Did you guys see the shit they guy from the Iranian supreme national council said recently about how we're still vulnerable to pain and suffering?

Just like that "Iraqi exit strategy cartoon" I saw, with the picture of the chopper hopping from Iraq next door to Iran...

3/8/2006 10:13:14 PM

History books will look back one day on how WWIII started in Iraq, possibly with some mention of increasing tensions between Palestinians and Israelis.

3/8/2006 10:19:47 PM

Well... I think we should just leave Israel alone. We send them a shitload of unmarked aid and all they do is spend it on more weapons to bully the Palestinians with.

And the Palestinians aren't really giving us a problem. Those damn Iraqis and Iranis though... it's time to open a can of serious whoop-ass on them. And after them? North Korea. We're coming, bitches!

3/8/2006 10:31:15 PM

i love the in depth political analysis brought by the illuminating posters on the wolf web

3/8/2006 11:15:42 PM

Quote :

" Those damn Iraqis and Iranis though... it's time to open a can of serious whoop-ass on them. And after them? North Korea. We're coming, bitches!"

Are you one of W's advisors?

3/9/2006 8:57:03 AM

DID YOU SAY ILLUMINATI?

3/9/2006 8:57:26 AM

no

3/9/2006 8:59:38 AM

I think we should just leave the ME alone altogether. We've sheltered Israel for 50+ yrs. Let's just get out of everybody's business over there.

3/9/2006 9:40:34 AM

you ready to stop driving your car?

3/9/2006 9:50:35 AM

DID YOU SAY ILLUMINATI?

3/9/2006 9:57:59 AM

ok

3/9/2006 10:01:53 AM

time to move to Berkeley and get a vespa.

3/9/2006 10:34:26 AM

Quote :

"Iranis"

Quote :

"Those damn Iraqis and Iranis though... it's time to open a can of serious whoop-ass on them. And after them? North Korea. We're coming, bitches!"

Not only are we going to Iraq... we're going to Iran and North Korea and Syria and Lebanon and Yemen. We're going to Pakistan and Afghanistan and Qatar. And we're going to the UAE and Oman and Turkmenistan and the West Bank and then we're going to Bahrain, to take over the Middle East! Yeeeeeeah!

3/9/2006 10:42:08 AM

The interesting part is that Ahmadinejad is essentially correct -- the west needs Iran (and its oil) a whole lot more than Iran needs the west. The veto powers in the Security council (with the exception of the US) understand this, and no serious sanctions are forthcoming. If the US tries to force the issue Iran can retaliate by blowing up Amercian soldiers next door in Iraq, with the enthusiastic participation of Iraqi Shi'ite militias.

Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld can bluff and bluster to their hearts' content, but they're out of options and everybody knows it.

And remember, "Bring 'em on!"

3/9/2006 1:28:46 PM

I really don't wanna fuck with Iran. They are hardcore, guys.

3/9/2006 1:58:44 PM

There's no way we can invade Iran and say in Iraq at the same time.

This will have to wait.

Or Shrubya will have to change his stance on clones and animal-human hybrids.

3/9/2006 2:01:13 PM

Quote :

"The interesting part is that Ahmadinejad is essentially correct -- the west needs Iran (and its oil) a whole lot more than Iran needs the west. The veto powers in the Security council (with the exception of the US) understand this, and no serious sanctions are forthcoming."

I view it as being a bit more balanced than leaning in Iran's favor. It's true that the West needs Iranian oil, but Iran needs trade with the West just as badly if it ever wants to go beyond a simple oil exporter. The only way Iran can truly cause real harm to Western oil prices is if it completely pulled itself off the international market. Say they decide to just sell to the Chinese and Indians; that would simply free up oil from another part of the market that was being traditionally consumed by the Chinese, increasing supply, and thus maintaining about the same price for oil as if Iran was selling directly to the United States. Why do you think that the United States has been fine without access to Iranian oil for the last several decades?

The Iranians need trade badly with the West though and would love to have access to the American markets. Aircraft parts and supplies are a good example: the Iranians are stuck with a lot of American aircraft, from 747s to F-14s, that requires spares that they can't purchase. Sure, they can hobble together a few and buy off the black market, but it puts a premium on all they do. They simply can't replace their entire fleet either due to cost. If they lost access to EU suppliers as well, then they'd be really screwed. The lack of access to American markets also hurts them badly, leaving their economy the decaying, stagnating mess it is today.

In the end though, the United States doesn't have any real options, especially after this idiotic India nuclear deal. Non-proliferation was already weak when non-signatory members got the bomb; now that the ones who signed the treaties are building nukes, the whole scheme has pretty much collapsed. God have mercy on us all.

3/9/2006 2:52:07 PM

Quote :

"Did you guys see the shit they guy from the Iranian supreme national council said recently about how we're still vulnerable to pain and suffering?"

Insulting the US must be a crime, huh?

The US can go around insulting any country it wants to (what to talk of invading), but oh no, a country insults the US and you (you, and the US) have to get your panties in a bunch.

And BTW, you are misrepresenting what he said.

He said the US can cause pain and suffering, but is also vulnerable to pain and suffering.

Regardless, I guess it is only free speech when the White Man speaks, right?

And before you say anything, he was referring to financial pain and suffering; he wasn't making any military threats.

Quote :

"And the Palestinians aren't really giving us a problem. Those damn Iraqis and Iranis though... it's time to open a can of serious whoop-ass on them. And after them? North Korea. We're coming, bitches!"

Man, you sound like a genius from the way you talk.

Logical inference from your quote:

Iraqis and Iranis ARE giving the US problems. And so is North Korea.

I wasn't aware of any problems the Iraqis, Iranis, or the North Koreans were causing the US before the US stirred them up.

Care to explain?

Oh wait, I know the answer:

Quote :

"While 85% [of US servicemen in Iraq] said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”"

And after the US attacks and massacres tens of thousands in Iran, a poll will show:

While 85% [of US servicemen in Iran] said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for the Ayatollah's role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop the Ayatollah from protecting al Qaeda in Iran.”

3/9/2006 9:54:33 PM

Quote :

"The interesting part is that Ahmadinejad is essentially correct -- the west needs Iran (and its oil) a whole lot more than Iran needs the west."

I dont think Iran is even in the top 10 as far as US oil imports. Maybe other western countries import a ton from Iran but the US doesnt.

3/9/2006 11:20:03 PM