Drum-beating.
By on Jan 26th, 2006 at 2:25 pm
Drum-beating.
Newt Gingrich says a military invasion of Iran should be one of President Bush’s “top priorities.” (UPDATE: Hans Blix has a different prescription.)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
he should get started on his ‘Contract with Iran’ then, shouldn’t he?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:29 pmWhat, we don’t have enough of our soldiers dying for oil as it is?
Why doesn’t someone tell Newt Gingrich: We’ll take you seriously when you explain why YOU were so gung-ho to impeach Pres. Clinton for having sex with a staffer when YOU were having sex with one of YOUR staffers.
Hypocrisy, your party is Republican, and your poster child is Newt Gingrich!
January 26th, 2006 at 2:30 pmLet’s put Newtie on the front line.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:34 pmThe removal of the Iranian dictatorship should be a high priority for 2006 and 2007.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:35 pmYou and what army, Newt? Oh right, the military isn’t stretched to the breaking point like actual military generals say. You politicans on the front lines know better.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:36 pmThe removal of Bush should be a high priority NOW.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:36 pm#4 – Signing up right now, aren’t you?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pmRegime change starts at home.
Shut the f*ck up, Newt!
January 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pmI like #3.
Fat chance that Chickenhawk Newt will go to battle.
By the way, has Newt studied geography? The invasion of Iran poses more than a few logistical problems, even if we had enough troops for the job.
Moron.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pmThe acquisition of the Iranian oil deposits should be a high priority for 2006 and 2007.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:39 pmGary, you signed up yet? How ’bout your kids?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:39 pmNewt must be in the contracting business with Cheney.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:40 pmNewt, with what army? This is just false brovado. Some republicans are downright crazy.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:41 pmForgive me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the “Iranian dictatorship” just have elections?
So that would be the “Democratic Iranian dictatorship” would it?
Z.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:43 pmI hope Newt’s ass is the first to be dragged to the frontlines to fight his Iran war. I bet he’ll be squealing like a little pig.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:43 pmOh, and if any Republican wants to argue that the Iranian elections weren’t as free as they could have been there’s some comment about living in glass houses and throwing stones that might be relevant…
Z.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:46 pm#2 Even worse – Newty the weasel was making it with his staffer while his wife was in the hospital!
We should take anyone who calls for war with Iran to the Iranian border (since we now rule neighboring Iraq), give them an M16 and make them cross over. My guess is the chickenhawk attack regiments might start singing a different tune before they start march over.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:48 pm#17,
January 26th, 2006 at 2:51 pmSo what? He was horny and his spouse was too sick to serve him.
#17 – You’re right. The greater the support for unilateral action, the less likely they will actually enlist.
It’s sad, and too bad, that the Republicans only support war with words and bumper stickers and not actually enlisting in the military.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:51 pmYou and what army, Newt?
January 26th, 2006 at 2:52 pmThe removal of the Iranian dictatorship should be a high priority for 2006 and 2007.
See you at the recruiting station.
January 26th, 2006 at 2:52 pmWell, if we are going to attack Iran, Gary Ruppert should be the first to sign-up to go fight Bush’s fight.
Considering:
Associated Press
January 25, 2006
Report: Deployments Nearly Breaking Army
They got work for you Gary Ruppert. Go serve your fellow americans for your dictator “noble cause.”
January 26th, 2006 at 2:55 pmThis is just insane!
January 26th, 2006 at 3:05 pmNow Iran, that’s exotic. I might think of joining up for that. They got some hot “revolutionary” chickie-babes. No burkas for them.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:06 pm#4 – Iran isn’t a dictatorship, unlike our good friends the Saudi’s (15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers where Saudi’s). Iran’s president was popularly elected. Now do I like that the Guardian Council prevented most of the progressives from running in the election. No, I think that was un-democratic and wrong. Do I like the current Iranian President? No, I think he’s a huge dick.
Still, don’t show your ignorance by calling it a dictatorship.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:09 pmLet’s not forget – Newt Was elected by the same crackpots who also put warning stickers on Science textbooks stating that “Evolution is a theory not a fact”…
(fortunately it has since been declared unconstitutional and removed). But Cobb Country has manditory gun ownership laws in one of their towns (Kennesaw) and actually lost their Olympic venues because of their anti-gay hate commentary.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:09 pmForgive me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the “Iranian dictatorship†just have elections?
