When will/Will the United States formally declare war on Iran?

a reply to: ManFromEurope

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Delta house!

Probably once the next Democrat is elected as President since they seem to love wars so much. All one has to do is turn on the news to see CNN, MSNBC, and all other liberal MSM want a war and right now.

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

All one has to do is turn on the news to see CNN, MSNBC, and all other liberal MSM want a war and right now.

Or you could just read what Bolton's take has always been.

But you're not wrong, just looking at a small part of it.

Edit- Or Pompeo-

AS THE TRUMP administration ratchets up tensions with Iran, escalating fears that the United States is looking for a possible path to another war in the Middle East, several Democratic presidential contenders are standing firm in their rejection of the White House’s attempts to create a legal rationale for war. They were responding to comments Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made in a May 21 classified briefing for members of Congress that suggested that the Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, passed by Congress three days after 9/11 could provide a legal basis for a war with Iran.

The Intercept.

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

MSM?

Is that Military Subliminal Messaging?

When your economy is based on war I guess there are a few consequences to deal with.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

That’s not fair the ayatollahs and their Imans should be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

Despite every sect of the Islamic religion waiting and praying for Yawm al-Qiyāmah (end of times ).

Those not wanting Iran have been nuclear weapons are just foolish.

Nobody follows their religion that strictly. It’s not like Muslims blow themselves up to kill infidels , nor do they go on shooting or stabbing spree‘s the name of Allah. They don’t subjugate theirselves to their God five times a day every day to keep the religious fever stoked . Why would they want to fufill another prediction by Allah ?!

That’s just silly .


Every worshiper of Islam is a saint and some of the sweetest least harmful people on earth .

Keep telling yourself that BS. Because your personal feelings are going to affect your children or grandchildren’s future. If something does happen it’ll be during their lifetime in all probability.

Good Lord can’t anybody see past their nose and look at the long-term implications ?

It’s so aggravating to watch smart people that can’t get over their emotions .

When will they attack Iran?
Well the jews who run the USA have just said, along with the USA`s other great friend the Saudies. That they are calling for a decisive strike. So all you Americans had best get your kit together, as it looks like you will soon be in action. Gotta bomb some democracy into Iran.
The USA has not declared war since 1942? lol In a war that they prepared and funded. Hitler could not have invaded anywhere without the engines supplied by Ford and the Oil supplied by Rockerfella, then we have the bush family and friends helping to fund Hitler. Then they sat on their asses till every one was on their knees then like hero`s they entered the war and SOLD us their help in a war that they prepared and funded.

a reply to: Fallingdown

The nuclear genie has been out of it's bottle for a while now. Muslims have already had the bomb next door in Pakistan for many years now as well. A global treaty did limit nuclear arms production for a while but looks like Trump is throwing that one in. Putin did recognize that this will lead to a greater arms race once again. There are already bigger fish in this pond than just Iran.

a reply to: Fallingdown

It’s so aggravating to watch smart people that can’t get over their emotions .

Isn't emotion what gets people on board to a war against a nation that doesn't pose a threat to us?

Israel and Saudi Arabia could take Iran if they felt so threatened, and that's what they should do.

We're trillions of dollars in debt, why should we have any part in it?

a reply to: kwakakev

If I had my way they never would’ve gotten nuclear weapons either.

The Pakistanis are our allies. Not even Putin wants Iran to have nukes.( which should tell you something ) That makes Iran a lone wolf much more difficult to control .

But you still sidesteped my position. Are you willing to take a chance with your children and grandchildren‘s future because of personal animosity ?

Would the world be a safer place if Iran has nuclear weapons ?

People need to quit thinking in the here and now and look at long-term implications and the impact on future generations .


“nuclear proliferation is a lot like passing a M 80 around in a crowded room. Sooner or later it will fall into the hands of someone with a cigarette and poor impulse control”

Mine

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Answer this question or our conversation is done .


Did you defend Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ( and Iran )when he/they said Iran only wanted nuclear technology for cheap power?

a reply to: Fallingdown

Did you defend Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ( and Iran )when he/they said Iran only wanted nuclear technology for cheap power?

As I've said many times before, I've never defended Iran. If Saudi Arabia and Israel decide to nullify their nuclear program, you won't see me complaining as long as America is left out of it.

I see no reason they need our help other than us footing the bill, which both can cover on their own.

a reply to: Fallingdown

To elaborate, I voted for Trump (first time I voted for a president with an R or D next to their name).

I did so partly as a protest vote to Hillary, who I did not want to be president, but mainly because of what Trump promised.

"The people opposing us are the same people — and think of this — who’ve wasted $6 trillion on wars in the Middle East — we could have rebuilt our country twice — that have produced only more terrorism, more death, and more suffering – imagine if that money had been spent at home," Trump said at a Oct. 26 rally in Charlotte, N.C.

Trump campaigned on a lesser military footprint abroad. Bibi boasted about getting Trump to pull out of the nuclear deal, which whatever your opinion on said deal, is the reason they are starting to enrich more.

a reply to: Fallingdown

The general consensus is that the whole world would be safer with out nuclear weapons. The reality is that we do not have that luxury.

I would like to think that the nuclear situation is one that the UN security council takes seriously and does its best to handle this delicate situation. It is not for me to decide who has what, but for those that do have them it would be good to see some minimum standards and procedures in place.

