I'm with COMarc again. 100%. Well, almost. I think he wants to wait until the consequences for bombing are clearly shouldered by the next administration. He doesn't want to be the one that starts the draft.

How could even power-hungry Democrats who put the election above saving the last wasted lives of our troops while they pretend they're powerless must realize this scenario: a death kiss for Democrats after 2008. Between this, the oil, and hastening the return of the Messiah, Bush has plenty of reasons to bomb, and very few to resist. Still, Pelosi and Reid say impeachment is off the table.

For that, they deserve to lose their jobs.

Just say, for instance, we were able to do to Iran what we did to Iraq. Which country would be next on the chopping block. and next after that? You want to talk about the 'domino effect'?

If the American people are willing to sell their souls and give up their lives and limbs for the most corrupt regime in U.S. history, then the nation is doomed and will suffer the consequences of its actions. Cause and effect.

To some it may sound strange, but the best thing for our country and the world, would be a defeat of our military forces. If we attack Iran, and I certainly hope we don't, Russian military power backed by Chinese forces have to crush our military in the region and also drive our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan

I and a few others have encouraged our fellow citizens to take non-violent action, especially work stoppages and the coordination of a national strike of all working people who are opposed to war and imperialism, like I did two days ago, on 9/11, but people really don't want to make any sacrifices. Talk is okay, but action is invaluable.

The White House is sociopathic. They are taking a mafia-like position. Manifest Destiny has become an abberation and a monster.
The only sane candidate is Dennis Kucinich and after him, Mike Gravel. Ron Paul is not a true Progressive but a Libertarian in disguise. (Maybe not such a disguise).

The people that voted for Bush are enablers and collude with the Administration without thinking. Iran is just another step in the takeover of America by corporate gangsters. It's about oil, hegenomy and religion, all a witches brew in the caldron of America's foreign policy.

Oh this is also not to say they won't go after Venezuela and other South American countries after they're finished with Central Asia.

The best bet for Iran is that the US will launch massive military bombings for 7 days, cripple the Iraninian military and leave the Iranian regime to crumple. It will basically be a US backed coup of the Iranian government in favor of any government that will give away all it's oil to the corperations, and drive the country into massive debt.

Remember Bush, doesn't really have 14 months left to do this. The Republican party would be telling him that a new war in the middle of the elections would completely sink a lot of Republican candidates that are struggling to stay afloat. They already have to run in a political environment where some 70% of the people oppose the Republican war policies. And just take a gander at what's happened to McCain's campaign when he was very visible in his support of the war.

An attack on Iran is equally unpopular. I saw an off-the-record sort of comment that said the White House staff would be happy if their propaganda got support for this UP to around 35%. That might be ok for a lame-duck White House, but that would be suicide for other Republican candidates.

So, Bush's calendar is running out. He doesn't have 14 months left. He only has a few months left. And the US military always schedules its attacks in this region for the winter time.

The only thing that would stop this would be the American people having so had enough that they'd walk out on strike if this happens. Most the spin and PR in the media is there just to cause enough confusion to keep that from happening.

Oh, and you want to know what's crazy on the left. This article about a coming war which would be disaster for this country gets zero comments while a debate rages amongst the 9-11 conspiracy nuts in another thread about stuff that happened six years ago. There's a huge amount of energy and time wasted on something that's already happened. Since its already happened, that debate can't save any lives and can't prevent any disasters. Meanwhile, another disaster is coming and tens of thousands of lives are at stake. But this is ignored while everyone pursues bizarre conspiracy theories. Amazing.

Kevin Zeese: "Hawkish Israeli Lobby Wants War with Iran!
Author
William Hughes
Date Created
25 Apr 2006
http://baltimore.indymedia.org/newswire/display/12448/index.php
The Israeli Lobby, with others, helped to instigate the Iraqi War. A scholarly report, the "Harvard Study," which was recently released, also documents the "unmatched power" of the Lobby over the national interest. Now, the Bush-Cheney Gang is targeting Iran for a pre-empted strike. Is the hawkish, hard right, pro-Israeli Lobby pushing for a war with Iran, too? Kevin Zeese, an independent candidate for U.S. Senate In MD, thinks that it is.
"So likewise 'a passionate attachment' of one nation for another produces a variety of evils..." - George Washington's "Farewell Address," September 19, 1796

