Stretched ground forces mean U.S. nuclear strike possible.
By on Jan 13th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Stretched ground forces mean U.S. nuclear strike possible.
The Marine Corps Times reports:
If the U.S. were to face a new conventional threat, its military could not respond effectively without turning to air power, officials and analysts say.
That is the ultimate upshot of the war in Iraq: a response elsewhere would consist largely of U.S. fighters and bombers — even, perhaps, some degree of nuclear strike — because so many ground troops are tied up in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
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
As much as I found US govt despicable, I won’t think for a moment, it would use nuclear weapons. It would be the dumbest thing ever…
January 13th, 2008 at 9:37 pmdo ya s’pose that’s been the plan all along…? just sayin’… after the past 7+ years, i believe this government capable of anything…
January 13th, 2008 at 9:43 pmAnd, yes, I DO take it personally
Bush is the terrorist I fear….
January 13th, 2008 at 9:47 pm372 days left….
Have they lost their freakin’ minds?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:49 pmAs much as I found US govt despicable, I won’t think for a moment, it would use nuclear weapons. It would be the dumbest thing ever…
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 9:37 pm
I’m not worried about the dumb — I’m worried about the power-hungry maniacs.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:52 pmWow. Sorry guys, we can’t take send in the troops so we HAD to nuke you. Come on, you understand right?
I sincerely hope this Iran talk is all just idle gossip.
January 13th, 2008 at 9:54 pmIt sounds like some kind of hick Texan defense against a murder beef
“Now my baseball bat was at my sister’s trailer, so I grabbed me my shotgun and took his whole damn head off. What was I sposed to do? And him lookin’ at me funny an’ all…”
January 13th, 2008 at 10:03 pmI’m worried about the power-hungry maniacs.
Comment by Zooey
You got a point…
January 13th, 2008 at 10:04 pmJesus H. Christ, nuclear war instead of the goddamn DRAFT?
Is THAT their sense of priority?
Are they THAT crazy?
January 13th, 2008 at 10:09 pmIt would be the dumbest thing ever…
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 9:37 pm
Well, back in 2002-2003, invading and occupying Iraq seemed to me like the dumbest thing ever. Yet, here we are, 5 years later, several thousand dead, and with the largest American embassy in the world in the heart of Baghdad.
Don’t you ever underestimate the capacity for recklessness of this administration (or its followers’ absolute lack of independent thinking).
January 13th, 2008 at 10:20 pmSo the strategy is, if we can’t use troops, cause their all tied up, we have to use nukes?
January 13th, 2008 at 10:35 pmThis has Cheney written ALL over it.
Is this what disturbed little boys who put firecrackers up the asses of small animals to watch them suffer grow up to be…armed maniacs who love to blow people up to prove they are the most powerful? I think it is proven by watching the thugs in the crime family in action….bomb third rate countries, overthrow them, and occupy them and steal their resources.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:35 pm“tactical nukes”
That’s what Cheney calls them.
Have you seriously not been listening to Cheney’s statements about an offiensive stike on Iran using “Tactical Nukes?”
“The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing – that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack – but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.”
Are you really unaware of the VP’s intentions?
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=6734
http://direland.typepad.com/direland/2005/08/pat_buchanans_m.html
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/nuke_iran.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/floyd/floyd81.html
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/18834.html
The first ever offensive use of nuclear weapons on planet earth. That’s what Cheney is planning – in your name.
These tactical nukes are stored in his home state – and some were recently sent across the country.
This is REAL.
Anyone who rises to defend this policy is completely insane.
WILD CORNERED ANIMAL STAGE IS UPON US.
The co-conspirators never expected to find themselves in this position.
WMD were going to be planted in Iraq, but Plame’s Brewster Jennings uncovered the plan, and their essential justification for the invasion of Iraq was lost.
They never shifted to a strategy that included VICTORY in Iraq. They had always intended to instigate the Civil War – but their original plan always relied on the justification of WMD.
Now they are stuck – implementing a plan that did not account for the absence of a justified pretext for the war.
Now their backs are to the wall, and they need to bomb Iran soon in order to create yet another distraction.
They are now desperate for a Pretext – the result of which will surely include investigations, arrests, and hanging for treason – if not war crimes trials at the Hague.
WILD CORNERED ANIMALS will do ANYTHING to protect their own skins.
Cheney is plotting a False Flag Terror Attack on US Soil to justify the declaration of Martial Law and the bombing of Iran.
ARREST DICK CHENEY.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:37 pmcLara, I’m not going to spend $35 for your counterpunch.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:38 pmit’s wept, not weaped. Geebus.
The flight officer at Minot AFB knew he had just released a flight with live nukes. The flight officer at Barksdale AFB knew he was in receipt of a flight live nukes. What happened next?
A two star general responsible for the AF region got a phone call. This “general” arranged for two “unnamed” officers to “report” the incident to Gannett and we are off to the races.
Keep in mind the next step. The Military Times cannot print ANYTHING without it being vetted by an officer. Either a full colonel or a brigadier. With a review of this post you will find that no fewer than four generals were involved in the order to get the missiles mounted on the B52 and no fewer than three in ANNOUNCING the event to the world.
This is mutiny. This is brass against brass. The senior officer who vetted the story for release knew he was “covered” by still higher ups [...] The Military Times, a division of Gannett media group, was ORDERED to release the story of the B-52 Nukes. Somebody from Washington DC with many stars gave that order. Somebody with so much juice that they knew they would survive.
The cabal is not popular with the US military. I will suggest that this is hope and that hope is good. The US military are what stand between us and martial law. Every officer signs his commission with the statement to uphold the US constitution. What if most of them do?
http://winterpatriot.blogspot.com/
WMR has learned from military sources on both sides of the Atlantic that there was a definite connection between Israel’s OPERATION ORCHARD and BENT SPEAR involving the B-52 that flew the six nuclear-armed cruise missiles from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota to Barksdale. There is also a connection between these two events as the Pentagon’s highly-classified PROJECT CHECKMATE, a compartmented U.S. Air Force program that has been working on an attack plan for Iran since June 2007, around the same time that Cheney was working on the joint Israeli-U.S. attack scenario on Iran.
Command and control breakdowns involving U.S. nuclear weapons are unprecedented, except for that fact that the U.S. military is now waging an internal war against neo-cons who are embedded in the U.S. government and military chain of command who are intent on using nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive war with Iran.
