Economic impact of possible attack on Iran

Discussion in 'Economics' started by NoMoreOptions, Jan 17, 2005.

  1. so we went to war because saddam was a bad man. FYI we have killed more iraqi's than saddam ever did. and if you haven't noticed we have done a little torturing over there ourselves.

    the difference between your propaganda and mine is that mine is based on truth, therefore it is NOT propaganda.
     
    #21     Jan 17, 2005
  2. The only problem is that US governments sent troops to Iraq for another reason...

    Horror of war is something people must see.



    In Name of God, Son and Holy Spirit, of imam and rabin, never that again.
     
    #22     Jan 17, 2005
  3. Sam123

    Sam123 Guest

    We're not going to invade Iran.

    Economic impact would a disaster because too many of our friends and allies do business with Iran, unlike Iraq, which was much more economically isolated.

    People are tired of celebrity journalists and all their anonymous sources. Nothing more than Left-leaning propaganda morphing leaked info about some new reconnaissance mission into some master "evil neocon" invasion plan.

    Perhaps the feds are setting Hersh up to catch all of his rats in the process.
     
    #23     Jan 17, 2005
  4. karol88

    karol88

    I agree
     
    #24     Jan 17, 2005
  5. Ratboy...No I am not muslim (my grandfather on my fathers side of the family was....and numerous of my relatives).

    Science Trader... Yes

    Actually for muslims to consider (they tend to have forgotten) the biggest killer of "Muslims" in the past 50 years in the Middle East was the war that was started by Saddam (September 22nd, 1980) and continued by Khomeini....
    http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761580640

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/iran-iraq.htm

    The west was not their great enemy then.....only themselves and nearly one million dead after 8 years.
     
    #25     Jan 17, 2005
  6. LOL, you clearly don't know the definition of propaganda.
     
    #26     Jan 17, 2005
  7. and who the hell did we support and give weapons to???
     
    #27     Jan 17, 2005
  8. ok...then i will restate and say my propaganda is true and yours is not... is that better?
     
    #28     Jan 17, 2005
  9. Everyone's got their own truth. It doesn't matter. What matters is to make the mistakes as small as possible. Mistakes happen all the time, it's just that big mistakes can be averted. Iran is as big a country as Iraq and probably a lot stronger than Iraq, why in the name of God would the US invade or attack Iran? Are you kidding me? That's complete insanity.

    The middle east is not ALL about oil. The Middle East is much more about Israel than it's about oil. Now I'm not saying that Iraq was not for the oil, it probably had some play into it. It was more linked to how weak Iraq was and how "easy" it would be to take it over. It was easy alright, especially for those that just speak the orders.

    Iran, on the other hand, would be the greatest mistake after the two WW.

    Just my opinion, but to me Bush and by default the US, has little credibility to call the shots anymore.
     
    #29     Jan 17, 2005
  10. We played both sides of that coin...with extremely limited military support and mainly some real and some false intel support to both sides. Actually if you do the research...France and Russia were the #1 and #2 suppliers of weapons to these two countries during their backyard turf war.

    And the middle east is ALL about two things....Religion and Oil.
     
    #30     Jan 17, 2005