War With Iran Would Be ‘Much More Complicated And Costly’ Than ‘Anyone Envisions’
War With Iran Would Be ‘Much More Complicated And Costly’ Than ‘Anyone Envisions’
Yesterday on Meet the Press, Nightline anchor Ted Koppel (who just returned from Iran) and Washington Post reporter Robin Wright both rejected the military option with Iran as unrealistic.
Koppel said, “I don’t think that’s an option,” and Wright stated that it “would be far more — to be effective, would be far more extensive than anyone envisions at this stage, at least in terms of the public debate about a military option. Much more complicated and costly.” Watch it:
On CNN yesterday, New Yorker journalist Seymour Hersh reported that a new CIA assessment concludes that “there’s no evidence Iran is doing anything that puts them close to a bomb.” Despite the intelligence agency’s conclusion, Hersh reports that the White House is still aggressively moving ahead with preparations for a military conflict with Iran.
Full transcript:
MR. RUSSERT: Is there any realistic way we can stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb?
MR. KOPPEL: Boy, I don’t think so. I don’t think so. I mean, if they want it, the only thing we have to hope is that their, their, their technology is not all that advanced. And unless they buy the technology somewhere else, I’m not at all sure they would get it for at least a few more years.
But having said that, can we stop it? We had no–I had a senior U.S. State Department official tell me we’ve had more diplomatic contact with North Korea than we have had with Iran. No diplomatic contact. The economic and trade sanctions have been in place for over a quarter of a century, really aren’t working. And the military option? Boy, I don’t think that’s–I don’t think that’s an option.
MS. WRIGHT: Well, I will add one thing to that. There is this illusion that we can go in and strike a few targets and eliminate their program. But the reality is with all the troops we have on the ground, any military operation against Iran would end up having to strike at their defensive positions. Whether it’s along borders, their tank corps, their artillery corps. It would be far more–to be effective, would be far more extensive than anyone envisions at this stage, at least in terms of the public debate about a military option. Much more complicated and costly.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
GO DEMOCRATS!!!
Rep. Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft
November 20th, 2006 at 12:30 pmEnriching Uranium and blocking Nuke inspectors is in no way helping them build material for a bomb……
November 20th, 2006 at 12:31 pmLook, I don’t think we are going to do anything militarily in Iran (Nor do I reallty think we should)…But why is there this widespread skepticism that air strikes would seriously hinder the Iranian program. As it turns out, Bill Clinton’s four-days of air strikes in 1998 (”Operation: Desert Fox”) against Iraq went a long way to destroying much of remaining Iraq’s WMD programs. Seems to me that Operation: Desert Fox indicates that air strikes can indeed be effective in degrading a nation’s WMD programs.
November 20th, 2006 at 12:34 pmI saw this interview yesterday.
Hersh said the WH refusal to accept CIA’s assessment was based on a Israeli intelligence report, obtained from an Iranian dissident who works for Mossad.
Hersh also said that WH has refused to turn over the Israeli report to the CIA so the Agency could evaluate its source and the verasity of the report
This smacks of the “Downing Street Memo” and the lies Collin Powel told the UN about Iraq. Back then they had a memo from a Israel agent who was a Iraqi dissident.
November 20th, 2006 at 12:38 pmLet’s send Bill Kristoll in first.
November 20th, 2006 at 12:39 pmWe’ll arm him; say with a ‘Ronnie Raygun’ or something of equal magnitude. He’s so anxious to get this new war started he breaks out in a sweat when discussing it.
Burnt Spume could be next. We’d need some toothpicks to prop his eyelids open, but it’s worth the cost.
Next, how about the guys going to jail? It’s cheaper to drop them in the desert than incarcerate them. Just think, the Dukester, Bugman, NAY NAY,
Scooter, Shooter, KKKArl. (Insert own GOPervert here)
We could embed Fux news fake reporters with them, and the head Falafel could do nightly updates. Maybe then Hannity could put something in his hand besides a pencil, which he never uses.
Conrad, Santorum, Talent, Allen, the list of inductees just keeps giving!
Seems to me that Operation: Desert Fox indicates that air strikes can indeed be effective in degrading a nation’s WMD programs.
Comment by Exley
Ex, so do you agree with some international air-bombing operation against the US due to its nuclear arsenal?
November 20th, 2006 at 12:43 pm#2
Comment by Roger_Roger — November 20, 2006 @ 12:31 pm
You are again mis-informed. I swear you remind of Bill O’Lilly.
IAEA has full access to Iran because they just submittied the report that said IAEA had found traces of enriched Uranium in Iranian nuclear waste.
Ergo, if no access how did they test the nuclear waste?
November 20th, 2006 at 12:43 pmSince when is Robin Wright an expert on military invasions and what they might cost?
November 20th, 2006 at 12:45 pmRoger and Exley,
Go ahead and take over commenting for a while, I am busy right now. Thanks.
November 20th, 2006 at 12:48 pmExley, what would be the long term strategy against Iran if we did use tactical strikes? Do you think their military would sit still? Most likely they would flood Iraq with 300,000 troops. It would make our current struggle in Iraq look like Panama.
Any military action against Iran has to be thought out and just striking several key points in Iran without looking at the ramifications is short sided and would surely bring about a draft, along with rationing, more terrorist attacks and all those unknown unknowns that lay lurking in the dark.
November 20th, 2006 at 12:51 pmSince when are air strikes not “military action”???????
November 20th, 2006 at 12:56 pmMy WTF Incredulometer just started it’s siren wailing.
let’s see Bush try to wage war against Iran.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:01 pmWake up American…in bush/cheneys greedy eyes, war means MONEY..the bottom line.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:02 pmHey, Ex…you didnt answer these questions. Please, if you find some time, do.
Why is Bush more hated elsewhere in the world than Castro? Why Ernesto Guevara is loved and admired all around the world, but not one marine? Why Europeans said that US poses more threat to the world than Iraq or North Korea? Havent yourself asked those questions? Because of democracy? People would hate canadians also. Nobody is doing that. See, Ex, you have to open your eyes and know that US is the most murdering state since UK.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:03 pmArea:
Iraq = 437,072 sq. km.
Iran = 1,648,000 sq. km.
Population:
Iraq = 26,783,383
Iran = 68,688,433
Iraq’s military had been decimated by the first Gulf War. Iran’s is still intact and quite healthy. Something to think about, war-lovers.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:04 pm#11,
That’s hilarious, RUCerious!
I believe we need a WTFI in the White House.
Fux News?
Minority Whip office?
On an unrelated note, how nice of Ex & R&R to moderate.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:06 pmBoy, 2 weeks after the elections & these guys already want to lead the progressive site efforts.
Thanks, guys!
Gee, the lying election-stealing Royal Idiot Bush has created one unholy Quagmire in Iraq and one unholy Quagmire in Afghanistan, and so now the lying election-stealing Royal Idiot Bush wants to create a third unholy Quagmire in Iran. Yeah, three unholy Quagmires sitting in a row. How truly moronic can he get?
US out of Iraq now. US out of Afghanistan now. Cheney and Bush out of the White House now. President Pelosi sounds just fine to me.
