U.S. anticipates Israeli attack on Iran this spring= $6.50 a gallon gas or more.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if Likud and Saudi Arabia are timing this to sink the economy in an election year to destroy Obama's chances of reelection and to bring to power their Republican toadies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Haven't the Neocons have been planting Iran war stories for years.

It's hard to believe that we defeated their mortal enemy for them. But then, it's hard to believe that we sold them thousands of TOW and Hawk missiles after they took our people hostage. Can anyone explain why Republicans keep giving them gifts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this happens, Romney santorum 2022

2012, if obama wants tobe reelected we should attack first and allow war to cushion the double Sammy of euro problems and Iran w. Gas prices

You want more dead Americans just to keep your gas prices down? Really?

There will be more dead Americans if we go into another recesion or appear weak.

That worked so well in Iraq. We lost over 3,000 soldiers, dinged up tens of thousands more, and gas prices shot up from $1.60 to $4+ a gallon.

Could've been worse. 3000 is unfortunate but the libs thought it would reach vietnam levels, remember the This is Bush's Vietnam BS LOLz

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this happens, Romney santorum 2022

2012, if obama wants tobe reelected we should attack first and allow war to cushion the double Sammy of euro problems and Iran w. Gas prices

You want more dead Americans just to keep your gas prices down? Really?

There will be more dead Americans if we go into another recesion or appear weak.

That worked so well in Iraq. We lost over 3,000 soldiers, dinged up tens of thousands more, and gas prices shot up from $1.60 to $4+ a gallon.

Could've been worse. 3000 is unfortunate but the libs thought it would reach vietnam levels, remember the This is Bush's Vietnam BS LOLz

Yeah, we could have attacked the wrong country by mistake. Oh wait...

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:Could've been worse. 3000 is unfortunate but the libs thought it would reach vietnam levels, remember the This is Bush's Vietnam BS LOLz

So an unnecessary war is justified if it was not as bad as the last unnecessary war? Then even if we overlook the fact that this economic downturn was a Bush holdover, it's okay, since it's not as bad as the Hoover mess.

[Anonymous]

It would be wonderful for oil/gas to cost so much. It would finally force the US to start thinking about alternate energy sources, such as solar, electric, etc. The US has benefited from cheap oil for years, and it just cannot last forever. Go to any European country and you will find very expensive oil/gas. Those countries have invested in mass transit and that is good for everyone. I for one am happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be wonderful for oil/gas to cost so much. It would finally force the US to start thinking about alternate energy sources, such as solar, electric, etc. The US has benefited from cheap oil for years, and it just cannot last forever. Go to any European country and you will find very expensive oil/gas. Those countries have invested in mass transit and that is good for everyone. I for one am happy.

And their economies are FUCKED

[Anonymous]

At the very least Bush setup a great launching pad to hit Iran so its a win

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the very least Bush setup a great launching pad to hit Iran so its a win

Moron, we aren't even on that launching pad. Don't you remember, Bush signed away the launch pad right before he left office.

[Anonymous]

everytime gas prices go up, people act as if gas prices never hit over $4 a gallon before or something and we go into "looking for alternatives" and "investigating the oil companies"

instability in the market is causing the prices to go up. speculators (more than normal) are crowding the market and driving futures up which in turn drive prices now. doesnt help that demand is high and no tapping the ground here and there isnt going to drive the price down that dramatically either so stop dreaming.

and iran has been "months away" from a nuclear weapon for how many YEARS now?

the president in office thats got to deal with iran whenever they decide to finally go there is going to be screwed for his whole term. i dont care what party. i think too many people arent taking this seriously that an attack may come out of nowhere. this isnt to suggest we attack iran but we better be on their behinds hard with sanctions and the like cause im not interested in another war that we could have prevented if we kept our eye on the ball

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this happens, Romney santorum 2022

2012, if obama wants tobe reelected we should attack first and allow war to cushion the double Sammy of euro problems and Iran w. Gas prices

Is your husband, wife, son, or daughter currently in the U.S. military. It is always so easy to send someone else to war so that you can have cheap gas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this happens, Romney santorum 2022

2012, if obama wants tobe reelected we should attack first and allow war to cushion the double Sammy of euro problems and Iran w. Gas prices

You want more dead Americans just to keep your gas prices down? Really?

There will be more dead Americans if we go into another recesion or appear weak.

That worked so well in Iraq. We lost over 3,000 soldiers, dinged up tens of thousands more, and gas prices shot up from $1.60 to $4+ a gallon.

Could've been worse. 3000 is unfortunate but the libs thought it would reach vietnam levels, remember the This is Bush's Vietnam BS LOLz

The only reason the deaths are so low is due to medical technological advances. Many of those wounded in Iraq would have died with the medical technology of Vietnam era. Instead of death, they are permanently and/or severly wounded. Oh and I still don't see in the future how we won in Iraq. i think the biggest winner are the Shiite Iranians. I support our US military, but I think they are not proteccted by our civilian elected officials and their pundits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the very least Bush setup a great launching pad to hit Iran so its a win

Moron, we aren't even on that launching pad. Don't you remember, Bush signed away the launch pad right before he left office.

Or Kuwait / Qatar and we would have iran fly over access

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the very least Bush setup a great launching pad to hit Iran so its a win

Moron, we aren't even on that launching pad. Don't you remember, Bush signed away the launch pad right before he left office.

Or Kuwait / Qatar and we would have iran fly over access

*IRAQ fly over

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this happens, Romney santorum 2022

2012, if obama wants tobe reelected we should attack first and allow war to cushion the double Sammy of euro problems and Iran w. Gas prices

You want more dead Americans just to keep your gas prices down? Really?

There will be more dead Americans if we go into another recesion or appear weak.

That worked so well in Iraq. We lost over 3,000 soldiers, dinged up tens of thousands more, and gas prices shot up from $1.60 to $4+ a gallon.

Could've been worse. 3000 is unfortunate but the libs thought it would reach vietnam levels, remember the This is Bush's Vietnam BS LOLz

You're right about that. Because of advances in medical care and armor, the American servicemen who would have died in Vietnam era instead have been maimed and broken, physically as well as mentally. What we've seen is a much higher rate of survival of wounds (around 9% in Iraq versus 24% in Vietnam). Given the nature of warfare in Iraq--where many of the wounded were struck down by IEDs, we're seeing a very high rate of traumatic brain injuries. And those aren't fully reflected in the casualty statistics.

In any case, the number of wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan are something on the order of 35,000, and given the kia/wia ratio, the wounded tend to be more gravely/permanently injured than in the Vietnam era. lots and lots of amputees. Lots and lots of debilitating and permanent brain injuries, some of which are downplayed to drive down the numbers.

As you so eloquently put it, "LOLz".