Now, if you go around threatening to invade a nation - especially a nation where you already have a record of having overthrown one government and of having sent in an airborne assault force ­and especially if you have just invaded a another country, one that is a neighbor of the nation you are now threatening-shouldn�t you expect that that nation will be preparing for your attack?

Furthermore, if one of your most trusted friend, who has not occupied neighbouring Palestine, but have been an arch-enemy of Iran � alsp posses between 250-400 nuclear bombs � enough to blow-up entire Middle East and Europe.

Rehmat wrote: Now, if you go around threatening to invade a nation - ...-shouldn�t you expect that that nation will be preparing for your attack? ...

A good point, if you can maintain it. For example, how do you prepare for an attack? What preparation can you make that will work?

F

fezziwig wrote: ....A good point, if you can maintain it. For example, how do you prepare for an attack? What preparation can you make that will work?

Judging by those Zionists crying like spoiled children - I must say - Tehran must be prepared for Israeli attack.

Now, if you go around threatening to invade a nation - especially a nation where you already have a record of having overthrown one government and of having sent in an airborne assault force ­and especially if you have just invaded a another country, one that is a neighbor of the nation you are now threatening-shouldn�t you expect that that nation will be preparing for your attack?

you know I was in the Persian gulf when Iran purchased a Delta class submarine from the Russians.and sailed in into the Persian gulf.Guess they thought our Navy couldn't find it.US Navy SH-3 and SH-60 helicopters located the sub.within minutes and dropped sonar buoys all around it.Nice to see in the reconnaissance pictures (which I saw firsthand.) All those brave Iranian sailors standing on the now surfaced submarine waving white flags.yep I'm really scared of them.

America is the Thamud of today. Corrupt, militant, imperialistic, oppressive. 

It is the preogative of any sovereign Muslim people to take every measure to defend themselves against America's diabolical intiatives.

The zealotry of some American people for war and destruction as exemplified by the likes of Ken's post further suggests that Americans fitting a particular profile should be deemed operatives of the imperialist interests of the American government.

Bismillah,

Are you saying that Iran is prepared for war, or is preparing for war, or both?

An operative is someone being paid for their work.  A non-combatant can be cheering their soldiers from the sidelines and not be fighting and does not intend to fight. 

It's important in this world to make these definitions clearly because too many people, the US included with the suicide bombers and kidnappers of non-combatants in Iraq, for example, don't seem to care at all about the rules of war.  It is an Islaamic rule not to kill non-combatants.  We need to stick to that.

Bismillah,

The numbers they need are lower than that 51%.

I was unable to add a second post in explanation of my original.

I meant that certain Americans who visit the Muslim world such as Iraq and  Iran should be deemd operatives with clandestine motivations. 

By military defense I mean submarines as well as nuclear weaponry.

As for the armchair general scenerio of America's invasion of Iran, oh how clean it will be. just take them out form 30,000 feet, right?  Subhanna Allah.

Here on a Muslim board are barbaric blood thirsty killers and their supporters with no morality as to the nature of their words.  

 People talk about Muslims reining in their extremists, but American Christian warmongers (with their brand of bigotry and racism) are actually the ones killing, bombing, talking war, and encouraging killing of innocent people.

 People talk about Muslims reining in their extremists, but American Christian warmongers (with their brand of bigotry and racism) are actually the ones killing, bombing, talking war, and encouraging killing of innocent people.

yes and OBL should have thought of that before he attacked us too. America gets enraged when it gets sucker punched. Anyone who stood up and cheered on sept.11......could be next.

Bismillah,

Allah, SWT, has all the power and the glory and you could be next.  Don't come here threatening people with "your" supposed power!

I guess marines are cheering now, when they drop a bomb; they cheer.

seriously commander'n'chimp should be punished for misleading the country. 
 

Ive heard the cheers myself.my biggest problem with the beginning of the war was that instead of using a legitimate excuse like Saddam has mass graves or has ignored 16 UN resolutions. he picks WMD now that seemed like a good reason at first, but hell Saddam had ample time to hide those while the US bickered in the UN about this topic.but why couldn't Bush use the mass graves ? well many of the same republicans encouraging Bush now were fiercely complaining when Clinton attacked Serbia, Clinton cited mass graves.How hypocritical would that have been? So they picked a weaker reason and its backfired on them. Had they cited the mass graves instead, I think alot more people would have agreed to strike Saddam.