CHECKMATE and OPERATION ORCHARD would have provided the cover for a pre-emptive U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran had it not been for BENT SPEAR involving the B-52. In on the plan to launch a pre-emptive attack on Iran involving nuclear weapons were, according to our sources, Cheney, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley; members of the CHECKMATE team at the Pentagon, who have close connections to Israeli intelligence and pro-Israeli think tanks in Washington, including the Hudson Institute; British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, a political adviser to Tony Blair prior to becoming a Member of Parliament; Israeli political leaders like Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu; and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, who did his part last week to ratchet up tensions with Iran by suggesting that war with Iran was a probability. Kouchner retracted his statement after the U.S. plans for Iran were delayed.
http://winterparking.blogspot.com/2007/10/wayne-madsen-report-air-force-refused.html
January 13th, 2008 at 10:39 pmAbout NUKING Iran:
“August 1, 2005 Issue
Deep Background
In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing–that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack–but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.”
http://amconmag.com/2005_08_01/article3.html...
Gen. Pace to Troops: Don’t Nuke Iran:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=8678
How to Stop the Planned Nuking of Iran:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=8359
Nuking Iran Without the Dachshund:
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hirsch.php?articleid=8153
No Proof Found of Iran Arms Program
Uranium Traced to Pakistani Equipment:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/22/AR2
UK and USA has looked for middle-east oil interests for 100 years. This is the heart of the conflict.
Everything else is just looking excuses for bombing and eventually invading. All according to the PNAC plans they need their military bases so that interests can be protected.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:40 pm“As Nuremberg showed, differences of race, religion or ideology cannot be tolerated as valid grounds for destroying those who happen to be different. It is NOT permissible ’self-defense’ to slaughter ‘the other’—it is the crime of murder. Aggression, according to the Nuremberg judges and other precedents, is ‘the supreme international crime’ since it includes all the other crimes. There can be no war without atrocities, and unauthorized warfare in violation of the UN Charter is the biggest atrocity of all.”
January 13th, 2008 at 10:41 pmDon’t you ever underestimate the capacity for recklessness of this administration (or its followers’ absolute lack of independent thinking).
Comment by Gregor Samsa
mmm…still I think a nuclear weapon is too much. Another thing, I don’t think this admin does things “recklessly”. I think that they calculated very accurately benefits vs losses. It is a mistake to think they “made a mistake”…of course not.
4,000 soldiers? MMm…ok. We made more chauvinist and military ads
1 million Iraqis…oh, come on, it is only 9/11 but 300 times and its brown people.
Bush is an idiot. Agreed. But Kissinger, Negroponte, Bush I and the REAL HAWKS are not.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:43 pmUh, plunger just woke up.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:44 pmColin Powell in four-letter neo-con ‘crazies’ row
Martin Bright
Sunday September 12, 2004
The Observer
A furious row has broken out over claims in a new book by BBC broadcaster James Naughtie that US Secretary of State Colin Powell described neo-conservatives in the Bush administration as ‘fu#king crazies’ during the build-up to war in Iraq.
Powell’s extraordinary outburst is alleged to have taken place during a telephone conversation with Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. The two became close friends during the intense negotiations in the summer of 2002 to build an international coalition for intervention via the United Nations. The ‘crazies’ are said to be Vice-President Dick Cheney, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1302834,00.html...
Crazy enough to attack its own people?
According to Colin Powell, then US Secretary of State…the answer was a resounding:
“FU%KING CRAZY!”
January 13th, 2008 at 10:44 pmRucerious. What are you some kind of freakin war monger? Is that what this blog is about?
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 10:40 pm
If you’ve read any of my posts, you’d know I’m not.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:45 pmThis article comes from the Marine Corps Times, not
” just bs from some intelligence quadrant”
Why would you, in three consective posts, cite counterpunch. Have you got anything else?
Obama is scheduled to weep as well. Look for it folks, in your TV guide.
Stay on topic much?
January 13th, 2008 at 10:46 pmHow about the recklessness of TP for posting this without any sources????
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 10:45 pm
Are you so fu(king stupid you can’t click a LINK?
January 13th, 2008 at 10:47 pmRU, cLara is, at best, a mental case. There’s no reason to attempt engaging the troll in discourse. Move along.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:47 pmHow about the recklessness of TP for posting this without any sources????
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 10:45 pm
Sources?
Are you really unaware of the VP’s intentions?
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=6734
http://direland.typepad.com/ direland/ 2005/ 08/ pat_buchanans_m.html
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/nuke_iran.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/floyd/floyd81.html
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/18834.html
January 13th, 2008 at 10:48 pmAre you so fu(king stupid you can’t click a LINK?
Comment by RUCerious — January 13, 2008 @ 10:47 pm
This is what it does, RUC. Pretty soon it will start whining about being “abused.”
January 13th, 2008 at 10:49 pmSounds like the military has turned back into the “Hollow Army” of the 1970s.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:50 pmSorry all, I didn’t realizing I was debating with a uberpatriotatious trollite.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:50 pmTHE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE – How’s THAT for a source?
http://www.amconmag.com/2005_08_01/article3.html
In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:51 pmOK, one more futile effort…
See the underlined word report in the first sentence?
Hold your mouse over it and left click, once.
Read.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:51 pmI’d offer to talk it down off the ledge, but really, I don’t care.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:53 pmCheney makes plans to nuke Iran
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/270705nukeiran.htm
Earlier this summer, according to Mr Giraldi, the Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice-President Dick Cheney, tasked Strategic Command to draw up a response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the US. “The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons,” said Mr Giraldi.
