Europe Threatens Iran ... I Guess

Europe threatens action as Iran airs new 'confession'

Well, that's the headline anyway. Apparently it depends on what the definition of the word threatens is.

The EU threatened to act against Iran last night if it did not immediately and unconditionally release the 15 British sailors and marines it has been holding for more than a week.

EU foreign ministers meeting in Bremen, Germany, threatened "appropriate measures" if Tehran did not let the group go, supporting Britain's position that the crew had been in Iraqi waters when they were seized eight days ago.

Appropriate measures? What, are they going to make the mullahs go to bed without a snack? If you're going to threaten someone, medieval is a much better word than appropriate. Don't you think?

Comments

[Buzzy]

Somehow I expect something more like this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkwWMnvVl6w

[scarshapedstar]

We've got to close the threat gap!

[Buzzy]

Exactly what do you suggest scar?

[LOL]

an article for wingers to selfishly scoff at

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/environment/article/0,28804,1602354_1603074_1603076,00.html

[BobInStamford]

No one takes Bush seriously. Look at your brave leader. Its been 5 years and he still cant find bin Laden. He did start a nice civil war though. Surge on, heros!!

[Purple Avenger]

He, he, this is going to be good. They're threatening the dreaded comfy chair now!

[Purple Avenger]

"Its been 5 years and he still cant find bin Laden."

clinton had 8 years and the Sudan offered to turn him over several times.

[Buzzy]

Trying to have a debate with these guys is like debating with a bunch of preschoolers. Mention the EU's reaction to the Iran hostage situation and they talk about everything from corn husks to bin Laden but never about Iran or hostages. Liberalism is indeed a mental disease.

[BobInStamford]

It must be sad being such a bunch of losers, cons. Wars lost, elections lost. Now just sad irrelevant clowns. Surge on!

[Buzzy]

See, poster children for Attention Deficit Disorder. Still can't comment on the topic. Liberalism is a mental disease.

[vetter]

Buzzy, if they did comment it would be twisted into ALLBUSHSFAULT BUSHITLERLIED, etc, etc, so really, do you care that they cannot address the issue? See, Buzzy, you are missing it. BiS reads about the Iranians taking hostages and his brain intakes: "blah blah blah blah It must be sad being such a bunch of losers, cons. Wars lost, elections lost. Now just sad irrelevant clowns. Surge on! blah blah blaj". BiS "feels" (we cannot us "thinks" with these cats) he IS debating the issue!

[Zifnab]

If not for those stupid libruls, we wouldn't even be in this mess! If only the country had clapped harder, Iran would never have taken those hostages! Where, oh, where is our dear leader Sir Ronald the Reagan to lead us from this quagmire with under-the-table arms sales and massive subsidies to oil company executives the likes of which will surely pacify the foul Islamofaciasists?!

You know, its worth mentioning that the last President to suffer an Iranian hostage crisis got swept from office in a landslide election. I only hope that American disgust at Bush's mishandling of this new hostage crisis doesn't permanently scare the Republican minority like it did their rivals in '79.

[Phoenix]

BobinStamford is a plant designed to raise the ire of the discourse here. Notice the regular libs don't acknowledge him. Why does anyone else acknowledge such a cretin?

It makes the normal people here look stupid to respond to him. If you comment to him, you know what a fish feels like getting caught.

[Cindi]

So that makes BoobinStamford a master beta?

[Cindi]

Are we at war with Iran?

http://kevinmccullough.townhall.com/#7e3f724e-a7da-494b-bfda-e7185ba51b52

[ET]

--You know, its worth mentioning that the last President to suffer an Iranian hostage crisis got swept from office in a landslide election. I only hope that American disgust at Bush's mishandling of this new hostage crisis doesn't permanently scare the Republican minority like it did their rivals in '79.

wow, zippy. You just demonstrated a classic lib mentality. The hostages are BRITISH. This is not Bush's crisis...yet you will blame him for MISHANDLING it. Typical lib logic that blames america first last and always for all the problems in the world. you must feel sooo superior to the rest of us.

Your problem is, I am learning, that you don't even realize how fucking twisted you are.

[BobInStamford]

British hostages but US military failure in Iraq. Complete the mission, patriots!!

