Democrats & Liberals Archives

16 Days to Armageddon

The drumbeat has started. Iran is an evil empire. Iran is the greatest threat to the U.S. since … well, since Iraq was. Iran will bury America under a mushroom cloud - the same type of cloud Iraq used. Let’s not wait. There is no time. Don’t believe weapon inspectors who say it will take between 5 and 10 years. It may take as little as 16 days! To avoid Armageddon, we must stop Iran now with nuclear block busters!

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced to a prominent group of Iranians that Iran had achieved the enrichment of uranium. Now it would use its new technology for the peaceful development of energy. He warned the West that trying to force Iran to abandon enrichment would

“cause an everlasting hatred in the hearts of Iranians.”

Other countries do not believe this and they have good reason for not believing this. However, most other countries want to use diplomacy. U.S., however, uses diplomacy, in name only: ostentatiously, it refuses to take military action off the table. U.S. has been making belligerent remarks from the very beginning of this face-off.

Now America issues a continuous stream of combative statements, harsh words and unyielding rhetoric - reminiscent of the build-up to the Iraq War. As with the Iraq war, America is telling the UN that it must follow America's lead if it is to be taken seriously in the future. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urged the UN to take

“strong steps to make certain (to) maintain the credibility of the international community.”

Seymour Hersh refers to a former senior intelligence official who says the administration views Ahmadinejad as a

"potential Adolf Hitler."

Hersh also tells us that the decision to bomb Iran - with nuclear weapons, no less - has been made by Bush. Bush's response to this revelation:

"Wild speculation."

The latest (verbal) bomb was exploded by Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation. He declared:

"Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges. Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days.''

Natanz is an undergroud nuclear facility. To blast it away, the Bush hawks want to use nuclear bunker busters. Don't worry, they say, these are only "tactical" weapons.

Bush is doing a lot better than with the Iraq war buildup. Then, all he could muster is a "mushroom cloud" soon. Now we are talking about 16 days to the end. Hardly enough time to prepare your will. But then why prepare a will since we are all going?

Bush is jumping off the deep end. Since he gets all his orders from God, there is no way to talk him out of anything. However, he must be stopped. He must be contained. We must find a way to hem him in.

I think it is up to Congress. Congress must let Bush know that it favors diplomacy over war. Congress must pass a resolution that informs Bush that wars must be declared by Congress and not by the president. And if Bush starts a war on his own, Congress will provide no money for it.

The Bush administration believes there are 16 days to Armageddon. Tell your representative and senators that they must stop this calamity.

Posted by Paul Siegel at April 12, 2006 6:04 PM
Comments
Comment #140271

My thoughts exactly. No matter what Bush says, his cronies have been going on about the threat of Iran for some time now.

It’s the same story as Iraq: “They have WMD and pose a viable threat to U.S. national security, blah, blah, blah.”

Posted by: Michael at April 12, 2006 6:17 PM
Comment #140272

Paul,

We can never take military options completely off the table. That said, we can’t deal with Iran right now and they know it. They are all but thumbing their noses at us. Why? They know good and damn well we cant financially support another war even if we could militarily.

Hopefully in the future this country will decide to use our military might as a true last resort and a true “eminent threat”.

Nuclear weapons? Yeah, this bastard’s crazy enough to use them. Will he? I don’t think so….there are still a few folks left with a little common sense in Washington.

Posted by: Tom L at April 12, 2006 6:22 PM
Comment #140274

Iserale will attack them before we ever will. They believe in protecting their people.

Posted by: philipz at April 12, 2006 6:44 PM
Comment #140278

I think Bush’s drug and alcohol addictions have made him paranoid.

Soon we’ll be aiming nuclear weapons at France and England.

Posted by: Pat at April 12, 2006 7:15 PM
Comment #140280

Checkout this surreal NewYorker”>http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact”>NewYorker article.

Posted by: Max at April 12, 2006 7:23 PM
Comment #140296

Bush is back snorting (White Lines)again.

Posted by: phillipkucia at April 12, 2006 8:53 PM
Comment #140298

This man is crazy.He only listens to the voices in his head,not the people of the United States of America.

