Originally posted by anon72
Well, he could start by taking action against them for all the weapons/materials/supplies and support they have been caught inside Iraq-giving to our
enemies.
Well, let's be honest. A country that has just invaded, leveled, and then occupied a country can't complain too much if someone decides to help out
the insurgents fighting said occupation. Especially given our own history of doing exactly that.
He then could go after them for the US citizens that Iran has arrested and charged with fake crimes.
Who should come after the US for all those dudes locked away by Americans with no charges against them at all? Since these men are from several
nationalities, should there be a coalition formed?
Or, he could go after them for the nukes they have obtained/made or on the verge of the same that we know they intend to use against the USA or
its allies. How do we know. Cause Iran nut job told us so.
So you think we should commit mass murder of Iranians because you think they might possibly have the potential to make a weapon if they someday want
to that you are convinced they might perhaps use against us someday if they think to do so.
See, with people like you voting to see who's in charge of the US nuclear codes, I can't really blame other nations from thinking they might need a
nuclear deterrent. 'Cause that's a pretty derange thought process you've got there.
No one else has the balls to do it.
Brains are more useful than balls. You don't die if you lose your balls.
And , we're holding Israel back from trying to do anything.
Yup. Disney stockholders also hold Disney back from re-releasing "Song of the South." Why? Because it's a dumb goddamned decision.
Sometimes, someone has to be the badass. It's time-before we are too late.
Real life is not a Steven Segal movie; you can tell because the acting is generally better.