Cheers.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:07 pmHey,
While it may not be clear what can be done about Iran, a number of things are; one, that many innocent Iranians and many other nationalities are at risk, two; that no matter what the world, and the UN (united nothing) think, Russia and the Arabs will invade Israel sometimes soon. It is only God who can help us. Watch closely and you will realize that the battle for Gog and Magog is very near…you do not have to be a fundamentalist to see that buddy, Read Ezekiel.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:08 pmThe problem is all of the frickin’ retarded right wingers think that Iran and Iraq are the same. They can’t see past their hatred for brown people. They can’t see that Iran has a real military with real military weaponry. They are a cobbled together band of misfits. They will fight back.
Let’s start with your “Air Strikes” against Iran.
Let me introduce you to the IIAF, other wise known as the Imperial Iranian Air Force.
They even got a web site:
http://www.iiaf.net/home.html
While our sanctions may have turned Saddam into a toothless tiger, Iran is still fully armed and will fight back.
You cannot compare Iraq and Iran. The are nothing alike.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:10 pm#19
Watch closely and you will realize that the battle for Gog and Magog is very near…you do not have to be a fundamentalist to see that buddy, Read Ezekiel.
I’m putting my money on Magog. But if Mothra jumps into it, all bets are off.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:15 pm#20
The problem is all of the frickin’ retarded right wingers think that Iran and Iraq are the same.
One letter difference. Big whoop. Don’t be so nitpicky.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:18 pmThat should be:
November 20th, 2006 at 1:20 pmI’m putting my money on Magog. But if Mothra jumps into it, all bets are off.
Comment by chimpeach
Best laugh of the day. Thanks.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:25 pmRobin Wright “at least in terms of the public debate about a military option”
As though Cheney and his friends care one tiny iota what the public thinks about this…
November 20th, 2006 at 1:28 pmWar With Iran Would Be ‘Much More Complicated And Costly’ Than ‘Anyone Envisions’
Wrong, occupation of Iran would be ‘Much More Complicated And Costly’ , the war itself wouldn’t be much harder than the Iraqi war.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:28 pmthe war itself wouldn’t be much harder than the Iraqi war.
Comment by squegeeboo
Yeah, squeegee, without mentioning that Iraq didnt have an army when US invaded, I would say you are correct. /sarcasm off.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:34 pmA Dem Congress will not commit to a war on Iran.
Bush will not rest his poorly-backed aggression towards Iran.
What happens when the movable object hits the resistable force?
November 20th, 2006 at 1:39 pm#26 - Squeegie - did you read #16 - have you just graduated to long pants?
Let me try this in terms you might understand:
Iraq: Saddam had only one army and the USA attacked with at least three - the US got to roll three dice to Saddam’s one and the US took Iraq on the first roll.
Iran: now the Mullahs have had 15 turns to build up their armies (just like holding Australasia, you know) and their successful support for hezbollah gave them another card. So now Iran will be able to roll two dice against the USA, which because it needs to hold Iraq can only roll two dice itself. Iran can roll almost indefinitely and has those Risk cards to change into a few Republican Guard fanatics to send into Iraq to cause trouble. So no, the Iranian invasion can’t possibly be as easy
Does that help you understand better?
November 20th, 2006 at 1:45 pmsquegeeboo your military experience & expertise is what??? I don’t think you have a clue about the problems this would cause. Our govt. (Pres, Veep) are already the most hated in the world…guess it can’t be any worse.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:48 pmWhy would the Bush Administration want to start something against Iran when the region is already unstable and they only have two more years in power anyway? Oh wait, I forgot, they’re completely insane war mongerers who probably have their cronies lined up with no-bid contracts to steal Iran’s oil, too.
PS. The draft legislation has even less of a chance of passing as it did in 2004. If all of these young Republican war supporters would sign up it wouldn’t be needed anyway.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:51 pmWhat happens when the movable object hits the resistable force?
Comment by Drew Mackenzie
But Bush will claim that he doesn’t need congress’ approval in his role of commander in chief and go ahead with his plans. Seriously, preemptive action needs to be taken against this president before he makes an even bigger mess of things…
November 20th, 2006 at 1:54 pmLet’s make sure the Iran invasion happens in spring, when the supply of flowers to be thrown at us is at its peak.
November 20th, 2006 at 1:54 pmThose who opine or suggest that a war with Iran would be a cake walk are willingly participating in a delusion, and that confuses me.
First, a myth needs to be dispelled, and that is that Iran is like Iraq. Iran is geographically 4 times larger, has a population of 68 million as opposed to Iraq’s pre-invasion population of 26.5 million, and Iran has an economy that boasts a $570 billion GDP whereas Iraq’s GDP was in the $90 billion range (less than 1/6th of Iran’s).
Prior to the Iraq invasion, it was already a country under siege. There were heavy economic sanctions, travel restrictions, import and export restrictions, and extreme restrictions on its military. Iran not only does not have any of these impediments, but as illustrated above is also a considerably larger and healthier entity. In comparison, going up against Iraq was like a professional football team playing a game against a team of one-legged men wearing only their underwear and handcuffs and having not eaten for a month. Going up against Iran will not be like pitting two professional teams against each other, rather it will be like a top notch collegiate team competing against a professional team. The pro team would have the advantage, but it would not be a cake walk. And, a top notch collegiate team could actually beat a pro team.
The only way the US would have a “cake walk†of a time going into Iran is if the event was nuclear from the get go. And for those who do not think that IS the plan, reread what I just said above. This action must be stopped before it begins. If you invade Iran and offensively use nuclear weapons, the world itself will have no option but to respond and forcefully end the tyranny of the USA. I urge you, stop this before it starts.
After all, consider how much of an ass kickin’ that you’ve gotten from a malnourished mostly naked one-legged man with handcuffs on.
May peace be with us all.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:00 pmTerrytheTurtle
So your saying we should have taken Austrilia first to build up an extra 2 armies per turn?
Anne
Our govt. (Pres, Veep) are already the most hated in the world…guess it can’t be any worse.
If it can’t be any worse, then it wouldn’t cause any more problems from a diplomatic stand point.
Juan C.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:01 pmYeah, squeegee, without mentioning that Iraq didnt have an army when US invaded, I would say you are correct. /sarcasm off.
So use an extra carrier group or two, it would deal with their extra forces nicely, and if you consider the entire point of the war is to remove nuclear capabilities, give an even smaller role to our ground troops, and just let the navy hammer all of their infrastructure into the ground.
It is working for the war profiteers only.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:01 pmwith what military are we even intelligently discussing this possibility????
November 20th, 2006 at 2:02 pm#20…you’re right. Spelling and certainly intelligent discourse was never the forte of any right wingnut I’ve ever know.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:03 pmThe american people will be in the streets if this administration attempts to do ANYTHING without the blessing of Congress.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:04 pmBut their information is not part of the “stovepipe” that dickey and georgie will rely on. This is just selling a little chatter for those that always bunk church on sunday.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:06 pmgive an even smaller role to our ground troops, and just let the navy hammer all of their infrastructure into the ground.
Comment by squegeeboo
Squeegee, we are very lucky to have you as one of our most pacifist member in ThinkProgress. Keep that up.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:08 pm#36 - funny how its only the chickhawks who think its this easy…how thick are you?
