leejo

Britain 'argues against Iran attack'

Conversely, do you think that this helps or hurts the UN and EU's bargaining position with Iraq?

To me, it's like hearing the cops on the loudspeaker talk tell me to come out with my hands up, but then I turn on the tv and the police commissioner is saying that the police department's official position is that no force should be used against me. "Come out with your hands up, please", effectively.

DudeMan

yeah, your govenrmnet bent over backwards to make sure they looked good before their election.

the British Election is in may... maybe Mr Bush should have waited if he wanted any support.

just like the second world war when your governemnt wanted to get involved but the election meant they couldnt.

same deal, Bush should have waitied till June he may have got a more favorable response from Britain.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

leejo

The British goverment and people are entitled to take any position they like. My point is simply that *my take* on President Bush's comments is that they're designed to put pressure on Iran to make a deal (and, please God, stick to it THIS time) with the EU and UN.

DudeMan

yeah thats fine, but you ask yourself one question. do you think jack straw would have said this if bush had waited till Tony Blair had won his third term?

the answer is no, just before an election you do not want to be on the brink of war, its about home security and peoples morale.

he didnt wait, and as a result he will not get the support he may have anticipated. in the end, screw iran screw iraq screw the world, when it comes to an election its all about winning. and being on the brink of war will not achieve the result.

i also personally think bush is going for war too soon, he has proved a point twice in iraq and afghanistan, he should have offered iran the chance to come out with their hands up first, yes it probably would not have worked but if you are looking for support (and not just from the world but from your own people) then this does something to get rid of the war munger image he has been tainted with.

not saying i dont agree that iran has some issues, but i dont think now id the right time, i certainly think he should have waited a while, till summer at least.

bashing the crap out of a country is not winning a war, a war is won by doing it for a reason that people relate too.

Hitler could smash most countries in Europe and did, but he has never been considered a winner of the wars he fought because overall he lost. i think the time and effort of the untied states military as with that of the united kingdom and other members of the coalition, are best spent in iraq at the moment.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

USN_Squid

Here's a related update to the Iran story. It doesn't involve anything related to Bush threatening Iran, but it does certainly show Iran's desire to decieve. Iran is the serpents head IMO, aside from Saudi. Saudi just disguises it better.

Link (the main page has the video)
"Thanks to our dealings with Europe, even when we got a 50-day ultimatum, we managed to continue the work for two years. This way we completed (the UCF) in Esfahan. This way we carried out the work to complete Natanz, and on top of that, we even gained benefits."

__________________

USN_Squid

The President of Iran is currently at the United Nations (with a visa granted by the State Department in an exception to their own rules), and he’s promising to share Iran’s nuclear knowledge with the Islamic world.

Link