Th sbvrtr s n pr wth th prts tdy.
[Editor: ignore=off]"Congress Must Admit Its Mistake and Repeal the Authorization to Go to War"
The War Funding Bill By Rep. RON PAUL
Quote:
"...It's amazing to me that this Congress is more intimidated by political propagandists and special interests than the American electorate, who sent a loud, clear message about the war in November. The large majority of Americans now want us out of Iraq..."
"...In 2004, bin Laden stated that Al Qaeda's goal was to bankrupt the United States. His second in command, Zawahari, is quoted as saying that the 9/11 attack would cause Americans to, "come and fight the war personally on our sand where they are within rifle range."..."
"...We have totally failed to adapt to modern warfare. We're dealing with a small, nearly invisible enemy--an enemy without a country, a government, an army, a navy, an air force, or missiles. .."
"...Only with the complicity of Congress have we become a nation of pre-emptive war, secret military tribunals, torture, rejection of habeas corpus, warrantless searches, undue government secrecy, extraordinary renditions, and uncontrollable spying on the American people. The greatest danger we face is ourselves: what we are doing in the name of providing security for a people made fearful by distortions of facts. Fighting over there has nothing to do with preserving freedoms here at home. More likely the opposite is true..."
End quote
The Gutless Mini-Politics of the Congressional Democrats
Quote:
"...Despite polls showing that 6 in 10 Americans want the U.S. out of Iraq asap, the best that this crew can come up with is a call-not binding, or course-for the president to pull out the troops by next spring or even summer..."
"...At the rate things have been going, it would also be perhaps 1000 more dead Americans, 14,000 more gravely wounded Americans, and 100-150,000 more dead Iraqis later..."
"...And in offering this limp request, Congress is in the process of approving the appropriation of another $122 million in spending on the War in Iraq and the War in Afghanistan..."
"...And those subpoenas. Congress is boldly demanding the appearance of Bush's Rasputin Karl Rove and his ousted legal adviser Harriet Meirs. Fine as far as it goes, but what about the clear evidence at the Libby trial that his regent, Dick Cheney, orchestrated a smear campaign against administration critic Joe Wilson and his CIA wife Valerie Plame, obstructed the Justice Department investigation into that effort, and lied about what he had done? Shouldn't there be subpoenas issued to the Veep himself and all of his staff?..."
"...Unless they don't start challenging the Bush administration directly and forcefully, Congressional Democrats aren't going to do bupkis in two years and people are going to start wondering why they were voted in in the first place. People might even start to think seriously about letting the Democratic Party just wither away..."
End quote
The US kidnapped, and later released under Iraqi demand, two Iranian diplomats a few months ago and nobody cared. Meanwhile the UN Security Council has been set up by the US to vote on more Iranian (watered-down) sanctions tomorrow. President Ahmadinejad wants to speak to the UNSC but wasn't granted a visa by the US until today. His speech, should he be allowed to give it, will be interesting since Iran is doing nothing illegal in enriching uranium. The president of the UNSC, from South Africa, says that he feels like he was steamrollered into this vote. The sanctions have been hammered out by the 'big six' and are being flashed in front of the other nine members of the UNSC just now. The sanctions don't really do much, and give Iran sixty more days to do what the Israeli/US cabal dictates. Bush can use them for propaganda purposes, of course. In the meantime the Iranian Navy is conducting naval warfare exercises in the close confines of the Persian Gulf and the place is a tinderbox.
Posted by Don Bacon at March 23, 2007 09:31 AMY my b crrct; f th wtrs wr n dspt, thn th mprl Hbrs wld ntntnlly prvk sttn by srchng nd hrssng rnn vssls n th dsptd r.
Th mssng lmnt s tht w dn't hv Tnkn scrpt, yt, n trms f n mprl shp bng trgtd, r strck. Bt, th srls jst prcdd, nt lng g, n tw cptrd sldrs. Ths, th bttm ln s wht frm f nvctn th pwr lt wll chs.