‘entire point…’ - right degrade the Iranians by less than 5 years, lose Iraq to Iran permanently, and all the while bombing Irans roads, water, power, hospitals (just like Lebanon - to the stone age) tell the Iranians - “who needs food, power, water - you’re free!”
You people are insane.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:11 pmThe Russians have also indicated that they’ve sold Sunburn Missiles to Iran.
They are supersonic cruise missiles that make evasive turns. They are designed to take out aircraft carriers.
If true and Iran sinks a carrier or two, you can bet we’ll have a full blown draft in the US.
Our old geezer brigade wants their chance to win at Normandy. To give them their chance, we need a world war.
Onward to glory!
November 20th, 2006 at 2:21 pm#6 Juan, You purport to be a staunch believer in the rule of international law. As such, I would like to let you know that under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also referred to as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the United States, as well as the Russian Federation, United Kingdom, France, and China, are permitted to possess nuclear weapons. Iran, which is a signatory to the treaty, does not. Thus, Iran, by violating its obligations under the NPT is in violation of international law. The United States’ possession of nuclear weapons is not a violation.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:26 pm“If Mothra jumps in…” - funniest comeback to a religious nut I’ve heard in years. But wait- do we also get the two singing Japanese twin midgets? This gets better.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:31 pmThus, Iran, by violating its obligations under the NPT is in violation of international law. - Exley
Iran does not have nuclear weapons.
How can a country with no nuclear weapons be in violation of this treaty?
*************************
On another note, how did bombing IRaq in 1998 end a weapons program that was ended in 1991? Was there a flux capacitor involved?
November 20th, 2006 at 2:35 pmMy money is on Gamera! Go Turtles!
November 20th, 2006 at 2:36 pm“Wrong, occupation of Iran would be ‘Much More Complicated And Costly’ , the war itself wouldn’t be much harder than the Iraqi war. Comment by squegeebooâ€
Please tell me you’re being facetious! You call the Iraq war EASY?!? Invading Iran would unleash a bloodbath unlike anything we’ve yet seen. As many people have pointed out Iran is FAR better shape than Iraq was when we invaded.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:37 pmhow did bombing IRaq in 1998 end a weapons program that was ended in 1991? Was there a flux capacitor involved?
Yah, but we only managed to generate 1.19 gigawatts of power…
November 20th, 2006 at 2:38 pmKerys
You call the Iraq war EASY?!?
The initial invasion and defeat of the Iraqi army was easy, but then we screwed the pooch on the occupation.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:40 pm#47, Weaseldog,
Iran had admitted working on developing a nuclear weapons program. Such work in and of itself constitutes a violation of its obligations under the NPT.
And the 1998 Operation: Desert Fox strikes launched by Bill Clinton were aimed at all of Iraq’s WMD programs, including chemical and biological.
Nice “Back to the Future” reference!
November 20th, 2006 at 2:42 pmI love how Think Progress puts up headlines like that as if it’s news. Come on. You’re trying to tell me that a war would be both complicated AND costly? Thanks, Dr. Obvious.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:49 pmI watched meet the press for the first time in a long time. I wanted to see Webb. It was wonderful to hear intelligent dialogue. This segment was great too. You didn’t hear stupid propaganda, just reporting.
November 20th, 2006 at 2:51 pmYou purport to be a staunch believer in the rule of international law. .
Comment by Exley
Is that so? Im in favor of justice. Law is made so the ruling class keeps power as long as it can. If a country has Nuke power why are not the others allowed?
Furthermore, have you seen inspectors of the UN in US nuclear arsenals? No, you dont. Israel has declared how many nuke heads has? No, it hasnt. So, I dont undertand, really. It works for some, for some other it doesnt? Thats the world we have, Ex.
The United States’ possession of nuclear weapons is not a violation
November 20th, 2006 at 2:55 pmIsnt that convenient for the only country in the word which has used it?
Yes, after being threatened, by a nuclear power, Iran has been making threats back. this is the only sane response to Bush’s Drunken Bar Room diplomacy.
You the the type of diplomacy I’m referring to. Some drunk stranger walks up and says he’s gonna kick your ^%%. There’s only a few ways to respond to this belligerent behaviour.
Still there’s no evidence that Iran has scaled up their program to levels required to build nukes. They don’t have enough centrifuges.
Now that doesn’t mean continuing to threaten them with war, won’t lead them to making nukes. It would be the rational thing to do, when faced with irrational behaviour.
Clinton was grandstanding. Saddam had no weapons program. The UN said so, the IAEA said so. We bombed Iraq to make Clinton look manly.
Killing people and smearing their blood on the faces of our presidents is now pretty much a tradition in the US. Killing people in wars fought for no clear purpose glorifies our presidents.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:03 pmNow on the other hand, Iran could make quite a few dirty nukes now. Essentially nuclear material wrapped around conventional exposives. Hitting our Iraqi bases and Halliburton’s Iraqi oil fields with a few missiles of this type, would cause us some issues.
If a few of our biggest ships were hit with dirty nukes, would we have to retire them?
November 20th, 2006 at 3:07 pmClinton was grandstanding. Saddam had no weapons program. The UN said so, the IAEA said so. We bombed Iraq to make Clinton look manly.
Well, Weasekdog, I don’t agree with you here. But it is nice to see someone out there admit that Bill Clinton also acted on the stated belief that Iraq had WMDs.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:20 pm#55, Juan…Israel is not a signatory to the NPT. Thus, any nuclear weapons they may have developed or possess is not a violation of international law. The same is true for India and Pakistan.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:24 pm#44 Weasledog
The Russians have also indicated that they’ve sold Sunburn Missiles to Iran.
They are supersonic cruise missiles that make evasive turns. They are designed to take out aircraft carriers.
If true and Iran sinks a carrier or two, you can bet we’ll have a full blown draft in the US.
They’ve also got Chinese anti-ship missiles with at least 150 mi. range on them and can be launched from land, air, or coastal craft. The latest ones are said to defeat jamming systems and are basically unstoppable.
Also, look at the countries near and bordering Iran. Does anyone think that Turkey, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia is going to support an attack on Iran? And look at how close Baghdad is to the border. Makes a nice target for a counter-attack.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:32 pm#56, WeaselDog, You are correct. I misspoke and was careless and hasty with my language. Iran has not admitted that it is developing a nuclear weapons program. They claim (rather laughably) that they are developing a nuclear power program for peaceful purposes. Of course, no one in the international community believes that Iran, a nation that sits on a sea of oil, needs a civilain nuclear power program. What has occurred is that the United Nations ecurity Council, advised by the IAEA, by a 14-1 vote in July 2006 passed a resolution demanding Iran suspend its unranium enrichment activities or face economic and dipolmatic sanctions. The Security Council’s actions were undertaken after In 2003, it was discovered that Iran had carried out secret nuclear activities for 18 years in breach of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:40 pmOf course, no one in the international community believes that Iran.
Comment by Exley
Do you have something to back that up other than pure speculation?
a nation that sits on a sea of oil, needs a civilain nuclear power program
Whats the place of the US for oil producing countries?
How many nuclear reactors there are in US soil?
How many nukes?
