Originally posted by BaCk2thereallife
mehdi wont be coming soon maby not for the nxt 100 200 years
if you want to life for that long Drink MILK

and you are entitled to your opinion. however, ahmadinejad seems to think it will be within his lifetime.....and believes that he can actually make that happen.

netbound

You make a very good point; it was a lot of misconceptions and preconceptions when the present administration when into Iraq and that is a fact.

No only bad Intel but also the arrogance of our leaders to at least wait a littler bit longer.

The welcoming party never materialized and until this day only because the government in Iraq has been allowed to be rule by Shiites US holds some sympathies.

Occurs the propaganda for the public opinion in Iraq although in full gear it seems to be just more money gone to the wrong hands and wasted, our money.

Iran is another issue and not as easy as many may think in their dreams that even when we are a Mighty nation we are not invincible.

One thing is dominate the world markets and be savvy on that arena but another is that our political markets that have been sold to the rest of the world since world war II has been tainted by to much hypocrisy.

Many countries in the world that are reaching the point of dominance in the world are going to sit back and let the mighty US fall on its butt.

Because they have been waiting for a long time.

We are not financially ready for another long term campaign while Iraq is still a mess in which the promised money for reconstruction has not reached the Iraqis hands.

Too much bureaucracy and to much private interest involved because we have become a nation in which every else profit but the American people.

Every president brings its own dreams of grandeur and recognition and a long lasting legacy to the future.

Bush legacy is an Ideology in which he seeks a middle east free of theocracy and full of American style democracy, while claiming that divine intervention guided his steps.

And at the same time he will open the door and pave the way for America control of the future energy pitfall woes.

China, Russia, Germany, France and many others are just happy bystanders waiting and hoping that the present administration is arrogant enough to try to take Iran next.

They know that it will be a devastating blow to the US and the oil markets that our administration is so fond off.

As for WWIII it will come from the Middle East and Armageddon also but the nuclear holocaust will not be coming from Iran.






[edit on 5-2-2006 by marg6043]

Marge I just you to read this quote from Theodore Roosevelt, read it and think about our efforts in the ME. I found it to be strikingly prevalent to what is happening in today’s America.

It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy course; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know not victory but rather defeat.
- Theodore Roosevelt

I think that the Islamic contigient burning down embassies over those cartoons is finally uniting the whole of Europe with the U.S to make 2 peed off Superpowers gearing up against the Middle East .
Bad news Iran!

Originally posted by WestPoint23

It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy course; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know not victory but rather defeat.
- Theodore Roosevelt

I am glad that you bring that quote, as a former marine wife and one that supported my husband for 18 months of his endeavors in the first gulf war and now have to deal with wifes that have husbands in the middle east.

I can tell you this:

They are tired, they are in desperation and they don't want another profit ridden war they want to come home and they want the present administration to stop.

For onces they want our government to take care of the American people not the war profiteers.

I hope that you get the meaning of my post.

I see that you proceed to talk on the behalf of the people serving abroad.
And Marge I’m sorry to say this but you did not fully understand the meaning of the quote. It means that the drive to accomplish that which is right no mater how difficult it might seem should never be overcome by the feeling of defeatism and failure, for I it does then we have no hope of accomplishing it.

That is why people who look at our efforts in the ME and automatically give up and proclaim it cant be done are wrong. If we had given up so easily in past endeavors of our nation one only wonders how we would be today.


[edit on 5-2-2006 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I see that you proceed to talk on the behalf of the people serving abroad.

Yes because I move in circles that have plenty of them.

And Marge I’m sorry to say this but you did not fully understand the meaning of the quote.

Yes you are right I took as it was fitting for me.

See westpoint the fiasco in Iraq has a lot to do with what many people feels and sees another possible conflict with another country may bring.

One fiasco makes two and worst.

Now is fear, fear for the future or our nation and us the people that have to live everyday with what our elected leaders do.

I seat in cafés and mingle with people in one of what can be considered a very conservative and Republican state what I have been hearing is not what I would have expected at least from two years ago, when many though that our administration could not do any wrong.

Now they are not turning democrats by any means, but now is many questions and not enough answers.

Just a littler bit of personal experience that all.

[edit on 5-2-2006 by marg6043]

Yes because I move in circles that have plenty of them.

It still doesn't give you the right to speak on their behalf. Now you can vouch for the ones that you have spoken too but don't put words in everyone's mouths.

I seat in cafés and mingle with people in one of what can be considered a very conservative and Republican state what I have been hearing is not what I would have expected at least from two years ago, when many though that our administration could not do any wrong.

*sigh* Marge, what I'm talking isn’t about this administration nor the next one to come. Its not about conservative or liberal, its about deciding if the goal we are trying to accomplish in the ME is just. Its also about debating which are the best means by which to accomplish that goal.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

*sigh* Marge, what I'm talking isn’t about this administration nor the next one to come. Its not about conservative or liberal, its about deciding if the goal we are trying to accomplish in the ME is just. Its also about debating which are the best means by which to accomplish that goal.

And exactly what might that goal be? I’m not trying to be confrontational here. I’m seriously asking what our goal in the ME is, and more specifically what our goal is in Iraq. Since the start of the conflict in Iraq, a sovereign nation, it seems to me that our justification for launching a pre-emptive strike has changed a number of times. I guess I’m a little slow on the uptake here, but it’s still kind of vague and murky to me. Has anyone actually decided yet what our “true” motivation was for invading Iraq, what our reason is for being there and what our lofty goals might be?

Maybe I’m a psychic and just don’t know it, but I could have told you long before GWB ever set foot in the Whitehouse what his intentions were regarding Iraq, and where it would inevitably lead. IMHO his plans for Iraq are far, far from kind and benevolent in nature, and have nothing to do with what’s in our (America’s) best interest. Personally, I think his agenda is blatantly ruthless, self-serving and inspired by delusions of grandeur.

While I feel sympathy for the people in Iraq who fell victim to Saddam Hussein’s bloody form of justice, I also feel sympathy for all the others in the world who live under such oppressive, murderous regimes. That doesn’t mean, however, that I’m in favor of the wholesale slaughter of many, many thousands of innocent citizens (casualties of war), plus thousands more of our own (soldiers), in the name of Ol’ Glory while we lumber around the globe flying our flag high, destroying and rebuilding countries in our own image. And that’s not to mention the TRILLIONS it will cost us in the process.

Has it occurred to any of our “trusted” leaders that maybe these countries don’t want us to destroy them and remake them in our sacred image? Or that the people of our own country, for that matter, might not approve of it? Has it occurred to our brilliant elected officials that perhaps there is something intrinsically wrong about doing this, and that it goes against the principles our nation was built on? No other President in our history has attacked another country on the premise that one day they “might” attack us. The pre-emptive strike concept was GWB’s brainchild. And everyone in the world, like it or not, is now paying for it.