posted October 01, 2004 05:19 PM            

Still at it I see, pushing for a military draft to fight a ground war in Iran.

Have you made your concerns about Iran known to the President? I'm sure he would appreciate your expert input considering he only has the combined experience and talent of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, Director CIA, NSA etc., to draw on.

Why don't you draw up a war plan for invading Iran Petron and send it to Bush? I'm sure he would be appreciative.

All fun and kidding aside. The fact there is a battle hardened military force, superbly equipped right next door to both Syria and Iran is a factor in the President's pressure on Iran to open their nuclear facilities for inspection by the UN and also to curtail their nuclear weapons program.

The fact Bush has proven he will act decisively in the face of threats is not lost on Iran or Syria either.

Right now, Syria and Iran are doing everything in their power to destabilize the situation in Iraq. The fear of a representative government right next door is destabilizing to terrorist nations and the implicit threat of military force is not lost on either of them. Their best hope is John Kerry, who would pull troops out of Iraq.

posted October 01, 2004 07:44 PM              

"In particular, Washington should press its allies to take a harder line against Iran, which remains the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorism" "Lead an international effort that would replace rogue regimes in Iran and other states that continue to support terrorism. "

"The bills adoption capped a year of anti-Iranian efforts in Congress.
A U.S. plan for military action against Iran has been complete since May 2003, according to the Sydney Morning Herald"

so jwhop, you think the president doesnt already have the plans drawn up for an invasion? i suppose it would be just like him not to think that far ahead.....

"In my Universe, I don't negotiate with Islamic terrorists"-jwhop

The revelation of secret arms dealing with Iran detonated a domestic political crisis for president reagan and his vp hw bush. It also contributed to a serious credibility gap with Western allies and friendly governments in the Middle East and damaged the moral authority of the Administration to lead the common international effort against terrorism. There were blatant contradictions between the secret arms deals and repeated policy statements calling for no concessions to terrorists and an international arms embargo against Iran and other states supporting terrorism.......

"In my Universe, I kill those who make war on civilians "-jwhop

The Contras were considered terrorists by the Sandinistas and many Nicaraguans, and many of their attacks targeted civilians
In 1984 Nicaragua filed a suit in the World Court against the United States in Nicaragua v. United States, which in 1986 resulted in a guilty verdict against the US, calling on it to "cease and to refrain" from the unlawful use of force against Nicaragua through direct attack by US forces and through training, funding and support of the terrorist forces

"Anyone suggesting the war against the terrorists and the nations who support, equip, train, shelter and fund them should be scaled back has, in my opinion, their head in a place it doesn't belong."-jwhop

so then are you saying you dont believe iran is THE primary source for international terrorism...or what?

"Iran and Syria now find American and Coalition troops in their midst with airfields from which American and Coalition planes can operate. It was intended they should get the idea they were next"-jwhop

posted October 01, 2004 10:37 PM            

By the way Petron, I don't advise the President but he doesn't seem willing to negotiate with terrorists either and they do seem to be dying in large numbers in Iraq.

posted October 02, 2004 12:41 AM              

and you just seem totally oblivious to the possibility of another terrorist attack provoking a "need" for another invasion, for which a draft would be required.....
then you profess complete ignorance to the real threat that iran poses.......(I'm the 1 who thought THAT up eh?lol)
so ive been giving you examples, in case youve been "out of touch" lately.....

Iran arming militia, says Iraqi official

"There are Iranian-made weapons that have been found in the hands of criminals in Najaf who received these weapons from across the Iranian border," Mr. Shaalan said.
Najaf Gov. Adnan al-Zurufi said last week that 80 men who fought U.S. forces at a sprawling cemetery in Najaf were Iranian. "There is Iranian support to al-Sadr's group, and this is no secret," he said on Friday. http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040810-123446-3839r.htm

"There's no question, but that there have been and are today, senior al Qaeda leaders in Iran, and they are busy," Rumsfeld told reporters on Wednesday. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/GoodMorningAmerica/iran030522_alqaeda.html

so again i ask, do you think people are going to rush to the enlistment offices based on the same "intelligence" bush dubya offered on iraq??

posted October 02, 2004 01:21 AM              

so then, you say, if a small band of saudi's working from the border of iran and pakistan succeed in another large scale terrorist attack in the u.s. we would probably begin the attack on iran......
my opinion is that we would do it in 2 stages like iraq, but im afraid it would be considered too much to do without conscription, thats where we differ then
that is to say, if an attack comes soon anyway, my humble opinion we would be a bit stretched dont you think??

amd btw yes i find this humerously paradoxal .....