Posted by: phillipk at April 12, 2006 9:11 PM
Comment #140300

The world was not with us on Iraq and diplomacy failed because of it and the result was war. I blame Anan and Powell. Now it is Europe’s turn as Bush made clear- we will see how they do? Personally, I would threaten to pull out of MIdeast and tell Europe to defend Israel which is really the root of the problem that started with the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and the UN creating Israel in 1948(?) MOst of you people just don’t thnk big enough which is why you don’t get it………….

Posted by: Dave at April 12, 2006 9:16 PM
Comment #140301

It’s still being said that this is sabre rattling at it’s best, and even at that, they are 5 to 10 years from being able to produce the weaponry. The really maddening part is when Bush made such an ass of himself to the rest of the world, he took the rest of us with him. Anyone remember not long ago, when we were held in fairly high esteem in most of the rest of the world??? SAD !!!!! And what’s even more sad is that he will leave at the end of his term and be so arrogant and obnoxious to really believe “mission accomplished”. I just hope he can find a rock big enough to crawl under……….

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at April 12, 2006 9:19 PM
Comment #140304

Dave….what politics with Iraq ??? That was all posturing and Bush throwing us all a line of BS while he went ahead with his own private little war game agenda…

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at April 12, 2006 9:23 PM
Comment #140310

Paul

You made a tactical error. Bush critics are usually careful not to give a date certain or a number, since when it doesn’t happen they are caught.

So let’s be generous. By April 30 this will be a little silly.

You can always say that it really did happen, but Fox is keeping us from finding out. We will call this false intelligence.

Posted by: Jack at April 12, 2006 10:07 PM
Comment #140336

Here he goes again … ENEMY ON THE HORIZON … NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN IRAN..! Bush, find the WMD’s in IRAQ you said were there! Lied to us then … shame on you! Lie to us now … and we fall in formation behind the Fox News Storm Troopers … shame on us! Iran must be dealt with by the World Community not by sword swinging Republicans!

When will this White House and party of the Right stop the spinning and “Psuedo-Mandate Agenda force feeding! The mid-term elections will send a clear message to the neo-conservatives, that the nation has had enough of the fear-mongoring and callous disregard of true democracy.

Yesterday it was Iraq, today it is Iran, tomorrow it will be NPR! Can we believe anything that comes out of the White House? I think not!

Posted by: Rafael-El Paso at April 13, 2006 12:06 AM
Comment #140346

I get the feeling lately that I am watching a Shakespearian play as Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld are criticized by ex-military and ex-state department personnel. This is the season of the long knives. Et tu, Brute? Then fall Cesear!

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2006 12:56 AM
Comment #140352

DON’T PANIC!

Paul included this quote in this article:

Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges. Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days.

The Iranians do not HAVE 50,000 centrifuges now. The Iranian president stated in a press release, the Iran INTENDED to procure additional centrifuges. With the current number in operation in Iran, the earliest deadline that I have heard is 2 years. There is no need to fly into a panic because a quote is being taken out of context.

Although the threat is not as dire as Paul indicated, changes in the rate of uranium enrichment by Iran could significantly lessen the timetable for Iranian nuclear readiness. The world will do well to respond to this crisis quickly.

Posted by: goodkingned at April 13, 2006 1:34 AM
Comment #140355

Of course it is all a build up for another war. All the major Middle Easter countries wanted to switch their trading in Euro’s. Let’s face the problem everyone. The only war that exists right now is the silent cold war between the EU and the United States in currency. The US knows that its dominance over the market with its currency will plummet once global oil trade turns to Euros. Do not be fooled. The agenda is out there, one just must uncover the sheet and the face of another cold war of currency and finances will emerge. I hope we are ready for a war like no other before. War of economics. War of currency. War of not just nuclear weapons but hatred toward other nations because of economic success. This hate will have borders. This hate will bring nationalism worse than Hitler. This war will start and end in a global crisis like no other.

