Headlines Why not Iran or N. Korea?

[tzedek]

President Bush - State of the union January 29, 2002

Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens, leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.

States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.

We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction.

We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack.

And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.

So based on that we invade Iraq, ousted Hussien and "liberated" the Iraqi people. At the same time we ensured our own safety by taking out whatever "WMD" Hussien had control of. But using that same logic Mr. Bush used back in 2002, why not attack Iran or N. Korea now? N. Korea has said that they have nuclear weapons. Iran has the capability to make nuclear weapons. Instead, Mr. Bush now wants to negotiate a deal with them.

"We support the efforts by the European three to get Iran to abandon any nuclear weapons," Scott McClellan told reporters.

read

I leave you with this quote from Mr. Bush

And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.

How was invading Iraq considered "what is necessary to ensure our nation's security", yet now (that it is a different country) negotiating is what is necessary?

 

[bigck3000]

this definitely didnt warrant a completely new thread

 

[tzedek]

this definitely didnt warrant a completely new thread

wow someone is really good at holding an e-grudge.

 

[Skitch0o0]

But it looks so nice as a centerpiece on the table I just bought from Ikea!

 

[Havok]

Alright children, stick to the topic at hand.

 

[voiceofreason]

And what is in the best interests of our nation's security ?

OIL​

As soon a Korea strikes oil, we'll be over there is two "shakes" of a lambs tail...

​

 

[bigck3000]

No hard feelings....just didnt think it was all that different from a couple others.

If you must....America is like one of those fake "Gangsta" type kids you see in middle or high school (see "Smoke")....when its some nerd that cant do anything...they'll pick on them...and when they're not....we wont. Couldnt be put simpler. Like VOR said...it all comes down to oil...

Oil=Money. Money=God.

Bush is only here to do what God tells him.

 

[Hicts]

And what is in the best interests of our nation's security ?

OIL​

As soon a Korea strikes oil, we'll be over there is two "shakes" of a lambs tail...

​

Iran has oil, and a lot.