Washington, D.C. - Kevin Zeese was the first speaker at a public forum held on Monday evening, April 24, 2006, at the West End Neighborhood Library, near the community of Georgetown. The topic for the event was, "Is the Israel Lobby Promoting War on Iran?" He said the question of whether the hawkish, hard-right, pro-Israeli Lobby in America wants to see war with Iran "gets answered in an ad which was in the New York Times, the Financial Times, and other newspapers. It's a full page ad by the American Jewish Committee, put out on April 4th. The center of the bull's eye is Iran and the headline is: 'Can Anyone Within Range of Iran's Missiles Feel Safe?' I think that's a pretty inflammatory ad. It's signed by more than a hundred people...I think it's a pretty strong indication of where the Lobby stands. That isn't the only proof we have that the hawkish Israeli Lobby wants to go to war."

Zeese is the director of DemocracyRising.U.S., an organization working to end the Iraqi War and the Occupation. He was also an ex-press secretary for Ralph Nader in 2004. Presently, Zeese is an independent candidate for the U.S. Senate in Maryland, who is looking to bring together, in a voting block, the combined electoral efforts of the Green, Populist and Libertarian Parties. (1)

The DC Anti-War Network (DAWN) presented the evening program. (2) David Kirshbaum and Carol Moore of DAWN acted as co-moderators for the event and did a splendid job. Other speakers were Simin Royanian and Alex Patico. Alex is a U.S. coordinator of the multi-country "Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran." Ms. Royanian is an economist and the cofounder of the "Women for Peace and Justice in Iran."

Ms. Royanian, in her remarks, pointed to U.S. "militarism and imperialism" as being the root of the problem of injustice around the world and in the Middle East as well, and as posing the main threat to Iran today. She did acknowledge that the Israeli Lobby is "brainwashing" the American people. She also emphasized that Iran is not making "any nuclear weapons." Mr. Patico saw the U.S. government itself as the main issue with respect to Iran. He said it has "exacerbated the situation." Patico asked: "Why did it (the U.S.) put the nuclear option on the table?"

According to DAWN's press release, the focus of the event was the new "Harvard Study on the negative influence of the Israel Lobby and what activists can do about it." (3) The report was authored by Professors John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt. (4) It generated hostile reactions from Israeli sympathizers, like Alan Dershowitz, David Gergen and the Washington Post. (5) Essentially, the document revealed what most objective observers of the Middle East already knew: The Israeli Lobby, which includes the Neocons, has exercised "unmatched power" over U.S.'s policies to the extent that its role is harmful and not in the national interest. In fact, pundit Charley Reese, was even more blunt. He called Israel, "The dead roach in America's salad." He also accused the Lobby of "beating the drums for war with Iran." (6) Recently, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh revealed, that the Bush()-Cheney Gang was planning a nuclear strike against Iran. (7)

Continuing with Zeese's comments, he said: "Another important, hard line group is the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). They have been advocating 'regime change' in a number of Arab counties: Iraq(), Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and with the Palestinian Authority for years. JINSA's board of advisors has included many Bush administration leaders: Dick Cheney, John Bolton, Richard Perle, James Woolsey and Douglas Feith...They (JINSA) put a report out on April 12th, called, 'Iran, Iran, Iran and Iran.' Iran, the document said is the 'whole list of national security priorities.' Yes, they want to see 'regime change' in Iran. They want to see an attack on Iran."

It's interesting to note that one of the members of the U.S. Congress, who supports a U.S. air strike against Iran's nuclear facilities is the Israeli Firster, Joseph Lieberman (D-CT). He told the Jerusalem Post, he would, if necessary, advocate such a measure to "deter the development of their nuclear program." (8) What, of course, Lieberman didn't say is that his favorite country, Israel, is suspected of having over 400 nuclear weapons! (9)

