they can not wait to destroy the whole world.

turn the fucking place to glass.

That's a pretty piss poor analogy.

People on a street respect and are intimidated by their own local law enforcement that are supposed to be there.

People in other nations who have 0 respect for some bully who has no business being there won't have the same response.

Well, if a policeman stands next to a mugger, the mugger will be less likely to mug someone. If two carrier battlegroups park next to a country, the country is less likely to carry out their threat to annihilate a nearby country.

As a Canadian I will stay here getting high off good B.C. weed

Almost the whole world is or was involved with this war so......Wouldn't that make this world war III or is it the 30 year war that Nostradaumus predicted?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Holy shit that cracked me up. Thanks man :1orglaugh

In this context ... it means a world war according to the US govt and one they elect to have based on any excuse (called pre-emptive strikes) that can be mustered up.

The international community don't get involved in fake wars - other folks have better shit to do than listen to the bully on the block trying to muster a war over one thing or other. They also don't have a need to live in a closet boasting about military might while sinking into economic oblivion and thinking the world is going to attack them. Who gives a shit?

The irony is, if there was a clue, the US could have excellent relationships internationally (much like most other nations), a decent trade surplus and credibility internationally - tho fat chance of that with a bar full of rednecks in the boardroom.

I dont think its prudent for a nation to make foreign policy decisions based on the reaction of Ali-the-middle-eastern-guy-selling-carpets-in-the-market.

The whole point is to intimidate a whack job like Ahmadinejad to let him know that he can run his mouth all he wants but if push comes to shove he's toast. Missiles in your bedroom speak louder than pacifism.

Yes, and more likely to hate the country that sent in the 2 carriers... and more likely to hate the nearby country even more for having these outsiders interfere where they don't belong.

Seriously, if they are intimidated enough not to act... then 1 carrier is all that is needed. If they're not intimidated enough, than 2 carriers won't change anything except to raise tensions.

Holy jebus. Can someone else explain things to him as I'm eating right now.

That's the whole point. Tension is good - tension always leads to resolution. Resolution can take many forms, it might be violent or not. There will be no resolution however without tension.

Tension and conflict is the basis of every great moment in life, personal or global. A prolonged gobal conflict (ie world war), The last minute of overtime in hockey, when your wife/girlfriend says "we need to talk", an impending sneeze, proposing to the woman of your dreams, the sustained diminished chord at the end of a beautiful hymn.. all are tension and/or conflict and all have resolution - and mostly beautiful in these cases.

If life is going to be interesting at all, tension and conflict must be embraced so one can experience the resolution (good or bad).

All you keyboard warriors are willing to spend as many american soldiers lives as it takes to get the job done arnt you?

your arguements wrongly assume that if the US did nothing, relations with Iran would improve. the simple fact of the matter is that Iran has told the entire western world to fuck off, made endless threats, continues to pursue a nuclear program in spite of strong international condemnation.

its not like they are just reaching out for a hug. the problem is there.. the problem is real.. no one is doing anything about it. even if you dislike the US, their actions, Bush or anything else, that doesn't make Iran, their policies, their open defiance and thier threats go away.

If ya want tension, chat to occupying forces in Iraq. Some folks there think tension is good too - and they are obviously intending that it remain that way.

And you wrongly assume the terrorists attacked the US just for fun.... that the US didn't provoke it somehow.


You guys seem to think that it doesn't matter what anyone thinks of the US moving in more troops into a conflict it doesn't belong in and that nothing will come of it. And then get all shocked when these guys turn around and fly a plane into a building.


If you seriously think that these actions won't raise tensions and make people hate the US even more than they might already do.... then you're just deluding yourself. Yes, sometimes you have to do something that will make people hate you... but sometimes you can do that without having to push it even further for no good reason.

If you push, people push back. I'd think the war eager bunch of you would realize that.

pussy alcohol and drugs will always sell, no matter what.

Yep, it's a two way street - applies to both sides. Is it good for the US soldiers who die? Nope, it sucks balls.

]

Sure people attack the US just for fun - what other reason could there be?? :1orglaugh

The US relationship with Iran over decades was so close - it was almost incestuous and oozing a level of goodwill yet unsurpassed :)

Considering the US fucked Iran time and time again and messed in that nations internal affairs, assassinated members of it's (democratically elected) government - then whined and moaned when more extreme elements surfaced in opposition to the US. Fuck with people and they will fuck you back.

