William Lind is President of the red baiting Center for Cultural Conservatism that rails against "political correctness" such as what they call Marxist feminism.

He works with Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation, a conservative think tank.

Are The River, Allblue or ballerina employed to post on this site?

Catchy little Beach Boys tune eh?

Another SUBBLIMMINAL message you might hum through the day.

Do you think Carl Rove is behind this?

What we need to go with Terry Jones' words is a contribution from his confrere, Terry Gilliam - a large, animated foot to stomp down onto McCain (Guiliani, and Clinton, and Obama etc etc etc etc etc) to eliminaite them from the race.

If there was just some way to take out the Democrats with some low level nuclear devices here, or maybe just ship them all off to our prison archipelago across Africa and the Middle East as traitors. You know Bu$h has to drop the nuclear bomb on Iran and find some more lies to justify it to save his global war. Repugs Forever.

The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out...without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.

HL Mencken

The Republicans and Democrats wear the suits of capital as they carry their war forward.

"These suits are made for walking and that's just what they'll do. One of these days these suits are gonna walk all over you."

To add a Randy Newman jingle:

"They all hate us anyhow...so let's drop the big one now...."

McCain seems to be taking his "warrior" image a bit too far. He is getting scary in his old age ... starting to seem like Dick Cheney.

After watching McCain and the rest of those fools I came to conclusion that they have neither brains nor guts. The only driving force for them is get nod of approval by their puppet masters. So those clowns are not dangerous. The crowds of clowns who cheers McCain and Co. and ready to nuke everybody oversee, that is the real danger. 25 years ago, when my office mate had only one solution for all foreign problems, "Nuke 'em all", I thought he was joking. He was intelligent man and new American Constitution inside and out.
Too late I came to understand why Julius and Ethel Rosenbergs tried to divulge atomic secrets to Soviets: they and others understood too well that nuclear monopoly of the US is lethal for civilization.
Now, the horse of American benevolence had run from the barn. Perspective of the second American President talking and doing nuclear has already mobilized the rest of the world to plan for the worst. The most likely scenario is nuclear bombing of one or all aircraft groups. That is the nightmare of our militarists: you do not have return address and their leverage against every nation on Earth will be lost. It will bring paroxysm of false patriotism on the whole of American public, left and right. But don't hold your breath to expect the same lines around draft offices as those back on December 7, 1941. Our heroes are not made of the same stuff.

I disagree with the phrase "So the only solution is to bomb Iran".
I would argue that it is only one of the solutions.
Let me ask the question- What is the Bush-Cheney goal? (mind you, probably isn't the same as America's goal).
If...the goal is to stay in power, then anything that adds to world tension, or anything that creates chaos and fear, or anything that necessitates a larger and larger military/violent reality, will increase the power of the Commander-in-Chief while decreasing the role of the Presidency and its need to heed the other branches of government, let alone the voters.
Bombing Iran could happen, but does not have to. It is the tension, the chaos, the increase in danger to the US, the increasing need for a LEADER with more and more power to deal with that chaos and danger that would lead to the goal.
Iran is merely the evil enemy du jure. Anyone anywhere else would do just as fine.
So that's why I disagree with that particular statement.
Let me take this opportunity to announce my new pool. Guess the day Martial Law is declared in the US. It's only 10 bucks a guess, winner take all. I took October 25th of next year (when I estimate the crisis over impeachment will come to a head).
If nobody wins and the US actually has an election next November all monies will be donated to charity.

Ah, but if we bomb Iran into chaos, that would give us three contiguous countries on which we could build three giant red plastic hotels-- a perfect monopoly! We could raise the rent ten fold!

Who is behind this? Must see video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRWWZVVOxeM&mode=related&search=

I would be most tempted to believe the Reichstag fire hypothesis advanced by several posters (US military or intel establishment inflicts harm on the US in order to gin up support for wider war) but there is a dimension to this that is even darker than that.

