What to do about Iran? Options

[pysex]

ok so I have a question because Im just now reading news on this:

Were the soldiers in international territory or Iran territory?

England is saying they were in Iraqi waters. Iran is saying they were in Iranian waters.


Since Iran has pulled this kind of shit in the past....I believe the soldiers were in Iraqi waters CLOSE to Iranian waters and the Iranian military just swooped in and picked them up.

[Seeker]

i'll bet someone $100 bucks that the us attacks iran late next week or early the week after

[Mommy]

i'll bet someone $100 bucks that the us attacks iran late next week or early the week after

I'll take that bet

[Hartmann]

The Iranians told the British that the sailors were captured at a certain set of coordinates, the British checked the coordinates and replied "but those coordinates are inside of Iraqi waters"... The Iranians then gave them another set of coordinates that was just inside of their waters.

[Hartmann]

P.S. - at what point did Rosie O'Donnell decide that she had any kind of political or world event knowledge? To quote her "This was a setup to create another war..."

[cupcake]

I hate her and her ilk...

[Mommy]

1) the US wont get involved right now. President Bush knows that the Senate wouldnt back us getting involved, especially with the vote that just went through for us to pull out of Iraq... So ill definitely take on a bet that would make me $100 richer

2) Iran is going to keep pulling this shit. Britain, US, etc should fight their own battles as they arise (like what Cupcake proposed with Britain doing an overnight raid). Unless SEVERAL countries form an alliance to bring down Iran, it would be stupid for us (britian and the us) to do anything that can be mistaken as an act of war (bombing, etc). China and Russia have sided with the US in telling Iran to backdown, but if it came down to it, they would side with Iran in the end. Plus, North Korea and Iran have close ties. In other words, fight them as they come and keep the consequences as minimal as possible while still achieving the objective (in this case: Britain retrieving her soldiers)

[pysex]

Iran is allies with pretty much every single enemy we have.

[cupcake]

aside from the obvious benefits of such as small footprint, relative low cost, objectives acheived...the rad part about a successful raid the psychological impact it has on the enemy.

makes them second-guess themselves and lose confidence.

downside is if the raid goes south like operation eagle claw in, oh suprise, iran...frickin ooooooooops.

but the SAS wrote the book on this kind of crap...and if anyone could pull it off, its them.

[cupcake]

Iran is allies with pretty much every single enemy we have.

Iran is an enemy of the US and has been our whole lives.

Iraq has not always been.

[Hartmann]

Iran is an enemy of the US and has been our whole lives.

Iraq has not always been.

Our whole lives yes. But before the Ayatollah and Jimmy Carter, they were on good terms with the U.S... This was when Libya was our enemy.

During the Iran-Iraq war both sides operated U.S. aircraft. There are some F-4s and F-14s in their arsenal but no one knows where they are or if they are even operable (since the embargo cut off parts for them)

[Billy]

1) the US wont get involved right now. President Bush knows that the Senate wouldnt back us getting involved, especially with the vote that just went through for us to pull out of Iraq... So ill definitely take on a bet that would make me $100 richer

2) Iran is going to keep pulling this shit. Britain, US, etc should fight their own battles as they arise (like what Cupcake proposed with Britain doing an overnight raid). Unless SEVERAL countries form an alliance to bring down Iran, it would be stupid for us (britian and the us) to do anything that can be mistaken as an act of war (bombing, etc). China and Russia have sided with the US in telling Iran to backdown, but if it came down to it, they would side with Iran in the end. Plus, North Korea and Iran have close ties. In other words, fight them as they come and keep the consequences as minimal as possible while still achieving the objective (in this case: Britain retrieving her soldiers)

1) I hope you're wrong for the sake of the world. I would fully support a war against Iran.

2) Russia is too weak to support anyone. And because the China/US economy is so intertwined, China would be forced to remain neutral in an Iran/US war. Their best interest lie more with the US than the black gold they receive from Iran. They can get oil elsewhere.

2a) Iran and NK have close ties? Explain to me how NK is going to march their army over to defend Iran? Because god knows they are not capable of invading the United States. They simply do not have the naval power. And what would they gain by defending Iran anyway? They need economic relief. And they will most certainly not get that relief by helping Iran.

[Seeker]

the gulf of tonkin incident was faked to draw us into the vietnam war

the british sailors being arrested by the iranians is fake too, and part of a series of events to attempt to draw us into war with iran

[cupcake]

the gulf of tonkin incident was faked to draw us into the vietnam war

the british sailors being arrested by the iranians is fake too, and part of a series of events to attempt to draw us into war with iran

[Hartmann]

the gulf of tonkin incident was faked to draw us into the vietnam war

the british sailors being arrested by the iranians is fake too, and part of a series of events to attempt to draw us into war with iran

Yes, because the capture of British soldiers would draw the U.S. into war... Emphasis mine...