The level of naivety on this is awesome.

Why would the United States, as a rational national actor 'care' about the 'feelings' of a group of people who already 'hate' them. It makes no difference if people in the middle east hate the US 'more'. If you think that Iran or some terrorist is sitting around going "Man I really hate the US.. but i wont do anything yet, but lemme tell you if they send another aircraft carrier make me MORE MAD then Im really gonna fuck them up" then you are deluding yourself.

Anyone who wants to harm the US/west doesnt need a tipping point - save it be for political reasons. Unlike the US however, domestic politics in the middle east is a farce. Crazy totalitarian leaders dont worry about the latest approval ratings or re-election.

This is all about securing oil for the future. The USA isnt in Iraq because they are concerned about selling the oil or terrorists or wmds or spreading democracy. They are concerned that we are going to hit Peak Oil in around 2010 and they wont have a reliable source of oil at all. This was the role Iraq was going to play for the USA and the reason for the incasion. If you dont beleive Peak Oil is coming soon, read this report by Deutsche Bank http://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/DBR_IN...0000181487.PDF

If you want to read the scariest page on the internet check this out- http://lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

When WW3 comes, it will be because of this......................

You've never read up on Operation Ajax, have you?

I'm thinking of writing to my local Member of Parliament, asking him to disband the police. You see, if the criminals do not feel threatened then they will not commit any crime.

Also, if anyone were to threaten the life of my family, I would not do anything about it, because I wouldn't want to infame any tensions.

You see, everyone and everything is good and there is no evil in the world (except the Joooos, NeoCons, Bush, SUV drivers, etc).

When the Iranians say "Death to America", "death to Israel", "death to all infidels", "etc", "etc", "etc", and when they simutaneously develop nukes, what they are really saying is "we love you and there is no need to worry." So let's bring the carriers home. History shows that when some madman makes threats to annihilate people, it is always no more than hot air. Just ask the 60 million people killed in World War 2.

People forget the past way to easily and way to quickly.

Everyone knows this, the strategic importance of the middle east isnt a mystery to anyone with half a brain or any knowledge of history/economics/global politics. And as a citizen of the (rich) west you probably want to be on the side of the group of countries that has strategic advantage in the middle east for the sake of your current way of life and your future generations.

As a side note, the 'oil crash fear mongers', as like any group of extremists, have the thing way over done. Anyone with an incentive to adopt and pormote extremist views on any topic lack credibility and conservatism, meaning that it is in their best and personal interest to adopt irrational and extreme assumptions.

I am very familiar with the history of American/Iranian relations - how does that fit into the argument you are trying to present? Subtlety will do nothing to keep the conversation going.

i dont assume anything. get over yourself. you act as if the world is perfect... with simple problems and easy solutions. hate to break it to you, but the world is a much more complicated place and driven by and shaped into a clusterfuck of the political, economic and security interests of each nation.

its easy to criticise taking action... i submit however, that you are definately less informed and less qualified to determine a proper course of action, than anyone actually making the decisions.

again... the problem is there. just like with N Korea. whats teh world doing about it? uhmm...nothing. meanwhile, their own sabre rattling continues to grow louder and louder and louder as do their threats. thats a fact. its also a fact that the UN and world at large, has a horrible track record of dealing with threats early on before it becomes a major catastrophe.

the whole "you push and they push back" argument is weak. they have been pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing and pushing against the entire world, against the UN, against the IAEA etc. at some point, you have to push back or become the victem.

Well, do you seriously think that Iran felt the same way about the US before Operation Ajax as they do now, or do you think that the US's meddling may have created a little bit of tension?
Do you really think that if the US had used Operation Ajax with the best intentions of the Iranian people, instead of their own best intentions, that maybe things might be a tad different now?

Or are they just evil and would want hate Americans just the same?

And yet I knew there were no WMD's... funny that huh?

Again, I wonder why that is... hmm... maybe because the Iranian's primary source of income in the 1940's and 50's was carpets and not oil? That could be because they've never held ownership of something within their own country.
Or are they just bitter because they have a lot of sand?

Anyway, you guys keep going on and on about how you should do more, and then gripe that they get upset about it and retaliate, forcing you to do yet more than you did last time.

Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.

Keep on believing what you will. Go kill the bad guys who hate you just because they're the bad guys.

Good luck with all that. I'm outta this pointless thread.

