Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Should we know go after Iran?

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia -- A leading U.S. senator on defense issues says any military strike on Iran to stop its nuclear program must also strive to take out Iran's military capability.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who sits on the Armed Services Committee and the Homeland Security Committee, said Saturday the U.S. should consider sinking the Iranian navy, destroying its air force and delivering a decisive blow to the Revolutionary Guard.

He says they should neuter the regime, destroy its ability to fight back and hope Iranians will take a chance to take back their government.

Americans are DONE with the wars, but he wants to start ANOTHER one? In the HOPE that the citizens of Iran will do something?

 
sweet-a-kins

Asked by sweet-a-kins at 9:13 AM on Nov. 7, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (44)
  • So....since we have nuclear capability TOO, who should invade US?????
    kerp1960

    Answer by kerp1960 at 9:29 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • Nah...Let's just "wait and see" while letting them play with the enriched uranium they need to power the country's "baby milk factories!" And when they blow Israel off the map, you all can blame Bush for allowing it happen.
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 9:29 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • Kerp--
    Yes, the United States has nuclear capability, but we follow the rules of the United Nations and engage in diplomatic discussion with other countries. While Iran has agreed to diplomatic discussions, when it comes to having them, they then refuse. Iran also refused to cooperate with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and the United Nations, which even has Russia and China in alarm.
    We have nuclear capabilities, but we allow ourselves to be monitored.
    layh41407

    Answer by layh41407 at 9:38 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • Yes, we should. The UN won't do it for the same reason they wouldn't support Iraq or Kosovo. (money) Bush and Clinton both had to ignore the UN.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 9:23 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • financially...how?

    In terms of our military , how?

    We have record number of SUICUDES by our soldiers because of teh past decade of WARS...multiple deployments...

    ***
    Well, maybe if Obama would stop jet-setting around the world on 2 BILLION DOLLAR wild goose-chases in the name of "economic recovery", ceased approving multiple TRILLION DOLLAR stimulus', ceased multiple BILLION DOLLAR business and industry bailouts, and actually DID something about our piss-poor economy and record high unemployment rates, MAYBE we could scrounge up the money needed to fund the wars and provide the necessary services to our returning veterans!!

    By the way, last I checked, Obama was continuing to follow Bush's Iraq withdrawl timeline, but is responsible for increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan...so you're going to have to ask HIM!!
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 9:43 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • Since I do NOT watch Fox, thanks for clarifying the story for me LIBERALS!!! LOL I LOVE how those who hate Fox and attempt to discredit it at every turn, watch it or cite it more than those who they accuse of watching/citing it!! :o)
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 11:21 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • We have no choice where Iran is concerned. They are not developing a nuclear program for peaceful purposes. They have said time and again they plan to eradicate their neighbor. A nuclear Iran is a serious threat to the already fragile Middle East. Obama lacks the balls to face Iran. It will have to wait until his term is over and by then it will probably require ground troops...and that means blood.

    We already have the bombs needed to take care of the nuclear facilities. Everything could be taken care of with a few well placed air strikes.

    yourspecialkid

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 11:38 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • Yah sure you betcha and doncha know .... its a southern Republican. I wonder who he is being paid by?

    ***
    You mean, RINO, Lindsay "Grahamnesty?!" I guess he's only "great" when it comes to certain political issues. Typical libs, flip flopping on their support of elected officials.
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 9:32 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • It doesn't matter, Now or later, we WILL be going to war with Iran. They are funding terrorist groups that are killing American military and they are doing who knows what with Venezuala, China, Russia and other communist countries against America that will become clearer in the coming years. That's not even mentioning they are preparing nuclear to make bombs. That little crazy man is not about to back down or bow out.
    itsmesteph11

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 10:18 AM on Nov. 7, 2010

  • The best I could find about costs associated with Presidential trips to Asia is this article from Politico.  Insterstingly enough there is only information on Clinton's trips abroad, and not on Bush?


    A Clinton trip to six countries in Africa in 1998 rang up at $42.8 million, most of that for military aircraft costs. A trip to Chile came in at $10.5 million. A trip to China that year cost $18.8 million.


    http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1110/How_much_do_Obamas_foreign_trips_cost.html


    Even accounting for inflation, I'm not seeing where past presidents have incurred 2 BILLION DOLLARS over the course of a 10 DAY trip abroad!!

    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 10:25 AM on Nov. 7, 2010