Posted by: Joe Piani at April 13, 2006 1:39 AM
Comment #140366
Anyone remember not long ago, when we were held in fairly high esteem in most of the rest of the world???

Erm, can I have some of what you’re smoking?

The rest of the world has never held the United States in anything but contempt and tacid acceptance of our existence. We went from annoying step-child ‘way over there’ to global superpower almost overnight. We’ve never been trusted or respected and seen as being too powerful but too young of a country to know how to handle that power.

I wonder sometimes what they teach in those History classes in school these days.

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 13, 2006 2:56 AM
Comment #140369

Rhinehold:

You ever lived overseas? Sandra is right. While the rest of the world did not exactly like us, they at least TRUSTED us. They believed the US was a force for good. Nowadays America is second to Iran as being a threat to world peace!!!

That being said. I believe we must go to war with Iran. There is no question Iran is aiming for Nukes. We must attack Iran unilaterally if needed. We cannot rely on the World Community after declaring them “Freedom Fries” and “Surrender Monkeys” during Iraq. We must go it alone.

I am sure there are enough Republicans out there willing to spread freedom to Iran. We must convince Jack, Eric Simonson, Duano and their ilk in doing their Godgiven Duty!!!

Posted by: Aldous at April 13, 2006 3:50 AM
Comment #140372
While the rest of the world did not exactly like us, they at least TRUSTED us. They believed the US was a force for good

Sorry, Aldous, you’re going to have to sell that nonsense to someone else.

Demonstrations against the US for supporting Israel, Vietnam, terrorist attacks against us for decades, WTC I bombing, WTC II bombing, USS Cole, Embassy bombings, Beruit, Lebenon, Black Hawk Down, etc. During Gulf War 1 we had to agree not to invade Iraq as a requirement for getting most of the coalition to join in.

There is no way you can convince anyone with a straight face that the US was trusted as a force for good. We have always been seen as ‘throwing our weight around’ and only doing anything for our own interests (oil for example). I remember the day of the WTC II bombing hearing someone from England say in a chat room I was in ‘God, they so deserved this’.

We were despised by many for our action in Vietnam much more than for Iraq. We may have had a ‘gold’ period between the end of WWII and the start of Vietnam, during the Korean War perhaps, when what you say may have been the case, but Vietnam was protested and we were despised for that much more than Iraq IMO.

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 13, 2006 4:11 AM
Comment #140378

Rhinehold:

Yup. Just as I thought, never lived overseas.

Posted by: Aldous at April 13, 2006 4:49 AM
Comment #140383

A lot of people on this board seem to be using their emotions instead of thier minds. Iran has chosen a path that gives the world no choice but to respond. If someone was angry with you and was getting ready to break into a cabinet to obtain a gun to use on you, would you try to stop them from getting the gun. If you have any common sense you would stop them before they could inflict major damage or even kill you! We are just recovering from the stab wound of the WTC’s.

I agree that the issues are mostly about world powers fighting amongst one another. I personally believe in segmented powers, and one form of segmented power is nationalism. I am also a supporter of reforming the governement so that we have the elements of a competitive society, which capitalism provides, but also the ability for government to separate itself from business and monetary influences so that decisions can be made on a moral basis, which elements of socialism provide. The correct way to handle the questions of right and wrong are not answered by apathy nor by war, but finding a balance somewhere inbetween. Never in history have we as a collective group had the luxury of both sides coming to a peaceful resolution. War is as much a reality as the sun rising in the morning. With the rhetoric coming from both sides, it is clear Iran will not back down, nor will the US. This is a war in the making, and all we can do is sit back and watch the fight unfold and hope that it ends with as little casualties as possible.

Posted by: Diablo at April 13, 2006 5:42 AM
Comment #140385

We must bomb Iran. We must liberate the Iranian people from its oppressive government. We cannot rely on the weak europeans and the pathetic UN. We must go it alone.

We must go to war!!!

Posted by: Aldous at April 13, 2006 7:33 AM
Comment #140387

Pat

Good idea on nuking France.Not the Brits though.

