The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
wtf
why haven't we bombed them yet. where is george bush?
This is ridiculous.
Firstly Iran would be much harder to take over.
Firstly Iran is highly mountainous, secondly they have not been bombed into submission for the past 10 years, they also have a standing, functioning army, and of course they could already have WOMD.
Also, they are far more likely to give these weapons to terrorists in retaliation to an invasion than Saddam would be.
Certainly Iran is the most dangerous out of the Axis of Evil (TM).
It clearly has some involved weapons programme or at least a capability to start one. It is also a fundamentalist theocracy.
Iraq on the other-hand, well I think it was always very dubios that they had any programme going on after sanctions and bombings. Plus Saddam would not pass weapons onto Islamic terrorists who would probably turn against his 'ungodly' regime first.
And North Korea, while probably having the most advanced weapons programme would have little insentive to give the weapons to terrorists. Personally I think they only want them for self-defence, though I believe a dictatorship should not have them, and also I think it is clear that North Korea is the most open to dialogue.
Thus I think the U.S. may well regret ignoring Iran. They could easilly crush their military but the resistance would most likely be far worse than Iraq as well as the casulties if war was committed to. The U.S. may be superior in military but as I said before there is actually and army to fight other than your allies, unlike in Iraq.
All Dubya needs to do now is tell his troops to go into Iran via syria.
wtf
why haven't we bombed them yet. where is george bush?
This is ridiculous.