That's the point I was going for. They have such a vested interest in the country, and even they have to admit that the groups are up to no good, they just don't care because they need the outside currency.
-- Timothy Heald Analyst, Architect, Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] W: 202-228-8372 C: 703-300-3911 -----Original Message----- From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 5:07 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: WTF!??!!!!??? Don't kid yourself. The Russians are not even remotely on our side in these matters, whether we are talking abou Iraq or Iran. Russia is not only against military force, they are against sanctions unless there is "concrete proof" (e.g. a mushroom cloud) to demonstrate that Iran wants nuclear weapons. Not only that, Russia is selling military hardware to Iran, even now. They were never going to have our backs when it came to either of these countries. It has nothing to do with us. The Russians and the Iranians are big buddies. Remember who sold the Iranians nuclear reactor technology. Russia. On 4/21/06, Robert Everland III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >It's funny that even after the Russians, who were against the war, > >came > out > >and said that the Iraqis were trying to attack us, people still feel > >this way. > The fact that they didn't want to join the war along with so many > other countries should have been a sign that this was a mistake. We > have 2 counties right now that are clear and present dangers, Iran and North Korea. > I'm not saying Iraq may not have turned bad, but at the time we went > in it wasn't as bad as Iran and North Korea are now. We should have > rallied for the world's support instead of overextended our economy > and our military to the point that we are not even able to take out > Iran if they try to develop nuclear bombs. We're the boy that cried > wolf, and now that there really are some wolves everyone is hesitant to help us. > > >What would it take to send you to war man? > Well this is tricky isn't it? We have countries that developed nuclear > bombs recently (India and Pakistan). India is a democracy and Pakistan > is a dictatorship and we didn't invade them, was it because they don't > present a danger to us? We went to war in Iraq when we thought they > were developing WOMD, but were never able to prove it and we have > countries that are clearly touting their ability to make nuclear bombs > and we're not doing anything about it. So my answer is, I don't know. > I agreed with the Afghanistan invasion which the majority of Americans > and the rest of the world did. Iraq is a mistake and I don't know why we don't have enough people seeing that. > They were never a direct threat to us and the examples you listed were > not enough to go to war over. Why are we in NATO and the UN if we > aren't going to listen to our allies? Neither India nor Pakistan have ever threatened the U.S. Apart from their own border war, they have never threatened anyone else. The Pakitanis wanted nukes for prestige and as a threat against India. The Indians wanted nukes to counterbalance the Pakitani and Chinese threat. None of that has anything to do with us. It would be better if neither had nukes, but it isn't a burning national security issue for us. Iraq, on the other hand- well you saw Tim's list. -- --------------- Robert Munn www.funkymojo.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:205127 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