The religio-fascissts in our military actually think they are doing God's will by trying to grant Israel hegemony over the entire mideast so that they can hurry along the second coming of Jesus. In other words they are actually trying to commence Armageddon with their policies! Oil and commerce is just another way of selling the power elite, terrorism is for the sake of mobilizing the masses.

Go to:

http://militaryreligiousfreedom.org/

then click on the "media" button,

then click on the speech at Temple Beth-El in Long Island.

The speaker is a Jew and he is not spouting Zionist diatribe, but rather documenting just how far the christo-fascists have advanced in their goal of dominating the military from the Pentagon (Satanists that is an interesting irony isn't it?)to the most remote US military installation. It's scariness is its specificity and factual verification.

As I have commented on this board before...Gates was not shrubs or darth cheneys choice for Sec Def. Gates is old school and a close friend of Bush Sr and the more 'realistic' foreign policy makers. I believe that Gates primary mission as Sec Def is to stop shrub or vader from pushing the red button. I also believe that is why the neo cons are seeking desperately for a 'war czar' to work directly in the white house. In theory the war czar would have parallel duties to Gates. Has anyone noticed that there have been no takers for the job? Cheney wants a war czar that will push the red button if he gives the order. It will not work because no joint chief or theatre commander is going to defy orders from a Sec Def and take orders from a war czar.

He probably picked up the little ditty here: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14721.htm

The Corporation, excellent, a must see. I rented at the local supermarket when it first came out believe it or not.

Satire is wasted on the American public,so Terry Jones'piece will go thru to the keeper.That McCains nuclear suggestions go without outraged protest and condemnation is the big worry.

McCain is a senile Nu-Clear Kamikaze pilot! A war looking for a place to happen and a good poster boy for the MICs (Military Industrial Complex).

The fact this 'Luny Toons' character remains amongst the top three Repugnant, contenders is scary.

Maat, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU

Bomb Iran?

They're more likely to detonate a small "terrorist" device in America itself.

S.

I agree with Smurfy. If you bomb Iran you don't get to control the consequences. If you bomb America, then you can choose which democratic stronghold you want punish.

And the likely dirty nuke target is the SF Bay area. Very. dirty. nuke. It will be big, big enough to possibly trigger a massive earthquake. The rethuglicans hate Pelosi and she knows too well that if sher personally puts impeachment on the table that they'll nuke her district.

That way they can say "See? The Dems are soft on terror and the terrorists know it." Of course, the Bushies are the world's largest terrorist organization and funded bin Laden to the tun of $250 million of our dollars.

Doesn't sound like math, but break out your calculator and imagine all the GOOD things you could do with that much money. It's truly mind-boggling.

McCain sings a ditty about unleashing a nuclear holocaust to the tune of the Beach Boys' "Barbara Ann", and the public at large fails to grasp the insanity of it....

I'm afraid that the "corruption" of the Bush White House referred to in the article permeates all levels of society. But for some reason the masses can't seem to recognize it for what it is----MADNESS....

Unfortunately, I believe Smurfy is right. I mean correct.
"Terrorists" will be allowed another opportunity to strike in our country, giving the maniacs in charge a perfect reason to declare martial law...and "delay the election until the emergency is over".
Sad, but this is very possible.

I find it interesting that after Rove smeared McCain in his repugnant primary run against shrub that he is now licking the boots of the misadministration and kissing butts among the christian lunatics that he once held in disdain. Perhaps he is on a special mission for AIPAC? Or, perhaps he is plain nuts? Whatever, McCain is definitely out of touch with reality and the large majority of Americans that want their country out of Iraq and do not want another war.
Nuclear war with Iran would be world economic suicide and overnight America would become the 'object' that would focus every country in the world to take actions against us, not to mention the blowback from terrorist cells waiting for the call. Of course, reason has not stopped this bunch of cretins from going there merry way so far.

McCain has gone soft in the head. Get him a full time nurse, a rubber room, and a permament Prozac IV.

Out of line and in bad taste.

To christisntcomingback: I think the neo con wing nuts would like San Fran for a target but the problem is the prevailing westerly winds. After all, they dont want to take a chance of radiation particles settling on their homes or DC, to the east.
Actually, the target that is hit will be an clue to who is behind the attack.

