| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Novalis 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 15 2007
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 338
|
 Topic: Likelihood of War...
Posted: October 25 2007 at 03:45 |
To clarify, this is not a poll on what your desired outcome is ( because hopefully we would all be unanomously against it), it is based purely on your conclusion based on the facts.
In my opinion, it is very likely, sadly.
|
 |
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 11:04 |
|
'Very likely' bordering on inevitable. The political will for it is very strong, and all the military harware is in place. It would have been planned a long time ago. The worlds media and the rest of us will be at least five years behind the decisions made in Washington and Tel Aviv. People sometimes forget that the blueprints for 're-shaping' the ME were actually drawn up back in 1996 between Clinton and Netanyahu, and entailed regime change in Iran, Syria and Iraq. One down, two to go.
Thats my take on it anyway.
|
|
Arsillus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 26 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7374
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 11:21 |
|
It's only a matter of time, be it 5, 10, or 20 years down the road.
|
|
The Doctor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 12:54 |
I am unsure. Hopefully, we'll get someone a little more level-headed in office as president before war breaks out. As long as Bush is president, we could end up going to war with the U.K. if he decides he doesn't like them. I keep waiting for word that we're going to invade Canada. I'm sure they have loads of WMDs there. 
Let's just all hope that January 2009 comes before Bush can do any more damage to the U.S. or to the world in general.
|
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
|
cynthiasmallet
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 01 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 545
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 12:58 |
|
I hesitate to say "inevitable" purely from a philosophical point of view, but whether it ben in 5 months or 5 years or even 50 years, I am almost certain that we will see some form of war between these two nations, whether or not by that time the rest of us are singing "Star Spangled Banner" with a little more gusto than we would like, if you catch my drift.
|
|
Would you like to watch TV, or get between the sheets, or contemplate the silent freeway, would you like something to eat?
|
|
Slartibartfast
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 13:07 |
|
Being native to the US I think we have totally depleted our military resources in Iraq. Can't speak to Israel. Even if war was justified, I don't think we have the resources to do it, unless we're talking about nukes, which would be a more despicable thing to do than our Iraq folly. Count me as unsure but hopeful for something better.
Edited by Slartibartfast - October 25 2007 at 13:08
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
|
zicIy
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 04 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 413
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 15:21 |
IMHO, thats bullshi*tt for USA to going to sacrifice their guys and gals on that altar of Zionism.
USA cant be some "glory winner" in the war against Iran because Russia is too strong in this moment, strongest than ever before and Russia is very very friendly to Iran today.
what about unconquered Russian S-400 anti-aircrafts and anti-rockets systems already ordered at high mountains in Iran, for example? any succesful (conventional) U.S. Air Force attack (s) is impossible. what to do ? get to use a nuke stuff only because Zionists are desirous to steal that crude oil from Iran? this is a crazy idea at all, IMHO.
Edited by zicIy - October 25 2007 at 15:32
|
|
Zitro
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 11 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1321
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 18:21 |
|
Likely, bordering on "very likely". Probably the danger would fall quite a bit if nothing happens by 2009 and neither Hillary or Giuliani are the next presidents.
But it is quite likely in my opinion, about 75% likely. The media is doing the same thing it did for Iraq.
Edited by Zitro - October 25 2007 at 18:21
|
|
rileydog22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 21:13 |
|
I sure as hell hope not. The USA has no business being in the Middle East, and at the very least we need to dig ourselves out of the huge hole we made in Iraq before we start doing sh*t in Iran and Israel.
Edited by rileydog22 - October 26 2007 at 19:02
|
|
|
|
Leningrad
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 15 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 7991
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 21:14 |
 The Doctor wrote:
I keep waiting for word that we're going to invade Canada. I'm sure they have loads of WMDs there. |
Dude, Canada could be invaded by California. 
|
|
Shakespeare
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 18 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 7744
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 21:15 |
|
You already tried that! Didn't you see Canadian Bacon?
|
|
Leningrad
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 15 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 7991
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 21:16 |
|
Canada's basically a more laid-back USA with less people.
|
|
Shakespeare
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 18 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 7744
|
Posted: October 25 2007 at 21:21 |
The Doctor wrote:
I keep waiting for word that we're going to invade Canada. I'm sure they have loads of WMDs there. |
Why don't you invade yourselves? Word is you've got the most 'round here...
|
|
Novalis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 15 2007
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 338
|
Posted: October 26 2007 at 00:03 |
Blacksword wrote:
'Very likely' bordering on inevitable. The political will for it is very strong, and all the military harware is in place. It would have been planned a long time ago. The worlds media and the rest of us will be at least five years behind the decisions made in Washington and Tel Aviv. People sometimes forget that the blueprints for 're-shaping' the ME were actually drawn up back in 1996 between Clinton and Netanyahu, and entailed regime change in Iran, Syria and Iraq. One down, two to go.