Meanwhile, as gas prices soar above $3 a gallon, the resentment in the U.S. towards the Israeli Lobby's role in inflaming that problem, too, can also be expected to grow exponentially. Some fondly recall that before the creation of Israel, the U.S. didn't have any Arab enemies in the oil-producing Middle East and that buying gas for the car wasn't an issue. Other matters, like: Israel's launching of the notorious "Lavon Affair," in 1954; its bulldozing to death, in 2003, of peace activist Rachel Corrie; its deliberate attack in 1967, on the U.S. Liberty; its unleashing of the spy/traitor, Jonathan Pollard; the over $140 billion in dollars in foreign aid that it has extracted from our treasury, since 1948; and the Larry Franklin/Pentagon Spy case, with its ties to American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)-will continue to simmer in the bosom of many Americans. (10)

There is, too, another factor which causes friction. It is the arrogance of some of the Israel's apologists! Their condescending attitudes and their use of smear tactics towards those who dare to speak out for the good of our Republic is deeply resented by their targets and, too, by the wider community. It reminds some of how the British imperialists regularly abused our gallant patriots before the Revolution. As brave Americans die daily in the Neocon-inspired Iraqi War, and others ingest the toxic depleted uranium dust, those feelings against a militant Israel, and its haughty and schoolyard bully of a Lobby, will only persist. (11)

Finally, in his over fifteen-minute-talk, Zeese underscored the importance of the Harvard Study and how it can open up a discussion on matters that have long been a "taboo topic among elected U.S. politicians." He had high praise for its two authors. Zeese spotlighted for the audience some of the significant items, and findings, contained in the report, including one of their conclusions that Iran is Israel's next target for "regime change." He emphasized that the "lopsided U.S. policy in favor of Israel" needs to be changed. He pointed out that aid to Israel over the last 58 years has far outstripped aid to other nations. He gave as example the fact that, "Aid to Israel is greater than all of U.S. aid to sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America combined."

Zeese said that our "democracy is threatened by the stifling of debate." He said now is the time to confront that "special relationship. It is evident that the current approach has not benefitted Israel, the Palestinians, the Middle East on the United States." He finished up by urging people who are opposed to any war against Iran "to get organized."

while i understand the concern this piece is pretty alarmist. at this point, though, i don't think military action against iran is going to happen. the tenuous hold we have in iraq would be completely undermined (meaning risking losing control of the oil fields) if we strike iran now. the tough talk creates a holding pattern for the u.s. in that region-the military gets some breathing space and the pres. gets to maintain his cowboy swagger. the generals have the administration boxed in pretty well also. the military, stinging from the embarrassment of being mislead on wmd's and now looking bogged down and losing in iraq, probably will not be united in allowing another front to open up. conspicuously, many of the original war-planners have left the administration as well. the only chance i see for an attack on iran is if bush has completely lost the plot and decides to stay in power past the end of his term. that would makes things really interesting.

Bush's calendar will never run out. He is only the most recent icon of American imperialism. Whoever takes over from him (providing Bush doesn't cancel elections and put the country on an emergency war-measures footing) will not stray much from his path. If Bush doesn't bomb Iran, his successor will.

Of utmost importance here is that Iraqi oil bill -- and, of course, that beautiful US military base outside Baghdad, the one they're calling the "American Embassy in Iraq." Once the final coat of paint has dried and the oil bill is signed, the occupation begins in earnest, and Bush and his successors can declare victory. With this beachhead established, Iran can be attacked whenever it's convenient for the US.

lastdregs September 12th, 2007 2:02 pm
Although I sympathize with yours views, all Bu$hCo have to do is orchestrate another 'Bay of Tonkin' false Flag attack in Iraq or on the American mainland; then link this with Iran's Government and your ideas and Iran will be blown to bits...resulting in a total conflagration in the ME....unspeakable mayhem

lastdregs September 12th, 2007 2:02 pm
Although I sympathize with yours views, all Bu$hCo have to do is orchestrate another 'Bay of Tonkin' false Flag attack in Iraq or on the American mainland; then link this with Iran's Government and your ideas and Iran will be blown to bits...resulting in a total conflagration in the ME....unspeakable mayhem... as if Iraq wasn't enough!

Bush can't even handle Iraq. Is he stupid enough to invade Iran, which is 4 times larger? Sadly yes.

What is mindboggling about the entire scenario is he pulled this act already and, though it was obvious at the time it was built on a pack of lies, it is more than evident now for any fool who was bamboozled then. Yet, he proceeds with inpunity to the next catastrophe...

