Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

This is absolutely hysterical to me! Does this newfound obsession with Iran by the neo-Con chicken hawks, signal they have successfully established a thriving and self-sustaining democracy in the first rung of the targeted Axis Of Evil?

I apologies if I may have missed it, but I went back thru the WatchBlog Red Column archives since the election finding only one entry addressing the topic of Iraq. Is this a Fox News or Washington Times thing? Did the Maureen Dowd set refuse to report/broadcast our glorious victory in Iraq?

I found it telling that in the only current WatchBlog debate on Iraq, there is but one person defending the invasion. Seeing that very keen observers like the NYTimes’ Tom Friedman believe the next two months will determine the outcome, this undoubtedly should be a topic of priority among Bush apologists.

Again, we are seeing dire warnings based on old and sketchy intelligence, about a Muslim society even more closed to us than Iraq.

Maybe the plan is to get it right, the second time.

The firm conclusion of the exercise is sobering: striking or invading Iran is wholly different in kind and scale from Iraq, and unlikely to succeed.

I wish I could read the whole article. I’d love to know how the conservatives think Iran is going to kick our ass.

Hmm… Unless the exercise is based on the premise that Bush will send in the troops inadequately armed and armored, in inadequate numbers, and with really bad intelligence and no plan.

The interesting thing about Iran is, they really are on the verge of nuclear weapons and everyone knows it. That alone makes the situation way different from Iraq. I expect to see the involvement of the international community in a way that was totally missing from our rush to war with a WMD-free Iraq.

I expect to see the involvement of the international community in a way that was totally missing from our rush to war with a WMD-free Iraq.

Problem is Bush ruined the US’s reputation so the international community is less likely to help us in the face of a real threat like Iran or North Korea.

Problem is Bush ruined the US’s reputation so the international community is less likely to help us in the face of a real threat like Iran or North Korea.

Game theory, people. The problem is game theory.

As long as the U.S. remains Terrorist Enemy #1, the Europeans are happy to fly under the radar. It is not in their interest to join the U.S. or to put the pressure on rogue states. The terrorists are playing the game well: look what happened in Madrid when Spain sent troops to Iraq. As long as the U.S. remains unilaterally active in fighting terror, the Europeans and others will stay just below us and let America take the casualties, the costs, and the risks.

In a realpolitik sense, what America needs is a couple car-bombings in Paris and Berlin. Unfortunately, that may be closer than we think - with murders by Muslim immigrants in Holland and Belgium this month, the Europeans are realizing that the problem of Islamic militarism is not one they can skirt.

Short of tragedies in Europe, the U.S. needs to apply its North Korea strategy to other rogue states. The Bush regime has consistently refused to deal unilaterally with Kim Jung Il, instead forcing his neighbors to assume a level of involvement concomitant with their interests.

Unilateralism was a bad idea in Iraq, it’s a bad idea in Iran, and it’s a bad idea in general. As long as we stick our shoulders up higher than the rest of the world’s, they’ll be happy to let us carry the entire burden.

Chops, I couldn’t have said it better! World cop is NOT a role that will benefit the U.S. in the long run. World leader will. But, we have to wait another 4 years before we can hope to reestablish our role as world leader.

yee of little faith

The Bush Administration recently supplied Israel with BunkerBusting Bombs. It is a widely held belief that Bush will order Israel to Bomb Iran in exchange for advantages in Palestinian Settlement Talks. What do you say to that?

Aldous.

It is not in their interest to join the U.S. or to put the pressure on rogue states.

Chops, it wasn’t in Germany’s and France’s best interest to take on military roles in Afghanistan, either. But they’re there.

Iraq was a one-off case of the EU not falling for Bush’s banana in the tailpipe trick. German and Polish intelligence was pretty certain Iraq had no WMD, and by Feb/March 2003, Iraq was officially declared free of nukes and nuke programs, and it was pretty clear they had no other WMD. The invasion was unnecessary, and Europe knew it.

Iran is different. It’s very clear that Iran has the capability to develop a nuke, and everybody knows it. While the US and EU are ruling out military action against Iran right now, Bush and his European counterparts have made it clear that a nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable.

John-Paul,
“The firm conclusion of the exercise is sobering: striking or invading Iran is wholly different in kind and scale from Iraq, and unlikely to succeed.”

Gee, ya think.

Iran hasn’t spent the last decade under the watchfull eye and sanctions that Saddam had to endure. They have also had nearly twenty years to recover from their war with Iraq. And all this besides the aforementioned nuclear possibility.
This will be an entirely different kettle of fish.