So that would be the “Democratic Iranian dictatorship†would it?
Comment by Zwack — January 26, 2006 @ 2:43 pm
Yep, just like all the other Democratically elected ‘dictators’ our military has a history of over throwing…
January 26th, 2006 at 3:12 pm#6. That Should read”HIGHEST PRIORITY”/
The removal of Bush should be a high priority NOW.
Comment by Bob Loblaw — January 26, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
January 26th, 2006 at 3:14 pmFrom the desk of the number one turdblossom comes a very telling leak by an anonymous source that refused to be identified. The talk of invading Iran is the first step in the Bushco plan to retain King George the Dumb. They intend to start the war just shortly after the 2006 elections where Diebold has guaranteed every voting machine they have sold will only count Repug votes. With this 100% voter mandate the House and Senate will pass some innocuous bill which KGtD will sign with a “Signing Statement” that declares Congress obviously intended, on the bill to make Friday the Thirteenth a national holiday in Crawford, Texas, that he, KGtD, in light of the Country being in war–again–at election time, should remain in office for the duration plus six months. Just time enough for him to declare war on Monaco so the process can start over. Monaco doesn’t have any oil but they don’t have an army either so the four troops left in our military can probably do the job in four years with Haliburton’s help. Don’t it just make you want to jump up and down and puke.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:19 pmHow’s that crow taste wingers? You went on and on about how this invasion of Iraq was going to “promote democracy in a part of the world that had never known it before”. Well, you got what you asked for – democratically-elected leaders in two of “the incubators of terrorism” Iran and Palestine – but since it isn’t Bush style democracy we’re already threatening them with invasion and economic sanctions because they don’t “renounce terrorism” and support Bush policies. And are you satisfied with the fundamentalist theocracy your tax dollars funded in Iraq?
0-for-3 guys, what’s next – invade China? They could use a good “democracy”, don’t you think?
January 26th, 2006 at 3:21 pmWho let Newt Gingrich lose again… he’s a rotten apple.
“If combat means living in a ditch, females have biological problems staying in a ditch for 30 days because they get infections… On the other hand, if combat means being on an aegis class cruiser managing the computer controls for twelve ships, a female may be again dramatically better than a male, who gets very, very frustrated sitting in a chair all the time because males are biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes.” -Newt Gingrich
“And I think that one of the great problems we have in the Republican Party is that we don’t encourage you to be nasty.” -Newt Gingrich
January 26th, 2006 at 3:23 pmFirst of all, Iran is not a dictatorship. They did, in fact, just hold internationally monitored (unlike our last few contested elections) elections. Just because the guy who won is someone we don’t like, doesn’t make him a dictator (although the word fanatic does seem to fit him pretty well…sound familiar?).
Second, study some history sparky! This is precisely what we need to avoid doing because removing the Iranian government worked out so well for us the last time we did it. Here’s a hint: google, “Iranian coup of 1953″. What most people in the rethuglican camp seem to miss is that EVERY enemy that we are currently facing today is an evil that we created ourselves. From the mullahs of Iran to Al Qaeda to Sadaam Hussein to Fidel Castro…and on and on and on.
The 3rd, and perhaps most important, point is that we have neither the troop levels or equipment that it would take to undertake any invasion of Iran. For those of you in the cheap seats: Iran is 3 TIMES the size of Iraq with a very large and well-trained standing army that has not been crippled under 10 years of economic and other sanctions the way Iraq had been before 2003. The best we could pull off is strategic air strikes and Ahmadinajahd (sp?) knows this. Do you yahoos beating the drums of war (again) honestly believe that he chose now to reconstitute their nuclear program as a coincidence? This may be the single worst (in a LONG and not very distinguished list of doozies from the administration and their cronies) idea I’ve heard come out of these buffoons yet.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:29 pmGingrich, Clinton and Iraq
By Martin McLaughlin
27 January 1998
On the eve of the State of the Union speech, with the media baying at Clinton’s heels and congressmen of both parties openly discussing impeachment or forced resignation, House Speaker Newt Gingrich gave an unqualified endorsement to White House action in one critical sphere: the impending military assault on Iraq.
Gingrich declared, in a statement approved by the House Republican caucus, that notwithstanding the political warfare in Washington, “In matters of international relations, the United States is one nation.” He warned Iraqi President Saddam Hussein not to be “confused by the difference between headlines and national will.”