[Gary Maxwell]

Nahh lets just go cozy up to the chinless one in Syria. And forget about even expressing solidarity with our ally. Sounds like a plan to me!

[Gary Maxwell]

his one is going to leave a mark:

http://web.mac.com/ryskind/iWeb/Site/The%20Ryskind%20Sketchbook.html

[Jon G]

I'm kinda curious where the troops to fight another war are going to come from, because the military is pretty much out of troops and stretched to the breaking point.

So are you guys in favor of a draft? Are you willing to pay $5 a gallon to fill up your cars if the Iranians decide to stop pumping oil? Or, worse, decide to take out the Saudi oil fields or block the shipping routes?

[BobInStamford]

Syria? Oh, thats right, you flatearth rednecks think thats where the WMDs were moved to. Hard to keep all of your victories straight!

[Tom]

Its been 5 years and he still cant find bin Laden."

clinton had 8 years and the Sudan offered to turn him over several times.

Posted by: Purple Avenger

You are an asshole PA. Just another righty robot worshiping the imbecile currently squatting in our WH. You make me sick. Clinton is not president any longer - numb nuts.

[Phoenix]

Jon,

We have a Navy not currently engaged in warfare. They're just floating around waiting for the word.

If Clinton had 'been' a president with fortitude like Bush, Bush wouldn't be forced to do more than is almost humanly possible.

[BobInStamford]

To put it in simple terms that you patriots can understand: when a cowardly male cheerleader loses a war to a bunch of 3rd world goatherders, the goatherders' neighbors tend not to be afraid of the cheerleader. Got it??

[Jon G]

Wars have a way of taking unexpected turns, note our current adventure in Iraq. I doubt the US could limit it to a simple naval confrontation for long.

Again, are you in favor of a draft?

How are you going to protect our 175,000 troops in Iraq, right next door to Iran? How are you going to protect the Saudi, Kuwaiti, etc. oil fields? What are you going to tell the American public if oil prices rocket to $5 or $10 a gallon? Are you prepared to accept the consequences of what that would do to the economy?

[Zifnab]

"We have a Navy not currently engaged in warfare. They're just floating around waiting for the word."

Ah yes. The ever successful "drop artillery until the problem goes away" technique. Didn't Saddam try that back in 1980 with mustard gas and naplam we sold him? And he totally defeated the Iranians then too! Victories abound!

"If Clinton had 'been' a president with fortitude like Bush, Bush wouldn't be forced to do more than is almost humanly possible."

See: Hypocrasy, Desert Fox, bin Laden train camp, Kosavo, Republicans whining about Monica-Gate distractions.
http://www.samsloan.com/osamasur.htm

The fact is that Clinton came closer to killing bin Laden in '98 than Bush has come in his entire 6 years in office.

Also see: Bin Laden determined to Strike America. My Pet Goat.

Bush couldn't have done less to protect this country. The initial invasion in Iraq (not even counting the subsequent clusterfuck) is one more notch in the President's belt of security failures. He attacked the wrong country.

[Buzzy]

If we would take out Iran we would probably find that the problems in Iraq would go away too.

[Zifnab]

"If we would take out Iran we would probably find that the problems in Iraq would go away too."

Supreme Allied Commander Buzzy, after days of in-depth research and coordination with his generals, has spoken.

Unfortunately, he left all the support of his claim back in the car and is too busy to pull it back out. So I guess we'll just have to take his word for it.

I bet if we invade Iran, we'll find those WMDs.

[Zifnab]

"9 Months for Hicks
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8020
...
“They told us this was one of the world’s worst terrorists, and he got the sentence of a drunken driver,” said Ben Wizner, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
...
Under the deal, Hicks agreed not to talk to reporters for a year, to forever waive any profit from telling his story, to renounce any claims of mistreatment or unlawful detention and to submit voluntarily to U.S. interrogation and testify at future U.S. trials or international tribunals."

Your government security inaction! I feel safer already. Maybe one of the wingers in here can promise to fly down to Australian and shoot him as he comes out of the pen. They'll keep him sile... err... from harming America again.

[Jon G]

Talk's cheap but wars have consequences, particularly when you're fighting where most of the world's oil is.

