Thread: War Pimp Alert! Bush Firm Against Talks With Iran and Syria

War Pimp Alert! No diplomacy. Only invasion and occupation with Iran and Syria.

Bush firm on Iran, Syria talks


The president appears unlikely to agree to direct talks with Iraq's neighbors, which the Iraq Study Group is expected to recommend.

By Paul Richter
Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — As pressure mounts for the United States to seek direct talks on Iraq with Iran and Syria, President Bush appeared Tuesday to rule out any change in his administration's policy toward those Iraqi neighbors.

Bush firm on Iran, Syria talks

You don't see a little double standard in your post Horhey?

Originally Posted by Sparta

You don't see a little double standard in your post Horhey?

What do you mean?

Originally Posted by Horhey

What do you mean?

I meant to say that it looks to me as if Irans been pimping the war whore themselves.

Originally Posted by Sparta

I meant to say that it looks to me as if Irans been pimping the war whore themselves.

They are surounded by US forces and they are aware of long held US plans for regime change. It also doesnt help them to have a right wing loose lipped president which is probobly why his term is being shortened. Hes an idiot.

If you were a president of a country, and you knew you were about to be invaded by an imperial super power, how would you deal with it?

Originally Posted by Horhey

They are surounded by US forces and they are aware of long held US plans for regime change. It also doesnt help them to have a right wing loose lipped president which is probobly why his term is being shortened. Hes an idiot.

If you were a president of a country, and you knew you were about to be invaded by an imperial super power, how would you deal with it?

I think you may be avoiding the reasons that Iran was included in the infamous Axis of evil speach. Iran didn't start mouthing off yesterday. What do threats from the US have to do with destroying Israel, I don't know. It is not in our best interests to go to war with Iran or any other country at this point. So how do you conclude that, without provocation, the US would take any military action against it?

Originally Posted by Sparta

I think you may be avoiding the reasons that Iran was included in the infamous Axis of evil speach. Iran didn't start mouthing off yesterday. What do threats from the US have to do with destroying Israel, I don't know. It is not in our best interests to go to war with Iran or any other country at this point. So how do you conclude that, without provocation, the US would take any military action against it?

No, Iran is part of the "axis of evil" becouse of their defiance of US policy in the region. They have been independant of Washington's influence since 1979. Becouse of their defiance the US is determined to make an example out of them so that other US clients and governments dont even consider disobeying US orders.

If your an "imperial super power" governments have to fear you in order for you to get obediance out of them. For example, the existance of the Saddam Hussein regime was hurting US credibility becouse despite 10 years of confrontations with the US, Saddam was still standing.

The Clinton administration spent nearly a decade trying to overthrow the regime with coup attempts and bombing raids. The US subverted the WMD inspection process and turned it into a vehicle for gathering intelligence which lead to their expulsion when the operation was discovered by the regime. The Clinton administration then accused the regime of hiding WMDs becouse of it.

Originally Posted by Horhey

No, Iran is part of the "axis of evil" becouse of their defiance of US policy in the region.

Yes, the policy of advocating peace between Israel and Palistine. The policy of considering terrorists murderers and wanted men. The policy of promoting an open market between the US and countries in the region. The policy of placing our troops in countries that have invited them. The policy of attempting to create a stable environment in which to trade. If these countries didn't have oppressive regiems what would become of them? Well, Iraq could be an answer. So why is it that Iran should have an oppressive dictator when it could have a dictator that is sypathetic to Americas goals?

Originally Posted by Sparta

Yes, the policy of advocating peace between Israel and Palistine. The policy of considering terrorists murderers and wanted men. The policy of promoting an open market between the US and countries in the region. The policy of placing our troops in countries that have invited them. The policy of attempting to create a stable environment in which to trade. If these countries didn't have oppressive regiems what would become of them? Well, Iraq could be an answer. So why is it that Iran should have an oppressive dictator when it could have a dictator that is sypathetic to Americas goals?

No, the policy of US dominance of the middle east and central Asia. Period. That is the issue. Ill continue this debate with you with evidence shortly.

Originally Posted by Sparta

I meant to say that it looks to me as if Irans been pimping the war whore themselves.

Uh-huh, they're currently invading and occupying how many countries?