Administration spokesmen have openly threatened to launch massive bombing raids against Iraq if Saddam Hussein does not bow to never ending demands by United Nations weapons inspectors–the vast majority of them British and American military and intelligence officers on loan to the UN–for access to Iraqi sites.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:35 pmThe removal of the Iranian dictatorship should be a high priority for 2006 and 2007.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 26, 2006 @ 2:35 pm
Mr. Ruppert is again showing his inability to follow world events, and his inclination for living a fantasy of his own making.
Iran had elections -they were not perfect, to be sure, and Iran’s democracy needs fostering. But it is not a dictatorship in that no one person, or group of persons, holds the reins of absolute power.
Also, Mr. Ruppert’s cavalier attitude towards the potential loss of lives is staggering. What he is advocating is another pre-emptive strike against a nation that poses to threat to the US.
Not to mention that Iran is roughly four times the size of Iraq, with about three times the population. Unlike Iraq’s, Iran’s infrastructure & military are unharmed by years of sanctions and no-fly zones.
With their military bogged down in Iraq, and military spending going through the roof, is amazing that the Bush adnminstration should have appetite for starting another war.
Here is Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst, evaluating the possiblity of on an attack against Iran back in 2005:
[T]the notion that the Bush administration would mount a “preemptive” air attack on Iran seems insane. (…) But Bush administration policy toward the Middle East is being run by men — yes, only men — who were routinely referred to in high circles in Washington during the 1980s as “the crazies.”
Attacking Iran: I Know It Sounds Crazy, But…”
Global Research has a very interesting article on the resons why the US would invade Iran:
The Iranians are about to commit an “offense” far greater than Saddam Hussein’s conversion to the euro of Iraq’s oil exports in the fall of 2000. Numerous articles have revealed Pentagon planning for operations against Iran as early as 2005. While the publicly stated reasons will be over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, there are unspoken macroeconomic drivers explaining the Real Reasons regarding the 2nd stage of petrodollar warfare – Iran’s upcoming euro-based oil Bourse.
The Real Reasons Why Iran is the Next Target
Here is another analysis:
Now that the administration has abandoned the internationally recognized benchmark of an “imminent threat”, it has also disposed of any other reasonable claim to justify unprovoked aggression. Iran will be attacked without pretext and without congressional or UN authorization invoking the executive authority to prosecute the war on terror by “all necessary and appropriate means”.
The Countdown to War with Iran
More wars for access to natural resources, personal wealth and prestige. Were are back in Imperial Rome…
January 26th, 2006 at 3:37 pmA U.S. Attack on Iran: The Perfect Storm for wider nuclear conflict
‘U.S. political and military officials have also approached Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, Oman, and Azerbaijan seeking their support for a U.S. attack on Iran. Ina replay of the phony pre-war intelligence on Iraq, Washington is trying to convince various countries that a link exists between Iran and “Al Qaeda.”
Polish intelligence sources report that Poland’s Defense Minister Radek Sikorski assured Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of Poland’s support for any U.S. strike against Iran. Sikorski is a former American Enterprise Institute colleague of such neo-cons as Richard Perle, Michael Ledeen, and Lynne Cheney, the so-called “Second Lady” of the United States. Sikorski and Polish Foreign Minister Stefan Meller assured Rumsfeld and Rice, respectively, that Poland would stand by the United States during the split in NATO that will occur as a result of the American strikePolish intelligence sources, who are unhappy with the arrangement of the new right-wing government in Warsaw with the Bush administration, leaked the information about the recent U.S. demarche to NATO in Brussels about preparation for the attack.’
January 26th, 2006 at 3:46 pmhttp://snipurl.com/FAAL_alert
Anyone see this? Saw it on a different site and it’s disturbing to say the least… Anyone know anything about this other than that it’s a nuclear weapons option specifically geared for countries like Iran and North Korea?
Google CONPLAN 8022 to see more – no time for a proper link – sorry…
January 26th, 2006 at 3:50 pmCONPLAN 8022
The Arkin story in the May 15 Washington Post, which has been picked up by news outlets around the world, offered a chronology of the recent steps taken by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, on the road to pre-emptive nuclear war. This updated a EIR timeline of the Bush-Cheney Administration’s drive to pre-emptive nuclear war, which was published on March 7, 2003, and is reprinted below. That original story tagged John Bolton as a pivotal player in the drive to end a quarter-century American policy of no first nuclear strike against any non-nuclear power. It traced the origins of the pre-emptive nuclear war policy to the early 1990s and then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, who launched a plan to include “mini-nukes” in the conventional arsenal.
