America's power is so strained. It's not like the majority of the Airforce and the Navy are sitting on their ***.

Had the men been French, Iran would have gotten nuked....

Popular support isn't strained? There would be political repercussions for any action on our part (as in, everyone is hesitant to make a first move because it could backfire against them later in an election). The atmosphere is rather charged here, and if we hadn't invaded Iraq it would be easier to do punitive action currently, would it not? When I say we are strained, I don't just mean military resources wise. Our hawkish actions as of late has made being strong-handed a less popular position to have.

I'd like to see where popular support lands if they kidnap Americans again. The D boys aren't new to the game anymore.

[Edit - if, not when]

Hopefully we leave the area before they're able to.

D-boys?

Joking aside, they haven't kidnapped Americans, have they? It's irrelevant to the point. That, and they have been pretty-much killing us in Iraq anyway. I haven't seen any flare ups because of that (as much as, you know, there could be or should be).

Japan makes me cry.

Oh, I agree, the order to finally engage Iranians in Iraq came much later than it should have been. I'm so glad the media was busy reporting more important things than armed Iranians attacked U.S. forces, like, what celebrity is actually a homosexual, or Taco Bell is spreading disease in its lettuce.

I predict the middle east to be a gigantic plate of glass in 6 years.

man that sucks :(, i really hope they are returned safely. even with all the bad press the US gets from other countries (yes and from our own country) i have always wished everyone well, especially Britain. except france seriously Iran worries me.

There are a growing number of similarities between what Iran is doing now and what pre-WW2 Germany did before unloading on a great deal of countries. The only thing I'm pondering is who will play the role of Neville Chamberlain this go around.

Dutch news report said that the British troops had drifted off into Iran territorial waters. Foreign soldiers moving into one's country usually leads to capture of said troops. If that is true, the soldiers themselves would be to blame, not Iran, not the US government, and not ZOMGTERRISTS.

And you trust the Dutch news?

Yes. An invasion of Iraq was in the works before Bush was even elected. The neoconservatives in Republican Party saw it as a way to put pressure for democratization on other states in the Middle East. All 9/11 did was make the matter appear more pressing.

They said this last time when they captured some British troops but were never willing to hand over the gps data from the boats to show that they were over the border.

After the return of the troops they gave a detailed account of how they were "shepherded" into iran waters before being captured, the same appears to be the case now.

What really bugs me is why on earth HMS Cornwall didn't go after the bloody Iranians, the helicopter hovering above saw the incoming ships from afar and although their intentions at first were not known, it wouldn't have been too hard to guess in my opinion.

From what I understand of the ships that were used it would have been pretty easy for the Cornwall to see off the iranian boats, its about time iran got a firm kick up the arse in respect to what its doing.

They should learn that they can't just willy nilly forcibly capture our troops, parade them on iranian tv, getting browny points with the populous and then hand them back after they are finished with them, keeping the boats at the same time so no questions can be raised.

Is it lesser than American news?

Please be so kind as to explain said Similarities, I don't really know what the problem with Iran is.

Well, Nazi Germany as anti-semitistic and desided to disregard the Treaty of Versailles and armed itself among other things. Iran is showing somewhat similar anti-semitism and disregards past agreements dealing with nuclear energy/weapons.

At least.

It's on mother****ers. I have a feeling I'm going to get some persian notches on my tomahawk sometime in the next few years.

I'm willing to go out on a line and throw a "conspiracy" flag on this.

More koolaid please!

Not really a whacky conspiracy theory at all. I believe that Michael is referring to The Project for the New American Century, a neo-conservative think tank that was urging the use of military force against Iraq as early as 1998. Promiment members of the group include Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton, Paul Wolfowitz, and many other high ranking members of the administration. In 2000, the group issued a report entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses. Included in the report were the following claims:

...while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for US military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein

Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region.

So yes, neo-conservatives were seeking a military presence in the Middle East and were drawing up plans and justifications for invading Iraq long before 9/11 and before Bush even assumed office.

So?

Seconded.

This whole thread reeks of conspiracy.

that made me giggle

but yes, 9/11 didn't have much to do with the invasion of Iraq at all, and if you ask me it didn't need to. Iraq was constantly violating conditions of the cease fire set up after the end of desert storm in 91. even doing stuff similar to what happened recently in Iran with the British troops.

"Hey Mr. President Osama Bin Laden is planning to attack the US"
"OH FFS HAVE SOME KOOLAID JEEZ"

Well according to George Bush's former treasury secretary Paul O'Neill the invasion was planned before 9/11. Also, Bush's former ghost writer Mickey Herskowitz claims that “He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999.”


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1028-01.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/

ZOMQ CONSPIRICY!

I guess I should have clarified. I was just trying to provide some information about what I thought Michael was talking about. Whether the neo-cons planning military action in Iraq prior to 9/11 is good thing or bad thing is up for the individual to decide, I suppose--a matter of personal perspective.

[QUOTE=IRG SithLord]
Seconded.

This whole thread reeks of conspiracy.
[/QUOTE]

It isn't a conspiracy theory at all. The Project for the New American Century was public about its positions.

So?

I for one welcome our new neo-conservative overlords.

...

Well, technically Spook, if you've killed any Iraqis you already have persian notches.

But, if it weren't for our current mishap in Iraq, I'd totally support going to war with Iran. Their dictator's crazy, he's built an army that's basically aimed at taking us out (though he's sorely lacking in numbers and technology) and has said many times he wants to nuke several different countries.

I doubt very much Iran would be invaded on foot. I'd expect lots of air strikes and shelling on their coast. America hasn't the man power to invade Iran at the moment, not unless it abandons Iraq. However, crippling Iran with air strikes may stem the flow if Iranian nationals across the border into Iraq, and help the Iraq effort.

Hey, now. The "All Shi'ites are Persians" argument is a blatant lie made by Baath nationalists to deligitimize Shi'ite Arab claims. Now it is possible if you've killed people in Iraq they could be Persian or of Persian descent, but the majority of Iraqi Shi'ites are Arab.

I'm not sure what you are looking for from me, Isuwen.

Yeah...

That.

I saw 300 the other night too.

I am thinking of wearing a speedo and taking a sword and spear with me.

What seems to be strange about the capturing of these sailors and marines is that the they were sure that they were in Iraqi waters, but the Iran claim that were. I don't think they would have strayed into Iran's waters. But Iran have done this is provoke Britain and America into another conflict, and they know that both countries are strectched as they are involved in Iraq and Afganistan.

The British have already proved that Iran are helping insurgents in Iraq and this is the same Iran whose leader called for 'Israel to be wiped off the map'. The've done this to wind the West up and don't forget Iran's little cronies in Lebanon called 'Hezbollah' kiddknapped two Israeli soldiers and provoked Israelis to respond.

Iran and their mad extremist leader is wanting to make war and the UN might bang on about agreeing sanctions to stop Iran making a nuke, but Iran have decided they want a war and they know that America and Britain don't have the resorces but something needs to be done.

Iran is rouge nation, and we don't need Bush to say it. Lets just hope that other NATO and EU countries do more than talk. I just hope that those sailors and marines are not harmed or tortured by Iranians and that this fire is put out before it spreads.

Sorry about the rant, but its about time the Middle East was sorted out and get rid of these extremist militant scum before they come up with some more barmy way of killing people and these are the same monsters who plotted the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks.

I really wish people would stop referring to the London Bombings as 7/7.

7/7 Just doesn't have the...ring to it.