All

This will be an Isreali operation,now repeat after me
“I will not be afraid…I will not be afraid…I will not be afraid……”
Feel better?
Geez…..

Posted by: sicilianeagle at April 13, 2006 7:41 AM
Comment #140388

Let them make the bomb.

Posted by: dawn at April 13, 2006 7:48 AM
Comment #140389

Aldous,
Many, if not most of us, look to you for guidance on these difficult issues. Your sarcasm makes it difficult sometimes to know your position.

Posted by: Schwamp at April 13, 2006 7:56 AM
Comment #140390

Whether or not Bush would like to send troops to Iran, I think it’s unlikely that even a single US boot will be on the ground in that country anytime soon. With the military already stretched the way it is, it’s simply impossible from resource allocation point of view. Oh, let me take that back — if the draft is reinstated, then it might be possible. But if this administration thinks it has the “capital” to reinstate the draft, well, Bush and Cheney better be prepared to live full time on Air Force One at 35k feet. Dick, get me a cheeseburger, will ya?
This is a red herring issue, designed to draw attention away from the supernova-like implosion of this administration. It was worth a try, but it just makes them look like even bigger jerks, because we heard all this same nonsense last time.
These idiots should resign and give the country a chance at respectability.
And I agree that Israel has a good track record with operations like this. Let them do it. At least they’ll be smart enough not to try to occupy the country afterwards.

Posted by: Govt Skeptic at April 13, 2006 8:24 AM
Comment #140416

If Iran manages to gain a nuclear arsenal, even if it’s just a few short-range missles with nuclear warheards, they will likely wind up in the same position as all other nuclear-capable countries: safe from the United States.

The number one threat to world safety is almost inarguably North Korea. A despotic madman with nuclear capability and plenty of enemies that are our allies. We don’t “change that regime” because his bat, while shorter, swings just as hard as ours. Iran is looking to be able to hold that same stance, and who can blame them.

I suppose the questions are:

1) Will anyone push the button? “Tactical” nukes (which are Hiroshima sized) or otherwise.
2) Who will push it first?

Posted by: Thomas R at April 13, 2006 11:27 AM
Comment #140418

Aldous

I lived overseas for most of my working life (a total of more than 16 years in Europe & Latin America) and I travel to Europe still at least three times a year. I can read newspapers in four languages and spend a lot of time looking at foreign media.

you are just wrong about what you are saying. Sure,they all say that they used to trust us. Do you remember the MILLIONS of people who protested Ronald Reagan. The fools supported a nuclear freeze, which would have keep us in the MAD arms race. Those were the biggest anti-US demonstrations in history. The anti-Iraq is small potatoes.

The French thought up that hyperpower thing during the Clinton administration. We go through rough patches and better patches, but it always looks better when we look back.

Remember when Reagan died? All those leftist and fellow travelers who hated him pretended that they always thought he was a great guy.

Memories are short for these sorts of things. Anti-Americanism is one of the few forms of racism that is still accepted. There are reasons why people might not like us. So what?

Aldous, your foreign friend are decieving you and problably themselves when they tell you these things.

You live in Phillipines, right? Check into the newpapers around the time we were leaving the bases there. Don’t ask people what they thought, check the written record.

Posted by: Jack at April 13, 2006 11:32 AM
Comment #140421

Jack-
So your solution to the problem of disagreements abroad is to intentionally provoke and sustain such discord? I find the problem with the current Republican approach is that it aims to make a foreign policy problem worse that doesn’t need to be any worse.

We need cooperation from abroad, especially if our aim is to head off terrorist attacks, isolate nations that are support terror, and working against problem countries like Iran.

Do we really need to approach our foreign policy problems so inefficiently, just so we can isolate ourselves from the court of world opinion and international law in terms of our actions? That’s only going to create more friction and more problems for us as a nation.

In all honesty, Iran or Syria should have been our next concern, our next targets. We had the political capital to isolate them. We had the military capital to threaten them. And we had the financial capital to keep things going. Now all those things are in question, and the likely source of soldiers for any next war will have to be from a draft.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 13, 2006 11:58 AM
Comment #140424

When a school yard bully decides to give ultimatims and name-calling and the threat of violence to others, what does he expect the response to be? well-thought-out conversation? submission and docile deference?