Kenski - The mass graves and gassing of the Kurds happened while Saddam
was on the US payroll. Saddam was "our boy in Iraq" then.

Very true! And why was that? Because Saddam was against Iran plain and simple. We looked the other way because he was against our adversary. His mass killings took on a larger scale and we distanced ourselves from him. After Saddam invaded Kuwait, America had no choice but to turn its back on him. Was looking the other way wrong? yes absolutely wrong. But how long did the concentration camps go on for? The Killing fields in Cambodia? lots of genocide, America cant stop it all acting alone. Saying America is responsible in part for those mass graves, is like saying we're responsible for the gulags in soviet Russia because we were allies with Russia in WWII.

Saddam's murderous reign was not the U.S.' fault, nor was it the reason we
invaded Iraq. It is a post hoc justification.

All in all, the U.S' invasion will prove to be a positive event because it will
bring Islamic government to Iraq. Unfortunately Sunni Islam will be
suppressed and Christians expatriated. Bush's incompetent diplomacy
assured the elimination of Christianity in Iraq, and the 32k dead.

Agreed!  Its amazing to me though is how lots of people out there who do blame the US for their misfortune. I once saw an interview with an afghan man who said the post soviet war economy in Afghanistan was America's fault. and we abandoned them after they fought the Soviets for us. I'm like "Hello its your country not ours. all we did is provide support for you so you could repel the Russians."

Saddam could have been knocked off many years ago, if the US had not fought on the side of Iraq when Iran fought Iraq back to the Iran-Iraq border and then tried to invade Iraq to get Saddam, who they knew was evil.

Iraq invaded Iran. Iran fought back. Iran knew Saddam was evil. They tried to get him, but the US protected him.

----

If Afghanistan had been invaded by anyone else apart from Russia, the US would have completely ignored the whole incident. But because it was the USSR that invaded, the US had to jump in and play the cowboy with the white hat. And now they are reaping what they sowed and the Afghanistani people are still suffering. The US doesn't care about them, they are just trying to protect themselves from some almost invisible, US-trained and funded enemy.

Kim...

Saddam could have been knocked off many years ago, if the US had not fought on the side of Iraq when Iran fought Iraq back to the Iran-Iraq border and then tried to invade Iraq to get Saddam, who they knew was evil.

Iraq invaded Iran. Iran fought back. Iran knew Saddam was evil. They tried to get him, but the US protected him.

----

If Afghanistan had been invaded by anyone else apart from Russia, the US would have completely ignored the whole incident. But because it was the USSR that invaded, the US had to jump in and play the cowboy with the white hat. And now they are reaping what they sowed and the Afghanistan people are still suffering. The US doesn't care about them, they are just trying to protect themselves from some almost invisible, US-trained and funded enemy.

Kim...

Outstanding Kim you are very well informed indeed.The Iran-Iraq war happened shortly after the Iranian hostage ordeal.Americans had nothing but hate for Iran. And would even back someone as foul as Saddam just to spite Iran...........Afganistan was a cold war battle field without a doubt.There have been many. But I am failing to see why the US after the war is over and we have gone are responsible for how Afghanistan turned out.Is it because we didn't stay and rebuild? We only supplied the stingers the Afghans had to have to win the war. does that make us responsible for the aftermath? The Afghans got what they wanted from the US. weapons! And why is it people are crying about the US being in Muslim lands now  but cry that we left after the Afghan war?

Bismillah,

Subhanna Allah!  Bush the most fair?  I think Jimmy Carter had him beat.  But what does the most fair mean to people who live with open sewage in the streets, barricaded in by a super wall, with enemy planes flying overhead and bombs landing God knows where each day?  Fair isn't the right word at all.  Life isn't fair, and it certainly isn't fair to the people in Gaza and elsewhere in Phalasteen.  AND it's not fair to Daniel and his family either for that matter.  No-one signed up to live in such bedlam!