"You seem to be the only one talking about invading Iran Petron. Why?"
"Do you think we also may have to invade China Petron? How about Syria? "-jwhop

"Iran and Syria now find American and Coalition troops in their midst with airfields from which American and Coalition planes can operate. It was intended they should get the idea they were next"-jwhop

posted October 02, 2004 01:37 AM              

"Guess who all the terrorists and terrorist supporting nations are pulling for in the Presidential election"

this is a cut and paste from the post "Introducing John Kerry" you should read it....

The public reality of BCCI changed completely when John Kerry, fresh from his lead role investigating the Iran/Contra scandal, was tasked to run down Iran/Contra drug connections as chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Operations. Very soon, Kerry discovered damning BCCI connections not only to Noriega and the laundering of drug money, but to a massive international network of dirty cash moving to and from the most dangerous people in the world.

Immediately, Kerry met with opposition from power-players in Washington. Everyone - literally everyone, from both parties, including President George H.W. Bush, whose son George W. had enjoyed BCCI financing for one of his doomed oil businesses - pressured Kerry to back off. Instead, Kerry took the information he had gathered and gave it to New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. Morgenthau agreed to begin a criminal investigation into BCCI. By 1991, the investigation had blown up what Morgenthau described at the time as "one of the biggest criminal enterprises in world history."

"By July 1991," continued Sirota and Baskin in their article, "Kerry's work paid off. That month, British and U.S. regulators finally responded to the evidence provided by Kerry, Morgenthau, and a concurrent investigation by the Federal Reserve. BCCI was shut down in seven countries, restricted in dozens more, and served indictments for grand larceny, bribery, and money laundering. A decade after Kerry helped shut the bank down, the CIA discovered Osama bin Laden was among those with accounts at the bank. A French intelligence report obtained by The Washington Post in 2002 identified dozens of companies and individuals who were involved with BCCI and were found to be dealing with bin Laden after the bank collapsed, and that the financial network operated by bin Laden today 'is similar to the network put in place in the 1980s by BCCI.' As one senior U.S. investigator said in 2002, 'BCCI was the mother and father of terrorist financing operations.'"

posted October 02, 2004 01:40 AM            

Part of the reason foreign fighters from Iran and Syria are slipping into Iraq is to keep our military occupied in Iraq. Those terrorists are being killed and captured.

posted October 02, 2004 01:43 AM              

quote:

---

youre the clip and paste master jwhop.......

---

quote:

---

im sick of retyping my own handwritten points and questions that recieve no answer......

---

posted October 03, 2004 03:54 AM              

The Bush Administration, realistically speaking, cannot raise another 100,000 troops even if that should be required to pacify Iraq or deal with other terrorist threats without threatening to bring the political house down. The world’s most powerful nation state cannot threaten, let alone invade, Syria or Iran – even if these terrorist regimes were shown to have hidden Saddam’s weapons or were engaged in plotting a terrorist attack on the United States. If the commander-in-chief went before the American people to request such authority, who would believe him now? http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/28/122057.shtml

The New Republicans believe that America has a monopoly on power as well as a monopoly on virtue. America's destiny is to use its power to impose its virtue on the world - especially the Islamic part.
This agenda has nothing to do with a "war on terror." However, it will create a lot of terrorists.
And a lot of casualties.
The New Republican Party is a party of delusion. Republicans are deluded not only about America's purpose, but also about America's power.
American casualties in Iraq have passed the 8,000 mark. Every day we blow up more houses and buildings, and kill more women and children - and the attacks on our troops increase by the day.
Delusion has such a powerful hold on the Bush administration that despite being stalemated in Iraq, high ranking administration officials are agitating to invade Iran and Syria.
No such undertaking is conceivable without reinstating the military draft. It would mean generalized war in the Middle East and, likely, a world war. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/9/14/91727.shtml

posted October 03, 2004 12:29 PM            

"In other words, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the beheader of Nicholas Berg, is not really America’s enemy (unless you are misled by the deceiver in the White House); he is actually an Islamic reincarnation of Ethan Allen or Paul Revere, a harbinger of a new global freedom which will only be achieved by the overthrow of the Great American Satan. This obscene fantasy is of course just an excessively vulgar version of the same Marxist fantasy that radicals like Moore (and Kerry) were peddling in the 1970s about totalitarians like Ho Chi Minh, prior to delivering their Vietnamese allies to the Communist gulag from which they have not yet escaped." http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/28/122057.shtml

Now Petron, Laff, et al. I invite you to debate only one point at a time. Try to resist enlarging a debate, throwing every bit of crap you can find against the wall hoping some of it will stick or attempting to obscure the fact you have no valid argument on the subject at hand.

