And this you deducted from one comment by the Iranian president, the translation of which is questionable.

And how will they go about this extermination? With the nuclear weapons they aren’t trying to build anymore?

“The Israelis have no wish to kill any Iranians, if they don’t have to. There’s a distinct difference between the attitudes of Jews towards Muslims and the opposite. One has been brainwashed for centuries to hate the other. Figure it out.”

Overgeneralize much? “Oh, them ker-razy Muslims!”

“Oh please, the Iranians know that we’d never do that. We won’t even dare bomb them at all. They know perfectly well that if they nuke Israel, nobody would do it back.”

So in other words, you feel our entire deterrence capability is useless?

What’s the point of the US having nuclear weapons, then?

Comment by DreamCrusher — December 7, 2007 @ 4:13 am

and now you’re contradicting yourself. you better get your story straight or even your best friends are going to be laughing at you behind your back.

Because the NIE also says that Iran halted its nuclear program in 2003, which is in direct contradiction of Pres Bush’s assertions that Iran was on a quest for nuclear weapons.

And the NIE says Iran “would be technically capable of producing enough HEU for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame” if they decided to do so; again, you are talking about intentions as if they were actual actions and a fact.

How a quest/action is different from an intention is something we already covered.

Bush said that if we don’t prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, we’ll could face a new world war. How does the new NIE assessment make that inaccurate at all?

Wha? I don’t know how you can extrapolate the NIE into a world war. You are making no sense.

Ah yes, because no fundamentalist Muslim would ever relish the thought of going down in flames after exterminating Jews from the face of the Earth.

What, are you a mind reader now? A fortune teller?

All the actions by the Mullahs so far have been about self-preservation, to the point of making political overtures to the US and making an offer to cooperate with the US on various topics back in 2003 -the same offer Rice later claimed she didn’t remember.

It’s the first half of the Klein quote from, “The Bush reaction…” to “….our advantage”, that is a little bizarre, not least because it appears to be entirely speculative commentary.

I do accept he was referring specifically to the NIE when he referred to the “amazing moment of candor”, and I think you are being as stubborn as he is if you won’t accept this. Klein’s characterization of Bush’s bobbing and weaving is where Blogger-Joe appears to disagree with Talkinghead-Joe, and perhaps most importantly, as BarbinMD points out, neither Joe appears too familiar with what Bush has actually being doing.

Klein absolutely deserved to have the sh!t thrown at him for his FISA article, I think here the case is not quite as clear… unless you are making the point that he spoke without fully engaging his brain which hardly amounts to a high crime of journalism.

Klein is as stubborn as all hell, but I’d say he’s worth hearing out here. And he isn’t smearing anybody which makes a nice change.

I would think the knowledge that just half the warload of one US Ohio-class SSBN could turn their whole nation into a parking lot would deter the Iranians from committing any kind of nefarious nuclear strike.

There is no evidence to support this claim. There is no evidence that Iran would launch an unprovoked nuclear attack on Israel. Your claim is conventional wisdom within neoconservative circles, but it is not a rational claim. It’s based on fear and loathing, like most Republican policies.

“Logical”? That Iran gets a nuclear weapon and they immediately launch an attack against Israel?

The Mullahs are many things. Stupid and suicidal are not among them.

And just where did I say who would pull the first punch? I said Bush was warning of the pending confrontation with Iran. One way or another, the US would be involved in a war against a nuclear country. Or at least that the doomsday scenario that Pres Bush repeated over, and over to anyone who’d listen.

He was repeating this script even after he was told about the new information regarding Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

That is the context you are trying so hard to avoid acknowledging, Mr. I-am-all-about-the-context.

Iran hates Israel. Iran gets nukes. Iran nukes Israel. Israel retaliates. The US gets involved. Nations take sides. WWIII. Get it?

What I get here is a bunch of hypothetical baloney to justify beating the Iran war drums. This scenario is totally out in left field. Completely backwards, I might add.

I mean, Bush is hardly the first to envision this scenario.

Lots of neocons are spewing this crap all the time. So what?

It’s a pretty logical scenario for what would happen if Iran got nuclear weapons.

It is not logical at all. It is a product of neocon think tank propaganda designed to frighten people and justify invading Iran.

Do you deny that?

I deny it totally!! And if you really believe it you must be comprehension challenged.

Clearly, it is difficult for our little friend to tell the difference between the roles of two authority figures. It’s all too blurry in his mind.

Exactly so. “Conservatives” truly believe in a hierarchical structure for the country. They are at the top and the rest of the people are servants. So, whoever is an authority figure is OK. They are all on the same team and as long as they know their place it does not matter where on the ladder they are.

Progressives stand for equality amongst people, a democratic socxiety and all that stands for. Conservatives love and seek aristocracy, along with all that stands for. Like empire for instance.

Conservatives are not the opposite of Progressives, offering another view to be debated about. They are against a democratic society and should be seen by the people for who and what they are..

Comment by DreamCrusher — December 6, 2007 @ 9:23 pm

Another in your endless series of lies. lies, lies, lies, followed by rightard bullshit. You’re so weak, you hate TP, yet you can’t resist coming here and making a fool of yourself. You have a problem, DC. You have no comprehension skills, you don;t do nuance, you don;t recognize the beating of the Bushco war drums because Bush has never directly been quoted as saying quickly, even though he never misses a chance to accuse iran of something they aren’t doing, and that nobody can prove that they ever did do. he pulled the same lies for Iraq, now nobody but you and the other idiots of the 20% are buying it. No WMD, no terrorists, no nothing but oil. You’re weak but slimy, creamcruiser, but you don;t fool anyone here. if you’re so very upset, take your dolls and go home. Leave the patriots here alone, go hang with your traitor buddies.

Says the twit who is unable and/or refuses to put Pres Bush fearmongering in proper context.

And since Iran was on a quest for nuclear weapons….

But since only DreamCrusher can correctly interpret Pres Bush’s mind and deeds, WWIII probably means something other than war.

Heh. That was my first thought. Clearly, it is difficult for our little friend to tell the difference between the roles of two authority figures. It’s all too blurry in his mind.

Can you tell me how what Bush has been saying all along is any different than what Fingar testified, that Iran wants a nuclear weapon? That it would be quite dangerous if Iran were ever to get one?
What specifically is wrong with anything Bush has said?

You know, DC, you almost have me convinced that you are serious.

Question:
What is the difference between Fingar and Bush? Eh? Do you get it? No? OK I will tell you. Fingar can’t declare war. Bush can and already has with Iraq. Pre-emptively!

BTW, on the Cheney thread you are knocking both parties, yet here you defend Bush. Why??? Are you playing both ends against the middle?

::sigh::

In case you missed it -it’s only been all over the news for the past couple of days- Pres Bush knew of the NIE back in August, but was still warning about the pending confrontation with Iran in October.

He was also fearmongering in Europe, trying to get the Czechs to buy a system to defend themselves of an attack from Iran.

That’s what’s wrong with what he said. But you don’t have to believe me, here is a link to your official source of news. Read and weep over your Dear Leader’s complete loss of credibility; assuming he had any left.