Considering the current geopolitical environment I can understand Iran's and others endeavors with this technology. When it comes to dealing with Iran, things would go much smoother with the support of Russia and China rather than antagonizing them as well.

Nuclear weapons are more so a global issue rather than just a national one.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Defend it was a poor choice of words .

BTW you’ve been defending Iran for over a week .

Did you at any point agree with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when said they wanted nuclear technology for peaceful reasons .?

If Saudi Arabia and Israel decide to nullify their nuclear program, you won't see me complaining as long as America is left out of it.

That’s a silly statement, who in the hell wouldn’t want that to happen ?

But getting back to the real world do you actually think that’s going to happen ?

Apparently you think the Iranian government is more stable than Israel and Saudi Arabia ?

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

They just need a bloody good false flag to kick it off - the tanker attacks were simply too obvious and lame.

The MIC does seem to be suffering from a lack of imagination.

They say that Iran (and North Korea) are weeks away from having nuclear weapons. They've been saying that for years and no one is buying it anymore.

They say the Iranian government is so crazy that they will attack ships knowing what the consequences will be. But they say that Iran is not crazy enough to admit it. And they hope the American people will ignore the fact that attacking our own ships is a false flag ploy used at least four times by the US government.

They say that the Iranian government is brutal and harsh in the treatment of its people, but they ignore the epidemic of cops murdering innocent people in the US.

The US government would like to have public support for an Iranian invasion, but they can't seem to come up with anything new to get the American people riled up enough to want to sacrifice their children, grandchildren, or money.

What will they try next? Another "proof" speech by the Secretary of State to the UN? Another actor talking about babies in incubators being bayoneted? Another terrorist attack in the US that miraculously succeeds in spite of all our Patriot Act "protections"?

How about this: instead of saying Iran is developing nuclear weapons, say they are developing anti-matter weapons. That way, we can claim that they accidentally created a small black hole and their nuclear program got caught up in the event horizon. That would explain how that can be weeks away from having nuclear weapons for decades.

a reply to: Fallingdown

Did you at any point agree with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when said they wanted nuclear technology for peaceful reasons .?

I couldn't agree with it, I'm not Iranian, I don't know if it benefits them. I typically tend to be isolationist as we have our own problems to sort out. One of the reasons I'm an isolationist, is because our foreign policy often comes to bite us in the ass, like for example on this topic.

The U.S. built that nuclear reactor in 1967 on the campus of Tehran University. It also provided Iran with fuel for that reactor — weapons-grade enriched uranium.

NPR

That’s a silly statement, who in the hell wouldn’t want that to happen ?

Well you keep trying to imply that I defend Iran, which I don't.... I wanted to state that if Saudi Arabia and Israel see them as a threat and act on that, that's their prerogative. I wouldn't "defend" Iran in that scenario.

Apparently you think the Iranian government is more stable than Israel and Saudi Arabia ?

That's an incorrect assumption.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I couldn't agree with it, I'm not Iranian,

Once again a evasive answer .

The U.S. built that nuclear reactor in 1967 on the campus of Tehran University. It also provided Iran with fuel for that reactor — weapons-grade enriched uranium.

Name one advanced country who isn’t looking into nuclear research.

The US quit supplying Iran with nuclear material after the revolution in 1979. For good reason .

Well you keep trying to imply that I defend Iran, which I don't

No I asked you a question that you still haven’t answered fully .

That's an incorrect assumption.

So then you believe Iran is the least stable country. Or are you going to claim something silly like all three countries are equally unstable .


This is getting reminiscent of our last discussion. I asked questions you give me a song and dance and the conversation goes on for eternity.

Any chance we can keep it short and sweet this time ?

a reply to: Fallingdown

I acknowledge that Iran has a right and duty to defend it's self from threats both foreign and domestic. If I was in their shoes I would be looking at the options available. With America having Iran loud and clear on their radar for some time, what message does that send to them. Get ready.

One technique of conflict resolution involves looking at the situation from both side. With the war machine still running hot there is not the trust or common discourse available to effectively wrap up the global nuclear problem at this time. Maybe humans have enough intelligence, wisdom and respect to pull it together one day and nukes become one more risk we can put behind us. Maybe they stay and we just learn to live with it, maybe the worst do get there hand on in and mess it up for everyone else. Every culture has its idiots.

This threat the world has had since the bombing of Japan, it would be nice for it to go away. Without international collaboration on it, we are stuck with it.

a reply to: Fallingdown

Once again a evasive answer .

I neither defend or support them having nuclear power ventures. It's not my country, not my problem. My country needs to focus on our problems instead of going out of our way to find new ones.

So then you believe Iran is the least stable country. Or are you going to claim something silly like all three countries are equally unstable .

Iran is clearly less stable than Israel. There could be a debate vs Saudi Arabia however depending on what sense of the word you mean stable, like power structure internally, or stable in their projection in the region.

This is getting reminiscent of our last discussion. I asked questions you give me a song and dance and the conversation goes on for eternity.

You keep framing question to get me to say I am defending Iran or view them higher than the other players in the region. Each time I've said I don't support Iran. At this point, I think it's more that you don't like my answers than me not answering. I've answered every question you've had.