Never wears a tie??!!

Remember the first national anthem: "LET 'EM ALL GO TO HELL, EXCEPT CAVE SEVEN!"

McCain seems to have gone off the deep end as far as being so pro-war. Maybe he is getting old, maybe he sees being a "warrior" as his main characteristic to get people to vote for him. He is getting scary.

To mwildfire:
Iran with an unknown number of Russian made Sunburn missles and an unknown quantity of short range ballistic missles is a serious threat to anything floating in the Persian Gulf or the oil loading facilities on the Saudi side of the gulf or any oil tankers attempting to transit the gulf, or any US facility in the mid east or to Israel. Also, no insurer is going to offer coverage to a shipping company with a war going on in the gulf between Iran and US Naval forces so no oil will be leaving the gulf aboard tankers.
Bingo, world economy stops!
Iran has had many years to imbed missles in their hundreds of miles of cliffs overlooking the gulf. Irans defense and offense will definitely pass the 'laugh' test. Do your homework. Google Sunburn Missle Iran and see what you come up with.
You seem quite cavalier about the PNAC mission that the neo cons have launched America upon. Well, we are far from 'gaining strategic control' over mid east oil and there are powerful forces in the world at work attempting to subvert our takeover of mid east oil. Of the three legs of power that all governments stand on we only have the military leg left and that has shown itself to be unable to whip a bunch of guys with flip flops, pajamas and some IEDs. Our diplomatic leg is led by an ex oil executive that knows as much about diplomacy as the three stooges. And as far as the our economic leg...well, you dont even want to go there. Between Regan and shrub our grandchildren are bankrupted before they are born.
There are two kinds of people in the world (leaving aside the religious fanatics). There are patriots and there are nationalists. The neo cons and their ditto head followers are nationalists, they are aggressive, they say 'my country right or wrong', and they are wrong headed. As several of top ranking nazis pointed out at the Nuremburg Trials 'any country can be led to war by simply telling the inhabitants that they are under attack.' The nationalists go marching off to war, the patriots say 'wait a minute, lets see some proof of your invasion claims.' Patriots love their land, its history and its people and do not want to see their country destroyed in a stupid grab for oil in a war that was a failure from its misconception by a bunch of stupid idealogues.
The first step in the neo con plan, to take out Iraq and quickly move on to Iran has failed miserably. An interim step was inserted, the attack on Lebanon by Israel to take out Hezbollah so that when Israel joins the US in a joint attack on Iran, Hezbollah would not be able to respond. That failed miserably. So now you think an all out attack on Iran is the answer? Thats a hoot! Dont forget, the Iranians invented chess.

I am 100% behind Kucinich. Maybe another illegal war, on Iran, and an accompanying quagmire there, along with the world economy grinding to a halt, will bring Mr Kucinich to the fore? One can hope.

Members of the Knights that say "Ni"unite... I see no mention of peace here in this land of a small shrubbery or bush as it were. I see no talk of peace here...

McCain slipped out of the number one Republican candidate position a couple of weeks ago. Since then, it looks like he has had a strategist (Karl Rove?) and a performing arts consultant helping him (Ann Coulter?). At the Ronald Reagan Library debate, he employed the style of looking and sounding tough, squaring up his shoulders and stabbing a finger at the camera directly and saying such things as he would follow Osama to the gates of hell. Sound like a practiced and rehearsed line from a script? The point seems to be that he wants to convince Republican voters that he is an assertive, take charge guy. He is the tough "military guy" in sharp contrast to the new front runner, Guilliani, (like the cowboy Chilli Sauce made in New York City).

He is desperate to win the Republican nomination for the 2008 presidential election. This has included being a graduation speaker at Jerry Falwell'a fundamentalist Christian College. This new pandering for votes persona is a stark contrast to the maverick we saw in 2000 that almost beat out Bush for the nomination based on his sincere positions.