If you're genetically, intellectually or politically disabled to the point you cannot do that, I'll pick A point you've attempted to make and speak to that, ignoring the rest.

posted October 03, 2004 12:47 PM              

or i suppose you think everything is just peachy now that we occupied iraq?
if so then fine ......continue along and pay no attention

posted October 03, 2004 01:52 PM              

Washington -- The Bush administration has directed the military to prepare contingency plans to use nuclear weapons against at least seven countries and to build new smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain battlefield situations, according to a classified Pentagon report.
The secret report, which was provided to Congress Jan. 8, says the Pentagon needs to be prepared to use nuclear weapons against China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Syria, Iran and Libya. It says the weapons could be used in three types of situations: against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons; or "in the event of surprising military developments."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/03/09/MN124394.DTL

'North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya are among the countries that could be involved in immediate, potential, or unexpected contingencies. All have longstanding hostility toward the United States and its security partners; North Korea and Iraq in particular have been chronic military concerns. All sponsor or harbor terrorists, and all have active WMD and missile programs." Ibid
Terrorists or rogue states armed with weapons of mass destruction will likely test America's security commitments to its allies and friends. In response, we will need a range of capabilities to assure friend and foe alike of U.S. resolve
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/dod/npr.htm

The Project for the New American Century

PNAC's vision is detailed in its September 2000 report entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." Among other suggestions, this report calls for the United States to:

"Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars" as a "core mission."
Warns that "we cannot allow North Korea, Iran, Iraq or similar states to undermine American leadership," and American military preeminence rests on the ability to "[remove] a dangerous and hostile regime when necessary." http://www.newamericancentury.org/index.html

PNACs members include:
Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense)
Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Secretary of Defense)
Peter W. Rodman (Assistant Secretary of Defense)
Dick Cheney (Vice President)
Elliott Abrams (National Security Council)
Steve Forbes (Forbes Magazine)
Zalmay Khalilzad (special envoy for Afghanistan)
Jeb Bush (Governor of Florida and brother of President George W. Bush)

posted October 03, 2004 06:17 PM              

"Has the US invaded neighbors Canada and Mexico? No"-jwhop

Mexican-American War
The Mexican-American War was a war fought between the United States and Mexico between 1846 and 1848. It is also called the US-Mexico War. In the USA it is also known as the Mexican War; in Mexico it is also known as the North American Invasion of Mexico
http://www.fact-index.com/m/me/mexican_american_war.html

posted October 03, 2004 06:57 PM            

wow petron...
those were come choice quotes from Newsmax. I had no idea they printed such insight regarding these empiring thirsting neo-Repubs.. suddenly i'm impressed and may actually go visit that site for the first time in a long while.

By the way, I'm following your logic on this topic and i'm enjoying watching the extensive verbal acrobatics you've got jwhop flipping in order to dodge your arguments...

Don't take it too seriously, I've been there before and I feel for ya. I've mentioned PNAC a number of times in the past but it's usually just met with silence or evasion.

---------
"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him" -George W. Bush 9/13/01,

posted October 03, 2004 08:38 PM              

so is another attack(GOD/ESS forbid), that much of a stretch ??

you know , when bush first threatened saddam and u.n. inspectors had combed thru all the sites that rumsfeld had listed
i thought we wouldnt have to invade any1.....
i was hoping bush had some trick up his sleeve to turn around actually try to use those billions of dollars and our mighty army to go into the border in israel and actually MAKE the israelis and also the saudi's DO SOMETHING.......a two pronged attack is what i would have done...TWO top priorities.......i understand that we must have special forces units that can hunt down al quaeda ....the money weve spent could have gone along way 2 that...or would it have gone better to boarder control?
but either way, we would have had to put TREMENDOUS "pressure" on Israel and Saudi Arabia as the second prong of the attack, considering how much weve been doing for decades for the "governments" in this region....thats the only sign we can give to the "axis of evil" states that they can honor now.....i havnt seen it at all from bush dubya have you? i only see "certain kinds of pressure" on iran.....

i find this article ironic, another advisor to hw bush who now criticizes policies of this administration

donald gregg http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kim/interviews/gregg.html

see what i mean by ironic?

i see 1 prong trying to squeeze al quaeda but the other stuck fast and deep in iraq, waiting around for our ex strongman to have another stroke......
in allawi's "speeches" he says that elections will take place in january on schedule......is it too much to give an estimate of how long we remain after that.....if we get out in time...maybe no draft
the saudi's and the pakistani have only taken cosmetic steps to give more representation to their people......who continue to boil under pressure......hey jwhop , would you want to have to leave your homeland for freedom from monarchal rule? who is going to live under the rules, policies, procedures and laws of a government they HAVE NO CHOICE in?

posted October 03, 2004 11:25 PM            

quote:

---

"Has the US invaded neighbors Canada and Mexico? No"-jwhop

---

Bet if you went back to the mid 1770's you'd find what later became the United States sent an expeditionary force into Canada. No excuse whatsoever for that was there Petron. What difference did it make that the British were forming an army in Canada with which to attack the Colonies? None whatsoever, right Petron?

