The Iraqis and Iranians won’t nuke us. That would be crazy, because we have more nukes than anyone else on the planet. We (meaning the U.S.) were the first and only country to actually attack another country with a nuke (Of course the reasons were real, and the nukes were needed). We invaded Iraq under the pretense of WMDs, and there were none. Then Bush decided to stay in Iraq to help form a “democratic goverment”. Another little thing: Iraq did not attack us. Afgahnistan did.
Russia has more
…nuclear weapons then the United States, or Iraq?
I don’t know where (who) you are referring to.
If you want to get technical, the United States did sell Saddam weapons (including chemical weapons) around the Gulf War period. (Not sure on the actual time, but it was in the last 20 years)
Edit: It was around the mid-80’s.
The United States invaded under two premises:
- Iraq has WMD’s (none have been found)
- Connections to terrorist networks (the group we were after didn’t move into Iraq until about 2003, if I recall correctly)
Well I didn’t mean nuke us but well attack our country in general.
The terrorists don’t gain any power by the U.S. pulling out of Iraq.
In fact, it may make a lot of them less angry because the United States is cutting down on meddling in other people’s business. The Iraqi PM actually said that he thinks that Iraq can handle itself and that he wishes the U.S. to leave. I am not sure who else shares those feelings.
Apperantley Dick Cheney does.
youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
I don’t know if Iraq will be able to “handle itself” for a long time. There are so many people over there who want to change the government there, that will go to violent measures, that something will happen eventually. So the question is, cut our losses and let what is going to happen happen, or stay and try to keep it from happening? I’m leaning more twoards the first, as I think much of what is happening will leave with us, but it’s a sticky situation, and I don’t think any of us here have the solution.
I personally don’t think that the United States has the right to tell them that they have to set up a democracy.
As long as the government doesn’t threaten the world’s safety, they should use the government that makes most sense for them.
Just because there is an election in no way means that there is democracy in Iraq, or elsewhere. In Iraq, what happened during the elections, was that the Imams told their fellow praying buddies to vote for specific people, and they did. It wasn’t an exercise of free thought and freedom that we take for granted over here, but simply an exercise of pointlessness.
I’m actually not sure whether the free nations of the West would stand up against terrorism in a situation like that. Pacifism and isolationism are gripping much of the western world right now. For instance, I’m A Nutjob declared that he would wipe Israel off the face of this earth, and still many people think that diplomacy can work with an insane power hungry aggressor. They are saying, anything but more war, anything. That’s what they said in the build up to WWII, with Neville Chamberlain following what many were saying. Chirac, who is no longer in power in France, thank the Almighty, said that Iran having a single nuke wouldn’t do anything, and perhaps he’s right. But then again, what if the other side isn’t afraid of MAD?
Say we attacked Iran, as bush seems to be itching to do. Then Iran would launch the nuke if they had one and weren’t afraid of MAD, or wouldn’t if they were.
And the comment about voting in Iraq? People don’t vote here, because of apathy, or because they don’t believe it will make a diffrence. Even worse, people vote because other people tell them to, and the hammered with propaganda from either side and don’t actually research the facts. How is that any diffrent from Iraq?
You make it sound as if Bush is worse than that guy in Iran. It was Ahmadinejad (wow, I spelled it right, first try!!!) that said that they wanted to wipe people off the face of the planet, not Bush.
Iran doesn’t have a bomb…yet. But they will if the West continues to sit back in its pacifist demeanor for several more years. And besides, Iran is funding Hamas, Hezbollah, and various other terrorist groups, with some working inside of Iraq even. It would be perfectly justified to go in there, not with an army, but just bomb the hell out of where the centrifuges are.
The main difference between American and Iraqi politics would be the ingrained respect for democracy that Americans have. Like, democracy didn’t just fall on their laps. They worked for it, and fought against the British to attain it. Thus they have a much more profound faith in democracy. And besides, there’s a difference between an ad on TV, saying that the other side will abuse power, and has taken some money in the past, and a religious leader painting the other side of the same coin as people who are going to Hell, are wicked beasts, etc etc.
All this talk of democracy makes me giggle.
The united states hasn’t been run like a democracy in a very long time.
Liberty does not exist in the US.
I’d be very surprised if a 2008 election even takes place.
Unfortunately it is far too late for change, at least in my opinion. A world government will be formed, and all the people that proclaim liberty will quickly realize how little liberty they really have.
The best slave is one that thinks he is free.
It really is depressing when you really think about it.
Oh well. 
I get really sick when I see how the US. acts like they know whats better for other countries.
One question: When they pull out (they have to do that some day, aye?) of Iraq, will Iraq’s oil plants be given to an iraqi (Not US. marionets) gouvernment?
Just because there isn’t one now doesn’t mean that the U.S. is not trying to set one up. One of the goals of the “re-construction” was to set up a democracy.
AHTD, I was writing that under the pretense that there could even be WMD in Iran. We don’t have any evidence of that. You are right, bush dosen’t want to kill everyone, just get rich. And bombing the hell out of where the centrifuges are?! That means bombing civilian populus, because terriosim and gurrelia tactics often go hand-in-hand.
Ingrained respect for democracy? Aparently you live in a much better community then I do, for alot of the people here just don’t give a shit. They don’t have faith, or they have absolute blind faith. I for one, do not have faith in the current goverment because of the random, stupid things that go on. (I.E. Pardoning Scooter Libey)
Democrat all the way. Not to say, though, that I ONLY listen to other democrats. Personally, I like to actually listen to the ideas and morals of people instead of just their favorite political party. But yeah, I’m definitely a Democrat myself.
Actually they are underground. It would take a well placed bunker bomb to blow them up. Iran doesn’t have nukes…yet. That’s why they installed so many centrifuges though. They intend to have them, and use them, I would say.
And about blowing up innocent civilians: if it comes down to choosing between bombing the enemy, which would hurt innocent casualties, or having yourself bombed, I would always choose the former, and so would any military leader in the world. If innocent civilians do get hurt, it is NOT the fault of Israeli or American forces. It is the evil, sick person who designed the army installations in the areas of civilians. These evil people do it to just project themselves as perpetual victims on the world stage. And you know what? It works. However, I will say, there will be a point where the other side bombs Israel just one time too many, and hell is unleashed upon them, regardless of those that are innocent.
I don’t think many people have all that much faith for Bush. I don’t like him, and a lot of people agree with me. I think the Iraq war has been a waste of resources, and America should have overthrown Saddam and booked it the hell outta there.
60% of Americans voted in the last election, so the entire population isn’t completely apathetic. And yes, there are many flaws in democracy, there is no denying that. However, from all of the other theories and ideas that have come up, and have been displayed for everyone, that the best choice is democracy (Bruno would probably disagree, but I really don’t care 
)
I would lean towards a more socialist democracy, with higher taxes but more social saftey nets. And what you are talking about in Iran is called a preemptive strike, one very unfounded one. If they do happen to attack us with a bomb or nuke, then we can nuke the hell out of their country and just leave a radioactive crater in its wake. Not that that would be advisable, or even humane, but we have a lot more hate in these countries now then we did then, because we invaded a country on false premises and are now staying there when the invasion itself was unjustified. The people in Iraq want us out. All of them, just about every soilder there says. The people in Afghanistan don’t want us to leave. Big difference.
Who hasn’t accused the Iraq war of being for oil?
cool that politics are talked about now on this forum 