same script as before new casting with Trump taking the gwbush role
January 2003, President George W Bush stood before the United States Congress to warn of a “grave danger” from a “dictator”, a former US client in the Middle East, armed with weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Twenty-three years later, in the same chamber, President Donald Trump used his State of the Union address to paint a strikingly similar narrative: A rogue regime, a looming nuclear threat, and a ticking clock
The Trump Administration gave Iran multiple opportunity to come to the bargaining table. The Iranian people are brave in their uprising. I wish them great success although the struggle for freedom will be long and difficult. That's what happens when you kill 32,000 + of your own citizens for protesting the government.
Strangely, all the liberals who advocate for the right to protest here in the U.S. will support the authoritarian Iran regime who murder, by the thousands, their own protesters.
Illegal for Trump to order military strike against Iran without justifications such as congress approval or risk of imminent attack. Iran is not Iraq or Venezuela. War would not be swift, cheap or decisive. No guarantee of regime change. Iran spend decades preparing to survive war and inflict damage to US allies in region. While US waste resources on foreign wars, China invests in infrastructure, technology and economic growth. Polls show most Americans oppose military action against Iran.
@Barbarossa
Why are we starting a war with Iran under the flabbly fake guise of nuclear weapons when there are out in the open countries who are doing more harm and have capabilities right now? Like say North Korea?
Why Iran? Because Israel told Trump what to do and he is following their commands. We have no reason to be involved in Iran and nothing good will come from this outside allowing Israel to destroy more lives of their enemies.
Also I seem to recall King big mouth blast Obama for the exact same scenario that Trump is in right now. In 2013 Trump insulted and degraded Obama calling him "not skilled" that he could not negotiate with Iran and yet gee when Trump does it everything is super cool and it is the correct decision.
Mad man in the white house has made the world more dangerous. Trump wants to return to 19th century international order with no US allies and more military spending. By waging unnecessary war against Iran, he has made it more likely other countries develop nuclear weapons to protect themselves from the US. This increases the risk of nuclear war in the future.
@nature1970
Well, I have to give the Trump administration credit for at least one thing:
Unlike the Bush administration and its invasion of Iraq, they didn’t spend months on a misinformation campaign to obtain congressional approval.
Instead, they just…bypassed Congress altogether! Unfortunately the Republicans who kiss his ass for approval will not be exposed in a no vote to save there seat in the midterms!
Really ?? Call me when we actually put ""Boots on the Ground.""
You libs always can't think ahead... i'll call it "regressive"
[Quote: Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers]@Barbarossa Why are we starting a war with Iran under the flabbly fake guise of nuclear weapons when there are out in the open countries who are doing more harm and have capabilities right now? Like say North Korea? Why Iran? Because Israel told Trump what to do and he is following their commands. We have no reason to be involved in Iran and nothing good will come from this outside allowing Israel to destroy more lives of their enemies.[/Quote]
How may North Koreans have killed American Soldiers, or injured them enough to have their arms/legs amputated ? C'mon now !! Use your head. Do you understand who was responsible for the Iraq/Afghanistan service members who were killed/injured ? Hello ?! 
Iran hasn't changed their direction after the 12-day War last year, instead increasing their ammunition stockpile. At what time do we say enough is enough ?
Trump will end the Iran Regime in its current form.
Democrats don't even understand the word ""Proactive"... They only understand "" Reactive""
So , why don't we just give the Iranians Billions of Dollars and see what happens, right Joe Biden ?
Appeasement..... Right out of the play book of Neville Chamberlain, right ??
It's Weakness...
we will see the retaliation for this action , I know it as do you raiders, it's going to get ugly quick, I could care less about oh we killed a cleric who took hostages nearly 50 years ago. I see the same stuff from the most ignorant batch of losers we ever had at 1600npenn ave no thought to consequences or reality
just same ignorance from idiots in charge, how many Americans are burnt or flayed for this it never be reported but it's happening and the losers who don't care about anything but themselves hVe no future in America
blue wave I hope it produces a super majority in senate that will convict everything in this administration in impeachment
rush nice to see you around must be hockey season way to go with the Olympics must of hurt to hear stars spangled banner again
@Rush51
How many unprovoked deaths have Iran been responsible for? Is Iran a direct threat to the US and have they ever been?
Quit using Bush fake logic to justify war mongering, Iran is no risk to the US. My comment was about the sand pillars your side uses to justify war which is-
Terrorism
Nukes
Human Rights
So tell me how Iran is on the top of ANY of those lists? I guess it doesnt matter because Iraq was not either and we invaded them TWO times using lies and propaganda just like you are shoveling now.
@Barbarossa
Isn't it ironic that libs are are protesting the killing of the ayatollah while Iranian citizens are dancing in the streets?