That may now have changed, in part because of opposition within the military. “A number of senior air force officers involved were appalled at the implications of what they were doing … that Iran was being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack,” said Mr Giraldi. None were prepared to object and damage their career, he added.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3018375.ece
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002145.php
January 13th, 2008 at 10:55 pmZooeuy
Screw you. I played nice last time. Not now.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 10:50 pm
You played crazy last time, and you’re even more crazy this time. Progress? I think not…
January 13th, 2008 at 10:56 pmAccording to Seymour Hersh, in April’s New Yorker magazine, a faction in the Bush administration has plans to use nuclear bombs against “targets†in Iran. The pretext is to stop the Iranians from developing a nuclear bomb. The precedent breaks sixty years of nuclear peace, to drop the first atomic weapon in anger since the incineration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Sixty years of marches, lobbying, and struggle by people all over the world, opposed to nuclear weapons, might come undone. The President who brought you secret detention camps, torture, spying, and unprovoked invasion of other countries, has plans for a new atomic age of terror. In a world of conspiracy and violence, we’ll cover four major theories of why America will nuke Iran. First: the Jewish people are worried that Iran will wipe out Israel with nuclear missiles, a horrible second Holocaust. Then there are stories that Vice President Cheney has plans to nuke Iran following ANY 911-type incident in America, whether Iran did it or not. Third, we’ll look at the hidden plotline of oil – how Iran is threatening America’s passion to control Middle East oil, and the American dollar itself. Finally, the neo-cons from the Council on Foreign Relations think America shouldn’t stop with a nuclear attack on Iranian atomic plants and labs. These intellectuals, and their banking friends, see a great opportunity. Thinking they now have nuclear supremacy, America should just nuke every atomic weapons site in the world, including the Russians and the Chinese. Total victory, total domination, all published in the March/April issue of the magazine “Foreign Affairs.†We’ll get to that. —-— Let’s begin with Seymour Hersh, speaking with ABC Radio in Australia: [Clip Seymour Hersh from ABCau: “If you really want to guarantee that you’re going to get rid of the major underground facility in Iran that’s believed to be tied to nuclear activity, a place called Natanz, which is seventy five feet underground, if you want to be sure, the only way to be sure is with a tactical nuke. This is one of the options given in a paper by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the Whitehouse. Nobody was advocating it, they were just saying 100 percent guarantee. Where it becomes interesting, the Joint Chiefs, in one of its subsequent papers, wanted to withdraw that option, because of course it’s madness. A nuclear weapon in the Middle East to an Arab Muslim country, my God, – and the White House wouldn’t withdraw [it]. And that’s the issue, that the White House, some people there, still wanted to have this option.†[interview ABC National first week of April, 2006] Mr. Hersh also revealed the Abu Ghraib prison scandal – not to mention his Pulitzer Prize revelations of the Mai Lai massacre during the Vietnam War. Hersh quotes his insider sources saying high level military men are so opposed to any plan to nuke Iran, they will fight it, and possibly resign if unsuccessful. You can find more in Slate Magazine, an article by Fred Kaplan, April 10th, titled “Are We Really Going to Nuke Iran?†This is not labeled a “pre-emptive war,†but a “preventative war.†Fred Kaplan wonders it this is another version of Richard Nixon’s “let them think I’m a madman†strategy in Vietnam. We saw how successful that was. Iran isn’t buying it, and they have a president who also qualifies as a madman. Madmen are threatening the Earth. This nuclear bravado, perhaps purposely leaked, is meant to hammer on Europe, to make them consider sanctions seriously. We saw how well sanctions worked in Iraq. Meanwhile, alleged high-level sources within the U.S. military say there is active resistance to the idea, and that some Generals will resign if the government moves toward the nuclear option. In the event an order is given to drop a nuclear weapon for the first time since Hiroshima, we may all hope a military coup will displace Bush and his neo-con gang. Are times already so desperate, that the world prays the military men will revolt, as they did against Hitler in 1944? Of course, the nuclear story may be a cover to makes us all feel better when the Bush Boys attack Iran with conventional weapons. We’ll be relieved they didn’t start a nuclear war, yet. Others, including Kaplan, worry this may be a juggernaut of planning, long in the works, just like the attack on Iraq, that cannot be stopped. The theory “it’s just another bomb†tosses nuclear weapons into the military tool-kit, as just another weapon. The future result would be incinerated cities, or perhaps an inhabitable radioactive planet.
http://odeo.com/audio/1079998/view
January 13th, 2008 at 10:58 pmChristian Science Monitor:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0410/dailyUpdate.html
CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/10/hersh.access/index.html
how many sources do you want?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:01 pmcLara = derailer.
Flag & Ignore.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:02 pmIf Israel had tactical nukes, would it use them against Iran?
Yaakov Katz, THE JERUSALEM POST
Jan. 8, 2007
http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2007/01/if-israel-had-tactical-nukes-would-it.html
January 13th, 2008 at 11:02 pmWe have a hyperventilating troll in the thread.
Please flag accordingly. You will need to wash your hands afterwards.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:04 pmtill I think a nuclear weapon is too much.
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 10:43 pm
I agree, I think so too. Too bad you and I are not in charge.
I think that they calculated very accurately benefits vs losses.
This is where you and I disagree. I am convinced they miscalculated, and that they really thought the occupation of Iraq would be a “cakewalk”.
It is a mistake to think they “made a mistakeâ€â€¦of course not.
They didn’t make a mistake in that they were looking for an excuse to invade Iraq. Their mistake was in believing Iraqis would hold the door open for them.
They really didn’t expect Iraqis to resist the occupation. That’s how deluded the crowd in the White House really are.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:07 pmPlunger
you miss the point
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:02 pm
The point?
The point is that you work for the government, and you are fully exposed as an agent of disinformation.
This story is thoroughly sourced, and has been covered extensively over the last two years in all major media outlets.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:07 pmWhy Bush Will Nuke Iran
By Paul Craig Roberts
09/26/06 ” Information Clearing House” — – The neoconservative Bush administration will attack Iran with tactical nuclear weapons, because it is the only way the neocons believe they can rescue their goal of US (and Israeli) hegemony in the Middle East.
The US has lost the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Generals in both war theaters are stating their need for more troops. But there are no troops to send.
Bush has tried to pawn Afghanistan off on NATO, but Europe does not see any point in sacrificing its blood and money for the sake of American hegemony. The NATO troops in Afghanistan are experiencing substantial casualties from a revived Taliban, and European governments are not enthralled over providing cannon fodder for US hegemony.
The “coalition of the willing” has evaporated. Indeed, it never existed. Bush’s “coalition” was assembled with bribes, threats, and intimidation. Pervez Musharraf, the American puppet ruler of Pakistan, let the cat out of the bag when he told CBS “60 Minutes” on September 24, 2006, that Pakistan had no choice about joining the “coalition.” Brute coercion was applied. Musharraf said Assistant Secretary of State Richard Armitage told the Pakistani intelligence director that “you are with us” or “be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age.” Armitage is trying to deny his threat, but Dawn Wire Service, reporting from Islamabad on September 16, 2001, on the pressure Bush was putting on Musharraf to facilitate the US attack on Afghanistan, states: “‘Pakistan has the option to live in the 21st century or the Stone Age’ is roughly how US officials are putting their case.”
That Musharraf would volunteer this information on American television is a good indication that Bush has lost the war. Musharraf can no longer withstand the anger he has created against himself by helping the US slaughter his fellow Muslims in Bush’s attempt to exercise US hegemony over the Muslim world. Bush cannot protect Musharraf from the wrath of Pakistanis, and so Musharraf has explained himself as having cooperated with Bush in order to prevent the US destruction of Pakistan: “One has to think and take actions in the interest of the nation, and that’s what I did.” Nevertheless, he said, he refused Bush’s “ludicrous” demand that he arrest Pakistanis who publicly demonstrated against the US: “If somebody’s expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views.”
Bush’s defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan and Israel’s defeat by Hezbollah in Lebanon have shown that the military firepower of the US and Israeli armies, though effective against massed Arab armies, cannot defeat guerillas and insurgencies. The US has battled in Iraq longer than it fought against Nazi Germany, and the situation in Iraq is out of control. The Taliban have regained half of Afghanistan. The King of Saudi Arabia has told Bush that the ground is shaking under his feet as unrest over the American/Israeli violence against Muslims builds to dangerous levels. Our Egyptian puppet sits atop 100 million Muslims who do not think that Egypt should be a lackey of US hegemony. The King of Jordan understands that Israeli policy is to drive every Palestinian into Jordan.