I understand your concern about Iran, Ex. What about Israel which is a terribly aggresive country (thats how they got their country some years ago) and actually has nukes? Why arent you scared by that? I am assuming you seek the betterment of ME, right?
November 20th, 2006 at 3:50 pmIt is clear that the nations who developed nuclear weapons secretly like Israel,India and Pakistan had no intention to join IAEA or sign the non proliferation treaty. If Iran wants or wanted to build nuclear weapons,they would have withdrawn from the treaty,or simply chose not to join to begin with..and nobody can oblige them to do anything…even now they still can withdraw from IAEA with 3 months notice according to the protocol they signed…and Iranian government said if they are pressured they will withdraw from the agreements they signed ..meaning no inspections,no cameras…and no visits by inspectors…they will be like Israel,India,and Pakistan. But they chose to stay while they could tell the world body we: “are out of this agreement” …They have the right to do so…
November 20th, 2006 at 3:51 pmJuan C.
Do you have something to back that up other than pure speculation?
What about Israel which is a terribly aggresive country (thats how they got their country some years ago) and actually has nukes?
Israel has nukes? Do you have the proof to back that up?
November 20th, 2006 at 3:53 pmActually, Juan, I think te U.S. has too many civilain nuclear reactors on-line. I am anti-nuclear power until we figure out what to do with the nuclear waste.
And another thing Juan, re-read what I said in the first posting: “I don’t think we are going to do anything militarily in Iran (Nor do I reallty think we should)…” I am really not that concerned about Iran (or even North Korea) having nukes (And maybe I am naive about that). The nuclear genie is out of the bottle. I think it is impossible to prevent nations who really want nuclear weapons from getting them. I think it probably wise to make it economically difficult for these nations to get nuclear weapons. I think you and I agree that the less countries to have nukes, the better.
November 20th, 2006 at 3:58 pm#68 Squegeboo…Good point. The existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons is a matter of speculation. Mind you, I have no problem with Israel possessing nukes. It is a tiny nation surrounded by people and nations who have vowed to destroy the Jews and have waged war on Israel since its founding in 1948.
November 20th, 2006 at 4:05 pm#57, “If a few of our biggest ships were hit with dirty nukes, would we have to retire them?”
I don’t think there is any doubt about that, Weaseldog. However, I think a bigger concern than a dirty-bom attack on shipping is a dirty-bomb terrorist attack in a major city. Such an attack would make sections of the city uninhabitable for dozens of years (perhaps longer).
November 20th, 2006 at 4:10 pmSquegeboo…Good point. The existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons is a matter of speculation.
Why thanks, it’s so rare I manage one of those.
November 20th, 2006 at 4:25 pmdirty-bom attack on shipping is a dirty-bomb terrorist attack in a major city. Such an attack would make sections of the city uninhabitable for dozens of years (perhaps longer).
Well depending on the actual dirty bomb it could also be as little as 6 months until the area is considered safe again, it would all depend on the capabilities of the group that set it off.
Of course ideological Progs and Progettes believe Iran’s “storyline”. Despising US interests allows the “enemy within” to bolster the Iranian “nuclear power” alibi. President Achnidinejead and his band of Merry Mullahs should thank Allah I am NOT in charge….I would patiently explain that US and European nuclear experts were going to be inspecting the entire country’s nuclear sites. Then i would tell them we will also beinspecting the sites they do not want us to know about. Should they not acquiese to our polite request - I would inform them that I would turn their Allah-forsaken country into a stone quarry and glass factory…….Perhaps they would get the message….perhaps not…..
November 20th, 2006 at 4:33 pmWhy thanks, it’s so rare I manage one of those.
Comment by squegeeboo
Try not to accept compliments from Exley, Squeegy, the source is dubious…
November 20th, 2006 at 4:39 pmYes, let’s all listen to Hersh, the guy who’s been telling us about the coming war with Iran - for the past 2 years. How much more mileage you think Hersh is going to get out of this? As long as there are enough suckers willing to fall for it, I guess.
November 20th, 2006 at 4:43 pmI think you and I agree that the less countries to have nukes, the better.
Comment by Exley
I agree that no country should have nukes. Better, right?
Israel has nukes? Do you have the proof to back that up?
November 20th, 2006 at 4:43 pmComment by squegeeboo
Well, of course not. They have the wrath of Yahweh.
It ALMOST sounds like they’ve learned since the last time we accused someone of having WMDs, and then rushing in to attack….
Perhaps the social memory is longer lived than I had thought…. but I doubt it.
November 20th, 2006 at 4:55 pm#75-HighTimes,
Hey there sport, you need to put down the bong for a few minutes and find out where all of your military is. Then, if you still feel it necessary, go ahead and criticize Mr. Hersh.
Just don’t be too hurt when you notice that no one listens to you. Although, from your comment I would speculate that such is a situation that you are well used to.
Peace.
November 20th, 2006 at 4:56 pmSH*T Tarazan -Do you mean to say that a country could simply say “nope I’m not sticking to that treaty anymore” and just start doing whatever it was they promised not to do? Wow, I’m so glad nobody ever does that. I mean what’s the point of creating ‘international law’ through bi and multilateral agreement if you could just pull out or not bother to ratify it? It would make a mockery if a country did that for one treaty and then tried to impose a different law on another country, eh? /sarcasm off
November 20th, 2006 at 4:58 pmJuan C
Well, of course not. They have the wrath of Yahweh.
I hear they just upgraded their mail storage space to compete with google.
Zoo
November 20th, 2006 at 4:59 pmTry not to accept compliments from Exley, Squeegy, the source is dubious…
So does that mean I have to stop accepting them from you also?
#76 Juan,
I agree that no country should have nukes. Better, right?
Couldn’t agree with you more. If the world was the safe, peaceful, sane, and rational enough for the U.S. to get rid of its nuclear weapons, I would be the first one in line petitioning the gov’t to get rid of them.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:23 pm#65 Exley
Iran has not admitted that it is developing a nuclear weapons program. They claim (rather laughably) that they are developing a nuclear power program for peaceful purposes. Of course, no one in the international community believes that Iran, a nation that sits on a sea of oil, needs a civilain nuclear power program.
Au contraire. From WaPo, Dafna Linzer 03/27/05:
Lacking direct evidence, Bush administration officials argue that Iran’s nuclear program must be a cover for bomb-making. Vice President Cheney recently said, “They’re already sitting on an awful lot of oil and gas. Nobody can figure why they need nuclear as well to generate energy.”
Yet Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and outgoing Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz held key national security posts when the Ford administration made the opposite argument 30 years ago.
Ford’s team endorsed Iranian plans to build a massive nuclear energy industry, but also worked hard to complete a multibillion-dollar deal that would have given Tehran control of large quantities of plutonium and enriched uranium — the two pathways to a nuclear bomb. Either can be shaped into the core of a nuclear warhead, and obtaining one or the other is generally considered the most significant obstacle to would-be weapons builders.
Funny, isn’t it?
November 20th, 2006 at 5:30 pmI would be the first one in line petitioning the gov’t to get rid of them.
Comment by Exley
Good. good. Making progress here.