If we attack Iran, the price of oil is going up - guaranteed. If they decide to quit pumping oil, block the Strait of Hormuz, destroy oil pipelines or the Saudi, Kuwait, etc. oil fields, oil's going up A LOT.

1. Are you willing to pay $5 to $10 a gallon for gas?

2. Are you willing to accept what that would do to our economy - inflation, unemployment, probably recession?

If the war doesn't go as planned - see Iraq - we're going to need a lot more troops.

1. Do you support a draft?

2. Are you prepared to have your family and friends drafted?

3. Are you willing to pay higher taxes to support a wider war?

[Purple Avenger]

"You are an asshole PA."

The facts about Clinton's OBL non-action hurt don't they?

[Purple Avenger]

"I bet if we invade Iran, we'll find those WMDs."

Bekka Valley, Lebanon.

[Buzzy]

Jon G, what price are you willing to pay for cheap oil? Will you dhimmi down, put your wife and kids into the burqa? Do you want to convert to Islam or pay the cost to remain a Christian (agnostics and athiests need not apply in Islam).

What makes any of you think that this problem will go away if we leave Iraq and play nice with Iran. It sure didn't work under Clinton, we had several attacks on the US or US interests a year under the Clinton administration. Hell we even had Palestinian gunmen on the observation deck of the empire state building shooting people under Clinton and who can forget the Shi'a gunman with the AK47 blowing away CIA employees as they drove up to work. Two embassies blown up by Islamofascists under Clinton. The 1993 attack on the World Trade Center under Clinton. The USS Cole attacked under the Clinton administration.

The simple fact is that Middle Eastern Terrorist attacks have steadily increased since the "revolution" in Iran in 1979.

That's a high price for their oil I think. Too high a price.

[Capitalist Infidel]

John G, are you aware of how many members are on active duty? It's over 1.4 million. Not to mention the over 1.2 million in reserves. We have plenty of troops to execute about any mission deemed necessary. Oh and by the way, I'd pay $10 a gallon if need be.

http://siadapp.dior.whs.mil/personnel/MILITARY/ms0.pdf

[Zifnab]

"John G, are you aware of how many members are on active duty? It's over 1.4 million. Not to mention the over 1.2 million in reserves."

We have 1.4 million in the armed services. That's Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard. And, as crazy as it sounds, we can't just unload them all in Iraq. We've got military bases the world over, from Germany to Russia to the Phillipines and more.

But we can't use the Coast Guard in Iraq. And all the mid-shipman on the USS Abraham won't make Bagdad any safer. We need army soldiers to secure the cities which contain most of the sectarian violence. Airforce pilots and radar techs don't further that goal.

What's more, the 167,000 troops in Iraq don't stay their forever. They rotate on tours of duty, typically with two years of leave between deployments (although that number has been pressed to one resently). So that's not 167,000 troops you need to keep in Iraq, but 167,000 troops a year from your pool of 1.4 million. We've been at this war for four years now and we still have troops in Afganistan (although we've been scavanging soldiers from that theater as well). And this, of course, doesn't even begin to account for rates of retirement and injury.

So 1.4 million (and the 1.2 million reservists) actually come out to alot less than you would guess. But don't take my word for it, ask Shinsaki and Clark and even Paetrus. Like it or not, we are in fact running out of troops.

[templar knight]

This is just over the top. On the one hand, because of their belief that fossil fuels are causing global warming, the liberals want us to give up oil, yet, on the other hand, they argue for us to leave Iran alone, or we won't have any oil. Looks to me like you liberals would want an attack on Iran, as it would force us to look for alternatives to oil. But you wouldn't want to harm your ally, would you, dickbrains of the Left?

[Buzzy]

They'll use any excuse to trash the US and lift up their terrorist buddies.

[Jon G]

Looks like you're the ones trashing the US. In favor of $10 a gallon gas. You can pretty much say goodbye to the American Way of Life. You rich conservatives may be able to afford that, buy my working class friends are going to be out of jobs. Course there will be work in the military - since we're going to be at war for the rest of our lives. Fear, war, and a trashed economy. That's the future you're offering.

Buzzy - you're STILL an idiot.