Bush is incapable of recognizing his mistake. He can only escalate. Plans have long been made to attack Iran. The problem is that Iran can respond in effective ways to a conventional attack. Moreover, an American attack on another Muslim country could result in turmoil and rebellion throughout the Middle East. This is why the neocons have changed US war doctrine to permit a nuclear strike on Iran.
Neocons believe that a nuclear attack on Iran would have intimidating force throughout the Middle East and beyond. Iran would not dare retaliate, neocons believe, against US ships, US troops in Iraq, or use their missiles against oil facilities in the Middle East.
Neocons have also concluded that a US nuclear strike on Iran would show the entire Muslim world that it is useless to resist America’s will. Neocons say that even the most fanatical terrorists would realize the hopelessness of resisting US hegemony. The vast multitude of Muslims would realize that they have no recourse but to accept their fate.
Revised US war doctrine concludes that tactical or low-yield nuclear weapons cause relatively little “collateral damage” or civilian deaths, while achieving a powerful intimidating effect on the enemy. The “fear factor” disheartens the enemy and shortens the conflict.
University of California Professor Jorge Hirsch, an authority on nuclear doctrine, believes that an American nuclear attack on Iran will destroy the Non-Proliferation Treaty and send countries in pellmell pursuit of nuclear weapons. We will see powerful nuclear alliances, such as Russia/China, form against us. Japan could be so traumatized by an American nuclear attack on Iran that it would mean the end of Japan’s sycophantic relationship to the US.
There can be little doubt that the aggressive US use of nukes in pursuit of hegemony would make America a pariah country, despised and distrusted by every other country. Neocons believe that diplomacy is feeble and useless, but that the unapologetic use of force brings forth cooperation in order to avoid destruction.
Neoconservatives say that America is the new Rome, only more powerful than Rome. Neoconservatives genuinely believe that no one can withstand the might of the United States and that America can rule by force alone.
Hirsch believes that the US military’s opposition to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran has been overcome by the civilian neocon authorities in the Bush administration. Desperate to retrieve their drive toward hegemony from defeat in Iraq, the neocons are betting on the immense attraction to the American public of force plus success. It is possible that Bush will be blocked by Europe, Russia and China, but there is no visible American opposition to Bush legitimizing the use of nuclear weapons in behest of US hegemony.
It is astounding that such dangerous fanatics have control of the US government and have no organized opposition in American politics.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:10 pmSo let’s look at what the human costs of dropping a tactical nuclear weapon on Iran might entail.
They are astronomical.
“The number of deaths could exceed a million, and the number of people with increased cancer risks could exceed 10 million,” according to a backgrounder by the Union of Concerned Scientists from May 2005.
The National Academy of Sciences studied these earth-penetrating nuclear weapons last year. They could “kill up to a million people or more if used in heavily populated areas,” concluded the report, which was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense.
Physicians for Social Responsibility examined the risks of a more advanced buster-bunker weapon, and it eerily tabulated the toll from an attack on the underground nuclear facility in Esfahan, Iran. “Three million people would be killed by radiation within two weeks of the explosion, and 35 million people in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, would be exposed to increased levels of cancer-causing radiation,” according to a summary of that study in the backgrounder by the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Even if these estimates are off by a factor of two or three, I think we have unquestionably entered genocidal territory. We can only pray that these scientists are profoundly in error. (A much lower estimate is provided by the Oxford Research Group: up to 10,000 immediate deaths, although their report also predicts a much broader and protracted regional war to follow. That would obviously lead to many additional casualties.)
And please remember the overwhelmingly critical fact: we are talking about a threat — if it is one at all — that still lies five or ten years in the future. All these deaths, whatever their number, would result from an attack predicated on a potential threat that does not exist at present, or that will exist in the near future. Many Americans might still look to our “good intentions” and our “exceptionalism” to save them from identifying the savage and inhuman barbarism that the United States would then embody — but much of the rest of the world would not be forgiving or delusional on the required scale. There can never be any kind of forgiveness, even in the smallest degree, for this kind of act.
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2006/04/morality-humanity-and-civilization.html
January 13th, 2008 at 11:11 pmComing late to this thread….I think anyone who has been paying attention knows that airpower is the last arrow in the US quiver. Had Iran been on the agenda, it would have been all air to derail their nuke program, cripple their navy and degrade the RG and their munitions capability. All of that is possible from the air.
The only conceivable use of nukes would be if N. Korea invaded the South.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:12 pm[How an "incident" can be used as an excuse for military aggression-ed.]
Dangerous Crossroads: Tonkin II?
“An incident” in the Persian Gulf could be used by the US as a pretext for war against Iran.
A war pretext incident, similar to “the Gulf of Tonkin Incident”, which triggered the Vietnam war, could be used by US forces, with a view to justifying retaliatory military action against Iran.
In August 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson claimed that North Vietnamese forces had attacked US destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin. The Tonkin incident, which had been manipulated, contributed to unleashing a full-fledged war against Vietnam:
“A phantom attack on two U.S. destroyers cruising the Gulf of Tonkin was staged by the Pentagon and the C.I.A. The bogus attack occurred early in August, 1964. That evening President Lyndon Johnson went on television giving the grim details of the non-attack. Later, however, it was revealed that navy commander James Stockdale flew cover over the Gulf of Tonkin that night. Stockdale disclosed that U.S. ships were firing at phantom targets–targets that didn’t exist. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident that drew the U.S. into the quagmire of Viet Nam simply didn’t happen. Johnson, as presidents so often do, lied to the American people. The result was the rapid passage of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which was the sole legal basis for the Viet Nam War. As a result of Johnson’s lie, three million Vietnamese people and fifty eight thousand U.S. soldiers died.” (Charles Sullivan, Global Research, January 2006)
–Michel Chossudovsky, “US naval war games off the Iranian coastline: A provocation which could lead to War?” (Oct. 24, 2006)
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=2006102
January 13th, 2008 at 11:12 pmYou are stupid.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 10:51 pm
cLara, I thought you were justasking today. This multitasking you’re doing is making you sound crazier than usual.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:12 pm#52, most people know that second person possessive is “your”. “You’re” is the contraction for “you are”.
Many historians have said that Nixon (V-P) wanted Ike to go nuclear against the Vietnamese in 1954 when they were defeating the imperialistic French. Ike had more sense.
