Posted on 05/15/2006 12:02:52 PM PDT by SJackson
"In the 27 years since the Iranian Revolution, the United States has launched air strikes on Libya, invaded Grenada, put Marines in Lebanon and run air strikes in the Bekaa Valley and Chouf Mountains in retaliation for the Beirut bombing.
We invaded Panama, launched Desert Storm to liberate Kuwait and put troops into Somalia. Under Clinton, we occupied Haiti, fired cruise missiles into Sudan, intervened in Bosnia, conducted bombing strikes on Iraq and launched a 78-day bombing campaign against Serbia, a nation that never attacked us. Then, we put troops into Kosovo.
After the Soviet Union stood down in Eastern Europe, we moved NATO into Poland and the Baltic states and established U.S. bases in former provinces of Russia's in Central Asia.
Under Bush II, we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, though it appears Saddam neither had weapons of mass destruction nor played a role in 9-11."
Let's just imagine for a minute what the past would have most probably been like if Iran was allowed to develop unfettered nuclear weapon factories and long ranged missiles while being financed from their vast oil wealth, 27 years ago.
In the 27 years since Iran has become an unchecked nuclear super power, Libya has been "wiped off the map", Grenada has been "wiped off the map", Lebanon including the Bekaa Valley and the Chouf Mountains have been "wiped off the map".
Panama has been "wiped off the map", Kuwait has been "wiped off the map", Somalia has been "wiped off the map", Haiti has been "wiped off the map", Sudan has been "wiped off the map", Bosnia has been "wiped off the map", Serbia has been "wiped off the map", Kosovo has been "wiped off the map".
Poland and the Baltic States have all been "wiped off the map", Central Asia has been "wiped off the map".
Afghanistan has been "wiped off the map", Iraq has been "wiped off the map".
Imagine what would happen Soviet Union "was allowed to develop unfettered nuclear weapon factories and long ranged missiles". We all would be wiped out.
"maybe he does have a point, and maybe he's right after all?"
Or most likely Pat Buchanan IS a nut.
"Imagine what would happen Soviet Union "was allowed to develop unfettered nuclear weapon factories and long ranged missiles". We all would be wiped out."
That actually came very close, it was called the Cuban Missile Crisis. Do you really want to take a gamble like that with Iran?
The Iranians have acknowledged "holding" Al Qaeda figures. Thus far they haven't charged or tried any of those figures, so one must assume they're (at best) under a very permissive form of "house arrest".
Line ripped off from the MSM. The Iranians are just trying to turn their "Iran vs the UN (IAEA)" problem into an "Iran vs the US" problem for information warfare purposes (domestic and international consumption). I knew years ago that Pat was an "America First" nationalist. Later, when he ran against "Bush II", he proposed a "living wage" for workers, a socialist idea if I ever heard one. So you could say that he's a "Nationalist Socialist".
They might place it centuries earlier with the current battle dating from 1948.
Presuming Iranians=Jihadists, I suppose you're right. If the Iranian people aren't a jihadist equivalent, then I'd go with 1979, they had decent relations with the US and Israel, who Iran recognized, till then.
I know we backed the Shah big time before he was ousted but don't remember how that fit in with respect to 1979 as the start of the differences.
They attacked us in 1979, prior to that we had good relations with Iran, and I presume the Iranian people. I assume your reference to 1948 was to the founding of Israel. Iran was one of the first countries to recognize Israel, and had good relations until 1979, when the jihadists gained power.
In my view Rummyfan was correct in dating the conflict to 1979, not 1948. Or particularly thousands of years. Persians, though fellow Muslims, have not had particularly close relations with Arabs till the post 1979 era, common enemies.
Pat must have forgotten about the hostages. And the threats to close the straights of Hormuz. And their funding of terrorist groups that have declared war on us. And the insurgent war they are fighting against us in Iraq. And their funding of and ongoing support of Hamas.
Pat lost it a long time ago. Pats answer to everything is to dig a hole and hide inside bunker America, hoping the rest of the world will go away and leave us alone.
Pat has supported foreign aid for Hamas. This goes beyond hiding in a bunker. One can be isolationist and still recognize the evil of our enemies, simply advocate a different course. There's something else at work in his recent pro-Putin (including the headline allusion), pro-Hamas, pro-Iran advocacy. I'd prefer to think it's simply Bush hatred and nothing more, but it appears that he identifies America as an expansive, colonial power, and sympathizes with our "victims". The sheep, preyed upon by the wolf.
Whatever's at work, it certainly isn't his brain. He's all over the map these days and getting more incoherent everytime he opens his mouth. He's a manifesto short of becoming the Una-Bomber. If it isn't Bush's fault, it's Isreals. it's time for Pat to up his meds and change the tinfoil in his hat.
Do you think the Iranians view our overthrow of their elected government and installation of the Shah as an act of war?
The Communists, for all their faults, were never big believers in the glories of martyrdom the same can not be said for the Islamic Republic of Iran and her proxies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.