The Goat Pen

Yeah, like I said, Cary is kind of like Plano, Scottsdale, Bellevue, WA, Irvine, CA, and so on. Large enough to be among the list of cities but not really the central city in the area. More like a large suburb of the main urban center.

Charlotte is another city that has lowered its violent crime rate over the last ten years. Granted, they've annexed a good deal of the suburban population (ala San Antonio, Fort Worth and Austin) but still. It was along the lines of, say, Nashville for a number of years up until the early 00s.

hedge wrote:Cary is virtually crime free, and Raleigh is very low comparable to cities of the same population (and even much less population). We're a peaceful folk here in NC.

Except when you falsely accuse students of rape in Raleigh (and then your universities of higher learning line up to crucify their own students.) I don't see "peaceful" folk there. When those same defendants line up (all of them) offering to give DNA samples to prove their innocence and your DA doesn't take it (for fear that if he doesn't prosecute people he KNOWS are innocent, the irrational, race-bitten citizens of his "peaceful" city will vote him out of his government job) then that isn't "peaceful."

And even when all those defendants are fully exonerated by sane state government officials, the Gang of 88 refuses to apologize for their accusations purely on principle. Perhaps you might call that "peaceful" but I have another name for it.

Durham

Owlman wrote:Durham

Thank you, Durham, not Raleigh. Still "peaceful" NC.

swing state bitches....SWING STATE

NC is now a swing state, and Durham is the worst fucking place in NC by far (and not just because Dook is there).

Sad that Dora was the only one of you idiots that realized the US Invasion of both Iraq and Afghanistan had strengthed Iran's influence and power in the middle east tremendously rather than having diminished it. The Taliban was hostile to Iran and we eviscerated them. Invading and ultimately killing Saddam Hussein in Iraq eliminated Iran's chief regional rival and led to a Shiite dominated Iranian government. Iran is positioned nicely to fill the inevitable vacuum once the US departs.

Also, Dora, I think a great many of us on this board are liberal Democrats or raving Libertarians. Aside from ATM and Goitrous I don't know who else here would be your average run-of-the-mill conservative asshole.

That said, virtually everyone here dislikes Israel or at least thinks the US should reevaluate that one-sided relationship.

you are assuming the US actually intends to depart.

Given Japan, Germany, the Phillipines, Gitmo, South Korea, Turkey, Qatar, and various other bases tells me they do not.

>Invading and ultimately killing Saddam Hussein in Iraq eliminated Iran's chief regional rival and led to a Shiite dominated Iranian government.

Nah, Iran was Shia dominated before. It's Iraq that is newly Shia dominated.

I'm glad to learn I'm one of the idiots though. It's rare that I fit in so nicely.

Dora wrote:>Invading and ultimately killing Saddam Hussein in Iraq eliminated Iran's chief regional rival and led to a Shiite dominated Iranian government.

Nah, Iran was Shia dominated before. It's Iraq that is newly Shia dominated.

I'm glad to learn I'm one of the idiots though.

I hope you realize I meant Iraqi Government.

>I hope you realize I meant Iraqi Government.

Well, being an idiot...

Point taken.

A US attack on Iran could destabalize Saudi Arabia with their Shiite restless minority so don't look for the Israelis to succeed in their desires anytime soon. Saudi Arabia has made if very clear if anyone is going to attack Iran then it must be Israel as that gives their Shiites someone else to focus on aside from a US-cozy Saudi Royal family. That's why Israel and the Saudis are very strange bedfellows in the middle east.

>Saudi Arabia has made if very clear if anyone is going to attack Iran then it must be Israel as that gives their Shiites someone else to focus on aside from a US-cozy Saudi Royal family.

Well, according to Wikileaks, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, & Bahrain all urged the US to attack Iran. The Saudi king referred to it as 'cutting the head off the snake'.

Stormaktstiden wrote:Point taken.

A US attack on Iran could destabalize Saudi Arabia with their Shiite restless minority

I'm not convinced that you have any idea what the rhetoric you wrote, means. Destabilize? Restless minority? All just MSNBC talking points from people who are reading off cue cards in an attempt to get moderates, scared/nervous.

"Sad that Dora was the only one of you idiots that realized the US Invasion of both Iraq and Afghanistan had strengthed Iran's influence and power in the middle east tremendously rather than having diminished it."

Why is that sad? Also, I'd advise you not to get into a debate with innocentbystander. He is very sharp and will make you look like a fool, as his last post indicates. Beware of him, for your own good. Don't say I didn't warn you...

Dora wrote:>Saudi Arabia has made if very clear if anyone is going to attack Iran then it must be Israel as that gives their Shiites someone else to focus on aside from a US-cozy Saudi Royal family.

Well, according to Wikileaks, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, & Bahrain all urged the US to attack Iran. The Saudi king referred to it as 'cutting the head off the snake'.

Iran is a nation of 100 million people. It's bigger thn Germany, France, and Great Britian. It would take an army of 10 million to conquer and occupy a nation that size. To build a military big enough would mean a draft, which send the youth of American into a revolt that would make the sixties look tame. The casualties would make Viet Nam look like a bar room brawl. To attack Iran and fight a long term war of oocupation would be national sucicide. We just don't have the means, financially, militarly, or politically for a war of that magnitude.

Or we could just drop a few nukes on them...

hedge wrote:Or we could just drop a few nukes on them...

That would only workable solution, until they managed to slip one past our border, or worse build it right here and set it off in Times Square. Or much eaisier, set off dirty bombs in 20 football stadiums on a Fall Sunday afternoon.

eventually the iranian younger generation will take care of the mullah and ruling class of iran

and iranian leaders with us on the border will have to be very careful as the uprising reignite as they will again someday

the way we are chasing kaddafi around after taking out ben laden and saddm in the last 10 years I think iranian leadership will think twice about brutally taking out ther own people

the seeds are planted

Fifer wrote:

Dora wrote:>Saudi Arabia has made if very clear if anyone is going to attack Iran then it must be Israel as that gives their Shiites someone else to focus on aside from a US-cozy Saudi Royal family.

Well, according to Wikileaks, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, & Bahrain all urged the US to attack Iran. The Saudi king referred to it as 'cutting the head off the snake'.

Iran is a nation of 100 million people. It's bigger thn Germany, France, and Great Britian. It would take an army of 10 million to conquer and occupy a nation that size. To build a military big enough would mean a draft, which send the youth of American into a revolt that would make the sixties look tame. The casualties would make Viet Nam look like a bar room brawl. To attack Iran and fight a long term war of occupation would be national suicide. We just don't have the means, financially, militarly, or politically for a war of that magnitude.

No.

Iran has 78,000,000 people. You are paying it's government and military the same respect you would a 1st world nation. Don't do that. Iran is 3rd world with 3rd world military technology.

Baghdad fell in 4 weeks. Iraq cost the United States just under 3000 lives over a span of eight years, 2900 of those lives AFTER we raised the US flag in their capital. We have a veteran Army and Marine Corps (led by battle hardened veteran officers) that knows how to handle itself exactly, PRECISELY, in fighting Islamic militants in both flat desert ground and mountainous terrain. We have troops garrisoned on either side of Iran.

Iran would be a cakewalk for our military. We don't attack them because of the financial cost and our nation lacks the political will to be involved in a 4th warzone theater, simultaneously.