The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
So how long until we war with Iran?
danielof2k6
__BANNED USERS regular
__BANNED USERS regular
I'm thinking 5-6 months. Many have admitted publicly that the administration has stationed forces on the Iranian border and is preparing for operations. Not to mention the President calling Iranians 'evil' and condemning them all as terrorists. People call this rhetoric, I call it a big fat hint that GW wants to stomp Iran. This is obvious, right?
I hate to say it, but with the current state of homeland security and all the talk of threat from Iran and Korea, we're probably going to be attacked this year and WW3 will be up and running.
If you think it's just hysteria, listen to the administration. They are already calling out Iran, "we're going to make them pay for sending terrorists to Iraq and supplying weapons", so that's ANOTHER COUNTRY that America is expected to take over. Can we do this without a draft?
Suppose Korea succesfully launches another test nuke? Do you really expect America to stay out of it... That's 3 nations in 'the axis of evil' that we are itching to get into a fight with. WW3 in 2007, 2008 will be a time of crisis and as a result the elections will be historically important. GW will not end his term without seeing us in Iran, mark my words.
Or don't... I might be wrong. I know I sound a little hysterical but this 'threat of Iran' has been hinted at so many times that I get a sick feeling in my stomach. I really do fear that WW3 is already in the works.
:v:
I hate to say it, but with the current state of homeland security and all the talk of threat from Iran and Korea, we're probably going to be attacked this year and WW3 will be up and running.
If you think it's just hysteria, listen to the administration. They are already calling out Iran, "we're going to make them pay for sending terrorists to Iraq and supplying weapons", so that's ANOTHER COUNTRY that America is expected to take over. Can we do this without a draft?
Suppose Korea succesfully launches another test nuke? Do you really expect America to stay out of it... That's 3 nations in 'the axis of evil' that we are itching to get into a fight with. WW3 in 2007, 2008 will be a time of crisis and as a result the elections will be historically important. GW will not end his term without seeing us in Iran, mark my words.
Or don't... I might be wrong. I know I sound a little hysterical but this 'threat of Iran' has been hinted at so many times that I get a sick feeling in my stomach. I really do fear that WW3 is already in the works.
:v:
danielof2k6 on
0
Posts
Woah, when did this happen?
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/07/21/bush.terror/
Bush has said these things in many public addresses.
I don't see where he called all Iranians terrorists. Iran (on unofficial levels) works against us in Iraq. Anyone who didn't foresee this when we went in had too many SUV-mounted flags blocking their peripheral vision. It's not actionable in any reasonable way.
Doc is correct. The neo-conservative movement is literally chomping at the bit to go to war with Iran. However, the possibility of war against Iran presents a geo-strategic and geopolitical problem of far more complexity than the bombing and occupation of Iraq.
I could get into an exhaustive tldr version of this, but it won't happen for numerous reasons: Other countries need Iran for fuel, Israel, unsustainable hostility, the will of the american people, already stretched thin military forces, and the draft would cause mass riots.
Iran is spewing rhetoric, and we're spewing it back. The only real chance you can see this exploding is if we get the smoking gun that identifies the Qud Force directly involved in hosilities against american troops. Right now they're playing it smart, and going through intermediaries. Still, it's a very careful perch. One slip up, and we'll rain cruise missles on them all day. After that, I think we're pretty much at war.
edit-I've been studying the riverways of New York state for 3 years for this.
Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era remember. College and Canada will not be options. In December 2001, Canada and the US signed a "Smart Border Declaration," which could be used to keep would-be draft dodgers in.
Well, I'm attending college in San Diego come fall, so if college won't save me, Mexico might.
If they went to a draft for anything other than a war on our turf, there would be riots.
Conciencious Objection.
Hell, it worked for my Grandfather...
...
until they threatened to put him in a maximum security prison.
real story.
Can I hold out and say "ooops! I forgot" or is there like a fine or something?
They don't actually care as long as you are prompt.
But you also don't get any federal aid for college until you sign up.
stout's Amazon Wishlist | my lastFM
Registration is the law. A man who fails to register may, if prosecuted and convicted, face a fine of up to $250,000 and/or a prison term of up to five years.
Also, no federal aid at all. Ever.
I'm honestly wondering whether Bush and his boys could possibly be that stupid as to start a war in Iran now (assuming, of course, there's not some massive causus belli), with the strain on the military and his approval rating at startling levels. I saw 29% yesterday. It would be a Jonestown of political suicide. The Republican party would be decimated.
