Comment by Che — October 23, 2007 @ 5:31 pm

Neocon bullcrap and Zionazi bullcrap are one and the same. As far as I know, the Saudis have not threatened to bomb Iran like the Israelis and Americans have done. Bush kisses “Saudi ass”; he also licks Zionist feet. Don’t try to divert attention from the truth. You’re not smart enough to do it!

Actually, that makes perfect sense. Bush is also the guy most likely to stick a fork into an electrical outlet for fun. So bombing Iran (”One of them I-countries — Iraq, Iran, I wanna sandwich….heh heh….heh heh heh. I’m the Decider and I’ve decided to drop some whoop-ass on Iran….heh heh heh.”) would come completely naturally to the man-boy.

I know that, but what they are missing is where are they going to get their profits when we are all dead or this nation is bankrupted. China isn’t going to keep lending us money forever and if we are all bankrupt, there will be no tax money for them to steal.

It’s not right as he seems to argue it, that they developed these weapons faster than we expected. With the exception of sputnik they developed weapons systems slower than predicted.

The estimates of the missile gap were wildly short of the mark (JFK had a hand in pushing these false accounts) and the US over-reacted, leading the arms race.

That’s not the official fable, but that’s how it worked.

Comment by landofthefree — October 23, 2007 @ 3:48 pm

Maybe he got confused and thought he was on FAUX news?

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

Not very bright, are you? Iran would never attempt to destroy Israel. That is all neocon bullcrap. Bush kisses Saudi ass. Iran is Saudi Arabia’s biggest threat in the area–FACT. Try reversing the rectal-cranial inversion. The orginal poster posted an opinion used often by Jew/Ziophobes.

Comment by foreyes — October 23, 2007 @ 5:16 pm

The only way that Iran would start a nuclear war would be if there were enough Iranis who were batsh!t insane enough to believe that if they took out Israel and died in the process, they would all be rewarded in heaven. Since this kind of radical insanity is present only in the minds of a radical fringe element, it’s doubtful their leadership would employ something this drastic.

Besides, they wouldn’t succeed in taking out Israel. Even though it’s a small country geographically, it would take more bombs than they would have in a long long time to destroy it.

Bush is using any “threat” he can to justify bombing Iran. I suspect the real reason is twofold:

1) Iran is helping the Shiites win the Iraq civil war, and those aren’t the people Bush wants to negotiate with for Iraqi oil.

2) Bush is looking for a distraction from Iraq, and in his deluded mind he thinks Iran is it. He desperately wants some kind of success for posterity, and he probably figures that with two failed wars, the third one will be a charm.

Wait — I had another thought. Could Congress get him on inherent contempt? That would involve actual handcuffing and imprisonment. The only question would be if the 25th amendment allows the president and the veep to retain their power while imprisoned.

Comment by upside99 — October 23, 2007 @ 2:35 pm

Afraid not. Try facts sometime. Blaming Israel first gets old. This is for the Saudis.

Comment by Che — October 23, 2007 @ 4:33 pm

“We got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel. So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.”

Aside from the fact that this is actually false, why is Bush using the threat of an attack on a nuclear armed Israel as the reason to start WWIII? Wouldn’t Israel be able to defend itself with its nuclear superiority? Che, I think you’re the one who should try facts sometime.

I hear you say that the military won’t go along with the bombing of Iran. I have to disagree, they are military after all and when their Commander in Chief tells them to do it, they will do it.

You really wouldn’t want it any other way either. What is missing from the equation is the kind of person who should be CIC. Instead of someone you can trust, we have a maniac who doesn’t care what we think.

Actually, criticalthinker – I am to the point that I DO want them to refuse to follow Bush any longer. I’m quite aware of the implications, Constitutionally….but this administration has done their best to tear it apart in order to stay in power. And the bottom line, is that the military has sworn allegience to the Constitution FIRST (which is all about defending and protecting the nation) and to the CIC Second (who is doing quite the opposite).

Comment by nanlichi — October 23, 2007 @ 4:57 pm

Afraid so. Only Congress can declare war, but a declaration of war isn’t necessary to bomb anyone. The United States hasn’t declared war since December 8, 1941 — and presidents have ordered bombing and general warfare plenty of times since then.

Even if there was some procedural way to stop Bush from bombing another country, Bush and Cheney would merely ignore procedure. It’s not like that would be anything new for them.

So not only is impeachment the only way to stop Bush, it would have to be impeachment, conviction, and removal from office before he has the chance to bomb. And unless Cheney gets the same treatment, it wouldn’t make any difference.

Comment by nanlichi — October 23, 2007 @ 4:10 pm

Only the military.

So is impeachment the only way? Any other act of Congress that would bind his hands?

I hear you say that the military won’t go along with the bombing of Iran. I have to disagree, they are military after all and when their Commander in Chief tells them to do it, they will do it.

You really wouldn’t want it any other way either. What is missing from the equation is the kind of person who should be CIC. Instead of someone you can trust, we have a maniac who doesn’t care what we think.

This time around he doesn’t even have to lie to us he can just go ahead and give the order to bomb and give us the finger at the same time.

Sure we will be pissed and sure his ratings may dip below 20%, but after all he thinks that he is doing God’s work and Christians have always been persecuted. History will prove him right, and if not, if he is appropraitely villified so what? He will be long dead.

Can Congress stop him even if they had the balls to do so?