All irrelevant. Governments must act in the rationaly in the presentl to protect their national interest with the future in mind. Decisions made by past administrations in different geo-political times should not cloud the judgement of the present and the future. In fact, it would be a grave error. Do not misconstrue my statement to mean that administrations should not learn from history,

If the US were to follow your way of thinking:

a) Japan would still be a third world country desperately trying to fire some nukes at the US for screwing them over in WWII
b) Germany would be PISSED
c) The US would allow a crazy idiot to run around the middle east with nukes blowing up jews at will cause they 'feel bad' about 'messing with them' oh so many times in the past.
d) Russia would still be bitter
e) Central america? dont even go there!

It's the same as the Isreali/Palistinian situation. We can sit here and talk about how Britain was 'wrong' and the UN was 'wrong' and that the land that is now Israel never should have been split up the way it was and blah blah blah.

But that's just a gigantic waste of time and it disounts the present reality and solutiuons that will lead to a better future in favour of a distorted 'hind-sight-is-20/20 "I told you so"' past.

Hahahah! I was thinking the same thing. Where the hell are the Terminators? Where's Sarah Connor when you need her?

your solution so far seems to be "do nothing and all will be ok" - good luck with that hippy!

its easy to criticise whats being done. but the funny reality about the situation is that you can't offer any other solution.

Think we prob have been down this avenue before which other areas designated "terrorist". It happens all the time on varying scales - ie the IRA activity in the UK et al... Stuff people under pressure or oppression and they will react and prob result can be what is simplfied into a category known as "terrorism". People don't wake up on a Monday morning and decide to blow stuff up :pimp

On a global scale... often the oppression or aggression is over greed - the desire to possess land, oil or establish a sphere of influence to further abuse/rape natural resources. The old British Empire among others, was the same - now it's the new kid on the block who wants to be the predator and, sadly, has not got wiser thru history.

The US has over time fucked so many countries now - from Latin/South America, Asia and now the Middle East. The Latin America area has seen "quiet wars" with some very shitty conduct (killings, torture, assassination of democratically elected leaders, drugs trading - while kids in the US got locked up for trading drugs).

The "modern way" is now attempting to establish trading treaties (kinda like the Mafia having accountants and establishing banks from laundered money) - but there is a caution in dealing with predators in a fair number of countries who experienced the worse side of the "values" of the US. Their familes were wiped out by killers and torturers trained by the US - It will take many decades to get that trust back. It's surprising there were never more attacks on the US long before 9/11.


PS Suppose further evidence of a predator is in the size/security of their embassies - do a quick survey of US embassies in other nations and these will be bunkers with max security - while in other embassies, ya can have a drink with the Ambassador at the poolside - without guards.

people have been saying that ever since the end of WWII.

well, but they (Muslims, Iran etc - you name it) say the same about America, some things are just relative

A kid is getting bad grades at school so parents force him to study instead of playing some sport. In their mind they are doing the right thing, but if the child really loves that sport, it will definitely get him mad/frustrated/angry/disappointed.

Perhaps not the best analogy but it shows that everything depends on the point of view. Often there's no right or wrong, and remember, history is written by those who win wars and currently rule the world.

Sure, since we are a part of the western Civilisation and not the Arab World, we should rather take the position of the US and not Iran in this case. But still, if America always acts superior, as the only world power, which knows everything best, and in eyes of other nations - they act very selfish and often in a hypocritical way - it is obvious that some part of the world gets frustrated with it and they show some resistance.

Surely if America suddenly changes their politics/attitude 180%, they will still have many enemies and will still be a target for an attack for many years to come. But unlike DollarManSteve said, personally I think that each action / decision of the US can surely add to the fuel. Each war will kill tens of thousands of innocent people, but at the same time it will create thousands more terrorists than we already have.

So to sum up, there are really no easy answers and solutions when it comes to international policits, power, culture and religion.... and definitely there's no "black and white" as George Bush wants to portrait it. Yes, the Muslims also see it as "black and white" but if you assume that you're better or smarter than them, then you should also act more wisely. You obviously can't nuke all of them even if you wanted, and at the same time, enforcing democracy is also not an option as the Iraq case recently proved.

We can safely assume that the Muslims will change and become more "civilized" in future, but it will definitely be a slow process, taking decades or centuries. How many wars do you want to start until then?

USA Foreign policy is ... foreign to themselves :2 cents:

USA is going to start it!!!