|World Affairs Politics, government, leadership, elections, global issues, environmental issues, economics, domestic policy, foreign policy, social change, human rights, civil liberty, healthcare, education, news, history, space exploration|
| ||Thread Tools||Display Modes|
|06-23-2008, 12:52 AM||#1 (permalink)|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Rafael, CA
Kristol: Bush Might Bomb Iran If He "Thinks Senator Obama’s Going To Win"
In other words, vote for who we say or we will wreck more havoc before we leave.
Think Progress » Kristol: Bush Might Bomb Iran If He ‘Thinks Senator Obama’s Going To Win’
As far as bombing Iran -- my take on it is pretty simple. If we bomb Iran, pick an American city.
YouTube - UN Inspector Scott Ritter: Fools would Bomb Iran
Even Russia has warned us against military action in Iran.
Russia warns against military action in Iran | World news | guardian.co.uk
Here is another photo essay of life in Iran.
Life in Iran :: A Photo Essay by Arash Shiva
|06-23-2008, 04:31 AM||#3 (permalink)|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
I cant see him bombing Iran and then handing the situation off to a new president. He seems genuinely concerned about how history judges him and doing something this stupid would make him not only one of the worst presidents in the history of the country but one of the most senselessly destructive ones as well.
|06-23-2008, 10:00 AM||#6 (permalink)|
Join Date: Apr 2008
I don't doubt that he wants to, but I think by and large it's a scare tactic.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist. That is to say, I don't believe reptiles are in control of the world powers. I don't believe groups like the illuminati or the masons have as much power as people think (I doubt many of the groups even exist). I do believe there's a lot more going on than what we see, both positive and negative. Fortunately more and more of what's going on in the shadows is coming to light.
This feels like the build up prior to the climax of a Hollywood movie. The villain is fighting to gain the upper hand, or has the upper hand, and the heroes are trying desperately to stop him. Will we get a traditional ending wherein the heroes save the day just in the nick of time? Maybe we'll get a twist and find out the villain never had any power at all and his biggest fear is that we'd call his bluff. Maybe the villain will succeed, in which case we're guaranteed a sequel.
Perhaps I'm a fool, but I'm optimistic. This is exactly the kind of thing you'd expect when an old empire comes crumbling down. There's the risk that it could go either way (even right down the middle), but we're the ones that decide that, no? These aren't easy times but they're surely interesting. We need things like this to grow as individuals and as a species.
Let the monkey throw a tantrum and fling his poop at the world. Mr. Bush will get his due.
|06-23-2008, 02:26 PM||#7 (permalink)|
Join Date: Aug 2007
|07-03-2008, 12:21 AM||#9 (permalink)|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Its not in Bush's interest nor the US gov'ts interest to attack Iran.
1. They have nuclear capability
2. They have friends such as Lebanon, Saudi Arabia
3. They are a free country
The US attacked Iraq because:
1. It was a dictatorship. The US would like to wipe out all dictatorships if there are collateral benefits.
2. Iran, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon didn't care if we did
3. Iraq bluffed about having WMDs to appear stronger to Iran. Fatal move.
4. The US wanted bases in the middle east. Saudi Arabia was having no part of it, Iraq was the only location
5. Politically the US could twist things to make a case
The US did not attack Iraq because:
1. It would get oil or cheaper oil. This is absurd.
2. It believed they would harbor terrorists. This was just a reason.
3. They believed that Iraq had WMDs. They knew Saddam was bluffing.
I know that this post will draw a lot of criticism however I am not stating that I agreed with the US doing so. Only that Iran does not fit the criteria necessary for the US to make a movement.
Under the current conditions the US will NEVER go after Iran. They will however, bluff for negotiation purposes.
People over estimate the power of the US President and under estimate the true calculation ability of the US gov't. They knew exactly what the backlash would be but calculated the militaristic benefits of positioning bases in Iraq.
Even during Clinton they had their eyes on Iraq. Bush was sitting in the seat during the ideal climate. 911 also gave the perfect cover in which to execute what we wanted to do for decades.
OK, now I'm ready for the verbal assault. Just don't assume that I agree with any of this or assume my position on the situation.
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|ruining/hurting/killing myself because I'm not "pretty enough" or "smart enough"||lightthecandle||Emotional Mastery||12||03-11-2009 12:03 AM|
|San Fran Chronicle calls Obama a "lightworker"||tracyrtwyman||World Affairs||31||10-20-2008 05:31 PM|
|Bush aide says Iraq war "was not necessary"||Tasaio||World Affairs||0||05-29-2008 07:54 AM|
|I Need Ideas Attracting a "Buyer" for this "Income Stream"||VetTechJess||Intention-Manifestation||2||07-05-2007 11:12 PM|
|"Full-time vs. contract" & "Manifesting Intentions Without Resistance"||Rapid||Business & Financial||1||01-19-2007 06:01 PM|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:27 PM.