@THEMUGG
Do you partisan cherry pick all of your information? Why do you generalize like this and then actually think that the removal of a leader means freedom or any change for those living there?
Are your comments based on how you actually feel or are you just taking slimy stupid partisan pot shots at other members again?
How is freedom working out in Iraq and what will change by killing a leader in Iran exactly? Please elaborate...
@nature1970
It is slightly more than just 'killed a cleric'.
This is all pretty much open source about their civilian deaths, terrorism, proxy involvement, and intent (expressed or otherwise).
Iran acknowledges at least over 3000.
Human rights folks say it is at least 6000.
Other Independent sources say it could be up to 30.000.
The Iranian-aligned conflicts in places like Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, etc. are estimated to be in the thousands for civilian casualties.
Then you have to consider:
The 1980s Political Purges
2009 Green Movement protests
2019 Fuel Protests
2022-23 Mahsa Amini protests
So, since 1979ish it is estimated to be around 20,000 - 30,000 in those.
Then consider all of the conflicts they have been involved with:
Syrian Civil War, Iraqi sectarian violence, Lebanon-Israeli conflicts, etc.
So, the proxy conflicts are another tens of thousands they have been involved with.
Then you have all of the isolated terrorism-linked things from Beirut to Argentina, etc.
Obviously, the ocean helps the USA be somewhat distanced from direct action from Iran.
However, there have been many plots against USA personnel abroad, proxy-supported others that do as well. Then considering some of the confrontational standoffs in Hormuz and Persian Gulfs clearly demonstrate the hostility and threatening behavior.
This is, of course, signified by their well-known chants.
“Being described as “leading” in this context doesn’t mean Iran is the only source of terrorism. It means among nation-states officially listed as sponsors of terrorism, Iran has the most extensive and sustained institutional support networks for militant groups — often over decades.”
So, yes, as far as terrorism sponsor against everyone (including the USA) they are far and away number one.
Even though there are not ‘official’ lists of civilian deaths or lists of states that are a threat to the USA — Iran is on the list and very high on it.
“Often described by U.S. authorities as the most active state sponsor among state actors.”
“Not ranked #1 as a direct threat (no verified attack on U.S. soil), but seen as a significant adversary due to proxy attacks and hostile activity abroad.”
So, while there are other countries that have the more direct threat to the USA homeland, it is because they have the ability to reach it with current weapons. But they have not shown the direct intent Iran has — if they were to get those weapons.
So, there is a very good argument to be made to stop them before they achieve their expressed goal(s).
Whether, folks agree with this or not is a totally different argument.
Never, forget there were even folks that voted against WWI AND WWII in Congress.
Some people are big on total isolationism.
Others simply stick their head in the sand or kick the can down the road.
Some even feel that if we are 'nice' to these types of people they will return the favor; they have demonstrated all over the globe that they will not do that.
So you consider Iranian security forces massacring 30k plus of their own citizens in hundreds of cities a good thing and something that shall continue under his leadership with no repercussions? This was the largest massacre of civilians during street protests in history. But hey, you support that because Trump helped the attack, it right? Its ironic when Democrats get up an arms while the people they believe they're standing up for, do not support your ideas and protests.
More than 36,500 Iranians were killed by security forces during the January 8-9 crackdown on nationwide protests, making it the deadliest two-day protest massacre in history, according to documents reviewed by Iran International's Editorial Board. - https://www.iranintl.com/en/202601255198
@BigGame90
That has zero to do with us starting a war with them. As I mentioned above if your side uses a metric for invading and starting a war shouldnt the measure be that the war you are starting is with the very worst enemy possible, the one who is so horrible that you are willing to risk billions of dollars and many lives in the process?
I am not sure how old you are but Iran has always been a lousy place, that entire area is lousy there is very little with regards to democracy, stability or human rights.
If we are interested in human rights abuses then we would nuke the Saudis, they are worse and abuses of human rights are scattered everywhere in the middle east, I am saying NO to your question that NO your figures are not supportive of a war. I would put Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Afghanistan are more deserving based on your post.
Iran does not have nukes and does not have weapons that can harm the US and Iran is not a military threat to the US at all and never have been.
So do you have any content to add which has value outside combative partisan garbage? Can you have a discussion and do more than throw out generalities? You never explain or discuss or validate your wacko messages so what is the purpose if any?
@wallstreetcappers
Can you? You excel at picking out one thing in a post & hammering on it while avoiding answering any question.
Despite what has been a concern dating back to the Clinton admin., your contention is that there's nothing to worry in regards to Iran. All the attacks over the years & all the chants of "death to America" mean nothing? It's well known what Iran is trying to do but you say it's no big deal. Should we just wait until they've got a few nukes lined up & ready to go? You got better intel than EVERYONE else? How much further down the road should the can have been kicked?
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