Mnwhl, my sggstn t th N dps s t pss rsltn t kp th mprls t f dsptd wtrs, r t lst try. Prhps thy my b bl t sv sm fc, lk tht N gy tht pntd t tht srl/rb-srl ctzn ntrctn s sbjctd t 'prtd' cndtns.
W wn't hv t wt lng.
[Editor: ignore=off]Considering that waterway has been disputed between Iraq and Iran since 1935, this kind of thing isn't surprising, or new. The same sort of thing happened in May '04, and thank goodness the Brits understand diplomacy enough to diffuse the situation. Let's hope the cowboy in DC doesn't decide that this is his chance to throw some bombs.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 23, 2007 10:46 AMThe timing is interesting given the UNSC vote and Ahmadinejad's possible visit. Why now? Are the Revolutionary Guards trying to embarrass their president, are they just provoking the US through their Brit poodles, do they really want war, or what?
Posted by Don Bacon at March 23, 2007 12:48 PMOK, Bush, you got your Gulf of Tehrankin incident, bring it on if you think you still can.
Posted by TIKI AL at March 23, 2007 03:30 PMDn, wndrng jst hw shrwd hmdnjd my b; cld t b tht h wntd t s th Brtsh strk t pstpn th N spch, f nly t smply drg hs ft whl th S rdly drgs t's ft t grnt th vs? H hs hs lls tryng t st p nthr spch tm.
f s, ths gy s smrt; dn't knw mch bt hm, thr thn h's tgh.
[Editor: ignore=off]tk, crp, dn't gv hm ny ncntv! H'll lstn t vryn nd nyn tht wll tll hm wht h wnts t hr, fr crtn.
[Editor: ignore=off]Remember the USS Turner Joy and the Gulf of Tonkin incident? I don't believe anything the Brits or Bush says. Just why couldn't the ship that was carrying the Marines before they departed in the RIBs intercede on their behalf??
There are too many unanswered questions here.
Posted by Chief at March 23, 2007 05:56 PMI think we may be well and truly fucked, whether this incident is the cause of worse action or not. I think it's fairly clear, quite unlike Saddam, Ahmadinejad wants this as bad as Bush and the neo-cons, and why wouldn't he? If it is contained to Iran and Iraq, and doesn't spread throughout the Mid-East, the U.S. is fairly powerless. Yes, we can bomb the crap out Iran. And then what? We're not going to be able to force a regime change through bombing. Maybe some civilians die, maybe -- although I doubt this -- the U.S. derails Iran's nuclear plans, whatever they may be, for a while. Bad things, but the upside is much greater. The U.S. will be revealed as more impotent than ever. The U.S. position will be further weakened in Iraq, at best, and Iran's greatly strengthened. The international system, such as it is, will be further weakened if not wrecked, leaving Iran to gather even more allies. And, most important, the Iranian regime and Ahmadinejad's position in particular will be much stronger domestically than it was before any military action. I really believe Ahmadinejad wants this as bad as Bush. Look at recent Iranian actions, you tell me what Iran is saying. I think they're saying, "Come on, yankee, let's do this."
Posted by Brian Bell at March 23, 2007 10:06 PMThis isn’t the first instance of Iran trying to abduct coalition forces. Back in September a Cavalry unit from the 101st Airborne Division were led into an Iranian ambush by untrustworthy Iraqi Soldiers.
Posted by Danny J Norman at March 27, 2007 06:00 PMI tell you if I was the commander of that frigate, I would have warned the Iranians once with two shots, and if they proceeded, sunk all 15 of those Iranian boats as they approached the commercial vessel.
And if Iran cried publicly, I would then simply deny the incident ever occurred.
But hopefully letting Iran make a mockery of Western power will show all the wannabes how reasonable we can be - and we can then all succumb to fascist Islamic rule.
I wonder how tolerant of liberal views Ahmadinejad would be?
Posted by KarlB at March 27, 2007 08:22 PM