Our administration has chosen to rely on name-calling (You are the axis of evil!! you are bad. we are good and all-knowing and anything we do has the approval of God), and violent overthrow (called “preemptive strike” and or preventive defensiveness?) and becoming the self-appointed dictators of the world (“we can decide who gets to use nuclear energy and who doesn’t and it doesn’t matter whether they sign the non-proliferation treaty or not. we decide based on whatever criteria we chose”). Isn’t it sad and interesting that we are the only nation on earth who has used nuclear weapons against an enemy and yet we are the ones who decide who can use nuclear energy or not?

and who can “make us” follow the agreed rules of global nations when we refuse to join in and support the world court, the kyoto agreement, follow any global environmental rules, listen to the red cross or amnesty international about our personal involvment in abugrabe or guantanimo?

I wonder how the administration expected Iran or N Korea to respond to their name-calling and demands and bullying position? or was all this just exactly to get us to this point??

I wonder how the world would be different now if years ago our administration had used reflective and diplomatic and forward thinking ways to respond to 9-11, instead of this cowboy approach to diplomacy? I wonder, if we had, after going into afganistan, asked the nations of the world to join us in just going after the taliban? and then, with the rest of the global community, asked them to join us in working towards connection and diplomatic ways to join together to fight our common problems like AIDS, child and women slavery, global warming and pollution, world hunger and literacy? I wonder what kind of world we would have now—-if we had focused on that for the past 5 years instead of revenge and our diminishing barrels of oil? I wonder how many extemists would still exist if we modeled that kind of world community commitment and set that kind of priority to the rest of the world?

Posted by: judge at April 13, 2006 12:18 PM
Comment #140431

Stephen

Stephen

I don’t want to provoke anybody unnecessarily. My point to Aldous is that this is nothing new. We have often been provocative when we have tried to do something. The Reagan example is a good one. He was changing and challenging the way things had been done for a long time and many people hated him for it. Now that the changes have taken place, he is seen as visionary.

Most people get used to the status quo and don’t want to rock any boats. The U.S. is by nature a boat rocking nation, because of our free market system that encourages change and our super power status. We also get blamed for lots of things we didn’t do. It is fun for the local leftist and anarchists to bother the U.S. They know there is no real price to be paid for being anti-American.

President Bush is working with allies. In the case of Iran, very very much so. In Korea, the N. Koreans tried like mad to make it a bilateral problem. We resisted and some Bush critics complained.

Sometimes I agree that we should just take our ball and go home. Let these guys take care of their own problems without us. We support more than a quarter of the UN. We provide 1/3 of all the AIDS funding, more than half of all the food aid, we do about 40% of the the R&D in the world. These thing don’t make people like us better. On the contrary, they complain when our R&D produces a product they don’t like, won’t accept food aid because if might have biotech or complain that our funding for AIDS is insufficient. That is the nature of being a great power, I guess. We don’t always have to feel bad about it.

Posted by: Jack at April 13, 2006 12:52 PM
Comment #140438

Paul Seigel

Impersonating a mobster is punishable by Italian Masonic Law.

Good Luck with That, Sir

Posted by: Bernie at April 13, 2006 1:26 PM
Comment #140441

The way I see it, America has been feared and reviled for our bullying and greedy policies for quite a long time in a great many parts of the world, but what is new under this administration is that our allies now feel the same way and no longer trust our government. Clearly this is due to the shocking level of incompetence, and the trademark Neocon arrogance and utter lack of diplomacy that has been coming out of the White House. This is why we need these “leaders” removed, or at the very least halted in their tracks by Congress. To get the latter, it will be important for Dems to win the next election. If they don’t, I think we’re going to be so screwed.

Aldous, your last post reminded me of Groucho in ‘Duck Soup’. “Hail Freedonia! To War, To War!”

Stephen and Judge, terrific posts.
Judge is absolutely right, what more should we have expected when America’s leader spouts insane stuff like “Axis of Evil”?

