FBI stops Iran assasination attempt on Saudi Amb. to US

[PeZook]

Are you stupid or just hate the US?

The US isn't in the financial shape to fight another war.

Perhaps plunging yourself into another massive conflict would finally teach you guys something about foreign adventurism and invasionhappy policy that so many Americans gleefully endorsed. Just sayin'.

[CrateriaA]

I personally think it would be great for America to go into another war.

Are you stupid or just hate the US?

The US isn't in the financial shape to fight another war.

Of course Shroom hates the US. His country (the Phillipenes (sp?) was/is brutally opressed by America. Considering the shit we did there mirrors Iraq, I can't blame him.

[Simon_Jester]

Are you stupid or just hate the US?
The US isn't in the financial shape to fight another war.

Perhaps plunging yourself into another massive conflict would finally teach you guys something about foreign adventurism and invasionhappy policy that so many Americans gleefully endorsed. Just sayin'.

I think Iraq and Afghanistan have re-taught that lesson, at least for this generation. There's always going to be a residual layer of jingoists, but you don't hear political figures trying to score points with "bomb Iran."

We're too busy dealing with our own chunk of the global recession, and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars just are not popular anymore. What keeps America in them is the perception that the people we'd be abandoning those countries to are worse; there isn't the "why the hell are we even bothering to prop these guys up?" issue that came up in Vietnam after the South Vietnamese government went downhill.

But there aren't a lot of Americans who are all that happy we fought the wars and occupied those countries, or that we have to keep doing so, or who would urgently want another one.

Of course Shroom hates the US. His country (the Phillipenes (sp?) was/is brutally opressed by America. Considering the shit we did there mirrors Iraq, I can't blame him.

I can.

For one, "you should invade another country..." well gee, what about the people in that country? Sucks to be them, getting bombed just so the "fuck America" crowd can watch America learn a lesson.

For another, the "fuck America" mindset, for all its interest in watching America get taught lessons, doesn't seem very willing to believe that it's possible to teach America lessons. Has anyone noticed how lame McCain came across in 2008 with "bomb Iran?" That was three years ago, and foreign adventures haven't gotten any more popular since. That lesson, I think we really have learned.

[Shroom Man 777]

I personally think it would be great for America to go into another war.

I personally think it would be great if you got Super Herpes and died from it. Go fuck yourself for wishing ill on my country.

What? I only want your country to triumph over all adversities and win in the great war of freedomizing the rest of the world. What are you, a defeatist cheese-eating surrender monkey? Where's your patriotism? Support your troops, you goddamn anti-American wiener.

I totally think America should go for something a bit stronger than "sanctions". Maybe sinking half their air force and destroying what navy they have will teach them the appropriate lesson.

Iran might think it's too cool for school, but America has a newsflash for them.

They aren't.

[Block]

I personally think it would be great for America to go into another war.

I personally think it would be great if you got Super Herpes and died from it. Go fuck yourself for wishing ill on my country.

What? I only want your country to triumph over all adversities and win in the great war of freedomizing the rest of the world. What are you, a defeatist cheese-eating surrender monkey? Where's your patriotism? Support your troops, you goddamn anti-American wiener.

I totally think America should go for something a bit stronger than "sanctions". Maybe sinking half their air force and destroying what navy they have will teach them the appropriate lesson.

Iran might think it's too cool for school, but America has a newsflash for them.

They aren't.

I am one of our troops you stupid fuck. Turns out a lot of us never supported Iraq in the first place but did our jobs. Maybe next time you wish death on more of my brothers you should think about how we're human beings, and it's in no way our fault that Bush is a giant fucking moron. Unfortunately we don't get the choice about following lawful orders. For every one who acts like the criminals at Abu Ghraib there's thousands just serving our country. Again, you're a fucking horrible human being and I hope you die in a very slow painful way you pathetic piece of spamming shit.

[Shroom Man 777]

Wishing death? I only want freedom and democracy in the Middle East.

Besides, Iran committed an act of war. How often does America let them poke them till they respond with something stronger than sanctions?

We don't have to sacrifice troops at all if the Army or Marines aren't up for it. We can use drones and cruise missiles. Does anyone know how well Iranian air defenses can withstand a high-altitude B-52 bombing campaign?

[PeZook]

Perhaps plunging yourself into another massive conflict would finally teach you guys something about foreign adventurism and invasionhappy policy that so many Americans gleefully endorsed. Just sayin'.

I think Iraq and Afghanistan have re-taught that lesson, at least for this generation. There's always going to be a residual layer of jingoists, but you don't hear political figures trying to score points with "bomb Iran."

I would certainly hope your people have learned something, since as you wrote, another massive conflict means more misery and death for the people who happen to live in the place America decides to bomb next.

[Shroom Man 777]

You will notice that this methodology of waging war on Iran, with a delivery system loitering high up in the stratosphere vis a vis B-52 Stratofortress, will pose minimal risk to US servicemen, particularly our dear and precious ground troopers in the Army and Marines. There will be some risk in the B-52 crews, if Iran has high-altitude SAMs, but the risk would've been markedly lesser if Robert McNamara had not canceled the XB-70 supersonic bomber, which could perform this mission with much more speed and much less risk to airmen.

