ScottSurveys/Porcupine Poll: Military Force Against Iran

[CLARENCE 2015!]

I believe that war must only be taken as a last resort option, and only if we are certain that an attack is imminent.  The international community- including Israel, appears to be cautious of Iran and is prepared in the event of an attack, but do not seem to have taken any military action.

I will wait and see what happens during the time before the resolution hits the floor, but this must be an that issue we approach with great caution.

I understand what you mean and do not mean it personally- but I sure hope no one believes I don't approach an issue such as this without great caution

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I am extremely torn, as I think should be natural. I've not yet made up my mind.

Still, I do find it troubling that our President can so nonchalantly say "of course not," signalling to the world that aggressive countries will go unchecked by Atlasia. Are we not supposed to be a beacon of hope? We should not shrink from our enemies.

It is irresponsible to label countries as our enemy. We are not in a state of war.

If you read my resolution- it is clear Iran has labeled us as its enemy and we ought to return the favor...


Also Scott- SJoyce informed me that in this fantasy world- Iran HAS developed a nuclear weapon....

Lol.  I'm still not sure if it's best to rely on the events/fake updates of a game over those in real life when it comes to things like this.  But since no one would actually be going to war... who knows.

By the way, where did he tell you this?  I don't remember seeing that anywhere.

SJoyceFla mentioned it in several posts in his journal.   
 I would hope the people's representatives are looking at the update threads.   

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I believe that war must only be taken as a last resort option, and only if we are certain that an attack is imminent.  The international community- including Israel, appears to be cautious of Iran and is prepared in the event of an attack, but do not seem to have taken any military action.

I will wait and see what happens during the time before the resolution hits the floor, but this must be an that issue we approach with great caution.

I understand what you mean and do not mean it personally- but I sure hope no one believes I don't approach an issue such as this without great caution

I never meant to suggest that you don't.  However, I think we'd better see what develops over time before we make the final decision on this.  I look forward to the Senate and committee debates on this.

I am extremely torn, as I think should be natural. I've not yet made up my mind.

Still, I do find it troubling that our President can so nonchalantly say "of course not," signalling to the world that aggressive countries will go unchecked by Atlasia. Are we not supposed to be a beacon of hope? We should not shrink from our enemies.

It is irresponsible to label countries as our enemy. We are not in a state of war.

If you read my resolution- it is clear Iran has labeled us as its enemy and we ought to return the favor...


Also Scott- SJoyce informed me that in this fantasy world- Iran HAS developed a nuclear weapon....

Lol.  I'm still not sure if it's best to rely on the events/fake updates of a game over those in real life when it comes to things like this.  But since no one would actually be going to war... who knows.

By the way, where did he tell you this?  I don't remember seeing that anywhere.

SJoyceFla mentioned it in several posts in his journal.    
 I would hope the people's representatives are looking at the update threads.    

Many of these entries are two months old.  Forgive me for forgetting once in a while...

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

No (Labor); while Clarence's proposal is obviously in good faith, I flat-out don't believe in attacking unless we've been attacked or are near certainty that we are imminently going to be, considerably more substantively than we have been by Iran.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

No (MCPR)

As Nathan said, the proposal is in good faith, but I'd prefer a more diplomatic approach to Iran. If diplomacy doesn't work, then I'd support sanctions, but never military force. We don't have the cash to engage in another war right now.

[Donerail]

Iranian Nuclear Test Successful
May 17, 2012
Tehran, Iran

Atlasian intelligence has confirmed, despite previously denying they were pursuing a nuclear weapons program, that at approximately 5 P.M. Iran Standard Time today, the Islamic Republic of Iran conducted an underground nuclear test, the first test of a nuclear weapon by Iran. The test occurred after IAEA inspectors were expelled from the nation, and despite sanctions on the Iranian economy. The test, carried out near the city of Yazd in the massive and uninhabited Kavir-e Namak salt desert, was believed to be successful, according to seismic data from the UN monitoring station in Turkmenistan and Iranian reports. The bomb was believed to have been completely manufactured in Iran with little to no foreign assistance. Iran's leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini was quoted as saying that "Iran is now on par with the leading nations of the world. This great advancement in our scientific and technological capabilities shall give us the status we deserve. This is a historic achievement for the revolution, and shall lead to regional peace and stability". As part of this statement from the Ayatollah, Iran also reiterated their desire of a negotiation of their border with Iraq, particularly concerning the area around the Shatt al-Arab/Arvand Rūd and the al-Fakkah oil field (including neighboring fields); they also called for support for demonstrators in Bahrain and objected to the presence of Saudi and Emirati troops in the nation, and called for the withdrawal of the Atlasian Fifth Fleet from the region.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I am extremely torn, as I think should be natural. I've not yet made up my mind.

