posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 12:46 PM
I didn't want us all to forget about the important issues at hand here (the impending attack on Iran), and came across this article that, although
with heavy bias, sums everything up until this point.
This reminds me of what happened with Iraq, where they said that they had or were building "weapons of mass destruction", and it turned out they were
lying. Now it's not Iraq, but it's Iran, and they are giving us the exact same lies.
Now they're in sanction mode, and once sanctions are shown to not have the desired effect and the nuclear power plant gets started at Bushehr (and why
a nuclear power plant is justification for killing people is way beyond me...), I'll have to assume the obvious which is that someone is going to
"pre-emptively" attack them.
I know that there are alot of folks on ATS that think that America can just barge into Iran and take over like they did in Iraq... but even if they
did, I must ask the obvious question: Who is next?
Yup, we have Afghanistan, Iraq, then Iran, so there is no way that it stops there. Who comes after Iran? Is it Pakistan? Who?
And then if America does not win like in Iraq, then what comes next? Does America back off, or are they in it to win it? Do they really pull out the
nukes? They almost did in Vietnam, so do they decide they want to go for the win and pull the genie out of the bottle?
(visit the link for the full news article)