My guess is that, if it came to an order to nuke Iran with Iraq continuing as our quagmire, the military leadership might mutiny. The London Times has already run an article citing ten generals that would most likely resign if Bush ordered bombing or invading Iran.

They are close to that point currently. If the Surge indeed fails Petraeus may go public with that feedback and get fired by Bush. Petraeus recently replaced the previous military leadership team due primarily to that team's disagreement with Bush about the Surge. Tommy Franks retired after his successful invasion in disagreement over the quagmire he saw starting with civilian, neo con leadership put in charge of reconstruction. Anthony Zinni was forced into retirement after giving Bush absolutely correct feedback that more boots were needed on the ground for reconstruction to secure Baghdad and the borders. That would have been a 2003 "Surge" that may have prevented the mismanagement we have seen since then.

Who would (or will) take Petraeus' place when the track record indicates that it would be career suicide?

Since you, like the usual run of power maniacs, seem to like great big toys that go BANG, try singing a new ditty when you're in the shower, Mr. McCain - something like "...walking in a Nuclear Winter Wonderland".

Or as a better alternative, try growing up - for all our sakes!

Almost as scary and appaling as "no,no WMD's here" from Aug '04.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3570845.stm

Actually bombing Iran, may in a perverse way, help save the rest of the planet from us. Its bad for Iran but the US will never be the same again. It will destroy us as a nation or whats left of it and consequently make the world a safer place. Even our kids will never be able to put humpty-dumpty together again.

@Justin

"Satire is wasted on the American public..." Come on, that's a bit harsh. John Bolton as US ambassador to the UN? Succeeding Negroponte, a man whose speciality is setting up networks of death squads! At the UN! Brilliant! It's dark satire admittedly, but in the words of the late, great Bill Hicks, "It's a hoot!" Paul Bremmer! Operation Iraqi Freedom! Spreading democracy! Personally I think that Tom "I gave up satire the day Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize" Lehrer should come out of retirement and get himself over to the White House to keep the jokes coming.

sigh!

This is a reply to The River, who speculates on how McCain could kiss the boots of the boys who smeared him so viciously--you got his motives wrong. It's simply this: a whore doesn't get to be picky about her Johns. They may be fat and ugly and have foul-smelling breath, but if they got the cash, she spreads her legs. Those who aspire to high political office must make many compromises--not just McCain, but Obama and Clinton and Edwards. The only one who won't play that game is Kucinich--which is why he is made a laughingstock by the media.

If I didn't know better I would think the Republican's are encouraging the Iranian's to make a first strike! That way they can use the ensuing chaos and anger to their own advantage! That's the only way Bush has managed for 7 long years now! Is to use the last terrorist attack to create his own little feifdom. Use the Boogie Man to terrorize the American people into starting a totally unnecessary war! These people are extremely dangerous! It's likely they will let their big mouths get us into a World War or a Nuclear confrontation. People in this country need to learn to use the 'off' button on their televisions.

Also want to note that I think smurfy makes a lot of sense. THREATENING to bomb Iran keeps people like us in a state of tension, but actually doing it would be too risky. Their objectives could much more easily be achieved via "another" terrorist attck on US soil...and SF as a target does make some sense, although the comment about the wind pattern is also a consideration. They could get around that by picking a day with easterly winds, or by using something other than a nuke.
On the other hand, we all know the real objective is oil; Iran as a "threat" doesn't pass the laugh test. The idea that the US has miserably failed in Iraq assumes that the objective there was overthrowing Saddam/bringing democracy to the Middle East/fighting terrorism. If the real objective was putting a stop to the switch from the dollar to the euro for oil sales, and to Saddam's contracts with France and Russia for much of Iraq's oil, and to have control over the strategically critical area where the last of the world's oil is located--then it really doesn't matter how much chaos the country is in. So much the better if a million Iraqis are dead and two million have fled the country. And if this is the case, then creating chaos and civil war in Iran would be additional progress. Even if our "leaders" and the press make many pious comments about our failure to achieve our supposed goals of truth, justice and the American Way.