Arkin’s article continues the chronology from mid-2004: “Early last summer,” Arkin wrote, “Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld approved a top secret ‘Interim Global Strike Alert Order’ directing the military to assume and maintain readiness to attack hostile countries that are developing weapons of mass destruction, specifically Iran and North Korea…. In the secret world of military planning, global strike has become the term of art to describe a specific pre-emptive attack. When military officials refer to global strike, they stress its conventional elements. Surprisingly, however, global strike also includes a nuclear option, which runs counter to traditional U.S. notions about the defensive role of nuclear weapons.”
Arkin traced the Global Strike schema to a January 2003 classified Presidential Directive, in which President Bush defined a “full-spectrum” global strike as “a capability to deliver rapid, extended range, precision kinetic (nuclear and conventional) and non-kinetic (elements of space and information operations) effects in support of theater and national objectives.” Along the way, the Strategic Command (Stratcom), headquartered at Offert Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska, which formerly had been exclusively responsible for America’s nuclear weapons triad, was merged with the Space Command, and given responsibility for global operations involving both nuclear and conventional weapons.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:59 pmcome on ganute,JOIN TODAY and lead the soldiers in battle for your PARTY! since we all know you won’t do it,PUT A SOCK IN IT.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:03 pmMr. Ho – just curious about the notification date on the link since it’s labeled Jan. 26, 2006, 1300 GMT. And this sounds like it’s been announced a operational – meaning, what? On paper operational, or Chimpy is walking around holding “the football” operational? Seems like maybe the tinfoil needs another layer here!
January 26th, 2006 at 4:07 pmI meant my tinfoil – not that this site needs another layer!
January 26th, 2006 at 4:08 pmon March 15, 2005, the Pentagon placed on its public website a draft version of Joint Publication 3-12, “Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations.” This 69-page report made clear that the Bush Administration has fully integrated nuclear weapons into the conventional war-fighting. The Executive Summary stated: “For many contingencies, existing and emerging conventional capabilities will meet anticipated requirements; however, some contingencies will remain where the most appropriate response may include the use of U.S. nuclear weapons. Integrating conventional and nuclear attacks will ensure the most efficient use of force and provide U.S. leaders with a broader range of strike options to address immediate contingencies.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:13 pmJoint Publication 3-12: “Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations”
There are many such contingencies: And you will find the
http://www.specialoperations.com/Focus/Official/Joint_Pubs.htm
Dunno where you get tin foil Hat from the Document exists, and has for some time. The one post is a bit speculative and where I dont post a Link means basically I cant support the claim.
Now, suppose you step off your tin foil hat parroting before rush limbaugh sues you for stealing his truth detector metal in the head routine
January 26th, 2006 at 4:16 pmHey – I’m not a troll – and I prefer tin foil because aluminium is so hard to spell! I was only curious since this seems even bizarre by this admins standards. How have we gotten to this point where more than half of this country doesn’t trust anything that comes from the WH? I would have thought that we’d have learned from 1973… and been able to prevent this version of the fall of democracy…guess not.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:20 pm#I meant my tinfoil – not that this site needs another layer!
Comment by Seefleur — January 26, 2006 @ 4:08 pm
Cmon junior IRI show me where Anything I said, thru GOVERNMENT “tin foil’ hat Documents gives you any idea that somehow that means ELF frequencies and mind control?
You trolls just shoot your Faux watching News Self in the foot every Time. Hells Bells Man, Read the thing before you go spouting about something you havent even read ’seefleur’
January 26th, 2006 at 4:23 pmSorry if I somehow gave you the impression of trollness – this was posted on a thread at AmericaBlog and I was curious. Also, since I’m working (well, should be) I haven’t had time to read up on the stuff that was linked on the alert site. Did you actually read the link that I had on my first post? Since you normally seem to have good stuff to back up your posts here (yes, I read this regularly), I was intially pleased to see that you took the time to respond. Never mind… I will go back to the more civil sites like FireDogLake and Dkos as a way to stay informed and educated.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:29 pmI believe that Gary Rubfart claimed to be a Brit in a prior post. Since it was primarily the Brits who screwed up most of the Near, Middle and Far East, it would be an apt task for the Redcoats as long as they use the rules of engagement from the 1700’s.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:34 pmNews Briefing with Secretary of the Army Francis Harvey
January 18, 2006
Q: Hello, Mr. Secretary. Jim Mannion from Agence France-Presse. We’re watching a crisis build with Iran. What gives you confidence that the Army is large enough to handle additional major contingencies now?
