I think we should use all out airstrikes with Air Force and Navy. If IRAN strikes isreal Then we call the Nuclear Silo in Kansus to send missles to Tehran.

I think IRAN needs to get attacked because of their nuclear weapons program.IRAN SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS! EVER!! So we should bomb the hell outta them with Missle Air Strikes.Sanctions dont hurt IRAN a bit and they dont care what kind of sanctions you put on them.So the only thing to do now is WAR!!!!

Yeah.... or not.

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

steve out of curiosity how well do you think the war is goin in iraq and afganistan? great, good or awesome?

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons.

We have been presented with exactly ZERO credible evidence that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran, unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, actually has a functioning military.


If you're so gung-ho about war and killing, why aren't you in the military?

__________________
Whan they come, Ah sall staun mah grun
Staun mah grun, an be na afraid.
Thochts ae hame tak awa mah fear
Sweat an bluid hide mah veil o tears.

NOT YET,,, All this UN playing around is going to suprise everyone when they test a Nuclear Bomb. Remember all left winged europeans who didnt want to do battle against hitler back in 1938? They all didnt belived hitler what he said..And the Result France paid a terrable price later on.But I can see this comming when that crazy iranian bombs isreal youll see ther french do this next.

Riiight.

Iran is not looking for a war. Their government isn't secure enough. They do know, however, that if they're attacked the citizenry will come together to fight off the invaders, just like we would do here.

__________________
Whan they come, Ah sall staun mah grun
Staun mah grun, an be na afraid.
Thochts ae hame tak awa mah fear
Sweat an bluid hide mah veil o tears.

Where's the "economic sanctions" poll option?

Why should Iran not have nuclear weapons? Look at a map of Iran and the Middle East. Bordering Iran on it's East cost is US-occupied (a nuclear nation) Afghanistan, and it's west cost, is also US-occupied Iraq. Bordering it on the South-east is Pakistan - a nuclear nation. Bordering Pakistan is India - a nuclear nation. To its North is Russia - a nuclear nation. Slightly further to its West is Israel - a nuclear nation. Slightly further to its east is China - a nuclear nation. Do you see what I'm getting at? Imagine for a moment a hypothetical situation whereby the USA had no nuclear weapons, yet Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Guatemala and Columbia all had nukes? Do you seriously suggest that the US wouldn't advocate its right to develop nukes because it was surrounded by nations that already had them, and therefore it felt threatened? Why aren't you advocating that the West take action against the confirmed nuclear nations in the Middle East? Iran is actually a democracy - Pakistan is not. Pakistan and India have been on the verge of war for many, many years now, and are more unstable than Iran. Do you advocate the bombing of Islamabad and New Delhi also? Israel blatantly overreacted recently towards Lebanon, so do you suggest that we take action against them also? Of course not. My point is I'm curious why you approve of all of these other equally aggressive nations having nukes, but not Iran?

Your poll leaves out the possibility not to attack at all. Your nations military is not in any state to wage war anywhere at the moment. If you have a hard time beliving me, look at the numbers of U.S. soldiers in Iraq and their costs-->then at your nations economy-->then the requred manpower and funds needed to assault-->then the public opinions and opinions of other nations.

its ok that you understand irans feel for a need for nukes, now why dont you look at all the far reaching terrorist groups iran supports. Hezbollah actually has a good deal of operatives in america, we just had a pretty big bust recently. Hezbollah has bombed us before, hezbollah is responsible for many american soldiers deaths in iraq. Add that to thier hitler-esque speaches, and you will understand why iran having nuke is a bad thing. I dont think we should attack iran either i am just saying.

Well Hitler Was a nut when he speaks and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a nut when he speaks.Same shit differant times and the reason they should not have nukes is what he said about isreal. No one Belive Hitler would exterminate the Jews when he said he was gonna eliminate them.The Problem with Europe is they dont wanna fight and we americans have to bail them out.We saved france from Hitlers ass. And We saved half of western europe from the Soviets ass. but...NO MORE!!!If anything happens to europe WE WONT SAVE THEM THIS TIME Its time they learn to stand on their own two feet.

Get some background information aka, education. Then talk again. That is either comical or sad. You do not know anything you talk about.

I know what im talking about. You dont remember those days of 1938.Thats when it all started.It started with Diplomacy.And Hitler loved Diplomacy and he used it to set up WWII.Same thing with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,He knows all the UN Talk will do nothing.He knows the US hands are tied because of the UN. And Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is setting this up to wipe isreal off the map.

Of course he is well on his way to getting his hands on something that Israel has had for years. I am no fan of Iran but when you have another power with nuclear weapons in the region and another country that has nuclear weapons that has named you as part of an axis of evil and attacks neighbors on both your eastern border and your western border then building up military capabilities does seem like a logical step.