I can say this...I teach high school, and alot of my boys are very concerned about the possibility of a draft. One day we were talking about it, and I told them that, if a draft happens, I'll drive the bus to Montreal and they're all invited. Then I started to worry if I'd get fired for saying shit like that.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
I'd be real careful. I've known teachers fired for less mate. Of course, depends where you teach.
I'd be shocked if they were allowed to suppress your right to vote for that.
Though registering to vote while not registering for the draft might cause your name to pop up in a database somewhere.
What a noble philosophy to be teaching America's youth.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
What, you shouldn't be forced to kill and die? I agree.
So, just to clarify, you're fine with enjoying the freedoms that the United States gives, but against fighting or dying for them, that about right?
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
I'm against being forced to kill anyone, yes. There are some things worth dying for. The misguided stupidity of the leaders of this country is not one of them.
What? "Thou shalt not kill?" Christian Nation olol
If it's actually defending America, that's a different thing altogether.
At the same time however, the Draft is supposed to be more like a ground defense against like an actual army what with tanks and all and only if we really need it. So on this note, I support the Draft and really, I wouldn't mind getting Drafted if needed because America has been good to me. However, I don't want to be sent to a country to which I have no business with and suspect every fucking car to have a bomb in it.
So if some Russian army lands in California and starts a land war, I wouldn't mind defending our country but at the same time, I don't want to be used up unwisely.
Oh! Btw guys, This is pretty bad/sad....
'cept this isnt about fighting or dying for freedoms, it's about invading ANOTHER foreign country, because the first two went so well.
Iraq *was* the neocon plan in action - they've been advocating it since PNAC started, and now they've been renouncing the whole thing (well, not the actual invasion, just everything since the invasion) for months. And why wouldn't they? The whole thing was managed by neocons - Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were in charge of the thing, Cheney and co. wanted it as a big free market experiment, etc. - and it's a disaster. So, even though people might still be denying Iraq's a failure publicly, everyone accepts it privately, so there's a muted response to the Iran idea. Which was certainly still on the cards, say, 12 months ago, and was definitely the plan when they were invading Iraq (as in, if the occupation of Iraq had gone remotely competently, Iran would've been invaded or up for invasion right now).
Thing is about the neocons, they're not about reality or democracy or freedom, they're about invading nations in order to set up a scenario so in 20 or 30 years, they're in a good position to start up a new Cold War with China. Once this Iraq thing's collapsed into a civil war and the US is out, the neocons will be right back at it - blaming the Democrats and Iraqis (actually, that's happening already), fixing elections (actually, they've already done this twice), lying constantly (actually, they haven't stopped)... okay, so, not so much *start* doing that stuff again, more start doing it louder
As it is, they're obviously not loud enough right now banging on about war, so it won't happen
What does that have to do with going overseas and fighting Iran?
Both Republican and Democrat candidates are speaking seriously about action against Iran should it act against America. And of course they will find ways to prove that it is attacking us in Iraq, or even worse there will be another attack on American soil. After that, all bets are off... Democrats and Republicans alike will take us deeper into the Middle East. At least this is what seems to be happening.
Your feelings towards the current leaders are irrelevant. You either support what the country stands for, or you don't.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
I support what the country stands for. I don't support arbitrary power plays by those in power.
Maybe you should save us some trouble and describe what you think the country stands for?
Then if you were called up in the draft, regardless of the particulars of the conflict that you may or may not have some personal issue with, you would go?
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
stout's Amazon Wishlist | my lastFM
Wait, as defined by the constitution, or whatever the current administration's policies are?
Wasnt the draft and selective-service policy of the 70's abolished because it was counter to our constitution? I sort of always thought that, and I may be wrong. Can someone clear this up?
No. Because that's a loaded question. Given your hypothetical, we could have declared war on Canada for no reason at all, and not killing some kanuks would fall under "anti-American."
That's something every American citizen should be forced to watch. If you showed that to the President (as when people ask him about the current American death toll) I suspect he would speak of 'sacrifice' that is so necessary to bring 'freedom' to the Iraqi people. Globalists tend to think of deaths in the thousands as common routine, but the sad thing is America didn't sign up for this routine. We wanted out a year after Saddam was removed.
Btw, just sharing again since I was BOP'ed. :oops:
http://www.obleek.com/iraq/
EDIT: Thankyou Daniel.
No. Because that's not what our country stands for.