Why pick on McCain? How are HClinton, Obama and Edwards different? Which Democratic candidate with a chance of winning the D. nomination has spoken out against a nuclear attack on Iran's nuclear facilities?

There is another possible element at play here. On two occasions in the last fifteen months, the latter just a month ago, various intelligence sources were suggesting an American attack on Iran was imminent. Yet it did not happen. Is it possible that the military brass refused the order to attack? Certainly there are some Strangelovian religo-lunatics in there, but from a military perspective there is very little upside to such an attack, and a potentially disastrous downside.
Iran is not Iraq with it's thirty-year old degraded equipment and the military cost (let alone political cost) would be very high. As noted above, Iran certainly has Sunburn anti-ship cruise missile (which cruise at Mach 1.9), and may even have Onyx (the upgraded version which cruises at Mach 2.9). These weapons are the most potent tactical weapons in the world today, and the US Navy has no defence against them. Two strikes (with conventional warheads, they can also carry nuclear warheads) would sink any capital ship including aircraft carriers - the release of kinetic energy when a three ton missile travelling at 1900 mph comes to a dead halt is phenomenal, it wouldn't put a hole in the side it would rip out a great chunk and the vessel would be doomed. You can be sure that US admirals are aware of this. They can be launched from air, submarine even the back of a truck so within a few hours of an attack the US fleet in the Gulf would be decimated. Iran has a burgeoning home defence industry, which is obviously geared to their own defence needs, and they have sophisticated bottom floating mines (effectively underwater missiles) meaning they could quickly block the Straits of Hormuz which would not only halt the flow of 40% of the world's oil supplies, but also leave any ship in the gulf trapped, all within thirty miles of a hostile shore with nowhere to run. They would be sitting ducks.
Another area where Russian military hardware is superior to the US is anti-aircraft missiles. It is not clear how top-of-the-range the Iranian air defence system is, but It is not Iraq with it's 70s vintage Sam-7s. They probably possess a passive detection system (not radar which is obsolete) so the USAF brass know that any attack would leave them with considerable losses.
Iran has a battery of short and medium range ballistic missiles which could hit US bases throughout the Gulf region, including the 'super-bases' in Iraq. In an all-out scenario, these missiles could destroy oil production facilities throughout the region as well. The US military consumes a phenomenal amount of oil every day, so they could even be faced with the possibility of running out leaving all their mechanised equipment useless.
The US forces in Iraq are clustered in the centre of the country, and their main supply line runs through 400 miles of passively hostile territory. Expect that to become actively hostile in the event of an attack, and the supply line being cut. The 150,000 troops in Baghdad and environs require 20,000 tons of supplies every day, so it would not take long for them to run out of food, fuel, water and ammunition. You can be sure the generals are aware of this.
As the US possess over 5,000 nuclear weapons they could of course destroy Iran, but it would not be the easy relative cost-free 'cake-walk' campaign that they are used to, and the 'victory' would be pyrrhic to the point of being a defeat. Tens, even hundreds of thousands of casualties, catastrophic loss of materiele and political repercussions which are impossible to calculate. So the only two parties that would even consider such a course of action are Israel (what would they care?) and the armageddonist lunatics. If the German generals had acted sooner and assassinated Hitler in 1940 or 41 the outcome of that war might have been different. I wonder if that thought has occurred somewhere in the Pentagon?

McCain, once suspected of being a man of character, turns out to be nothing more than a spectacularly ambitious whore. He's a dinosaur. In fact, with his freakishly small arms he looks just like a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Could a McCain presidency bring us back to the golden days of presidential comedy stylings? Who could ever forget: "I've signed legislation outlawing the Soviet Union. We begin bombing in five minutes." Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!

Exactly. I once thought that if I had to live with another Republican president, at least McCain was honest and principled and believed in our Constitution. Ouch--so much for that. He's shown himself to be a whore who will sell himself to anyone who provides any support to his presidential quest.