[templar knight]

Oh, this is just too funny. Jon G, the hero of the working class, who has probably lived off the government his entire life. Jonny, you liberals come on here time after time trashing the working class, and you expect me to believe you have friends in the working class, or with your personality, or lack thereof, any friends at all. Haha, clever, Jonny, clever. But we'll never fall for it. You post here too much to have any time for real friends.

[BobInStamford]

Any of you patriots seen this??

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070331/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_march_casualties

Clearly the SURGE is WORKING. Stay the course, heros!!!

[Buzzy]

To the left calling someone an idiot somehow makes up for not having a plan of their own.

Come on you lefturds, let's see your suggestions. Oh, yeah I forgot they're gonna surrender and convert to Islam (probably already have).

[nowinger]

The only way to achieve lasting success in Iraq is for us to take over the management of the country's institutions for 20 or 30 years until the Iraqis have enough experience living in a free society and enough historic experience with the institutions of democracy to do it on their own and that assumes they would accept that level of US involvement in their country, which I doubt and that we would be willing to spend the TRILLIIONS it would cost and thousands more American lives, which I doubt. We lost the opportunity for a quick success in the first year of the occupation. The question now is how many American lives and how much money are we going to spend before admitting that its up to the Iraqis. Bush is playing Scarlet O'Hara, he wants to think about it tomorrow, the surge is a way to postpone the inevitable and make sure that he, himself, the war president and commander in chief will never have to personally accept responsibility for his failed war.

[templar knight]

We're the liberals and we don't have to have a plan for nothin'. We've never had to have a damn plan, and you can't make us. Because all we want to do is destroy, and it doesn't take a plan to do that. Have you got that, wingers?

[templar knight]

Jonny, all I hear is this sound:

*crickets chirping*

[Purple Avenger]

"Looks like you're the ones trashing the US. In favor of $10 a gallon gas."

That's *NOT* going to happen, and 10 seconds of actual thought would tell you why.

My standing offer: Any moonbat who thinks $10/gal gas will happen in the next 10 years(based on a 2007 dollar), can get 10:1 odds on any bet amount up to up to $1,000. That's right - put up $1K win $10K.

Put your money where your mouth is.

[LOL]

all liberals want to do is destroy?

hmm, who's called for nuking millions of people on this board?

[Phoenix]

I don't know, LOL. Who is?

I think any talk of military strikes is taking out their nuclear facilities with smart bombs. No one is advocating killing people.

[Cindi]

Of course Pheonix, we all know that any deaths that would take place in bombing the nuke facilities would all be guests of a wedding party.

[Buzzy]

Some Iranian friends tell me that dissatisfaction with Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs is a very real thing in Iran. Taking hostages and further alienating the rest of the world is exactly not what the Iranian people want. Any efforts to destabilize the Iranian government would be more beneficial than an attack at this point.

[bloodrage bob]

ahhh, freedom! lemminglike they line up, the retarded liberals, to defend the iranians, and throw rocks (well, verbal rocks, you understand: liberals aren't too good at face-to-face confrontations...) at those who would defend western ideals & values.

it's all very curious: the iranians stand for - as has been noted frequently - stand for the subjugation & abuse of women, homosexuals, and the 'differently abled', core liberal constituencies all. the iranians, and their muslim brothers call for a society run by white males; with rules dictated from on high by unelected white male theocrats; featuring religious police running amok in a way that the dreaded "christian right" has never even *dreamt* of.

and still, because the muslim/iranians/dogs aren't western, or aren't george bush, the liberal pukes stand in line for hours to kiss their asses. as they've done in some detail above. just like teacher instructed them to do. "never mind the public stonings/whippings/hangings of adulterous women or gays! look the other way, turn your back on your so-called principles or i'll *FAIL YOU*, you lightweight pussies!" and dutifully they murmur, "yes, teacher".

how 'bout now? can we point out that they're scummy hypocrites and call them unpatriotic assholes NOW? or do we have to wait until they actually draft the articles of surrender?

but hey! maybe i'm wrong here. show me where i'm wrong, pussies: see if you can defend your hypocrisy without squealing 'bush', or 'reagan', or any of your usual jive. explain for us, if you can, why the iranians latest act of war against britain shouldn't be responded to with overwhelming force. ("because teacher said that was WRONG!")