Don’t think the US would be the first to use nuclear weapons? Ask the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki what they think?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:13 pmJust the other day we had a major air bombardment on neighborhoods south or Baghad. Was there a murmer of concern raised in America? Did anyone complain while waiting on line at Lowes or Home Depot to pay for their wallpaper or painting supplies? No? No one complained.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
There were lots of complaints just not on Fox News or any of the MSM shows. Just because you get your talking points that nobody was outraged doesn’t make it so.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:15 pmThey really didn’t expect Iraqis to resist the occupation. That’s how deluded the crowd in the White House really are.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
I don’t think Iraqis were ever an issue for the WH. Since 1990, Iraq has been savagely attacked with bombs and sanctions that have starved to death thousands of children. Were the people of Granada an issue for Reagan? Were Guatemalans, Salvadorians, Nicaraguans, Panamanians (for Bush I)? Nope, never.
As long as the oilpipes keep pumping, the WH has a big smile on the face. They see such a threat from Iraqis that they are building the biggest embassy and 14 permanent bases.
Yes, of course, I think that 4,000 soldiers dead are not good for them (in their minds), however, I think they are perfecting propaganda and see to what extent the people of the US won’t protest forcefully. If things get out of hand, the WH will make deals with the terrorist leaders, as they always do.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:16 pmShut up
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:13 pm
Make me, Sybil.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:16 pmThe only conceivable use of nukes would be if N. Korea invaded the South.
Comment by Keltoi at Night
‘Cause we really don’t care if they’re irradiated through the ground water. Freedom requires sacrifice – others’ sacrifice, of course.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:18 pm#71
You’re an ass. Everyone mis types but you are just a newbie cutting your teeth on learning how to abuse people with put downs. You’ve got a lot to learn. And misplaced apostrophes don’t get you points.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:16 pm
Sorry clarabelle you’re wrong again. Keith is a regular and you’re the newbie. Do you know anything about anything? That’s rhetorical.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:19 pmWell Clarabelle, I’m not a newbie and why don’t you try addressing the other two parts of #71—-about Nixon wanting to go nuclear against the Vietnamese trying to defend their own country and about the US being the only ones in history to go nuclear?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:21 pmThe only conceivable use of nukes would be if N. Korea invaded the South.
Comment by Keltoi at Night
Again, why?
I think South Korea could answer back and then the UN Security Council would decide the matter at hand.
I don’t see the US on the picture, do you?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:21 pmIf you have something of substance to contribute, do. Otherwise shut up.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @
Please follow your own advice.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:22 pmYou’ve shown your stupidity clearly.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
You’re looking in the mirror again clarabelle. And you are showing your own ass to everybody including yourself apparently.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:23 pmclarabelle believe SHE’S the topic of every thread she’s on.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:25 pmClarabelle, I think vp Nixon wanting to go nuclear in 1954 and the US being the only ones in history to go nuclear are relevant to the thread. Can you say something without name-calling and slurs?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:26 pmIf things get out of hand, the WH will make deals with the terrorist leaders, as they always do.
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 11:16 pm
What you say in this post is what I was talking about earlier.
The Iraqis only entered the White House’s calculations as spectators of the invasion. They never thought Iraqis could, would organise themselves and shoot back.
As for making deals with “terrorists”, this administration already is: They have cut deals with some of the militias they were fighting not too long ago. Hence the “success” of this “surge”.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:26 pmIran-contra was certainly making deals with terrorists—-at both ends!!! And breaking specific laws!
January 13th, 2008 at 11:30 pmStill waiting for you to respond to Nixon wanting to nuke the Viet freedom fighters and the US being the only ones in history to go nuclear.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:31 pmI’m talking about this immediate piece of propaganda. Do you questionw here your propaganda comes from? Have you ever considered that the same side is playing you both ways? Oh wait I know that’s toooo difficult for muffy. Sorry the world is so simple, just like you think. Or not
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:26 pm
I question EVERYTHING. And we don’t need you to tell us how TP works. And frankly your opinion of the situation is meaningless to everybody here. We all know WHAT and WHO you are.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:32 pmHence the “success†of this “surgeâ€.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
So, how would you answer the question:
Is the WH worried about the 4 years, trillion dollars and 4,000 dead soldiers fiasco?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:33 pmWe’ve already used a lot of depleted uranium. Not as spectacular as a mushroom cloud, but plenty of deadly fallout. Seems to be no limits to our brutality.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:33 pmPakistan is who we should have been worried about these last 7 years—-not Iraq or Iran. They actually have nukes and delivery devices. They have a dictatorship. They funded and trained al Qaeda and the 9/11 men.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:34 pmcLara still hasn’t figured out there’s a link in TP’s story.
Jeebus…
January 13th, 2008 at 11:35 pmShayne, you’re a fat assed dope.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
And you base this on what evidence?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:37 pmIs the WH worried about the 4 years, trillion dollars and 4,000 dead soldiers fiasco?
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
Only inasmuch as it can cost the GOP control over the White House and Congress.
If that is the frame, then yes, very worried. Otherwise, they don’t lose any sleep at all.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:38 pmKeith
I base my supposition that Shayne is a fat assed dope on the same sources used for this thread
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:37 pm
See? Not a clue.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:43 pmOnly inasmuch as it can cost the GOP control over the White House and Congress.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Ok. That’s a good reason, one would think…but do you really think Republicans are gonna loose sleep hours if they don’t win those positions?
Dems have not been exactly critic about the development of Iraq…they are giving them free reigns, so to speak.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:44 pmIt does seem of some note that the Marine Corps Times thinks the military is stretched so thin that our options are narrowed down to air strikes including nukes. Saying that the troops are stretched too thin to respond when needed is not the kind of thin one expects to read in the Marine Corps Times.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:45 pmSee? Not a clue.
Comment by Zooey
Have you noticed that cLara is doing nothing to contribute to the topic of the thread but she immediately engages on personal insults?
A derailer. Ignore.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:47 pmHey Zooster,
January 13th, 2008 at 11:47 pmClarabelle is making it sound as if it is just an opinion piece by the Marine Times, but the paper is quoting many of the top leaders of the military and our budget process. I actually READ the article.
The republicans are just about ready to deploy a ‘KDO’ bomb-”Kills Democrats Only”….then the’ll blame it on the Clintons..
January 13th, 2008 at 11:48 pmcLara is another P sockpuppet. set phasors to ignore.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:48 pmA derailer. Ignore.
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 11:47 pm
Sorry. :(
January 13th, 2008 at 11:50 pmbut do you really think Republicans are gonna loose sleep hours if they don’t win those positions?
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 11:44 pm
Not as much as they should, but yes, they will lose an hour or two of “beauty sleep”.
Remember that whoever controls Congress controls the strings to the purse. It gives whatever party is in the majority a say on where the funds go (earmarks aka “pork”).