SEC. HARVEY: We have a readiness deployment tool which really — a fundamental tool by which we operate the Army. We call it the Army Force Generation Model, which, God bless you — which you may be — it is called — (inaudible) — which you may be familiar with. And this is a model in which we take the forces, both in the Reserves and the active, and we rotate them through various stages prior to deployment: a reset, remanufacture stage, recapitalization stage, and then followed by — part of that training, rest, refreshment, all in the first year. Second year: intense training. Third year: deployment. So — that’s for the active.
So if you have in today’s world 18 to 20 brigade combat teams deployed, we can surge, with the Army Force Generation Model, another 18 to 20 brigade combat teams.
So as these forces come around these circles of deployment, these cycles of deployment, they go from low stages of readiness in the first year and to increased readiness, and then, in mid-second year, they’re ready to go. And the Reserves — so one year deployed and two years at home station is our baseline cycle for the active, and one year deployed and five years at home station is the baseline cycle for the National Guard and the Reserves.
So we have the capability — to answer it straightforward — to surge to any crisis that the president may ask us to do.
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2006/tr20060118-12331.html
January 26th, 2006 at 4:42 pmKnute’s and Shrub’s happen when 63% of the voting public are asleep and vote against their own best intrests. Seldom do the rich and powerful fight war’s, they just create them for their own self intrests, be it relegioun or big business. We the people need to rid our government of the corruption and world power attitude. Impeach, march, unite, get the truth out about all these wackos…Blessings
January 26th, 2006 at 4:42 pmMr. Ho – this is what was posted on AmericaBlog – I just wanted to determine if this was a “real” post or crap. If Walt is right (#46) I am pleased to know that this is yet more garbage.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:46 pm
And WaltTheMan – by saying if you are right (correct) I meant about Gary claiming to be British – geez – I can’t post and work at the same time! No more multi-tasking…
January 26th, 2006 at 4:53 pmThose few Republicans that do go to war come home Yellow Dog Democrats. I’ve seen the trend. Most enlisted soldiers that come back from the war hate the Republican Party for what it actually is. Their families who happen to still vote Republican are in a pickle because they can’t call their veteran son or daughter unpatriotic. I love seeing the look on their faces. Their excuse is that their boy went through alot and needs time to sort things out. They just don’t want to admit that they are dillusional.
January 26th, 2006 at 4:56 pmWell… if we were going to invade a country over there, it should have been Iran in the first place. I don’t know where they are going to get the troops for this. Germany? Canada? Britain?
January 26th, 2006 at 4:59 pmhttp://www.defenselink.mil/ transcripts/ 2006/ tr20060118-12331.html
Comment by Don ‘
LOL! Hey Don,
How many First Person Shooters do you own?
Dork!
January 26th, 2006 at 5:01 pmDon is a member of the 101st Keyboard commandos. He gots a t-shirt and everything and a mean mouse trigger finger.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:02 pmBush ignored Blix in the past, so there’s no reason to think he won’t do the same now.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:30 pmNewt can join Bush and the neocons in fighting a war in Iran – all by themselves.
“Where are we supposed to run to when the US bombs start falling?” – iranian citizens not involved in any of this madness.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:51 pmSeefleur, please don’t take any of this personally. mr ho has been unfairly targetted by the trolls to bring him to this point. We all have. It’s become a merciless battle ground for us (you included) in so many regards, that there’s occasionally some accidental friendly fire (I’ve done it myself). I suppose it’s where we note what a good thing it is that we liberals use words instead of bullets, eh?
January 26th, 2006 at 6:03 pmJanuary 26th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
unbelievable – I kind of thought this was the case, but it’s good to know that this site has not been take into the “depths”. I just wish that words had more power to open eyes and minds. Seems like lately the only words that make any dent are the ones of lies. And incidentally, I learn so much from the majority of the posters here. Thanks!