“Iran hasn’t spent the last decade under the watchfull eye and sanctions that Saddam had to endure.”

Let’s all have a pity party for poor misunderstood Saddam.

Is it Bush’s fault Iran had 20 years to build up their arsenal? What about the UN? What about any other country that has an interest in keeping Iran nuke free?
Israel does not need the U.S. to give them permission to bomb Iran.

Bush gets bashed for ‘going it alone’ and then he gets bashed for encouraging other countries to work on the problems with Iran and N.Korea.
The U.S. is always supposed to take the lead and do nothing unless everyone else agrees?
Now Bush wants the UN to get involved with Iran. Why? So they can screw it up too?
Maybe the UN can put N.Korea and Iran as the heads of the security council and give them a veto. If they are more involved in world decisions maybe they will see the light and disarm.

Maybe the UN can put N.Korea and Iran as the heads of the security council and give them a veto. If they are more involved in world decisions maybe they will see the light and disarm.

Maybe someday we’ll see the light and disarm, too. After all, we’re more involved in world decisions than anyone else..

choppednutz,

“Let’s all have a pity party for poor misunderstood Saddam.”

I’m not sure I understand what you’re talking about, and I’m also not sure that I want to know.

“Is it Bush’s fault Iran had 20 years to build up their arsenal?”

Does the right belive that moderates and the left are incapable of cognizant thought?
Why anyone of any stripe would entertain the idea that we could blithely invade Iran is ludicrous. This administration seems to have the attention span of a gnat.
Yes we are the pre-eminent power in the known universe. But, I’m starting to question the mental capacity of our military leaders.

Rocky,

I am not the one who made it sound like the sanctions were such a big inconvenience for Saddam. endure???? The poor man, living in his castles and drinking french wine.

——
What is the ‘answer’ from the left? Let them keep building bigger and stronger weapons while we try to talk them out of it?
Talking is what is going on right now. It is doing fabulously I might add. Just fabulously.

I want the whole world to disarm. I really don’t think that the U.S. going first is the right thing to do.
The majority of the world can trust that the U.S. will NOT start a nuclear war.
I also don’t expect the U.S. to hold a summit if Iran or N.Korea launch one either.

Discussing these things on the internet is not exactly going to solve all the world problems. Bashing Bush. That’s about all most people (on the left)are capable of accomplishing. Our leaders may have attention spans of gnats but at least they don’t have one track minds. ‘Bush is wrong. We can do better. We can hold summits and talk the bad guys out of their weapons.’ Ha Ha. Only answer I’ve heard.

Bush screwed up? by going into Iraq and trying to help those people have a better life. To be free. To help fight against the terrorists who only want to ‘rule’ by fear and intimidation.
Aid, sanctions, what good are they. That is like giving people food but not showing them how to grow their own. Sanctions block countries from being able to join in with the rest of the free world.
Go ahead and keep believing that more Iraqi’s would rather still be under Saddam’s rule and that the people who died because of ousting Saddam are not hero’s themselves. People who died while gaining freedom.
Just what will the people on the ‘left’ say when this all works out in the end? ‘It’s good it worked out, but we would have done it different’?
It’s time everyone started hating the terrorists and stopped hating the people who are trying to do something about it. It time everyone started looking forward to a free, prosperous, and content Middle East instead of continuing to bitch about the way it is being done.
It’s time for people who think they can do better to get off their high horses and get into positions where they can do some good instead of sitting in their cozy homes complaining via the net.

choppednutz, Pulease……

“It’s time for people who think they can do better to get off their high horses and get into positions where they can do some good instead of sitting in their cozy homes complaining via the net.”

Can we assume that as you write this you are sitting in your cozy home?

“Is it Bush’s fault Iran had 20 years to build up their arsenal?”

Oh, I forgot, that was Clinton’s fault.

Can we finish one job before we begin to screw up another?
Are we going to offer the people of Iran the same type of security we are presently giving the people of Iraq?

Hearts and minds, right?

World cop is NOT a role that will benefit the U.S. in the long run. World leader will. But, we have to wait another 4 years before we can hope to reestablish our role as world leader.

So today the news is about how we are pushing Europe to do something about Iran, because we think that Iran has missles that can reach Berlin.

Did you ever wonder if Bush was the kind of child that would hit a hornet’s nest with a stick, just to see what would happen?

Didn’t the intel about these super missiles come from Iranian political exiles who stand to gain power if the current regime is overthrown?

Wolf!

AP,
Fox news.