Still, I do find it troubling that our President can so nonchalantly say "of course not," signalling to the world that aggressive countries will go unchecked by Atlasia. Are we not supposed to be a beacon of hope? We should not shrink from our enemies.

It is irresponsible to label countries as our enemy. We are not in a state of war.

If you read my resolution- it is clear Iran has labeled us as its enemy and we ought to return the favor...


Also Scott- SJoyce informed me that in this fantasy world- Iran HAS developed a nuclear weapon....

Lol.  I'm still not sure if it's best to rely on the events/fake updates of a game over those in real life when it comes to things like this.  But since no one would actually be going to war... who knows.

By the way, where did he tell you this?  I don't remember seeing that anywhere.

SJoyceFla mentioned it in several posts in his journal.    
 I would hope the people's representatives are looking at the update threads.    

Many of these entries are two months old.  Forgive me for forgetting once in a while...
[/quote]

Ok. I just get the sense sometimes the Senate isn't paying attention.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I fully support the Senator's resolution.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

This poll expires late tomorrow.

[Supersonic]

Yes. (Whig)

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

No (Labor).

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I am opposed to these forays into foreign lands.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I've decided to very hesitantly offer my support to Senator clarence on this proposal. The region is too unstable for these kinds of weapons to be in play, and when something terrible innevitably happens, I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I'd known we might have been able to do something to stop it.

[Napoleon]

I've decided to very hesitantly offer my support to Senator clarence on this proposal. The region is too unstable for these kinds of weapons to be in play, and when something terrible innevitably happens, I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I'd known we might have been able to do something to stop it.

You are uncomfortable with a nation having nuclear weapons available because you don't believe they will act rationally and your solution is to attack them?

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Yes. Why should I trust the protection of nuclear deterrence when one party exhibits a type of extremism that welcomes martyrdom?

Neutralize the threat.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Yes. Why should I trust the protection of nuclear deterrence when one party exhibits a type of extremism that welcomes martyrdom?

Neutralize the threat.

     Iran welcomes martyrdom? They've never exhibited anything less than a strong interest in self-preservation that I could see.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Support: 31%
Oppose: 69%

A hilarious result, if I do say so myself.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Yes. Why should I trust the protection of nuclear deterrence when one party exhibits a type of extremism that welcomes martyrdom?

Neutralize the threat.

     Iran welcomes martyrdom? They've never exhibited anything less than a strong interest in self-preservation that I could see.

I'd say being a state sponsor for terrorism qualifies. Even if, by some stretch, nuclear deterrence would stop the Iranian government from launching nukes, the corruption is such that the weapons could easily fall into less-cautious hands.

Also, the annihilation of Jews should not be seen as mere "self preservation."

[Cincinnatus]

Yes. Why should I trust the protection of nuclear deterrence when one party exhibits a type of extremism that welcomes martyrdom?

Neutralize the threat.

     Iran welcomes martyrdom? They've never exhibited anything less than a strong interest in self-preservation that I could see.

I'd say being a state sponsor for terrorism qualifies. Even if, by some stretch, nuclear deterrence would stop the Iranian government from launching nukes, the corruption is such that the weapons could easily fall into less-cautious hands.

Also, the annihilation of Jews should not be seen as mere "self preservation."

The annihilation of Jews isn't something that rules Iran, just in case you're not aware.  The President doesn't have real power.  Self preservation is precisely what Iran seeks.  We were on two sides, surrounding them militarily.  I'd say that any individual or nation, would look toward self preservation. 

Iran now see's them self's (in large part because of the Iraq War), and rightfully so, as the supreme power in the ME region.  Yet, we continue to ignore this, and pretend like they're crazy nutjobs, when they are indeed, rationale, calculating strategists. 

Why for so long did we put trust in a country like Pakistan to cooperate with is?  Drop the Sunni's, who are anything but organized and reliable, and accept that the only way to move forward, is to work with Iran.  Not capitulate, but to actually meet with Iran, and come to a real agreement (Yes, they are capable of such, despite your misconceptions).

The most important thing to remember is, we may be able to "conquer" Iran, but we will never be able to continuously occupy it.  And than what are we left with?   

[Napoleon]

More death, Cincinnatus. We are left with more death.

[Cincinnatus]

More death, Cincinnatus. We are left with more death.

and taxes..

[Napoleon]

More death, Cincinnatus. We are left with more death.

and taxes..

Absolutely right. More death and more taxes.