God, the stupidity of the public discourse in this country---all caused by the fucking Right Wing and AIPAC Noise Machine.
We ignore actual loose nukes (Russia, Pakistan) and force presidential candidates to (against all evidence, official monitoring agencies, and US intelligence assessments) to declare (with spittle of outrage flying) that "Iran is developing nuclear weapons!"
No candidate can stand up to it, and thus voting becomes an exercise in tea leaf reading. Well, I'm convinced McBush see's himself as the continuation of the War President (tm) and thus will be "forced" to bomb Iran and its "nuclear weapons".
As for Obama, he's forced to genuflect on the Alter of Holy Israeli Security, while seeing that the region is ripe for a Grand Bargain, though it surely won't be easy.
Posted by euzoius at June 3, 2008 05:40 AMSeems simple enough to me....
If the Democrats become a threat in the election, attack Iran (or have someone attack something in the US, blame Iran, and attack), declare martial law, and suspend the elections.
At the present rate of agreement among the left, this may not be necessary....
Posted by wilson rivers at June 3, 2008 05:41 AMSo McClatchy is in the tank for Hillary. How dare report that she "has been more nuanced in describing Iran's nuclear program, telling MSNBC on April 21 that Iran "appears" to have a "continuing goal of obtaining nuclear weapons.". At least they buried it in the last paragraph. These guys were the only ones to write against the Iraq War when we all knew that Saddam was about to nuke Crawford. Now they are attacking Obama for defending us against the Iran.
Posted by marc sobel at June 3, 2008 05:47 AMHas anyone seen the ad campaign (by moveon.org – I think)
It is hilarious – the entire ad is done to the theme song of “identical cousins”
…”There cousins, identical cousins … they think alike, they talk alike….”
The stars of this hilarious ad is McCain and Bush !
I loved it…………..
"Bo Diddley's gonna buy his girl a diamond ri ...oh wait, he's dead."
She'll get nothing and like it.
Bo Diddley helped "invent" rock 'n roll.
No rock 'n roll heaven, but he is back to stardust.
Sigh!
The threat from Iran is nonexistent whether or not they are developing or considering developing nuclear weapons, OK?
Iran has zero history of aggression throughout its history as a modern-day state, and for at least a couple of centuries before that.
Iran is not the "world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism" - far from it, in fact. Even if they DO support Hezballah - which is very arguably NOT a terrorist group anyway, but a legitimate national liberation group - Hezballah does not engage in what is commonly termed international terrorism, but rather has very narrow, specific, and localized goals. Ditto Hamas (but I will grant that many of Hamas' actions DO fit the definition of terrorism (as do many if not most of Israel's actions, not to mention those of the United States).
So, Iran is involved to one degree or another and in one way or another in Iraq - "interfering" as the Bushites so hypocritically and ironically put it. Who has more right and reason to try to influence Iraq's direction than Iraq's next door neighbors?
Contrary to the popular propaganda carefully and skillfully formulated and disseminated by Israel and the U.S. (including the saintly Barack Obama), the regime in Iran does not consist of a bunch of crazed religious fanatic ideologues. They are not suicidal, and they want to see their country thrive, not self-destruct, which is why, even if they DID have a few nuclear weapons, they would be far less likely to use them than, say, heavily nuclear armed Israel or the even more heavily nuclear armed United States (which, I need not remind you, has a history of using them).
I am disappointed to see that Obama either does not recognize these realities or is jumping on the "we need an enemy and for now Iran is it" bandwagon for political reasons.
PS I forgot to mention one extremely important reality. The NIE found that Iran had terminated its nuclear weapons program in 2003? WHAT NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM? Now listen carefully, boys and girls, because there might only be two people in this country who can and will tell you the following (Scott Ritter is the other one).
THERE IS NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE THAT IRAN HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM PRIOR TO 2003
Got that? No evidence at all. And furthermore, there is plenty of reason to believe that they did NOT have such a program. So, the assertion that they terminated their nuclear weapons program in 2003 is dangerous nonsense.
Posted by Shirin at June 3, 2008 12:20 PMBobby Jindal sponsors Senate ID bill 733 in Louisiana. Great VP material for the bible belt!
"Mr. Jindal is a technocrat and a Roman Catholic convert, a policy aficionado well-versed in free-market solutions to the crisis in health insurance and a proponent of “intelligent design” as an alternative theory to evolution, suggesting it may be appropriate in school science classes."
At long last the only real truth can be taught!
One designer could never have created all of this bounty. There are two, Twit and Twat, and they move from one human host to another to monitor and fine tune their masterpiece.
They currently reside in Pamela Anderson's natural breasts.
That should give the would be "Deliverence" cast members something to nibble on.
well, how will the korporations get their war profits if we don't attack Iran?
only neo-con psychopaths lust for war with Iran
Posted by gay veteran at June 3, 2008 05:08 PMeuzoius has it right
Posted by michael72 at June 3, 2008 07:52 PM