Paul, great post. You wrote: “However, he must be stopped. He must be contained. We must find a way to hem him in.”

Yes, and not only should we write to our Representatives and Senators, we should all vociferously protest the idea of Bushco starting yet another war. If our Latino population in America can get out into the streets and protest they way they have to send a clear message to Congress, then surely we can do the same to stop more Warmongering Neocon Insanity.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2006 1:35 PM
Comment #140444

I am going to book mark this post. When no war with Iran comes, I will write a post and reference this next time the hysteria starts about another future non-event.

You guys get all worked up about hypotheticals.

A long time ago, I was working in Latin America. The local paper wrote a big story “U.S. Invades Nicargua”. It had lots of detail and was entirely wrong as subsequent events showed. When the new year came the paper wrote a retrospective on its best stories. Among them was the U.S. invades Nicargua story. When I met one of the editors, I made fun of him for running the false story again. He was untroubled. He just pointed out that it had indeed been one of their best stories.

Your war story will be like that. I suppose like my editor friend, the subsequent error won’t matter to you.

Posted by: Jack at April 13, 2006 2:10 PM
Comment #140457

Jack,

You’re right. It sounds totally ridiculous. Who would do such a thing? But here we have a story from one the most reputable news sources around from a Pulitzer prize winning journalist including direct quotes from Bush’s inner circle.

When it comes to the world being blown to smithereens, or global warming, or any of these doomsday scenarios I much prefer we potentially overreact and play it safe than do what the NeoCons have done - put on their blinders and pretend it’s not happening.

You read a news article in Latin America once that predicted something that didn’t come true. So what? We’re supposed to ignore the news now? It’s all Bull? Your dismissive attitude is infuriating, because it’s irresponsible and based on nothing.

Posted by: Max at April 13, 2006 3:07 PM
Comment #140458

Jack:

So the US DIDN’T support the Death Squads or Murdering Dictators in Latin America?

Posted by: Aldous at April 13, 2006 3:07 PM
Comment #140468

Max and All:

I repeat, Iran does not have the requisite number of centrifuges at this time to prepare a sufficient amount of nuclear material to have a bomb in 16 days. Iran plans to procure up to 3,000 in the future, but they don’t have them now.

Posted by: goodkingned at April 13, 2006 3:33 PM
Comment #140473

Today from Rawstory: On Cheney, Rumsfeld order, US outsourcing special ops, intelligence to Iraq terror group, intelligence officials say
Insane and Scary, if true.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2006 3:55 PM
Comment #140474

If I am reading some of these posts correctly, the administration and Pentagon is being critized for preparing the nation for the unthinkable. Any administration or military chiefs of staff would be violating their duty not to have contingency plans for any possible scenerio. Having a plan is just common sense. Not having a plan is an impeachable offense of the highest degree. And, I do understand that not all plans are great…some are flawed, but my God people, isn’t trying worth something? A good plan of defense that never has to be used is a lot like insurance. We buy insurance to protect against the unforseen. Better to have it and not need it than to not have it when the chips are down. Wake up people! What is the sense of having a “big stick” and not waving it when necessary (ala T. Roosevelt). What I hear many of you saying is to burn the stick and trust our enemies. Now, just a comment on name calling as the reason our enemies are attempting to arm themselves to the teeth. That’s horse doo. My history shows the U.S. has used it’s economic and military power mostly for the good of the world with a few exceptions. Well hell, nobody’s perfect. Ok, resume your screeming! Jim

Posted by: Jim at April 13, 2006 4:05 PM
Comment #140475
This is a red herring issue, designed to draw attention away from the supernova-like implosion of this administration. It was worth a try, but it just makes them look like even bigger jerks, because we heard all this same nonsense last time.

My belief is that, now that it’s possible for the Democrats to take back one or both Houses of Congress in the fall, the Iran thing is just a ploy to scare the public into voting Republican enough so that won’t happen. Otherwise Congress will actually conduct hear hearings on what the administration has been up to.

