Who Wants To Bomb Iran? Democrats, Not Republicans, Says Seymour Hersh.
"There is no pressure whatsoever" coming from the leading Democratic presidential candidates demanding that Bush negotiate with the Iranians rather than bombing them."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener/who-wants-to-bomb-iran-_b_67229.html
Posted by Judith at October 6, 2007 04:14 AMWarner's Robinov Bitchslaps Film Women; Gloria Allred Calls For Warner's Boycott
Warner Bros Honcho Decrees: No More Films With Female Leads
Jeff Robinov, head of Warner Bros. has made a new decree that "We are no longer doing movies with women in the lead". Seems he blames women for the low gross receipts.
Yeah Jeff, couldn't be anything other than those damn women. Why does it feel like we are backsliding as women in the good old US of A? Jeff and Ann Coulter should meet one another.
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/warners-robinoff-gets-in-catfight-with-girls/
Posted by Judith at October 6, 2007 04:30 AMSen. Clinton's primary adviser, Mark Penn, is the
worldwide President and CEO of Burson-Marsteller. The firm's lobbying subsidiary BKSH helped Blackwater's top executive, Erik Prince, prepare for his congressional testimony this week. WTF?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3694881&page=1
Posted by Judith at October 6, 2007 04:51 AMWho Wants To Bomb Iran? Democrats, Not Republicans, Says Seymour Hersh.
But the same article says the following,
As a result, according to Hersh, the focus of the plans to bomb Iran has shifted from an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities to an emphasis on the famed "surgical strikes" on Revolutionary Guard Corps facilities in Tehran and elsewhere. The White House hopes it can win public support for this kind of campaign by arguing that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is responsible for the deaths of Americans in Iraq.
Last time I checked the White House had a guy with an R after his name living in it.
Posted by snark at October 6, 2007 06:42 AMSy is right about no pressure from the Dems. I think they want Bush to go ahead and have it assigned to his authority. They will still have to clean it all up, but they won't have to take the responsibility for starting it---that would be the most benign explanation. The more cynical would be: the Dems just want to get all the power and position in the Middle East that Georgie-boy and Big Dick put into place. Either of these explanation is too awful to contemplate let alone accept. Are we looking at a zebra or a painted horse, and does it make any difference?
Posted by gtash at October 6, 2007 06:43 AMThe headline on that article about Hersh is totally sensationalist. Iran is a huge concern in the region, they'll most certainly have to be a consideration in solving the Iraq situation; the candidates would be foolish if they didn't acknowledge it. But saying that Iran shouldn't get nukes is not the same thing as saying the US should bomb Iran. It's like saying that if you aren't in the streets with pitchforks, ousting the US president, you're responsible for the occupation in Iraq.
Oh...hmm. I sense a pattern, here.
Posted by iamcoyote at October 6, 2007 06:56 AMAnyone see who's advising HC and foreign policy now, Michael O'Hanlon of the "surge is working" fame. She doesn't seem to care what progressives think anymore.
That flap over the 'flag pen' seems to have a lot of Democrats running for president also making comments about Obama. Maybe the 'flag pen' flap is some of the reason he trails HC by 33 points right now.
Are more phoney Democrats rearing their heads now that MoveOn got theres?
Posted by peter at October 6, 2007 08:02 AMToday is German-American Day. It's also Get Organized Week, Eat Country Ham Month, Car Care Month and Dental Hygiene Month.
Posted by Josh at October 6, 2007 08:33 AMpoor pants-pissing peter, too bad the American people have MOVED ON from the corrupt, incompetent ReThugs
Posted by gay veteran at October 6, 2007 08:52 AMI agree with Hillary on Iran. We have to go to war. We can't let them get nukes.
Posted by Hill08 at October 6, 2007 11:09 AMI agree with Hillary on Iran. We have to go to war. We can't let them get nukes.
What a stupid comment. Going to war does not stop countries from acquiring nukes. Why the fuck does the US have nukes? Some Gawd-given right or something? Nobody should have nukes. That's NOBODY.
The world was horrified by Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and by Chernobyl. Although the latter was not a bomb, it was the result of screwing around with atomic energy. As Robert Oppenheimer, the director of the Manhattan Project, said at the Trinity test "I have become Death, the destroyer of Worlds.", a quote from the Bhagavad Gita. He never forgave himself for what he unleashed.
Try talking to a country before going to war with it. You be amazed at what the results can be, and regardless of the results, can they be any worse than war?
Posted by tempus at October 6, 2007 11:45 AMThe Bhagavad Gita isn't going to get you very far in Iran. If not Oppenheimer, another would have done it. Maybe had he not, the secret research in the Baltic may have gotten it and we'd all be speaking German now.
Try talking, I guess we haven't had THAT many UN meetings about this have we. Hasn't France "talked" to them? Germany? Seems there's been a lot of talk. Appearantly the Israeli attack on Syria last month worked to convence the NK's to do an about face. The Syrian's and Iran's must be scared shitless. All that "best" technology money can buy crap from Russia didn't help them too much. Israeli planes were flying unhampered over Syrian airspace.
We must have SOME new technology that blows them away.
Posted by peter at October 6, 2007 01:55 PM"We must have SOME new technology that blows them away."
spoken like a true psychopath
you posting from Iraq?
no?
then STFU
"spoken like a true psychopath"
Gay veteran, you beat me to it. I bet Peter would "love the smell of naplam in the morning." Yeah, let's fucking blow the world up. Let's level any country that we don't like. Let's kill, kill, kill, especially those fucking little kids. At least then they won't grow up and become an annoyance. I say let's just drop a nuclear bomb and get it over with. Yeah, that's the ticket. Let's lay waste the earth, burn cities, homes, fields, crops, forest and anyone who survives should be shot in the head. Yep, violence is the answer.
Posted by Judith at October 6, 2007 03:00 PMOh, and Peter, please explain how we got this God given right to have nuclear bombs, but the rest of the world is not allowed to have them?
Posted by Judith at October 6, 2007 03:03 PMIt's not the bombs so much anymore, Judith, but the friggin' three-stage ICBM's, that everyone except Darfur seems to have these days.
Since Dr. Mayhem from Pakistan started selling nuclear technology and hardware to anyone with anything resembling money, all you need is a launching vehicle, and you're off to the End Times, whatever the fuck they are. I guess we'll soon find out.
Oh, peter, try a large quantity of cyanide, preferably soon. And try sleeping with rattlesnakes, if you don't already.
Posted by tempus at October 6, 2007 04:33 PM