Now, answer this, please see post #15.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:31 pmIn 2005, Mohamed ElBaradei was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his outstanding work in the international control of nuclear weapons. In 2003, ElBaradei had proposed a verifiable ban on the production of weapons-grade fissile material – a positive move that would severely limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
In a vote of the Disarmament Committee of the United Nations (UN), one and only one nation voted against ElBaradei’s proposal – George Bush’s America. In that same vote, Israel abstained, apparently fearing international interference with their own outlaw nuclear weapons program, and Britain abstained in an act of diplomatic fealty to the “special relationship” between Tony Blair and George Bush. The final tally was 147 nations to one with the two abstentions. In a later vote of the entire UN General Assembly, Israel and Britain abstained, while America and Palau voted against ElBaradei’s verifiable ban on fission, and 179 nations voted in favor of his proposal. The final vote on that occasion was 179 in favor, two opposed (U.S. and Palau), and two abstentions (Israel and Britain).
ElBaradei’s proposal would monitor all nuclear fission and guarantee that non-nuclear weapons states would be able to obtain adequate supplies for their nonmilitary usage of enriched plutonium.
One nation has publicly accepted ElBaradei’s proposal: Iran.
BUSH WE WOULD BE IN A SAFER WORLD IF NOT FOR YOU AND ONLY YOU ……I hope the democrats take this back up as Clinton would have said yes ..bush is a moron
November 20th, 2006 at 5:31 pmTobey Tall,
I believe that’s called “Game-set-and match”. In a sane world that is. Unfortunately, sanity seems to be in short supply in the “civilized” world.
And I have one more critical point to make: In a democracy and representative government structure, the leadership accurately represents the people. That is not opinion, that IS the crux of such a structure. So, if the leader is a moron…
Peace.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:42 pm#83, Juan….Would love to respond to ya. But I hope you will respond to my other posts…
Why is Bush more hated elsewhere in the world than Castro? Why Ernesto Guevara is loved and admired all around the world
Well, I guess I reject the premise of your questions. I do not pretend Dubya is popular right now. But you know what? Neither was Reagan in the the 1980s, but history has vindicated him and proved that he was correct. That is why he is celebrated and indeed lionized in Europe today when back in the 1980s, he was faced with masive protests and criticism. Today, even those who criticized Reagan’s Cold War policies back in the 80s now admit he was right and they were wrong. The fall of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Soviet Union are his legacy. So, yes, Dubya is unpopular now. But, like Reagan, he will be vindicated and celebrated as the years go by.
As for Guevara..Well, Juan, I hate to break it to you. But maybe among you circle of friends, he is “loved,” But among the general population of the civilzied world and among historians, it is widely accepted that he was little more than a communist, terrorist thug and a dictator in the making. Today, the world laughs at Guevara and his brutal ideology.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:46 pm#68
Israel has nukes? Do you have the proof to back that up?
We’ve known for over 30 years that Israel has had nuclear weapons. During the Yom Kippur War in 1973, one of our SR-71s detected the radiation and confirmed that Israel had armed 13 Jericho missiles with nuclear warheads. When they found out they’d been caught, the Israeli Air Force tried to shoot down the SR-71, but it outran the SAMs.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:47 pm#88-Exley,
You are absolutely wrong about world opinion of Che Guevara. He is considered the model of a people’s revolutionary. Not to mention his “hero” status for showing that one “lowly” Hispanic could stand up and thwart the US government. Because as all students of history know, the revolution in Cuba was against the puppet government of, and exploitation by, the US and its interests.
Do you want more lessons in your own history or are you content at trying to write your own, regardless of your lack of qualifications. I do agree that history will remember bush though, just like it does hitler and mussolini.
May peace be with us all.
November 20th, 2006 at 5:56 pm#90, Humanist, “He is considered the model of a people’s revolutionary.”..Yes. Among a small, sad band of delusional, ignorant folks who refuse to accept the historical and political reality that the world has rejected commusism and recognized its monstrous crimes against humanity. Those who still celebrate Che Guevara are no different than those insignificant, pitiful but nonetheless morally deplorable white supremacists and neo-Nazi groups that to this day maintain “Hitler was right.”
November 20th, 2006 at 6:02 pmI do not pretend Dubya is popular right now.
Comment by Exley
unpopular? Lets say that every country he steps foot on, he is yelled at, and demonstrations are organized against him. Not even Castro has that kind of receivement. See, people who are not american, read real news.
The fall of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Soviet Union are his legacy.
Wrong. Thats totalitarian burocreacy´s and Gorbachov guilt. Russians couldnt care less about Reagan.
So, yes, Dubya is unpopular now. But, like Reagan, he will be vindicated and celebrated as the years go by.
I will wait on my seat.
But among the general population of the civilzied world and among historians,
which is what? Whats the civilized world? Could you please define that? New Orleans after Katrina? Mississipi back in the 50´s? Flint, Michigan?
it is widely accepted that he was little more than a communist, terrorist thug and a dictator in the making. Today, the world laughs at Guevara and his brutal ideology.
Some weeks ago I was watching an european football match disputed in Belgium. Among the flags of the local team, there was the picture of the Che. You could hardly say that Belgium is not a developed country, that they are not civilized or that the youth is lost. In fact, just like the Subcomandante Marcos here in Mexico some years ago, Ernesto Guevara is seen as one of the flawless characters in world history. I cant say the same about Castro, for example. Forget about Bush and Reagan, they are in the same level that Mao and Stalin.
In Argentina, under the military governments, schools taught the same things you are saying about him; that he was a merciless killer, etc. It is surprising that the same anti-communist propaganda is still alive. That tells a lot about the “victory”, that capitalists achieved when the CIA killed him.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:09 pmBecause as all students of history know, the revolution in Cuba was against the puppet government of, and exploitation by, the US and its interests.
Not only that. When he went to Angola to fight against South African invasion supported by (oh, what a surprise) CIA, that was the first time that a black army defeated a white army in world history. But, of course, Ex, you have already made up your mind.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:13 pmHey, Ex, when he was not in combat, Ernesto Guevara taught cubans how to read (illiteracy was one of the legacies of your palladin of democracy, Batista). Do you think Bush did that at some point…being the Commander-in-chief? Ha ha ha! I would like to see that!
November 20th, 2006 at 6:16 pm#89-Exley,
Interesting retort in that all that it contained was insulting and sophomoric language but referenced no facts or substance. I find it interesting that you purport to speak for the world, and in effect me, but nothing you say sounds familiar. I believe that is called “delusional” but I will leave that diagnosis to the professionals.
Oh, and that “communism†that you say the “world” has so rejected and recognized as monstrous and a failure, I wonder what the Chinese would say about that. You know the Chinese don’t you? All 1.3 billion of them. The same country that has no debt, but holds a majority of the paper on YOUR astronomical debt.
Open your mind and close off your ignorance and bigotry my friend.
Peace.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:18 pmWould Humanista and Juan-ista be so kind as to address the following question. If revolutionaries and communism are to be celebrated, WHY are people willing to risk death to GET OUT of “workers’ paradise”. (I have never seen it reported that HUGE throngs are crashing the shores of Cuba to get in….)