Dems have not been exactly critic about the development of Iraq…
I believe that, ultimately, this is about American control over the natural resources in the Middle East. Democrats might not like how it was achieved (even as the US still struggles with a stubborn insurgency in Iraq), but at the end of the say this is about the US’ “vital interests” in the region.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:51 pmSorry. :(
Comment by Zooey
Now go to your room…!!! (And wait for me) ;)
January 13th, 2008 at 11:51 pmHey Zooster,
Clarabelle is making it sound as if it is just an opinion piece by the Marine Times, but the paper is quoting many of the top leaders of the military and our budget process. I actually READ the article.
Comment by Keith — January 13, 2008 @ 11:47 pm
Me too. That’s how we can tell it’s worth paying attention to.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:52 pmNow go to your room…!!! (And wait for me) ;)
Comment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 11:51 pm
**running to room**
;)
January 13th, 2008 at 11:53 pmbut at the end of the say this is about the US’ “vital interests†in the region.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
And we’re done!
Oh, I envy your clarity.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:53 pmcLara is another P sockpuppet. set phasors to ignore.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — January 13, 2008 @ 11:48 pm
Couldn’t we set lasers to destroy instead?
January 13th, 2008 at 11:53 pmMaybe you are useful to Homeland Security. Maybe you’re a ‘real’ patriot.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:36 pm
Even paranoids have enemies cLark. Watch your back.
BOO!
January 13th, 2008 at 11:55 pmClarabelle is making it sound as if it is just an opinion piece by the Marine Times, but the paper is quoting many of the top leaders of the military and our budget process. I actually READ the article.
Comment by Keith — January 13, 2008 @ 11:47 pm
cLara IS the missing link.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:57 pmShayne
Watch your back.
Comment by cLara
This is a serious violation of the Terms of Use and a threat that should be suited. Ignore and Report.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:58 pmFYI, Shanye does not have a fat ass. She is actually quite trim for a broad with a daughter, 22.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:58 pm…
well, crap… i just read this headline, after refreshing the homepage…
here i thought i was going to sleep tight after reading through the
play/soap opera that is the SNOW thread…
visions of nukes to keep me restless now…
g’nite anyway…
January 14th, 2008 at 12:00 amWatch your back.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:55 pm
Very original. Now, why don’t you try actually READING the article instead of babbling nonsense.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:00 amComment by Juan C. — January 13, 2008 @ 11:53 pm
Clarity or cynicism? ;-)
This is the business of empire we’re talking about, Juan.
Certain things need to be done for the empire to survive. It is Iraq today, but yesterday it was the LatinAmerican subcontinent.
Although this time Uncle Sam might have bitten a bit more than he can chew.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:01 amThe Marine Corps Times has a well-know Left-wing bias [sarcasm].
January 14th, 2008 at 12:01 amFYI, Shanye does not have a fat ass. She is actually quite trim for a broad with a daughter, 22.
Comment by WaltTheMan
Links, please.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:02 amHey cLara, how many posts do you need to get to before you do your little celebratory dance? Sorry I messed up your fun as justasking on the other thread you were closer to your mission on that one.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:03 amThe Marine Corps Times has a well-know Left-wing bias [sarcasm].
Comment by Keith — January 14, 2008 @ 12:01 am
Oh yeah….the other left. ;)
January 14th, 2008 at 12:04 amIsn’t the term “broad” derogatory?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:05 amWhy does the Marine Corps Times hate America?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:05 amAlthough this time Uncle Sam might have bitten a bit more than he can chew.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Chomsky said that US empire would be over in about 200 years… I better pack my things.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:06 amZooey
Try responding rather than giving your witless witty comments. You really aren’t very smart.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:37 pm
Heh…you are new around here, aren’t you?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:06 amYou know things are bad when the Marine Corps Times is reporting on the fall of the US Empire.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:08 amIf you’d just once in the last 5 hours at the least state maybe I’d bother to respond. But you’re not worthy. You’re too stupid and indulgent for to bother explaining to you how stupid you are.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:05 am
So cLara, English is your second language, right?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:12 amWow, been gone awhile…When did they let Rachel out.? Guess the nurse will be around to doll out her med’s soon….Ignore her while she hide’s under her bed….Blessings..P.S. Thank’s for the post a few day’s ago Shayne..
January 14th, 2008 at 12:13 amComment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:07 am
Did you know that the Marine Times thinks a nuclear strike is possible?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:14 amThe USA burned very brightly and noisily, like flash powder. Now we’re done, we’ve burned out. Our democracy is in tatters, our leaders are fascist pigs, our representatives are greedy idiots, our citizenry is fat and happy in front of their plasma screens. It’s all over but the third-rate status, and that’s well on its way.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:16 amChomsky said that US empire would be over in about 200 years…
Comment by Juan C. — January 14, 2008 @ 12:06 am
I don’t know how Chomsky settled for that figure, but the British empire lasted a lot longer than that, and the US has been building on its hegemony (first regionally, then abroad) for about that long now.
So, the US empire “long gone” in about 200 years? Methinks it’s not very likely.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:17 amAlways great to hear from you #1.
Do you think this is the reincarnation of Rachel?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:18 amSo, the US empire “long gone†in about 200 years? Methinks it’s not very likely.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — January 14, 2008 @ 12:17 am
I agree with Chomsky. Only this time, it’s being done from within, by stealth. Why does Bush have 95,000 acres in Paraguay?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:19 amIt’s all over but the third-rate status, and that’s well on its way.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — January 14, 2008 @ 12:16 am
Our fascist leaders have led us down the path Hitler led Germany. RIP USA.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:19 am#165 Yep!…Someone smuggled in a lap top and they took off her restraint’s while changing her diaper and untill she get’s her med’s and TP wake’s up to all the delete messages I sent she’s here…LOL..Poor dear realy crave’s any kind of attention….How appropiate a bombing thread…Been down all day and I came into this, another appropiate…..Blessings
January 14th, 2008 at 12:23 amComment by Gregor Samsa — January 14, 2008 @ 12:17 am
Some economists say if the US continues with massive budget ($9.1 trillion so far) and trade deficits plus the baby boomers’ Medicare and SocialSecurity———that in about 25-40 years we could be declared a failed state and taken over by the World Bank with them managing our economy!
January 14th, 2008 at 12:23 amWhy does Bush have 95,000 acres in Paraguay?
Comment by Lefty Patriot — January 14, 2008 @ 12:19 am
Is there brush to clear?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:23 amOoh tell me Zooey and Keith, who exactly pays for your health insurance.?
