Al quaida loves you bong, it's fools like you who help them drag the world into the religious war they want. Yes, I hate bush, but he's a little smarter than you. Haven't heard much from him lately about wanting a war with iran, have you? He was stupid enough to start an unnessecary war, and lose it. You would have us start two, and lose them both. You are the most dangerous type of fool, one who would put us all at risk rather than face your own paranoia and prejudice. Why does iran want the bomb? Perhaps because they face possible attack from nucleur armed enemies? They won't nuke isreal, because they would nuke them back. Or else they will, which would be really sad, there would be nothing else on TV for weeks. Iran is sending fighters into iraq to take part in a civil war to decide which faction controls iraq. Whoever wins, we lose. The good knews is that as long as our enemies fight each other, we win. Time to get the fuck out and let them fight each other. Why would I debate religious freedom in iraq with you? What the fuck do I care? There will be no religious freedom in iraq anyway, it's not even an option. This is about whether shia fanatics allied with iran or sunni fanatics allied with al quaida will control iraq. Which would you prefer, bong? Me, I think we should have minded our own fucking business. To late for that in iraq, but we still have an opportunity to mind our own fucking business in iran.
andruejaysin Reviewed by andruejaysin on . The 'no-military option' fallacy The 'no-military option' fallacy Jerusalem Post ^ | 11-28-06 | JONATHAN ARIEL A chorus is telling the free world that an Iranian A-bomb is something we will have to accept. This is simply not true. Over the past two or three years, as the full scope of Iran's overt and covert nuclear weapons programs has been disclosed, the possibility of preventive military action by either the US, Israel, or both, periodically comes up. Rating: 5