On the subject of Iran...

Those poll answers aren't one sides of anything..

The UN is worthless. Saddam made a mockery of them before we overthrew his butt. Iran is making a mockery of them.

UN = worthless

As much as I'd like them to be an effective group at global peace keeping.. They aren't. They have no clout.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Feb 27 2007, 02:30 PM) [snapback]397358[/snapback]</div>

YOU STILL DONT GET IT - why dont you put my position on there??????

You answer this very simple question which in all probability will represent the case scenario: NO UN action, no public ally support --- does the US act unilaterally to prevent iran from going nuclear?? a simple yes or no will do.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Feb 27 2007, 02:52 PM) [snapback]397377[/snapback]</div>

not necessary - i am usually up against 100:1 odds here. the fact that you have NO wingmen on this topic says all that is necessary. that should give you pause..........

even dragonfly has not said she agrees with you on this one - WOW!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Feb, 12:00 PM) [snapback]397382[/snapback]</div>

Did I miss something?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Feb, 12:06 PM) [snapback]397389[/snapback]</div>

ok, yeah, I'm one of those.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Feb 27 2007, 02:37 PM) [snapback]397362[/snapback]</div>

The UN was completely successful in eliminating Iraqs WMDs.
You are absolutely wrong .I cant believe this is still even a matter of debate.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Feb 27 2007, 03:37 PM) [snapback]397362[/snapback]</div>

Yes, the UN obviously failed because Saddam had so many WMDs when we invaded. Oops. Hey, wait a minute... :blink:

EDIT: Doh! Didn't read above post.

The fact is, sanctions are already having some effect in Iran. Admanwhathisname's popularity is sinking cause people can't afford tomatoes for their everyday cooking (the price has skyrocketed due to sanctions).
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/...html?source=rss

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mojo @ Feb 27 2007, 04:13 PM) [snapback]397397[/snapback]</div>

UN inspectors were repeatedly denied access to inspect certain areas. All they did was pout.

Seriously, no one in the international community takes the UN seriously.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Feb, 01:17 PM) [snapback]397427[/snapback]</div>

...and it was later proven that there were enormous stockpiles of.... uh.... nothing.
Seriously, no one in the <strike>international community</strike> Bush admin takes the UN seriously.

And, perhaps more seriously, no one in the international community takes the Bush admin seriously.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Feb 27 2007, 05:17 PM) [snapback]397427[/snapback]</div>

You seem to forget (or not know of) the vocal and aggressive Scott Ritter. He did more than pout. He ripped the Clinton admin a new orifice for not being as aggressive/supportive on inspections as he wanted. But even he stated before the war that Iraq didn't have WMDs any more.

 

The military option in this case is not really an option. It might be good as a scare tactic, but that's about it. We could likely set back their efforts with an intense bombing campaign, but we have little chance of fully eliminating their ability to pursue nukes via military means.

So without a definitive military option, the choice is clear. Squeeze them to further isolate Amendinajad (?) and bring back the moderates. Their society there is already very unstable (40% unemployment). It can be easily tipped toward their current leadership with an attack and the subsequent nationalistic response it will generate or - they can be tipped away from him with continued sanctions and pressure on the Saudis to lower oil prices through increased production (along with decreased demand here through a fuel tax).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Feb 27 2007, 04:17 PM) [snapback]397427[/snapback]</div>

I agree 100%, assuming by "international community" you mean "The Bush Administration".

Fortunately, the rest of the world thinks differently.

 

The military option in this case is not really an option. It might be good as a scare tactic, but that's about it. We could likely set back their efforts with an intense bombing campaign, but we have little chance of fully eliminating their ability to pursue nukes via military means.

So without a definitive military option, the choice is clear. Squeeze them to further isolate Amendinajad (?) and bring back the moderates. Their society there is already very unstable (40% unemployment). It can be easily tipped toward their current leadership with an attack and the subsequent nationalistic response it will generate or - they can be tipped away from him with continued sanctions and pressure on the Saudis to lower oil prices through increased production (along with decreased demand here through a fuel tax). Amendinajad is operating in a very small box with few good options.

 

Some ought to get educated about what the UN is instead of repeating what you hear on our news. I would suggest an authentic source.

 

The UN was obviously not doing a well enough job as Saddam had ample time to hide his weapons or move them to friendly territories. What do you think Saddam was doing when he would deny UN inspectors access to certain areas?

 

What the heck do you expect the UN to do, exactly? It has some excellent world programs... and some not so good... but that depends on who you talk to. I would suggest you educate yourself about what the UN is. We're a part of it... so going by your argument if the UN is worthless than what does that make us?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Feb, 02:25 PM) [snapback]397476[/snapback]</div>

Obviously, you're the only intelligent poster in this thread. You're invited on my next quail hunt. You bring the beer.

As for the poll, I say bomb the crap out of the bastards. And if one of our bombs should go off course a little into France, well let's just say, accidents happen.

Now, where's that steak I asked for?