January 26th, 2006 at 7:24 pmFrom the article:
“”This is 1935 and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is as close to Adolf Hitler as we’ve seen. We now know who they are; the question is who we are — are we Baldwin or Churchill?”
(Click here to listen to Gingrich’s quote.)
Gingrich referenced the two former British prime ministers — Stanley Baldwin and Winston Churchill — who disagreed about Hitler’s intentions. Churchill proved to be correct in his fears of the Nazi leader, but Britain — and the world — acted too late, resulting in mass casualties during World War II.”
This is so fucking hilarious.
They’re trying to say it was a liberal vs conservative disagreement, when it was Neville Chamberlain, a CONSERVATIVE, who appeased Hitler.
God damned neoconservatives, you are such fucking LIARS. You lie to yourselves, and cynically lie to other conservatives to make your idiotic point.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:32 pmOh yeah, and let’s not forget it was Newt who was having an extramarital affair and had divorce papers served on his wife while she was in the hospital being treated for cancer. . . and then dumped wife #2 because he was having an affair with an office aide.
Fucking hypocrite. Ethically suspect, morally bankrupt.
January 26th, 2006 at 7:44 pmJanuary 26th, 2006 at 7:49 pm
#58 Unbelievable, let’s not forget, many of us are prepaired to use both if needed. Even us old witches will not be cornered or attacked with out using like force back…..Blessings
January 26th, 2006 at 7:57 pmFormer House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a potential 2008 Republican presidential candidate…
Is it just me? Or would this be a good thing if he ran?
January 26th, 2006 at 8:12 pmHow did we get this right wing Mullah in Iran? We attacked Iraq and the frightened people of Iran ignored any moderate faction and voted right. After the US invades Iran, then will Pakistan and India out of fear of being invaded pull more authoritarian too? When does this stop? Syria? Russia? China? Now the conservatives in Canada are starting to tell the US forcefully to mind our own business. Every time we invade we enlist thousands more of terrorists. Does this world all end with everyone being afraid of each other to the point that there is no humanism, no chance of diplomacy?
January 26th, 2006 at 8:27 pm#65 Eargy Earp — Answer to your question:
Does this world all end with everyone being afraid of each other to the point that there is no humanism, no chance of diplomacy?
January 26th, 2006 at 8:35 pm
The Iranians real crime is their plans to bring a new oil wexchange on line in March 2006 and use the euro as the base currency. All oil transactions have taken place either on the New York Merchantile Exchange or The London
January 26th, 2006 at 8:57 pmPetrolium Exchange but both use the US dollar as the basic currency of exchange. The nucs are as much a red herring as they were with Sadam, the last leader of an arab oil producing state to use the euro as the basic oil currency. He started in 2000, which is the reasonm that Dick Cheny wanted Sadam gone even during the electionof 2000 and the reason Bush HAD to win at any cost.
January 26th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
Scott Ritter has been trying to warn/prepare us for this new exercise in stupidity, for more than a year. The “planning” has been ongoing since the Iraqi invasion, if not longer. And perhaps that recent “boo-boo” in Pakistan, was a practice run, or maybe a warning? These people are freaking me out, BIG TIME!!!! Where is a partially chewed pretzel when you need it?
January 27th, 2006 at 3:42 amWell, Pakistan is an allied islamic state (the only?) with proven nukes and the USA bombed a village there. Great job hunting down (creating) islamic terrorists with WMD capability, Georgie Boy! Now, there’s a lot of people demonstrating against USA and the dictator-in-chief of Pakistan…
Also, the Palestinians just elected (democratically) Hamas, a proislamic political force with an armed wing.
I think Bushites are creating a mega big islamic coalition to fight against the USA. Osama will be very proud of his long time friend!
January 27th, 2006 at 7:26 am#70 And, by the way, Hamas has been elected not by pure evil, but because palestinians are too tired of being beaten by the USA-supported Israel and living in miserable conditions. They don’t hate your liberty, they want their own liberty!
And Bush isn’t helping a lot…
January 27th, 2006 at 7:30 am#67 Cliff, I agree completely, and it makes me want to cry.
January 27th, 2006 at 11:29 amIran. You Know It’s Next…
The push appears to be underway. Courtesy of Newt Gingrich….
January 28th, 2006 at 6:49 pm