I know, I know, the Republicans haven’t been polling well on security issues, but they’ve still got more than 6 months to turn that around through a combination of scare tactics, misuse of intelligence, etc. etc., just like they did with Iraq. Look for a resolution to come up to Congress in a vote in October.

Remember folks, you heard it here first.

Posted by: Steve K at April 13, 2006 4:08 PM
Comment #140479

If I am reading some of these posts correctly, the administration and Pentagon is being critized for preparing the nation for the unthinkable. Any administration or military chiefs of staff would be violating their duty not to have contingency plans for any possible scenerio. Having a plan is just common sense.

Anyone should be worried about war. After all, it is our brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters that are going to be doing the fighting. It’s better to be concerned now, thinking about it at this moment, debating where you stand and how you’d react should war be declared, than to let someone else decide your future without any input from you.

It’s not just that no one wants another Iraq (lies, and damn lies), they don’t want more death. Iran’s possible nuclear armament doesn’t have to be solved with air strikes. We just need an administration willing to figure out the other solutions.

Though perhaps if the Administration hadn’t cried wolf with Iraq, people would be more amenable to dealing militarily should a real threat to U.S. security come about.

Posted by: Thomas R at April 13, 2006 4:38 PM
Comment #140483

So I say we let them develop their nuclear technology (to the shagrin of Israel). We unite the world around this message: ‘If you (Iran), attack any sovereign nation after being allowed to develop peaceful nuclear technology under the supervision of the IAEA, we, the world’s powers (China, US, Brit, France, Russia), will retaliate as an cooperative unit to completely disable the Iranian military and governing body with overwhelming force.

Posted by Afroman

It sounds like your trying to get rid to two birds with one stone.

A couple of points, 1) Israel won’t wait for Iran to strike the first blow. Iran will be a glowing pile of sandy ashes. Not good for the world oil market or the environment of any of the neighboring continents;
2) Even if Israel didn’t stage a preemptive strike and was destroyed, the same environmental disaster would unfold in the Middle East times two when you consider the additional impact of our retailiatory strike.

I know you are being facetious, but I don’t think that Jewish sympathizers would be laughing at your jest.

In theory, since this is a Democratic site, there should be lots of people supporting jewish interests, but you don’t see many. I guess it’s not close enough to the election.

Posted by: goodkingned at April 13, 2006 4:52 PM
Comment #140492

I find it funny you people keep assuming Israel is a good little country. Considering how many lobbyists Israel has pouring millions of dollars into Congress, I would imagine the US is taking the bullet meant for Israel.

Posted by: Aldous at April 13, 2006 5:30 PM
Comment #140495

Aldous:

I think that Israel has been a good friend to the US. Furthermore we have similar cultures and ideals, so our interests often converge.

With the possible exception of Britain, no other nation has supported our interests as consistently.

What don’t you like about Israel? It can’t be that there … hmmm.

Posted by: goodkingned at April 13, 2006 5:39 PM
Comment #140498

btw… Its a common sign of ignorance to equate jews with the State of Israel as if they are one and the same.

Posted by: Aldous at April 13, 2006 5:42 PM
Comment #140499

goodkingned:

I suggest you study some of the recent behaviours of our “great” ally Israel. I’ll give you a hint: find out how many Israeli Spies there are in prison right now.

Posted by: Aldous at April 13, 2006 5:47 PM
Comment #140519

Aldous:

It’s true that not all Jewish folk are Zionist, but a great many are. I venture to suggest that the overwhelming majority of jews would not support using Israel to be bait to draw out the Iranians.

What you say about Israel having an active intelligence community is also true. But that cuts both ways. Our intel is vastly improved by information received from Israeli sources. I still maintain that the US has benefitted from its association with Israel.

Posted by: goodkingned at April 13, 2006 7:06 PM
Comment #140529

I spent a total of 11 years in German serving with the U.S. Army. My wife and I took advantage of that to travel extensively throughout Europe.

Our experience was that we found individual men and women who were very supportive of the United States. This was true in France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Denmark and Spain.