November 20th, 2006 at 6:19 pmIf revolutionaries and communism are to be celebrated, WHY are people willing to risk death to GET OUT of “workers’ paradiseâ€. (I have never seen it reported that HUGE throngs are crashing the shores of Cuba to get in….)
Comment by mighty aphrodite
If that were true, little fella, there would be thousands of people taking up the streets in Cuba. Remember, cubans know how to fight, dont you think they would have deposed Castro already? I know, there is a strong revolutionary propaganda, I am against that, but people eat every day. Can you say the same about the US? Does every single one of US citizens, the most powerful country in the world, eat every day? Answer that, please. Now, is US under a 40 y/o embargo? No? Yes? Im guessing you wont address the question.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:25 pm#94-mighty aphrodite,
I never said that communism needs to be celebrated. Rather, I was pointing out that only a fool would dismiss it as “dead”. Especially considering how the USA has placed itself into a position of servitude to its largest current example. Although one thing that I find very interesting about americans is that only about 1 in 100 (if that) actually know what “communism” is. They hate it only because they were taught to hate it. Change the name to “communityism” and there will be church groups having Sunday morning pancake breakfasts to fund it.
Another interesting aspect is that you are so ready to demonize communism and glorify democracy, yet you are currently threatening one of the newest world democracies, Iran. So, you only like democracies that act like you want them to and you only despise communists who won’t loan you money. Makes you wonder why the world questions your “principles” now doesn’t it?
Peace.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:36 pmDear Juan - Answer the question - if Cuba is SO great, why aren’t people dying to get IN. Instead, they are dying to get OUT. (Those ingrates who want to leave - how much more could one want - 3 square meals of rice and plantains??) Nobody has seen a new car in Cuba in almost 50 years and they have the most educated prostitute class in the world. Why, you might ask? Because the “professions” of medicine, law and teaching do not allow an earned income to support oneself above the subsistence level. Read “Eat the Rich” by P.J. O’Rourke who saw first hand how the average person in Cuba lives. When you wish to discuss building which have not seen rennovations in over 40 years, get back with me on the plight of US disaster victims.
If someone is hungry and lonely in the US, he can go to any number of small and large charities for assistance. If a family is poor and hungry, the USDA generously doles out food stamps to help our people. This provides for nutrition as long as those stamps are not traded or sold for other commodities.
I suspect you won’t answer why communist countries have to keep their people in with a barrel of a gun or the point of a bayonet. If people do not like living in the US, you are free to go. The people of Cuba, North Korea,China, Viet Nam,etc. have no such freedom - do they Juan? The people of the former Soviet Union and her satellite countries didn’t either, did they Juan? The millions killed by all those regimes were killed because……???
November 20th, 2006 at 6:42 pmDear Humanist - Being an ignorant neophyte regarding one of the “newest world democracies, Iran” would you be so kind as to explain the opposition platform to me and give me a break down of votes per party or candidate.
(FYI - For the most part, the only “churches” here in the US who would be pancake flipping to fund “communityism” are the UU’s, the United Church of christ and liberal Protestant denominations belonging to the National Council of churches. They don’t seem to be at odds with the atheism of official communist teaching. I think your moniker might belie an explanation….)
Piece….
November 20th, 2006 at 6:50 pm. “I never said that communism needs to be celebrated. Rather, I was pointing out that only a fool would dismiss it as “deadâ€.”
Comment by humanist
****I have never claimed it was dead ((additional converts are added with regularity) - I simply said it is not a viable or sustainable economic practice. Unfortunately, communism is not dead - not as long as they can keep the minions from going anyplace ELSE….
November 20th, 2006 at 6:58 pmAbout Cuba I think I answer when I posted the little thing called 40 y/o embargo. You people are so dumb that you dont know that if you stop the embargo, you would leave Castro without rethorical weapons for his “revolution”, he would crumble down because thats what he needs in order to keep in power. But he will die and he will win. But, hey, you just dont forget that CIA humiliation, do you?
And prostitution…sure, there is a lot of that. Now, I would like to join the embargo argument with the lifestyle of cubans. F*cking is the cuban national sport, then baseball. They dont have our christian hypocresy about sex. They just do whatever the hell they like to do. And they dont have overpopulation issues…again, because they are educated and poor (due to the embargo, lets not forget)
y/o embargo
I suspect you won’t answer why communist countries have to keep their people in with a barrel of a gun or the point of a bayonet.
There are not communists countries. Dont you read Exley´s posts? Reagan wiped them all. :)
November 20th, 2006 at 6:59 pmSeriously, those are not communists countries. Those are totalitarian regimes. See if you can see the difference…the communist manifesto of Carl Marx says nothing about a barrel of a gun or no democracy or things like that. You missed that one, I guess. But, hey, if Mickey Mouse says communists are bad, I guess they are.
#98-mighty aphrodite,
So a democracy only counts if it functions like you want and/or dictate? Interesting approach I must say. But, to paraphrase a character out of a popular movie, I don’t think “democracy” means what you think it means.
I am ignorant to all of the different churches and denominations that you have so please provide me with a list of “approved” ones herr aphrodite. Speaking of which, what is your definition of “civilized”?
Lastly, no comment on Communist China? Seems the “educated prostitutes” issue is not unique to Cuba. I’ll let you go, I’m sure you have some “tricks” to perform.
Peace.
November 20th, 2006 at 7:00 pmI simply said it is not a viable or sustainable economic practice.
Comment by mighty aphrodite
Hey, John Nash. Capitalism is accumulation of wealth. There cant be accumulation of wealth without some individual losing that same amount of wealth. Which one is not sustainable? Take a trip to III World countries to see how capitalism works. Do you know the rate of rich:poor guys in capitalists states? Yeah, communism which proposes a better distribution of the wealth is really evil…for Corporations, thats it. But, hey, if Reagan said that, then he must be right, why bother in searching that?
November 20th, 2006 at 7:04 pmSo does that mean I have to stop accepting them from you also?
Comment by squegeeboo
Of course! I’ve had you fooled all this time, Squeegy. Heh.
November 20th, 2006 at 7:39 pmHate to disappoint you MA, but new cars are flowing into Cuba, they simply are manufactured in Europe, Mexico, South America and Asia. Cuba is also looking at an up tick in the tourism business because the USA has become the worst place to visit because of Visa and entry policies that have been rated as the rudest in the World. I can attest to that last item.
November 20th, 2006 at 7:57 pm“Hey, John Nash. Capitalism is accumulation of wealth. There cant be accumulation of wealth without some individual losing that same amount of wealth. Which one is not sustainable?” Comment by Juan
*******I have discovered your educational deficiancy - your erroneous view that wealth is a “zero-sum gain”. IF your theory were correct, EVERYONE in capitalist societies would be IMPOVERISHED. The proof that your theor is wrong: the United States has not increased it’s resources except those it purchases and the expansion of human resources. When one person “wins” it does not mean another loses. The second person, if they are not inclined to be self-employed, has the ability to hone their skill set and sell their labour to the highest bidder.
What job do you have Juan? Are you with the Propaganda Ministry?