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:20 am
How is that relevant to the US Marines letting us know that our leaders are about to destroy our country?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:24 amI don’t know how Chomsky settled for that figure, but the British empire lasted a lot longer than that, and the US has been building on its hegemony (first regionally, then abroad) for about that long now.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Maybe I’m frying Chomsky here, but according to a Professor, he said that. Now, the Empire doesn’t crumble and is gone forever, look at Spain, UK, etc. I think nowadays the world is more multilateral than before WWII: China, Russia, Brazil and India. US & UK. Europe.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:25 amNO WHERE…it’s a bunch of typical bs and blah blah that SOMEBODY decided could be spun into war rhetoric. AND MY QUESTION IS WHY? And WHY TP>
Because it’s a logical assumption. Our leaders are every bit as batshit insane as you are, clarabell.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:29 amLefty, your patriotism is as vacuous as your bs
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:29 am
Your head is a vacuum.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:30 ami should be in bed… just found this though…
I have a feeling airstrikes are imminent.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — January 13, 2008 @ 3:14 pm
damn… but then, we all know what they’re capable of…
i’m done now…
January 14th, 2008 at 12:30 am“C”: Definitely have that vitriolic condition checked out by a medical professional. Acrimony causes hypertension which, in turn, may result in ’steam coming out your ears’ (where your brain used to be).
January 14th, 2008 at 12:31 amLefty Patriot, Keith,
I guess we will have to wait and see. I still think it very unlikely that the US will simply collapse in less than 200 years. It’s too big an economy, its currency is used for international transactions, and it monopolizes too many resources from too many places. Not to mention the military bases.
But then, the Soviet Union died an unceremonious death…
January 14th, 2008 at 12:32 am2nd paragraph of the article, vacuum-head. Direct quote. TP is doing the world a favor by getting this out to a wider audience. You’ve spent how many hours here being a moron? Sucks to be you, we can see that.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:32 amIt’s too big an economy, its currency is used for international transactions, and it monopolizes too many resources from too many places. Not to mention the military bases.
But then, the Soviet Union died an unceremonious death…
Comment by Gregor Samsa — January 14, 2008 @ 12:32 am
The economy is already being marginalized by the Euro, and more players are abandoning the dollar. The monopoly on stuff will end as the dollar shrivels. We will end up being a broke country with soldiers stationed around the world, waiting for checks and rations for weeks at a time. Our military will be tossed out as we weaken. If we don’t get a strong liberal president with a decent dem majority, it will be very difficult to reverse all of this.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:36 am…how does that support the topic of this thread which relies on the Marine Corps times for saying that we’re on the verge of a nuclear war.
Comment by cLara — January 13, 2008 @ 11:39 pm
vs.
No where in that article does it say we are on the verge of nuclear war…
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:27 am
Huh?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:36 amWe don’t believe your bs. You are finished.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:35 am
You have no power here, or anyplace else. You are finished. Once everybody decides to ignore you, which will be sooner than later, you’ll just be little bytes of shame and embarrassment, topped by lunacy.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:37 amLefty you are one facist pig.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:34 am
And you can’t spel.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:38 amLefty you are one facist pig.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:34 am
I doubt it. fascist pigs would never tell the plain, unvarnished truth. that takes a lefty patriot, like me.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:38 amMost likely you are a day laborer who has no respect for himself.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:39 am
ah, a classic. Troll projection.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:40 amMaybe I’m frying Chomsky here, but according to a Professor, he said that.
Comment by Juan C. — January 14, 2008 @ 12:25 am
I am not really sure whether Chomsky said that or not. At any rate, he is not an oracle and I disagree with that time line.
I think nowadays the world is more multilateral than before WWII: China, Russia, Brazil and India. US & UK. Europe.
And I think the neo-cons’ wet dream of world domination and supreme hegemony is born out of ignorance and arrogance (you are shocked, I know): They really believe the US can be the world’s only superpower, unchallenged, until the end of times.
The forget one of the earliest world superpowers (the Persian Empire) went up in flames after losing a crucial battle to an up and coming Macedonian nobody…
January 14th, 2008 at 12:40 amI guess we will have to wait and see. I still think it very unlikely that the US will simply collapse in less than 200 years. It’s too big an economy, its currency is used for international transactions, and it monopolizes too many resources from too many places. Not to mention the military bases.
But then, the Soviet Union died an unceremonious death…
Comment by Gregor Samsa — January 14, 2008 @
Still, the Euro is a competing currency that is gaining favor, our economy produces very little in actual products, our debt is high, and as the article in the Marine Corps Times states our military is stretched thin due to actual over use in Iraq or due to underfunding because of the financial drain of the war. Seems similar to what USSR went through with its Afgan adventure.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:40 amThey would if they were so stupid and frightened that they would sell their own mother for a Church’s fried chicken.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:40 am
Your mother is only worth $4.00? She was worth $8.00 before she had you. At least, that’s what your uncle paid.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:42 amComment by Lefty Patriot — January 14, 2008 @ 12:37 am
Is it me or a certain somebody has no reading comprehension skills?
Do you have any idea of what the troll is talking about?
Wait, don’t tell me. I am not really that interested… ;-)
January 14th, 2008 at 12:44 amSeems similar to what USSR went through with its Afgan adventure.
Comment by jb — January 14, 2008 @ 12:40 am
The USA doesn’t have to fail, but we are not doing much to prevent it. Can you imagine what the stress on the economy and military will be if we go up against Iran? they’ll kick the shit out of us, and if we go nuclear, the whole world will turn on us, really big. And we have no manufacturing base to speak of, and we’ve raised a genertaion of fat, lazy weaklngs, much to our shame. Here we are in a “war” that’s been pitched at every citizen every day as a positive thing, but recruitment is way down, the standards are low enough for cLara to join up, and we’re still way understaffed. Doesn’t look very good.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:46 amSeems similar to what USSR went through with its Afgan adventure.
Comment by jb — January 14, 2008 @ 12:40 am
That is exactly what was in the back of my head when I was typing my reply to Lefty and Keith.
As I said, I guess we will have to wait and see.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:46 amEverybody knows it’s not a real Ceasar salad if you leave the anchovies out.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:49 amDoesn’t look very good.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — January 14, 2008 @ 12:46 am
Might actually be a good sign that the Marine corps Times is taking such a realistic view of things. Like Gregor says, I guess we will have to wait and see.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:51 amMaybe we could hire Hessian troops to augment our Blackwater mercenaries.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:52 amWait and see my ass. Who you think you’re foolling? Who??
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:48 am
we’ve seen your ass. everything you type comes out of it. is your mama still $4.00? that’s too much, no wonder you’re so lonely.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:52 amMaybe we could hire Hessian troops to augment our Blackwater mercenaries.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — January 14, 2008 @ 12:52 am
Well, there’s the 800-pound gorilla. What do we do with those monsters?
January 14th, 2008 at 12:53 amMaybe we could hire Hessian troops to augment our Blackwater mercenaries.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — January 14, 2008 @ 12:52 am
Or offer military service as a path to citizenship.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:54 amWait, don’t tell me. I am not really that interested… ;-)
Comment by Gregor Samsa — January 14, 2008 @ 12:44 am
classic mr P sockpuppet, a drooling psychopath with a laptop. melting down in the next few minutes. cheap (really cheap) entertainment on the internet.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:55 am800 lb. gorillas would be very difficult to control, but if we could get 2 or 3 hundred of them to storm the enemy lines before the Hessians and Blackwater charge, I’m sure the Iranians would be totally surprised.