The safety and security of our brave troops is of utmost concern to me.

I do not wish death for any US serviceman, most certainly not. It's on those on the other side, the receiving end, of the warhead whose deaths are the objective of any military action.

And it won't be America who will be receiving any ill wishes from this delivery method. No siree.

[CrateriaA]

Of course Shroom hates the US. His country (the Phillipenes (sp?) was/is brutally opressed by America. Considering the shit we did there mirrors Iraq, I can't blame him.

I can.

For one, "you should invade another country..." well gee, what about the people in that country? Sucks to be them, getting bombed just so the "fuck America" crowd can watch America learn a lesson.

For another, the "fuck America" mindset, for all its interest in watching America get taught lessons, doesn't seem very willing to believe that it's possible to teach America lessons. Has anyone noticed how lame McCain came across in 2008 with "bomb Iran?" That was three years ago, and foreign adventures haven't gotten any more popular since. That lesson, I think we really have learned.

I agree with you with about foreign lives being lost so America realizes its wars won't work. Sorry, I meant I don't blame him about hating America.

Shroomy, even if you weren't being serious, fuck you. I'm glad that the citizens of Iran don't see that you posted that.

PeZook, you know that we Americans will still go to war if we're called to do so by our corporate masters. Sure, there'll be plenty of protesting but the war might still happen. I don't want another war but still, there's nothing big I can do at this point.

[Shroom Man 777]

I don't want another war but still, there's nothing big I can do at this point.

Agreed, but sanctions are useless and these fundie fucks will continue with their bullshit antics unless they feel the effect of serious consequences. The question is what consequences.

Just because the attack was foiled doesn't excuse the fact that this was an act of war. An appropriate response should be a righteous ass kicking. No invasion, no occupation, but a big enough military action to let them know that this shit will not be tolerated and there will be dire consequences for any governments who attempt it in the future.

Sanctions just don't seem enough considering that Iran has been fighting a low intensity war with us inside Iraq for years, or at the very least enabling others to do so for them.

For one, "you should invade another country..." well gee, what about the people in that country?

It's funny how that question only got raised after I agreed with the above statements from several posters in the thread.

[Block]

Maybe we should just recognize Reza Pahlavi as the proper ruler of Iran, it'd piss them off in a bloodless way. That or airdrop pigs with parachutes into Tehran. I mean since we're being so culturally sensitive in this thread, right Shroom?

Sanctions just don't seem enough considering that Iran has been fighting a low intensity war with us inside Iraq for years, or at the very least enabling others to do so for them.

Is what I wrote untrue? Here's a hint, look up sniper attacks around Basra in 05-07. Did I call for a military strike? All I said was something more than the usual sanctions that do nothing at all since China just increases its exports. You put those words in my mouth, and combined everyone who posted without even thinking that maybe, just maybe every person is different.

[PeZook]

So where was all this outrage when TheHammer advocated the exact same things Shroom wants done to Iran?

[Shroom Man 777]

Maybe we should just recognize Reza Pahlavi as the proper ruler of Iran, it'd piss them off in a bloodless way. That or airdrop pigs with parachutes into Tehran. I mean since we're being so culturally sensitive in this thread, right Shroom?

Those would be non-violent "consequences" to Iran's actions, and positively benign when compared to the other methods advocated by some warmongers, and it would certainly not risk the lives of any US servicemen or Iranian civilians for that matter.

Is what I wrote untrue? Here's a hint, look up sniper attacks around Basra in 05-07. Did I call for a military strike? All I said was something more than the usual sanctions that do nothing at all since China just increases its exports. You put those words in my mouth, and combined everyone who posted without even thinking that maybe, just maybe every person is different.

You were asking what consequences, and I happened to facetiously agree with TheHammer regarding what those consequences should be. Nobody said anything about US lives or Iranian lives until I said exactly the same thing as TheHammer.

[Block]

So where was all this outrage when TheHammer advocated the exact same things Shroom wants done to Iran?

Flagg called him out for being a warmonger, I said he was being over the top and rediculous. was that not enough?

[PeZook]

So where was all this outrage when TheHammer advocated the exact same things Shroom wants done to Iran?

Flagg called him out for being a warmonger, I said he was being over the top and rediculous. was that not enough?

You went from "Hammer was just being over the top" to "RAGHR I HOPE YOU DIE". I am just wondering why the difference is so pronounced when it's some Filipino saying warmongering things instead of an American.

[Flagg]

So where was all this outrage when TheHammer advocated the exact same things Shroom wants done to Iran?

Flagg called him out for being a warmonger, I said he was being over the top and rediculous. was that not enough?

You went from "Hammer was just being over the top" to "RAGHR I HOPE YOU DIE". I am just wondering why the difference is so pronounced when it's some Filipino saying warmongering things instead of an American.

Because when non American mud people do it it's worse for some reason?