November 20th, 2006 at 8:14 pmOh Juan……..why aren’t impoverished people dying to get in Cuba - I think if they want to go to Cuba, we should let them - for good……
November 20th, 2006 at 8:18 pmThanks for the info Walt…
November 20th, 2006 at 8:19 pma nation that sits on a sea of oil, needs a civilain nuclear power program
Are you kidding? Simple business and environmental sense. Oil is the 21st century gold. Why would you use it when you can sell it at a premium to consumptive nations while using cleaner nuke energy?
November 20th, 2006 at 8:30 pmAre you still here MA? I thought you were due for your ESL class.
November 20th, 2006 at 8:31 pmWhen one person “wins†it does not mean another loses.
Comment by mighty aphrodite
No, it does not, because money…puff! appears from nowhere. Look! I just made 1,000 bucks. The surplus is what companies gets free from its employees. So, there you go, they just won more money out of the same worker salary.
The second person, if they are not inclined to be self-employed, has the ability to hone their skill set and sell their labour to the highest bidder.
Yeah, that happens a lot. Mmmmm…lets see, no, GE´s offering is too low, I think Im wonna wait the General Foods CEO´s job.
What job do you have Juan? Are you with the Propaganda Ministry?
November 20th, 2006 at 8:32 pmMe? Uhh, like I control the media, right? How often do you hear: Hey, corporations are benefiting from our labor, next on Fox, right? Yeah, Im the evil one, MA.
Hold on!!! What country are you from MA? Anybody know what country MA claims to be from?
November 20th, 2006 at 8:35 pmOh, wait, wasn’t MA from San Diego? I know it was some Cali city. Can anybody spot the non-American word in this sentence?
The second person, if they are not inclined to be self-employed, has the ability to hone their skill set and sell their labour to the highest bidder.
MA, what is your answer to that, counselor? Or should I say barrister?
November 20th, 2006 at 8:41 pmwhy aren’t impoverished people dying to get in Cuba - I think if they want to go to Cuba, we should let them - for good……
Comment by mighty aphrodite
Do you read? I mean… at all?? A 40 Y/O EMBARGO.
Did you know that also Iraq was under an embargo since a long time before 2003, and you would say: hey, why impoverished didnt run to Saddam´s Iraq?
Why people from Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Canada, Australia, Finland, Netherland, Belgium, etc. doesnt run to US if thats the most powerful country in the world?
November 20th, 2006 at 8:43 pmMA, what is your answer to that, counselor? Or should I say barrister?
Comment by JPark
The Hag always pull that crap, JPark. Delusions of class…
November 20th, 2006 at 8:45 pm#114 No, labour is not class. That is English or Australian. She is a for’ner!!!!
November 20th, 2006 at 9:11 pmJust bomb Iran back into the stone age like we did to Germany and Japan during WW2. Fire bomb those scum. Hit not just their Military. But there Homes, Schools and Mosques. Don’t send any ground troops. That will teach them a lesson. they talk of wiping countries off the map, I say wipe them off the map!
November 20th, 2006 at 9:44 pmJigga, it is only a matter of time til you are swinging. Hurry it up already.
November 20th, 2006 at 9:47 pmJuan,
November 20th, 2006 at 10:02 pmThe one thing I admire about Castro is that he doesn’t belive that religious crap. Other than that he a tin pot dictator. Why don’t you go to Cuba since you like it so much!
Jigga, why do you live in a country where the leader is a bible-banger?
November 20th, 2006 at 10:08 pmAnswer the question - if Cuba is SO great, why aren’t people dying to get IN. Instead, they are dying to get OUT.
Sometimes, someone wins a point and is so overwhelmingly convincing, that it is indeed impressive to behold.
Well done, Mighty Aphrodite.
And AGAIN, I respectfully suggest that Juan meet and speak with Cuban refugees who have fled Castro’s totalitarian Cuba and listen to their witness accounts of Castro’s brutal and tortorous regime and its murderous ways.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:20 pm#92, Hey Juan, Did you know that Batista’s regime increased literacy and healthcare among the Cuban people? And what was Castro doing at the same time Batista was building school and hospitals and bolstering Cuba’s economy? Castro was planting bombs in movie theaters and hotels, killing innocents….You DID know that, didn’t you, Juan?
November 20th, 2006 at 10:25 pmExley, if you are getting cozy with MA you have real problems.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:26 pmExley, so you are in favor of military dictatorships like Batista’s?
November 20th, 2006 at 10:28 pmThat would explain your love for der Bush.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:29 pmHey Jpark,
November 20th, 2006 at 10:32 pmWhy not move to Cuba you Rich spoiled hypocritical Leftard scumbag.
Hey Jpark,
November 20th, 2006 at 10:33 pmCastro is Military Dictator you fool.
Hey Juan, Did you know that Batista’s regime increased literacy and healthcare among the Cuban people? You DID know that, didn’t you, Juan?
Comment by Exley
And when you woke up you thought everything had actually happened.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:36 pmJigga, you incredible retard, so was Batista.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:39 pmJpark and Juan,
November 20th, 2006 at 10:44 pmIf America so bad and Cuba go, Leave!
JPark, dont bother. Its useless. He.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:46 pmJigga, did I ever say I loved Cuba? Nope. I would not have want to live there during Batista or Castro. But you seem to love you some Castro. Why don’t you go down there and felate the old Commie?
November 20th, 2006 at 10:47 pmJpark,
I’d rather live there under Batista. At least I can make money. that’s all I care about.
Viva the CIA for putting over 50 bullets in Che Guevara’s body!
November 20th, 2006 at 10:50 pm#127, Juan,
You didn’t answer the question: Did you know that Batista’s regime increased literacy and healthcare among the Cuban people? Moreover, Batista enjoyed the support of the trade unions. You believe that economic opportunity is more important than political freedom…So, you should be a Batista fan…
November 20th, 2006 at 10:52 pmAre you really retarded Jigga? Cause I will take it easy on you if you are.
November 20th, 2006 at 10:55 pmExley, are you a fan of Batista?
November 20th, 2006 at 10:55 pm#135, JPark,
Well, Since Batista was deposed way before I was born, I am hardly in a position to say that I am a “fan” of Batista’s. However, based on the historical record, it is obvious that Castro was a far more oppressive and brutal dictator than Batista.
November 20th, 2006 at 11:06 pm#136 Well, considering everybody hated Batista by the time he fled I wouldn’t count on that.
November 20th, 2006 at 11:12 pmDid you know that Batista’s regime increased literacy and healthcare among the Cuban people?
Could you please provide a link of that assertion?
You believe that economic opportunity is more important than political freedom…
Comment by Exley
What? I dont understand. Really.
November 20th, 2006 at 11:21 pm#138 I wondered where that came from too. I thought I was going insane.
November 20th, 2006 at 11:25 pm#138, Juan, I am unsure as to what you are asking. Are you actually claiming that you did not know that Batista makedly improved the economy, healtcare and literacy of Cuba? Or are you claiming that you did not know that Castro and his minions bombed civilain targets during Castro’s insurgency in the 1950s?
November 20th, 2006 at 11:45 pmYou believe that economic opportunity is more important than political freedom…
What exactly does that mean Exley? Was that an ad hominim?
November 20th, 2006 at 11:50 pm#133 Exley
Did you know that Batista’s regime increased literacy and healthcare among the Cuban people?