Thats my take on it anyway. |
Exactly.
I'm interested in the opinions of some of our Israeli members, because IMO Israel will probably make the first move, thus drawing in the US and any other ally, because Iran and to a lesser extent Syria and Lebanon are going to explode...double entendre. 
Edited by Novalis - October 26 2007 at 00:14
|
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
|
Posted: October 26 2007 at 06:38 |
Novalis wrote:
Blacksword wrote:
'Very likely' bordering on inevitable. The political will for it is very strong, and all the military harware is in place. It would have been planned a long time ago. The worlds media and the rest of us will be at least five years behind the decisions made in Washington and Tel Aviv. People sometimes forget that the blueprints for 're-shaping' the ME were actually drawn up back in 1996 between Clinton and Netanyahu, and entailed regime change in Iran, Syria and Iraq. One down, two to go. Thats my take on it anyway. |
Exactly.
I'm interested in the opinions of some of our Israeli members, because IMO Israel will probably make the first move, thus drawing in the US and any other ally, because Iran and to a lesser extent Syria and Lebanon are going to explode...double entendre. |
I think after the Lebanon debacle of 2006, Israel will tread more carefully than people think. Olmert is not a great leader, and the attacks on Lebanon were more a political show of muscle more than anything else.
Attacks on Iran by anyone will light a dangerous fuse. Iran will not be an easy enemy. Typically, we thought Iraq would be a turkey shoot, but here we are 4 years on, with no end in sight. Iran has a relatively formidable military, funded and backed up by the Russians for decades.
|
|
Man Erg
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: August 26 2004
Location: Isle of Lucy
Status: Offline
Points: 7456
|
Posted: October 26 2007 at 06:48 |
The Doctor wrote:
I am unsure. Hopefully, we'll get someone a little more level-headed in office as president before war breaks out. As long as Bush is president, we could end up going to war with the U.K. if he decides he doesn't like them. I keep waiting for word that we're going to invade Canada. I'm sure they have loads of WMDs there.
Let's just all hope that January 2009 comes before Bush can do any more damage to the U.S. or to the world in general. |
If Bush thought that the whole of Planet Earth was against him,he would blow it up because I'm sure that he believes that it wouldn't effect him.
Sadly,I think that this isn't in the realms of fantasy either. 
Edited by Man Erg - October 26 2007 at 06:51
|
Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb.
|
|
IVNORD
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
|
Posted: October 26 2007 at 09:26 |
Slartibartfast wrote:
Being native to the US I think we have totally depleted our military resources in Iraq. Can't speak to Israel. Even if war was justified, I don't think we have the resources to do it, unless we're talking about nukes, which would be a more despicable thing to do than our Iraq folly. Count me as unsure but hopeful for something better. |
_popupControl();
Right on. Totally depleted. A prolonged war is always a curse. But preventive strikes against their nuclear facilities are possible.
|
|
IVNORD
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
|
Posted: October 26 2007 at 09:27 |
zicIy wrote:
IMHO, thats bullshi*tt for USA to going to sacrifice their guys and gals on that altar of Zionism.
USA cant be some "glory winner" in the war against Iran because Russia is too strong in this moment, strongest than ever before and Russia is very very friendly to Iran today.
what about unconquered Russian S-400 anti-aircrafts and anti-rockets systems already ordered at high mountains in Iran, for example? any succesful (conventional) U.S. Air Force attack (s) is impossible. what to do ? get to use a nuke stuff only because Zionists are desirous to steal that crude oil from Iran? this is a crazy idea at all, IMHO.
|
_popupControl();
It's ridiculous
|
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
|
Posted: October 26 2007 at 11:31 |
|
I hope we get Bush out of office before he has a chance to wage war. He (Cheney) will if they have enough time to lay the foundations in popular minds (it's beginning now).
|
|
|
|
IVNORD
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
|
Posted: October 26 2007 at 18:50 |
stonebeard wrote:
I hope we get Bush out of office before he has a chance to wage war. He (Cheney) will if they have enough time to lay the foundations in popular minds (it's beginning now). |
Why is there so much paranoia in connection with the Bush/Cheney team? There are certain limitations to wage war. An on-going war is one of them (just try to remember how many more wars the US condusted at the peak of the Vietnam war? - None). The Iraq debacle is bad enough to shy away from any other serious military involvment
_popupControl();
Edited by IVNORD - October 26 2007 at 19:00
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Likelihood of War...
