A MUST READ Bush and France going to attack Iran?

I agree! It makes me angry also. Not only because it puts me and my family in danger. It will also make gas prices rise... markets crash more than they already are. It will make our economy go crazy... as if things were not bad enough now.... We really need Ron Paul to get in the white house! This madness needs to stop.

lilwonders123, is right. It is naive to think that a new president is going to make any difference to terrorism. to think that we will be left alone simply by changing leaders or simply minding our own business is dangerously naive. We were attacked many times before bush. In fact we've been attacked less under bush than under clinton. So it has nothing to do with leadership or minding our own business. I doubt your going to see much in iran any time soon, were pretty bogged down right now. Something needs to be done though, if isreal does it you can be sure they wont be nearly as nice about it as we would. We would just do a seriese of surgical strikes on their nuke facilities and leave the civilian infastructure intact. Isreal would go in and turn it into a giant glass parking lot.

Why in the world would this lead to a world war? If anyhting it would be a united coalition of Western states against a handful of Arab states, but more likely, just Iran. It doesn't need to be this melodramatic...

in the Bible it says there will be wars and rumors of war..so the best advice is that of FDR.."the only thing we have to fear is fear itself"---I believe that 90% of what we fear will not happen...don't worry about stuff that you have no control over...this is why i avoid watching the news so much ...and try to focus on positive events...most of the news is all negative anyway...the news broadcasters put way to much "drama" in the news and blow the stories way out of reality..just try to focus on your life and not something that is happening on the other side of the world...have faith..the world is not going to end during our lifetime ..

What I don't understand is this: That doesn't make sense for the following reasons: If the military was going to do something, would it not keep strategy to themselves? It certainly would not be in People magazine asking readers about what they should do. And a lot of things that are supposed leaks are scare tactics the media uses. Occasionally they turn out to be true but more so the incomplete/half info just makes people scared, crazy, etc and then people get into such a fervor that they are going to oppose or protest against whatever news or information no matter if the info turns out to be positive or negative. It could be announcing that the national food will be Marshmallow Peeps and they are already in such a frenzy that they will declare it a comspiracy before they know what the news actually is. See, case in point. You are scared a little about it so the media has done their job. When and if there will be a strike with France, they certainly wouldn't send a publicist out to tell everyone because then Iran would know all about it. I think that there has been more damaged done by "the right to know." I remember in Somalia, I think it was, where CNN showed up where the Navy Seals were landing on the beach - totally blowing any security, their safety, and any stealth they were trying to use. And I remember Saddam Hussein getting all his info on what the troops to watching CNN also. Its internationally televised. I do believe there is stuff we SHOULD know, but plenty of stuff that needs to be kept close to the chest. I don't have military expertise, or more importantly I don't have the experience to call out what exact move the military should make. That is up to the people who are actually involved when it comes down to it.

What I don't understand is this: That doesn't make sense for the following reasons: If the military was going to do something, would it not keep strategy to themselves? It certainly would not be in People magazine asking readers about what they should do. And a lot of things that are supposed leaks are scare tactics the media uses. Occasionally they turn out to be true but more so the incomplete/half info just makes people scared, crazy, etc and then people get into such a fervor that they are going to oppose or protest against whatever news or information no matter if the info turns out to be positive or negative. It could be announcing that the national food will be Marshmallow Peeps and they are already in such a frenzy that they will declare it a comspiracy before they know what the news actually is. See, case in point. You are scared a little about it so the media has done their job. When and if there will be a strike with France, they certainly wouldn't send a publicist out to tell everyone because then Iran would know all about it. I think that there has been more damaged done by "the right to know." I remember in Somalia, I think it was, where CNN showed up where the Navy Seals were landing on the beach - totally blowing any security, their safety, and any stealth they were trying to use. And I remember Saddam Hussein getting all his info on what the troops to watching CNN also. Its internationally televised. I do believe there is stuff we SHOULD know, but plenty of stuff that needs to be kept close to the chest. I don't have military expertise, or more importantly I don't have the experience to call out what exact move the military should make. That is up to the people who are actually involved when it comes down to it.