To allblue:
Thanks for the post. I am glad that there are posters on this board that can think politically, tactically and strategically.
Iran has the Russian Tor system that is excellent but I believe that Iran has also aquired the S 300 ground to air system from Russia via Belarus. The S 300 is a longer range version of the Tor but both are capable of intercepting cruise missiles as well as supersonic aircraft. Both systems are state of the art...unlike the US 'Patriot' system.
An inquiry by the US Military after the first gulf war found that not one patriot missile managed to intercept an Iraqi Scud missile. That is pathetic. We have a bigger military budget than the rest of the world combined and the 'Patriot' is the best we can field? Is it any wonder that gas masks were selling so well in Israel during that conflict?

All governments are serial killers!!!!
(Except maybe Norway and Bhutan)

You're welcome River. We are all so propagandised about the superiority of US military hardware, and whilst true in some cases it most certainly is not in others. The Russians have always been good at making weapons - the AK47 is still being produced after sixty years and is still highly effective for example. Russia currently has the edge in fighter aircraft, anti-aircraft (both detection and destruction), and the extraordinary weapon that is the Onyx. When Reagan announced a massive naval building programme, the Soviets/Russians knew they could not compete so they thought laterally and found a way to make all that spending useless. Both tactically and strategically surface ships are no worry to the Russians now. Similarly, while the 'Star Wars' fantasy burns up the dollars, the Russians already have in service the SS30, an ICBM that can vary it's flight speed and carry out in-flight manoeuvres - a missile specifically designed to evade any anti-missile system deployed against it, rendering Reagan's wet dream obsolete before it's even invented! And you can bet there were a few glum faces round the Pentagon last year when China shot down one of their old satellites using a ground-based laser, as they faced up to the prospect of multi-billion dollar satellite-dependent weapons systems being left sitting on the ground unable to go anywhere!
You ask the question why the almost limitless resources available to the Americans does not translate into superior capability. That's because all the bloated beast that is the Military Industrial complex has to do to enrich it's stockholders is sit back, open it's mouth and allow their paid-for politicians to shovel in your tax dollars. There's no competition, no pressure to economise, and it is always the fancy (hence often unreliable) expensive option that is chosen. In the 60s NASA spent over $1m (a lot of money back then) developing a pen that would work in weightless conditions. The Russian solution? Use a pencil!
I remember well Bush 1 in 1990 gloating at Raytheon (manufacturers of the Patriot missile): "Forty-nine strikes, forty-nine hits!" As you point out the reality was forty-nine strikes no hits, (I hope he doesn't tell lies like that in front of his children, they might pick up the habit) but Raytheon's bottom line was secured even though their crappy system couldn't even shoot down a Scud, which is essentially just a GT version of the V2!
To get back OT, the Iranians have been threatened by the US since 1979, yet do not have the resources to compete in major weapon systems, so they looked at ways of waging war cheaply. They focussed on electronic and counter-electronic warfare, and now have considerable expertise in the area. We saw some of this being battle tested in Lebanon last year, and I would imagine there was much consternation at IDF HQ when Hezbollah were publicly announcing intercepted and decrypted Israeli battlefield communications before the generals in Tel Aviv were getting them. I don't know this, but I would imagine that Israeli soldiers will no longer be allowed to take their mobile phones into battle, because when they got the chance they were phoning home, and Hezbollah were listening! Oops! So one other consequence you can expect from a US attack on Iran is a massive disruption of essential computer systems in the US as the Iranian electronics warfare experts hack in and destroy them. Hopefully, the principle of deterrence will prevail and calamity will be avoided.

Great! Just what we need! A nightmare BIGGER than the nightmare we already have!
They're just trotting McCain out because he's damn near the ONLY Republican candidate with a war story to TELL! Check in to it, people! How many Democrats served in the military vs. how many Republicans that now sit on Capitol Hill. It is a sad nation, friends and neighbors that let the cowards form our foreign policy! I say to all TRUE PATRIOTS, we should burn these bastards at the stake and rid this plague of Vampirism that is feeding on the true democratic soul of this nation! I love my country. I fear my government. Especially when it's being sucked up the asshole of the Pentagon and Halliburton! This is OUR country and I. for one, am TIRED of kowtowing to 1/3rd of it! Nuff said!