And didn't the US steal the Southwest from Mexico Petron? And the Midwest from France? South Carolina and Florida from Spain? Nasty, nasty US.

Yeah Petron, if we had had nukes back then, no doubt in your mind we would have used them, especially if Bush had anything to do with it. Which only shows the state of your mind.

posted October 04, 2004 01:27 PM              

"Things that are happening in our society were unthinkable 30 years ago. With military service comes discipline and responsibility and those are 2 things a lot of boys--girls too often aren't exposed to at home when they're growing up. Call it an attitude adjustment and a much needed one."-jwhop

"Well, the reaction of the left to a military draft is predictable Pidaua. Military service instills a sense of responsibility, duty, self sufficiency, self esteem and service to the country and contributes to good citizenship"-jwhop

"You may think a universal military draft would be too expensive but we're already paying the price in lots of other ways that are even more expensive "-jwhop

"What are your recommendations Petron. You want to institute a military draft?"-jwhop

posted October 04, 2004 03:48 PM            

I've never made any pretense I favor a universal...a truly universal draft. Now isn't that democratic of me Petron?

I can argue for a military draft while at the same time recognizing and stating why it isn't going to happen Petron. There isn't anything disingenuous about that. All out in the open and above board.

Notice what's present in the reasons for a military draft that I posted, and what isn't. You see no mention of projecting United States military force around the world, do you? You see no mention of projecting US policy around the world either, do you?

The President has said there are no plans for a military draft. I believe him. The Pentagon is satisfied with an all volunteer military, thinking it more efficient and a better, more cohesive better trained fighting force. I believe the Pentagon too.

You are free to hatch the conspiracy theories in your mind or lift them from the loony websites that spread them. You're even free to call the President a liar, but if you do, be prepared to back it up with some facts.

There are NO facts in support of your theory Petron and many facts in opposition to your theory. All the Congress persons and the Senator on the record in favor of a military draft are democrats, out of power in America and some of the most radical elements of leftist thought and politics.

The contingency you mention, that Saudi Arabia or Iran would launch a chemical/biological or nuclear attack on the US would be responded to by bombing them back to the stone age. A rocket in every pocket so to speak. Additionally, if that were to happen, military enlistments would, as I have already mentioned and firmly believe, skyrocket. No military draft needed.....not for that reason at least but I still maintain it's necessary and beneficial for the reasons I stated.

quote:

---

"I renew my call for a military draft, if for no other reason than to make men out of all the little boys"-jwhop"

---

quote:

---

Things that are happening in our society were unthinkable 30 years ago. With military service comes discipline and responsibility and those are 2 things a lot of boys--girls too often aren't exposed to at home when they're growing up. Call it an attitude adjustment and a much needed one."-jwhop

---

quote:

---

"Well, the reaction of the left to a military draft is predictable Pidaua. Military service instills a sense of responsibility, duty, self sufficiency, self esteem and service to the country and contributes to good citizenship"-jwhop

---

quote:

---

"You may think a universal military draft would be too expensive but we're already paying the price in lots of other ways that are even more expensive "-jwhop

---

quote:

---

"What are your recommendations Petron. You want to institute a military draft?"-jwhop

---

quote:

---

no jwhop i dont want a draft......but i dont see it as a ridiculous stretch of the imagination considering the threats we face, and the domination mindset of the current administration....which has been the topic of all my replies in this thread....

---

posted October 25, 2004 11:36 PM              

so jwhop...why did you neglect to mention H.R. 3598, The Universal Military Training and Service Act of 2001,which was introduced by republicans smith of michigan and weldon of pennsylvania on december 28, 2001 with rep roscoe bartlett (r) is a co-sponsor

the title of the bill states it is "to require the induction into the armed Forces of young men registered under the military selective service act"
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3598:

yes i thought i remembered something earlier....is this what got the rumor started? right after 911, and just before dubya threatened to invade iraq as a "last resort"....
i guess we'll just "wait and see" if a draft becomes nescessary then prolly use all the same old procedures from the vietnam era....
didnt you say the vietnam draft was basically the same as slavery?

**********