Regime change in Iran if Bush wins

[slavdogg]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=39512
Following leaked reports yesterday that Israel is ready to strike against several of Iran's nuclear power facilities if Russia supplies the Ayatollah's with rods for enriching uranium, a senior U.S. official said America will take actions to overturn the regime in Iran if President Bush is elected for a second term.



more news

Israel 'ready' to strike Iran
If Russia supplies Islamic state with rods for enriching uranium
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=39506

[Torone]

"on condition of anonymity" is where the problem comes in. Whether you agree or disagree with what was said, that phrase means that there is basically no source. If you cannot research the statement, you are expected to take it on faith. I don't do that. After all, who IS the anonymous source? Some low-level janitor? Hell, I could be the source!

[Bishop]

Torone is now suspected to be the unnamed source.

[Rolo]

I doubt any present president or presidential candidate has the insight to be the force behind any regime change in Iran (I will be susprised to see an attack on Iran from the US with military force - too many things can/will go wrong)... and they do not have the charisma to make people want to change - they are both "status quo"... I think we will have to wait 2-4 presidents, before someone will be president, who got all the needed charistics, visions and leadership skills. And to think of it, I´m not so sure it will be a US president, that will win the minds and souls of the arab world, so they can evolve... more likely it will be a EU president.

[Mike AI]

Iran has needed regime change for a long time. Good enough reason for me to vote for Bush.

[grimm]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jul 19 2004, 07:20 AM
Iran has needed regime change for a long time. Good enough reason for me to vote for Bush.

why not, the 300 dollar check worked last time

plus i hear you get a free toy surprise with evey vote, and a personal hand job from Ann Coulter

[Phoenix]

this cant be good news.

i read a factoid claiming that 81% of staged attacks against North american nuclear power plants and facilities were succesful.

Scary stuff

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Torone@Jul 19 2004, 08:46 AM
"on condition of anonymity" is where the problem comes in. Whether you agree or disagree with what was said, that phrase means that there is basically no source. If you cannot research the statement, you are expected to take it on faith. I don't do that. After all, who IS the anonymous source? Some low-level janitor? Hell, I could be the source!

I actually kind of agree with you here ... when "names ain't named", you have to take a lot of things into consideration.

[Edit - my cat thought I was done.]

First thing I do when somebody posts a link to an article on the web is check out the main page of the site (not just when Peaches posts a link ). I was underwhelmingly impressed with worldnetdaily.com.

My personal favorite article on the main page was the one about the Senate candidate promising to campaign to pull the U.S. out of the U.N. That said everything I needed to know about the website in question ...

The United States is hardly in a position to impose democracy at the point of a gun in Iran, for a whole lot of reasons. I understand WHY the barrage of attempts to link Iran to 9/11 took place this weekend, and I'm greatful that at least no one has (yet) tried to link the Iranians to the grave threats confronting both our national security AND the "threat to marriage" ... but it is pretty pathetic.

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy+Jul 19 2004, 11:16 AM-->