| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| U.S. Plans Military Buildup To Warn Iran |
| 2006-12-19 |
| CBS News - Always suspect. But then again, a broken clock is right twice a day. CBS/AP- The Pentagon is planning to bolster its presence in the Persian Gulf as a warning to Iran's continuously defiant government, CBS News reports. CBS News national security correspondent David Martin says the U.S. military build-up, which would include adding a second aircraft carrier to the one already in the Gulf, is being proposed as a response to what U.S. officials view as an increasingly provocative Iranian leadership. |
| Posted by:Intrinsicpilot |
| #11 Year 2008 > suppos to be about NATIONAL SECURITY, ergo the US Dems should NOT want to seen as cowards = "cutting-and-running" iff they expect to control the WH + Congress AFTER JANUARY, 2009. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-12-19 22:35 |
| #10 O'REILLY guest GORDON SMITH [R-Oregon] just said today he is in favor of repositioning US milfors Regular Units to the border areas where foreign insurgents are sneaking in, while also using US Specfors, etal. to advise = lead [reliable]Iraqi Security forces agz those insurgents whom refuse to surender or lay down their arms [FORTRESS IRAQ <> "RE-INVASION OF IRAQ"]. MOUD = RADICAL IRAN WILL HAVE TO EITHER GIVE UP SUPPOR IRAQ AND OTHER ME SECTARIANISM, + AMBITIONS FOR REGIONAL EMPIRE; OR ELSE INITIATE NEW TERROR ATTACKS WHERE US-ALLIED FORCES ARE NOT, INCLUDING WID IN CONUS ITSELF. Iff the Radics choose to launch new terror attacks outside of Iraq-ME, Dubya and Allies will be justified in using the task force to attack Iran. Moud + anti-US Iraqi insurgents' only hope is to survive until the 2007 US Congress [ read - US Democrats] can prevent Dubya-CENTCOM from closing/sealing the borders along Iran-Syria, etc. KEEP BUYING THAT POPCORN + FTLG STAY ARMED. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-12-19 22:31 |
| #9 I vote Iran |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-12-19 21:53 |
| #8 Without trying to anticipate what Bush has planned, I'll venture that, the Iraq campaign costs such as they are, it is pretty unconscionable to assemble additional troops and firepower without any intent to use them. While none of knows what back-channel communications are happening with Iran, it is safe to say the vast majority of us feel that any negotiation is worse than useless. Neither should such a perception have escaped the White House. Therefore, all indications are that this amassed naval power will be directed against Iran or else the Oval Office is literally rudderless. Given how critical it is that Iran's nascent nuclear weapons program be taken off line, I would not like to think the latter is true. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-12-19 21:17 |
| #7 adding a second aircraft carrier to the one already in the Gulf... Uh, hey CBS, we had about eleventeen Carrier Battle Groups in and around the gulf about 15 days ago. Can't you numbskulls even read a website? The information is readily available. |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2006-12-19 19:44 |
| #6 "...So I put two warning shots in his forehead." "You have the right to remain dead." |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-12-19 18:12 |
| #5 Imagine this scenario: Suicide sub with a nuke. What is safe? |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-12-19 17:25 |
| #4 LOL |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2006-12-19 16:09 |
| #3 "...So I put two warning shots in his forehead." |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-12-19 16:04 |
| #2 BTW, didn't we have a pretty big buildup there a couple of months ago? Probably bigger than what's now being called a "buildup". You're right NS. It's all a bunch of hot air unless you put it to some good use. Just thrash Iran and tell us about the "buildup" AFTERWARDS. |
| Posted by: Intrinsicpilot 2006-12-19 15:37 |
| #1 Don't bother if you aren't willing to use it. Talk softly and carry a big stick. Right now, after the |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-12-19 15:13 |