:)
January 14th, 2008 at 12:56 amANd lefty patriot is his toilet paper boy.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 12:55 am
I would never steal your job, p.
January 14th, 2008 at 12:56 amReading the posts so far, I’d say they’re smoking your ass (I don’t want a toke off that, thanks).
January 14th, 2008 at 12:58 amComment by Lefty Patriot — January 14, 2008 @ 12:55 am
No kidding.
It’s almost painful to watch. I stopped trying to make sense of its posts. Not that I was overly interested to begin with…
January 14th, 2008 at 12:59 amAmerica has gone from a beacon of hope to a warmongering pariah state with a leader that is at home with a bunch of kings and authoritarians.
I hope he stays in Saudi Arabia.
-GSD
January 14th, 2008 at 1:01 amwe’re in a war of attrition for our country. the corporate dems (that’s all of them to some extent) will only slow things a bit, partly because they’re sellouts, and partly because each time the Repigs get in, they screw things up more and more, making them harder to fix. They only allow Dems in to rebuild the economy, so they can steal it again. So it may take another 50 years, maybe less.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:02 amA 5 year-old could write a better sentence than that. Somebody fetch a 5 year-old.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:03 amnote the meltdown beginning, p can’t control the twitching and is posting gibberish. I love this part.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:03 ama couple of months ago I had this troll howling at the moon, frothing at the mouth and absolutely livid with rage. Good times.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:05 amThere you go…
January 14th, 2008 at 1:05 amCome on, cLara, TP quoted the article word-for-word. Is your babysitter illiterate too?
January 14th, 2008 at 1:07 amSo, is the latest troll smarter than a fifth grader?
I don’t think so….
January 14th, 2008 at 1:08 amwe talk the talk and we walk the walk and if you can’t do it, get lost
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 1:07 am
I rest my case.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:08 amBut do you think they’re cute? If you don’t find them physically attractive, the relationship will never work.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:09 amBUt don’t pertend to talk about foreign policy.
Comment by cLara — January 14, 2008 @ 1:09 am
as long as you don’t PERtend to speak English. did you just come over the border?
January 14th, 2008 at 1:10 amthis is like playing badminton with a blind drunk. poor cLara doesn’t know whether to shit or go blind, so does both. better than TV.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:11 amI don’t want to set the world on fire. I just want to start a flame in your heart.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:12 amFor the sake of the blog, I hope he goes blind. If he shits in here, I won’t be coming back for a while.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:13 amWell, p, thanks for the laughs at your expense. I’m out. Night all.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:14 amThis is really funny.
First I am CIA (living a James Bond kind of life), then military intelligence, then have connections to Moscow.
LOL
This troll has been watching too many spy movies.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:14 amI am not protesting. I am laughing.
Do go on. Unadulterated lunacy -like yours- is rather hard to come by, without having to visit the local asylum.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:17 amcLara, since you’re not going to take your meds, could we have them?
January 14th, 2008 at 1:26 amcLara just because we’re all more intelligent than you are doesn’t mean were part of the “intellligence community”. I’d explain it to you but I haven’t got 3 days to spare.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:31 amComment by Shayne — January 14, 2008 @ 1:31 am
Isn’t the troll cute? It actually thinks I am military intelligence.
Must be what its caregivers scare it if it doesn’t eat its vegetables, or get in bed on time: “Go to bed now or
the boogeymanmilitary intelligence will take you away!”In a way, I think it’s trying to compliment me…. lol….
January 14th, 2008 at 1:36 amplunger wrote, “Cheney is plotting a False Flag Terror Attack on US Soil to justify the declaration of Martial Law and the bombing of Iran.”
Is there any indication of this besides guessing? I’d like to see it. I don’t doubt it, but I have not heard this said or seen it indicated.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:55 amIIRC, this was a policy back in the Bad Old Days with the Soviets poised to shove thousands of T-60s through the Fulda Gap. For obvious reasons it was a last resort to drop tactical nukes on a battlefield.
I don’t see any nation outside of China that would warrant something like this, and even in the most dire situations it would be a huge step to take given how easy escalation becomes.
January 14th, 2008 at 2:06 amplunger wrote, “Cheney is plotting a False Flag Terror Attack on US Soil to justify the declaration of Martial Law and the bombing of Iran.â€
Is there any indication of this besides guessing? I’d like to see it. I don’t doubt it, but I have not heard this said or seen it indicated.
Comment by shellyT — January 14, 2008 @ 1:55 am
Shelly,
You haven’t seen it indicated?
I’m sure you’ve heard more than one mainstream media newstalker query Presidential candidates as to what their response would be if a nuke were to be detonated in a major US City.
That IS an indication that a plan is being floated. These MSM talkers don’t write these questions themselves. They are purposeful.
Cheney’s plan calls for something worse than 9/11 here in America.
It may be dirty bombs, or it may be Jumbo Jets (again flown by wire utilizing Dov Zakheim’s Sysplan technology) flown into reactor containment vessels in some major US cities. The Chernobyl effect…in concert with a (Wag The Dog) outbreak of Bird Flu.
“Stay In Your Homes! Anyone caught on the streets will be shot by Blackwater and ICE enforcement squads.”
The Poppie Bush Crime Family and their co-conspirators have so many crimes to coverup that it has no choice other than to prevent any elections from ever occurring again in The United States.
They are wild cornered animals.
Make no mistake, a Fascist Dictatorship has inserted itself at the head of your government, and they are not going to stop until they have destroyed this Democratic Republic. George Bush Sr. is effectively the President, Cheney is the VP and Shrub is the puppet. David Rockefeller controls the entire game from a building called “The tower Of Power.”
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pGiRkJqZU9s
January 14th, 2008 at 4:56 amCouncil On Foreign Relations:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vo5CZvD3-QM
Dare to ask about the CFR?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nhj-FdS8Fbk&feature=related
The creation of the Shadow Government:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hQZ56hkKOlk&feature=related
January 14th, 2008 at 5:12 amAaron Russo reveal the truth about the CFR and Rockefeller:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA
January 14th, 2008 at 5:21 amNicholas Rockefeller and the big lie:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=MGF6DDd8Uto
January 14th, 2008 at 5:37 amYou can’t have “some degree” of nuclear strike.
176 good_golly: your post is feeble.
January 14th, 2008 at 2:03 pmplunger, I think cLara got deleted/banned and came back as shellyT, don’t expect her to understand what you’re saying.
January 14th, 2008 at 2:25 pm