Didn't any of you folks see the attempt made by the White House a few weeks back to start a war with the Iranians. When the Iranians captured the Brits, a few days later a news article popped up and quickly disappeared. The title was, "U.S.Offered to Scare the Iranians". The story stated that the U.S. military had offered to fly U.S. warplanes over Iranian bases with the idea that it would scare the Iranians into releasing the Britsh sailors and Marines. The Brits wisely turned down the offer. I can imagine the behind the scenes conversation from the Brits! "Are you stupid?" "We know what you are up to"! "We don't want to be here when you start a war."
If the U.S would have overflown any Iranian base, the Iranians would have been justified in firing some very accurate missiles at them and probably downing some jets. This is what Bush and the White House were hoping would have happened and that would be their excuse for an all out attack. This type of rigged attack is from the original play book of Bush before the Iraq War in which he proposed flying a U.S. U-2 spy plane painted with U.N. insignia over Iraq in hopes the Iraqis would shoot it down and provide justification to attack Iraq. Senator McCain is still fighting the Viet Nam war 40 years later. He has to remember that we lost almost 60,000 men in that one. I was there in the Infantry and don't want to see more suffering and death in Iraq or Iran like I saw years ago.

Allblue, I remember the pencil/pen incident all too well! Do you read William Lind 'on war archive'? Lind is well versed in every aspect of military history right up to the current debacle in Iraq. He posts an essay about every two weeks and is always entertaining. Over the past several years he has pointed out exactly what will happen to our troops in Iraq if we bomb Iran. His opinion is the same as yours and mine. One of his recent postings was Operation Anabasis. It is the story of a Greek Mercenary of 10,000 men that were cut off in in Iraq and had to fight their way out thru Turkey and on to the coast. Another of his recent essays is 'Blinking Red Light' which is a summation of how desperate our military situation in Iraq would be should our supply lines from Quwait be cut. Here is a link to all his postings.
http://www.defense-and-society.org/lind/lind_archive.htm
Lind taught at the Point and has a military background. He is good friends with Gen McCaffrey who is often in Iraq talking to the troops and field commanders. McCaffrey is retired and goes to Iraq to give his advice to the commanders there that are his friends and appreciate what he has to say. Lind and McCaffrey both understand that our army is attempting to fight third and fourth generation open source insurgency with a second generation army. I hope you find the Lind file interesting reading.

By making peace with Pat Robertson, and actively soliciting political suck with the leaders of the Dominionist and "prosperity gospel" megachurches, McCain had already squandered what little credibility he might have had with sober, thinking Americans. But looking at his record, there is ample material in support of sending this goon home with his tail between his legs. His recent high-profile junta to Iraq, and starry-eyed stroll through the Green Zone is almost trivial, but certainly highlighted his role as a corporate-war/Likudnik sheep-in-wolf's-clothing. Add to that his unquestioning devotion to the delusional dream of absolute global military supremacy of the US, and his conviction that military service should be compulsory for ALL Americans (read his books).

His momentary and abortive outburst against torture notwithstanding, the record of McCain's pseudo-American insanity goes on and on. It adds up to, not merely theocracy, not merely military rule, not merely corporate domination, but the classic fusion of all such forces in the unmistakable pattern of fascism: corporate-driven military theocracy with hell-bent lust for global conquest.

And this from a guy who portrays himself as a great patriot and defender of freedom.

As if Bush wasn't bad enough ... if all of the above isn't enough to demonstrate that McCain is totally and irrevocably off his rails, then his recent "joke" about exterminating masses of innocent Iranian civilians seals the deal.

Clearly, another little change of lyrics is in order:

"Bar, bar, bar,
Bar, bar McCain ..."

I'd prefer literal prison bars -- though, granted, the bulk of the Cheney/Bush Administration are in line for that well ahead of him -- but at this point, I'll settle for McCain simply being barred from any further "public service."

My thanks to The River for Lind's website which is fascinating reading. I really wish the Iraqis would take a look at it..they would learn just how to get us out of their country PRONTO!