Did you know that Cuba provides its people with free health care and high quality health care at that? Did you know they have a lower infant mortality rate than the US and the same life expectancy? Did you know they’ve sent their doctors to help out in developing nations all over the world, 68 of them to be exact? Did you know they’ve trained doctors and medical personnel from other countries at no cost? And they’ve done this even while the embargo and the fall of the Soviet Union have made it very difficult for them financially.
November 20th, 2006 at 11:51 pmExley, that is a straw man, or didn’t you know that?
November 20th, 2006 at 11:53 pm#142, JPark..It means that Juan has frequently stated his support of communist regimes, saying that the supposed economic opportunity communism provides to people living under communist totalitarian regimes “trumps” the political oppression that invariably accompanies communist rule. For example, Juan argues that the brutal political oppression of Castro’s Cuba and Castro’s jailing and torture of political dissidents is a relatively small price to pay for the supposed economic benefits of Castro’s totalitarian rule.
November 20th, 2006 at 11:57 pmExley, you are comparing Castro to Batista. What is the difference? They were both oppressive and you seem to be backing an old, dead dictator.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:01 amchimpeach,
November 21st, 2006 at 12:05 amYou like Cuba so much, move there you Leftard.
Jigga, you little retard. How do you like living in the most religious civilized nation?
November 21st, 2006 at 12:10 amJpark,
November 21st, 2006 at 12:14 amThis isn’t the most religious country you leftard. Try Iran and saudi Arabia.
I like this country because I make money and have freedom to bash religion. Screw god.
Do you have a problem reading? This is the most religious civilized country. And you like living here. Are you a masochist?
November 21st, 2006 at 12:18 amMoney and women that’s all life’s about.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:18 amYou love this country because you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth, weren’t you, lol.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:18 amWell, if you are a moron, money and women might be all that life is about.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:19 amJPark ,
November 21st, 2006 at 12:19 amI love the money and the pussy!
#153 K, Jigga, I am guessing the money and the pussy don’t love you.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:21 am#145, JPark.
Batista and Castro were/are both “dictators.” But there are degrees of dictatorship — Authoritarian and totalitarian being the operative terms when discussing Cuban history since the end of World War II. Batista was an authoritarian strongman, who, while undoubtedly improving the economy, literacy, and healthcare of Cuba (Batista created educational programs for the “peasants”, built schools, and implementied the minimum wage for farm workers) also was not what one would call a Jeffersonian democrat. Castro, on the other hand, was/is a totalitarian dictator who has created a one-party state for over 40 years in which all forms of political dissent are met with oppression, be it jailings, torture, and summary executions.
I do appreciate that yoy acknowledge that Castro is a dictator, JPark. Too many “progressives” refuse to acknowledge that well-established fact.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:21 amJPark,
November 21st, 2006 at 12:23 amI was born in the Ghetto and sold drugs to get cash. I went into the Army because it was taht or Jail. I then opened my own legetimate business. I wasn’t born in the happy happy spoiled White burbs like you were.
Exley, I am not sure I understand. You claim that progressives love Castro. I have never seen that.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:23 amJpark,
November 21st, 2006 at 12:26 amunlike you I get head on a regular basis from Hot women.
When you speak of Batista (I agree that he would be preferable) you are talking about populism. Chavez and Batista are also in this mold. Why do righties hate them so much?
November 21st, 2006 at 12:26 amJigga, my father, the breadwinner, died when I was 7. We had no money. You chose to sell drugs like a punk. My mom went to school. You are pathetic for your criminal choice.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:28 am#158 Unlike you I get my head from women without adam’s apples.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:30 amSorry, I meant Chavez and Ortega.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:35 amAnd they were popularly elected but righties can’t stand that.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:37 amYou might want to find out if the person you are talking to was born with a silver spoon in their mouth before you spout your shit.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:39 amJPark,
November 21st, 2006 at 12:45 amUnlike you I didn’t wait for the governmant to help me. That’s why I’m a Righty. I did what it takes and that’s why I’m living good, while your bitching about the Government not helping people with Healtcare and that crap. You’re a pathetic fool. Help yourself!
If I was allow to post pictures you’d jerk off at the women I screw, Loser!
I respect a drug dealer more than someone on Foodstamps!
“my father, the breadwinner, died when I was 7″
November 21st, 2006 at 12:47 amYou want a tissue, boo hoo hoo! Lol!
Jpark,
November 21st, 2006 at 12:50 amthat’s why I don’t vote or give a rats ass who’s in power. I have money and live good. My business is going well and life’s great!
Jigga, you drug dealing little thug. I was on survivors benefits, never foodstamps. You didn’t need to deal and hurt other people. You could have made something of yourself. But you didn’t. Once a piece of shit, always a piece of shit.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:50 amOoo, your “business”. Nice. You are a cancer.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:50 amDo me a favor, Jigga. Ask Exley what he thinks of you.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:54 amYeah, you bitch and moan all you want. That fact is my money stacks bigger than you! You see I didn’t let the Leftist Big City Establishment pigeon hole me into being another Spanish kid dependent on the generous White man for hand outs. I went out and did it my self. My current business is legit. I own 4 restaurants and making tons of cream!
November 21st, 2006 at 12:56 amGo ahead bitch and moan about Bush, it won’t change nothing. be creative and make some Dough.
Like Jay-Z and DMX said it’s about Money, Cash, Hoes!
War with Iran is in the works, but the big question is will the DC Democrats slit their own throats to back the Bush Regime attack?
November 21st, 2006 at 12:56 amMy god, I wouldn’t touch the women you screw!!! Are you crazy?? One, they are damned ugly and two, you have given them whatever horrid disease you are carrying with you.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:56 amThe fact is I have a new piece of pussy every week!
November 21st, 2006 at 12:57 am#157, JPark,
I know not all progressives “love” Castro and his ilk (One of my idols and heroes, Bobby Kennedy, for example). Unfortunately, some do (See postings # 15 and 88) … Some progressives seem to believe their liberal boba fides require them to defend or explain away Castro and his jailings and summary executions of political dissidents.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:57 amIf there’s war with iran I’ll re-enlist so I can kill some Turban head jerks. I’ll piss on a Koran!
November 21st, 2006 at 12:58 amMoney Jigga? Jay-Z and DMX??? LOL, you are nothing. You are an empty shell. You have no honor and you have no skills. NOTHING.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:59 amExley, the only thing I see in common with those comments was Che Guevera. Neither mentioned Castro.
November 21st, 2006 at 1:00 amJigga > ask Bush to drop you in Iran in the first wave of attacks > you will be a dead hero!
November 21st, 2006 at 1:00 amJpark,
November 21st, 2006 at 1:01 amThe women I screw wouldn’t even give you the time of Day. I drink Champagne, Dom P to be exact when I’m thirsty while you can only afford Bud. I’m in the VIP with Modely chicks while you have my Leftovers!
Jigga, nobody wants the “pussy” you get. By the way, you say if there is a war with Iran you will reinlist. WHAT, IRAQ isn’t big enough for you??? You are a toad.
November 21st, 2006 at 1:02 am#181 No, they wouldn’t because I am straight, poofy.
November 21st, 2006 at 1:03 am