[Shroom Man 777]

Cruise missile or drone strikes can work. Those who planned this attacks are obviously enemy combatants, and possibly Al-Qaeda operatives, and sending missiles or UCAVs to assassinate them would pose far less risks to both Americans and innocent Iranians. All the President has to do is sign an executive order or whatever to authorize the summary liquidation of the individuals whoever the CIA discovers were responsible for this.

Flagg, I want to kiss you in your eye cunts.

[Flagg]

Yeah, the problem with drone or CM strikes like I described Clinton using is that you end up with alot of collateral damage anyway, just by killing secretaries and janitors, and all other manner of civvie staff that might work at an intelligence or military facility that had nothing to do with planning the assassination. And if you do it in the middle of the night to lessen casualties the odds are you're going to miss the fuckers responsible. But it's a better option than an invasion or full on air campaign. Really, the fact that the plot was foiled and no one killed is the prime reason we should restrain ourselves for once and go with sanctions. If the attack had been pulled off and innocents killed (I couldn't give a shit about some assclown SA flunkie, I guess that makes me a prick but whatever) then I'd be more in favor of leveling the installations of whoever planned it.

[NecronLord]

Shroom Man 777 stop what I can only presume is your parody of an internet tough guy American. You are either deliberately trolling to try and get a rise out of folks, or you are engaging in unacceptable tough-guy behaviour (nuke em!). Either is forbidden and if you continue you're getting a trip to the HOS.

Besides, Iran committed an act of war.

In point of fact I hope you know that they have not. They were preparing for an act of war, perhaps, at worst.

[PeZook]

I really think a huge public trial of the ones responsible (well, the ones you can try for this anyways ; We don't know if the guys involved are legal or illegal operatives) would do far more political damage to Iran than a limited bombing campaign ever could.

[K. A. Pital]

Shroom massively trolled the thread with the typical Shep-style approach. I can only weep at the lack of understanding demonstrated by some of the posters. When you are being trolled and you respond seriously, that means something's really wrong.

I would also note that there's been lots of warmongering at the very start of the thread which met adequate reaction only from a few posters. "Sanctions are not enough" (meaning: war is okay, because bombing Iran is also war, even if you decide to ignore an occupation, not that this is fucking realistic too, since Iran can strike against American forces in Iraq and thereby retaliate).

So there's two options: sanctions and war. Well, and do nothing, the third option. Some people just don't understand that.

And please don't for a moment mistake this as apologising for that nutjob Pinochet and his band of butchers. Just illustrating a much darker shade of gray.

I understand that of course: blowing up one extra person is not the same as blowing up ten or twenty extra persons. However, from a strict "don't kill our citizens!" point of view even one murdered citizens in a foreign government operation is an act of war. I just demonstrated the absurdity of this. Sometimes even several killed citizens are not enough to start a war (Cole bombing).

[Broomstick]

I find it interesting that you seem to think the Iranians want a war. I tend to think they are not completely suicidal.

I don't think the Iranian people want a war at all. For one thing, they'd be the ones doing the brunt of the dying.

The Iranian government is another matter. It's hardly unknown for a government to start a war for political ends, to distract from domestic problems, and to inspire loyalty and sacrifice in the citizenry. If the big boys think they can keep themselves safe they might be willing to start some sort of conflict. Or the could simply misjudge the reaction to a provocation.

[Col. Crackpot]

And please don't for a moment mistake this as apologising for that nutjob Pinochet and his band of butchers. Just illustrating a much darker shade of gray.

I understand that of course: blowing up one extra person is not the same as blowing up ten or twenty extra persons. However, from a strict "don't kill our citizens!" point of view even one murdered citizens in a foreign government operation is an act of war. I just demonstrated the absurdity of this. Sometimes even several killed citizens are not enough to start a war (Cole bombing).

It's not just 'number of persons'. My point was it is different when bystanders are killed by design, and the death of bystanders is deliberately maximized, than when a minimal number of bystanders are killed or they are killed as an unintended consequence. Grim logic, but something that needs to be considered. Obviously I'm not advocating an invasion of Iran. But consequeces beyond the fuckall uselessness of UN sanctions are needed.

[K. A. Pital]

But consequeces beyond the fuckall uselessness of UN sanctions are needed.

I already said that there's only two options: sanctions and war. And a "do nothing" option. Yes, there's also "assassinate Iranian politicians" option, too. You can try that and see what happens.

[NecronLord]

There are six options:

Jim Hacker: Humphrey, do you think it is a good idea to issue a statement?
Sir Humphrey: Well, Minister, in practical terms we have the usual six options:
One: do nothing.
Two: issue a statement deploring the speech.
Three: lodge an official protest.
Four: cut off aid.
Five: break off diplomatic relations.
And six: declare war.
Hacker: Which should be it?
Sir Humphrey: Well:
If we do nothing, that means we implicitly agree with the speech.
If we issue a statement, we'll just look foolish.
If we lodge a protest, it'll be ignored.
We can't cut off aid, because we don't give them any.
If we break off diplomatic relations, then we can't negotiate the oil rig contracts.
And if we declare war, it might just look as though we were over-reacting!

Except in this case, option 1 makes the US look strong and efficient.