coalition in the UN. They've pissed too many people off.
As for aerial asaults, Haretz (spelling) reported that the Israeli
government just purchased over 500 bunker buster type bombs.
Interestingly enough the sale does not go through until after the
November election.
Force should be an absolute last resort. Start with still economic
sanctions coupled with a naval and land blockade to ensure that
nothing get through. Couple that with freezing of all assets including
those in the Swiss or Caymen Island bank accounts that the mullahs
have been stashing their bribes for years. Nothing goes in and nothing
goes out. Then let all the Iranian people know in detailed terms how
the sanctions can be lifted.
larry
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:33:49 -0500, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey Larry,
>
> I agree that Iran should be given a firm deadline. Do you think that the UN is capable of this, or would this have to be another case of the US leading a coalition of the weak?
>
> Do you think if it came to force, that we could accomplish our goals with an aerial assault on Iran, or would a ground presence be necessary? I recoil at the thought of sending troops into Iran for any extended period of time.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Larry C. Lyons
> To: CF-Community
> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:28 AM
> Subject: Re: Iran defies UN...and why not?
>
> Also forgot to mention that given Iran's hostility to the US, and
> their past inclination to slaughter thousands of their own people (in
> the Iran - Iraq War they used 10 year old kids and prisoners to clear
> mines by marching them through the mine fields), Iran with nukes is a
> definate threat to the security of this, and every other western
> country. I personally think that they should be given a firm deadline
> then if they are defiant bomb them back into the stone age (for them
> last Tuesday I think).
>
> larry
>
> <snip>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
