Dieselkanic]

Originally Posted by ArmyGuy45

Has Iran invaded our coast?

I carry because "enemies" are already here. Plenty of people here on our soil, both American and not, want to harm me and my family. Leave Iran were it needs to be, Iran. If they muster something to attack us then make them an ashtray.

Probably be too late if we wait to let them act first. We'll (the US) either BE the ashtray you speak of or we'll be back to the 1800s because of EMP. Neither is acceptable to me.

[ArmyGuy45]

Originally Posted by Dieselkanic

Probably be too late if we wait to let them act first. We'll (the US) either BE the ashtray you speak of or we'll be back to the 1800s because of EMP. Neither is acceptable to me.

Which brings me back to my original question. Should we bomb those who we "feel" are bad? If so that would mean that N Korea, China, Russia, Iran, Afghan, Iraq, and Pakistan should be leveled. I see your point and ask you this. Where does it end?

[Magnet]

Although not recent, I have a significant amount of experience in analyzing Iranian capability and intentions.

I think Iran is still a few years at least from having a deliverable nuclear weapon - one that is small enough to put into a surface to surface missile or cruise missile and have it hit a point target with reasonable accuracy. Delivery by manned aircraft or in a suicide scheme (surface ship or submarine).

So the means of delivery is problematic. So too is the will. Ahmadinijad is not representative of most of Iran. While he does believe in the Hidden Mahdi or whatever it's called, I don't believe that he has enough support in the Revolutionary Guards to incinerate the country - because if Iran did use a nuclear weapon, on Israel, Saudi, US forces, that is what would happen.

Iran would be glowing sea of glass.

[Dieselkanic]

Originally Posted by ArmyGuy45

Which brings me back to my original question. Should we bomb those who we "feel" are bad? If so that would mean that N Korea, China, Russia, Iran, Afghan, Iraq, and Pakistan should be leveled. I see your point and ask you this. Where does it end?

That certainly is the crux of the matter! The first three you mention are able to be managed by M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) IMHO.

The last four are more problematic, I don't think M.A.D. threat has any affect on them, they just get more glory in the afterlife(or so they think) if we take them out. And we don't want to be "too late" and we don't want to pull the trigger just because they might be a threat, so intelligence gathering is a must. And if we get the inkling they are close on a nuke, or know for a fact they are, we MUST act. And act decisively. I am glad I don't have to make the decision, but I support those who do.

[elliotriley]

I'm not arguing that there aren't people that are willing to suffer and live in huts to kill us. It's true. We could debate why they want to do this, but that's another discussion. The point is, they are not a threat to the US right now. If they were, we'd already have attacked them. Ron Paul has even said that if they're a threat to our security he would quickly neutralize the threat and come home.

You also forget that Israel can take care of this. No reason for our country, thousands of miles away, to get into another war that we can't afford and that the military (IMO) is too far stretched to get into. We're killing ourselves with these wars.

On a different note about our foreign policy, check out this video. It's got some important information that JFK and King discussed and shows how we've evolved in our mainstream way of thinking.

Ron Paul - Two or More Witnesses - YouTube

[elliotriley]

And I carry a gun because there is a threat to MY security. The same as why the military exists. Nobody on here ever said we should disband the military, so you're statement just doesn't make sense.

[john_bud]

Originally Posted by ArmyGuy45

Has Iran invaded our coast?

.

Depends on how you define "invaded". Agents of the Iranian Army were committing acts of war on our soil by hiring Mexican hit men to kill Israeli and Saudi nationals.

Iran has been supporting terrorists that kill Americans and destroy American interests.

Iran has been supplying ever more advanced weapons to kill American soldiers with in a military theater, IED's that are hardly "improvised".


But they are not parachuting into downtown Omaha or storming the beaches of Malibu.