Bush knew the reasons for Iraq war were bogus

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/they_knew_0802/

[MasterJedi]

Invade Iran! It would really make the region more stable and finally have to stop worring about Nuclear Weapons from that area.

[Lunar]

Invade Iran! It would really make the region more stable and finally have to stop worring about Nuclear Weapons from that area.

You do know how hard it would be to invade Iran, right?  The country has over twice as many people than Iraq, has a much better organized army, FAR more hostile terrain (mountains anyone?), is much more spread out, and the populace would rally behind the government in the event of an invasion.

To put it short, we'd need a draft and maybe 500,000 men.

[The Duke]

jfern,

There is nothing new in the article you linked to.  This debate has been had a million times on this forum about whether we should have gone in or not.  There was nothing of value ecept the same old crap I've heard a million times.

Voted for invading Iran, although I'd prefer the strategy of fomenting a revolt for the practical reasons Lunar cited.

[Seawolf]

the populace would rally behind the government in the event of an invasion.

Had to chuckle at this line.

[Lunar]

the populace would rally behind the government in the event of an invasion.

Had to chuckle at this line.

It's true.  At the moment, a good portion of the Iranians hate their government.  But when the US tanks start rolling by, I feel confident that they would rally and join the fight (unlike the Iraqi populace).

[angus]

the populace would rally behind the government in the event of an invasion.

Had to chuckle at this line.

It's true.  At the moment, a good portion of the Iranians hate their government.  But when the US tanks start rolling by, I feel confident that they would rally and join the fight (unlike the Iraqi populace).

I heard Dick MOrris being interviewed by Hannity and Colmes a few months ago and he was saying that as long as we have all those troups there we should just invade Iran.  He also said we'd get the support of the people.  I don't think we can say that for sure, but in any case, we have no legitimate reason to invade Iran.  

As for Bogus reasons for Iraq, I can still distinctly remember Rumsfeld saying that, among other things, we are going to Iraq to "protect American interests."  This WMD business seems to have been a shot in the dark.  A desperate grope, based on bad information, but it doesn't contain the elements of crime that would make Bush want to resign.  I still say I feel good about opposing US military involvement in Iraq, and that the disadvantages of going in seem, still, to outweigh the advantages.  Gas is still two bucks a gallon, or more, and we're no safer, but I see no reason for Bush to resign.  If Dems can knock him off with their boy, fine.  Good luck, but don't pressure him to resign.  That makes the Dems look as petty as the GOP looked back in the 90s when they were pressuring Clinton to resign over perjury and obstruction (neither of which seems to rise to the level of an impeachible offense in my mind.)

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

the populace would rally behind the government in the event of an invasion.

Had to chuckle at this line.

It's true.  At the moment, a good portion of the Iranians hate their government.  But when the US tanks start rolling by, I feel confident that they would rally and join the fight (unlike the Iraqi populace).

A better soultion would be to covertly engineer a coup, propping up a secular, American-Friendly dictator.

If he goes ape-sh*t 20 years later and starts invading his neighbors and gassing Armenians, we can then conveniently forget that we put him in power.  Then we invade Iran.

See, you have to understand how these things are done.

[opebo]

Invade Iran! It would really make the region more stable and finally have to stop worring about Nuclear Weapons from that area.

You do know how hard it would be to invade Iran, right?  The country has over twice as many people than Iraq, has a much better organized army, FAR more hostile terrain (mountains anyone?), is much more spread out, and the populace would rally behind the government in the event of an invasion.

To put it short, we'd need a draft and maybe 500,000 men.

No, we could do it with fewer men, but more nukes.

[© tweed]

None of the above

[Lunar]

Invade Iran! It would really make the region more stable and finally have to stop worring about Nuclear Weapons from that area.

You do know how hard it would be to invade Iran, right?  The country has over twice as many people than Iraq, has a much better organized army, FAR more hostile terrain (mountains anyone?), is much more spread out, and the populace would rally behind the government in the event of an invasion.

To put it short, we'd need a draft and maybe 500,000 men.

No, we could do it with fewer men, but more nukes.

True, but that wouldn't be practical.  The world would declare economic sanctions on us and it would end up hurting you directly, while with Iran it's unlikely.  It would also turn nations which currently aren't terrorist states into them due to a new wave of anti-Americanism.

Iran isn't as concentrated as Iraq, but you could probably knock that down to 100,000 men if you nuked Tabriz, Tehran, Mashhad, Birjand, Kermanshah, Esfahan, Yazd, Kerman, Shiraz, and Bandar Abbas.  Maybe 50,000 if you took out even more of the coastal cities.