Saturday, January 21, 2006

It's Time to Take Him Out

From Fox News: DAMASCUS, Syria — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met Friday with the leaders of the Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Syria, expressing his support a day after 20 people were wounded in Tel Aviv in a suicide attack claimed by Jihad. So now this bastard is openly supporting terrorists? and he wants nuclear weapons? Denial of the Holocaust, and a wish for Israel to be "wiped off the map" should have been enough for us to get tough with this guy. He is simply crazy, and this may seem radical but I believe his assassination is the only way to defuse the situation.

19 Comments:

At 1/21/2006 12:43:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Too bad we're stuck in Iraq, isn't it??

 
At 1/21/2006 08:53:00 AM, Anonymous Suedehead said...

don't worry, Iran will never have a nuke. Israel, surrounded by blood-thirsty enemies, will do what is necessary.

 
At 1/21/2006 09:03:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Well, maybe, maybe not. I've learned not to trust our intelligence. It can be spectacularly wrong.

 
At 1/21/2006 12:42:00 PM, Blogger Elle said...

"this may seem radical but I believe his assassination is the only way to defuse the situation

may seem radical? c'mon, TC, i'm disappointed in you! i'm going to assume that's sheer frustration talking... i know you're smart enough to think of another way to deal with this man.

 
At 1/21/2006 01:00:00 PM, Blogger GOPHokie said...

Such as?

 
At 1/21/2006 01:09:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

elle-

Sometimes, there is only one solution.

If we give in and appease this guy..we're looking at him still gaining nuclear capabilities

 
At 1/21/2006 01:37:00 PM, Blogger Elle said...

gophokie,

i will be honest and say that i, myself, have no idea. i just think TC is too smart and too young to be talking like that.

besides, if you kill him, he'll just be painted as a martyr or another victim of american high-handedness and 10 more people with ideas like that will pop up in his place.

 
At 1/21/2006 02:16:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Elle is right. I was waiting for someone else to say it, though.

Havent we learned that deposing a despotic dictator may, in fact, be the WRONG thing to do???

We should have.

 
At 1/21/2006 03:27:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

elle-

I disagree.

We can help a more pro-Western government come to power in the nation after his depature.

Dont you at least agree he's to crazy to hold nukes?

 
At 1/21/2006 03:50:00 PM, Blogger neocon22 said...

it is a historical fact the open democracies do not attack each other. i predict that it will not be the united states that removes ahmadijenad, but either israel or his own people.

if israel even has a hint that iran has acquired a nuclear weapon, iran will not even have time to use it before israel destroys the nuclear reactors.

 
At 1/21/2006 03:57:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

Israel needs to do whatever is necessary.

 
At 1/21/2006 04:16:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

I don't support Israel. I don't support Iran either.

The whole middle east is a f****n mess.

We are idiotic to pick sides in the scuffle.

 
At 1/21/2006 05:01:00 PM, Blogger James Young said...

I agree that the guy is probably insane, but I'm no more comfortable advocating his assassination than I was with Pat Robertson's advocacy of Hugo Chavez's assassination.

And isn't it nice that willis has gotten an "Amen!" chorus?

 
At 1/21/2006 05:13:00 PM, Blogger Elle said...

oh, TC i definitely agree he's too crazy to hold nukes, lead a country, etc.

but i have to take issue with you on this:
"We can help a more pro-Western government come to power in the nation after his departure."
on the one hand, i will be 100% selfish and say i love our form of government--especially the fact that i can rail against it at will. similarly, though my life is not perfect, i am glad that i am an american. not to say there aren't other equally-pleasing nationalities i could be, but all in all, i'm pleased with being born here :-)
here is where my politics get icky and unsorted (and i make no pretensions of having it all sorted out): despite the fact that i see the benefits of our form of government and acknowledge the freedom it offers its citizens, the thought of us going into other countries and basically "setting up" pro-Western governments seems somehow wrong to me. what if the people there don't want a pro-western government? how will that government ever sustain itself without our constant presence and interference?

IMHO, sometimes we, as americans, get on a "conversion" trip--and i don't mean that in religious terms. we want to bring everyone to our way of life, thinking, governing, etc. after all, in strictly economic and military terms, it has worked for us. it's impossible for most of us to see that some people don't want to be converted or that our system may not work for everyone.

so i'll agree with you, this guy has to go. but i'm wary of going on the offensive-- i hope neocon22 is right and that the people of iran take care of this man themselves.

 
At 1/22/2006 12:48:00 AM, Anonymous Rtwng Extrmst said...

Willis, if you think we are "stuck" in Iran, I would keep an eye on Iran in the near future. If we determine at some point that destroying Iran's Nuke capability or even deposing the Iranian government is critical to the security of the US, nothing in Iraq will keep us from accomplishing this. In fact, accomplishing this might in fact improve things in Iraq a tad.

 
At 1/22/2006 12:49:00 AM, Anonymous Rtwng Extrmst said...

Sorry, that first "Iran" reference above should have been "Iraq"

 
At 1/22/2006 07:47:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Well, remember, we said Iraq was getting nukes too. Even if our government says Iran has nukes, I won't trust them this time around.

 
At 1/22/2006 01:02:00 PM, Blogger neocon22 said...

willis: iran has SAID they will have nukes in 3 years. i would also like to remind you that the intelligence that was gathered about saddam's wmd program, did not come from US intel. It came from European intel. the intel problems we have had in the past are a direct result of the downsizing by the carter and clinton admins. the barriers that were put in place by jamie gorelick (janet reno's deputy AG), are the barriers that have prevented information sharing between intel agencies, which then resulted in 9/11 and also other failed intel.

 
At 1/22/2006 01:27:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

Thats BS, neocon.

Don't spout the talking points here and blame Clinton for all of Bush's problems.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home