But, as a whole, these countries looked upon the U.S. with contempt and, in some cases, downright hate. The French especially were, overall, extremely rude and unfriendly.

In Germany, many of the older people, those who lived through World War Two and the Cold War era, were very friendly towards us. It was the younger people, those born in the 1960s and ’70s, that didn’t like us much.

The labor unions especially disliked America and often held protest marches outside American military bases.

As far as Iran is concerned, does anyone remember the Israeli attack on the nuclear plant in Iraq in the 1980’s?

Posted by: ulysses at April 13, 2006 7:56 PM
Comment #140539

Didn’t George Bush’s mother ever tell him to Finish The War On His Plate before going into another one?

Oh well.

Jack confessed:

A long time ago, I was working in Latin America.

Right-Wing Death Squad?

Posted by: Betty Burke at April 13, 2006 8:59 PM
Comment #140548

Jack,
I knew a Special Forces Helicopter Pilot. He was in Nicaruaga,and Belize and ElSalvador,
unofficially, of course. Guess he didn’t shoot at you, Jack.

As to Reagan the Hero, wasn’t he the guy who sold weapons and jet parts to the Ayatollah? Wasn’t that deal brokered by James Baker, prior to the election? (Oops, they never proved that)I propose to you that maybe the USSR fell of it’s own weight, which wasn’t predicted by our “intellengece.” Memory is such a tricky thing. My father worked on “Star Wars” technology in the 60’s and 70’s. Propoganda has a funny effect on history.

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2006 9:40 PM
Comment #140716

Are we attempting to assert that President Ahmadinejad is lieing to the world? C’mon, he is as honest and up right as Saddam, right? These guys are our allies and we should do everything in our power to support them against that terrorizing, warmonger Bush.

Where do you guys get this stuff. Practically the entire UN is denouncing this guy. Running out on ant-Bush material?

Posted by: Curmudgeon-at-large at April 14, 2006 5:48 PM
Comment #140877

I didn’t read them all, but goodness gracious!
Paso, you had a point:

Here he goes again … ENEMY ON THE HORIZON … NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN IRAN..! Bush, find the WMD’s in IRAQ you said were there! Lied to us then … shame on you! Lie to us now … and we fall in formation behind the Fox News Storm Troopers … shame on us! Iran must be dealt with by the World Community not by sword swinging Republicans!

But do you not see, that even though the Republicans are blaming Democrats (and vise-versa) it is childish for people to do so because blame will not solve the problem. It’s like when children say, “but he/she said it first”, it’s childish and pointless to know who said what, who did what. People! Those of which you should MOST be angered at ARE the DEMOCRATS in the White House for they sit there and do nothing. They sit there and play the childish game of he-said/she-said with no relavent point and no solution at hand. Have you seen any of the Democrats come up with a solution and offer it to the Republicans? I haven’t. Shame on us for sitting back and saying, “the Republicans are so bad. They are taking over the world with their aggressive attacks on other countries” and not do everything in our power as THE PEOPLE of the USA to go to congress and peacfully protest what Bush and his Republican administrators are doing, to us, to politics, to the world. Shame. I, unfortunately, am only 17, so I must wait a little longer to have any true impact on Congress; but those of you out there who are 18+, DO SOMETHING! DON’T SIT HERE AND TYPE AWAY ABOUT HOW BAD SUCH-A-PERSON IS! DO SOMETHING!!!

Anyways, It’s sad that America has come down to this. Has become a capitalistic/ corporation-based psycopathic nation. But what can I do about it?

Posted by: Stephanie Guth at April 15, 2006 2:55 PM
Comment #140897

Stephanie Guth,

The Dems in Congress ar virtually powerless. They have come up with a few good ideas and have quickly been put in their place. Repubs don’t think they can go along with a Dem idea, even if it good, because it would make Republicans look weak or ineffectual. They have the votes, so nothing Dems can do or say will change anything immediately. However, because they negate every good idea Dems have, and have so few of their own they look weak and ineffectual. Catch 22…

Posted by: Marysdude at April 15, 2006 4:14 PM
Post a comment