It seems that the democrats in congress are either so in the pockets of the military industrial complex that they owe their very existence to corporate power, they are simply afraid to live by their convictions, or they want the republicans to drown in the sewage they have created. But if either of the last two speculations are true they might just be brought down by their own inablity to act. If the first idea is the right one, it truly does not matter which party is in office.

The idea that elections could be cancelled is a very scary one - and certainly not beyond question. Americans seem unable to reach their legislators concerning the invasion of Iraq, impeachment, health care, economic inequality, or dreadful laws like the misnamed Patriot Act. Our power to influence the government is waning, and the power of the executive branch seems to be growing in spite of the unpopularity of the president, vice president, and their henchmen.

Is the American dream over? I hope not.

over time the law of averages encourages a strike on iran and, of course, my idea is easily successfully argued against as it is impossible to prove a negative. i realize that my point is pure speculation. essentially that is the purpose of this thread.

i am not convinced that military action is not coming, but as the occupation has progressed i see the momentum to achieve goals in iraq faltering as the sun sets on this administration. i think that the rest of the world does not want their largest consumer market to dry up, yet want u.s. aggression to be contained. iranian regional influence has been increased by our actions and the economic ties that country shares with asia could be used to seriously damage our own faltering economy. there are many reasons for our aggression and how it initiated; one of the primary reasons was due to economics, which interestingly, is the same reason many use to argue for coming military action against iran. it's a judgement call on whether an attack would be beneficial or harmful economically. remember that bush's weathly base look at economic benefits somewhat differently than some others not as well off. also, many of the oil fields to be privatized if the oil law is passed are undeveloped so as they become more developed conflict runs the risk of damaging the infrastructure investment.

again, pure speculation, but based on fairly realistic considerations that are by no means the only ones. lately, i have read more progressive authors leaning toward no escalation in the near future (which is the time frame i am thinking about now). obviously the current conditions are tragic and escalation would cause unspeakable loss so maybe i am just being hopeful but not realistic. time will tell.

I don't think we should bomb Iran yet because I am not convinced their oil assets are necessary at this point. Iraq's reserves are though to be 4x Iran's, and Iraq has been easier to conquer.

We need to subdue Iraq completely before we start bombing Iran and Venezuela.

You know, once I realized that we take what we want when we want it, starting with the Native Americans 400 years ago, this whole thing started making a lot more sense.

But, I agree completely with the author -- Iran would be gratuitous at this point. At least, we have to completely sap Iraqis of all national will. We'll know we succeeded when the suicide rate starts spiking.

Why is it that the pro-war guys, civilian and military are totally unable to predict when we can get out of Iraq safely, but can tell us exactly in detail what will happen if we get out too soon?

Iranians aren't stupid. They're not going to attack anyone and invite the U.S. to bomb them to Kingdom Come, no matter what Bush's dogs of war say.

While they're at it, why doesn't the IAEA inspect Israel's nuclear weapons facilities? How many hundreds of nukes do THEY have?

JUST A TASTE OF THINGS TO COME IF ISRAEL GETS IT'S WAY ON IRAN.......

"Oil Hits $80 a Barrel for First Time"
Wednesday September 12, 3:09 pm ET
By John Wilen, AP Business Writer
Oil Prices Reach $80 a Barrel for First Time After Government Reports Decline in Inventories

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil futures prices rose sharply Wednesday, briefly climbing above a record $80 a barrel after the government reported a surprisingly large drop in crude inventories and declines in gasoline supplies and refinery activity.

The report from the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration suggested oil supplies are tightening as demand remains strong. That's why oil prices are rising despite OPEC's decision on Tuesday to boost crude production by 500,000 barrels per day this fall, analysts said.

simonhhh, why sympathize with my view? isn't promoting a view that does not predict the escalation of violence a good thing?

He will...no he won't...he will...no he won't. Why oh why is congress sitting on the sidelines wringing their hands? The American people don't know half the story. The whole thing stinks and once more we're walking into deep dodo. Wake up and smell the stench. They stick a gun to the world's head while sermonizing about salvation. Criminals all of them.

Cheney shoots lame ducks. Doesn't he?

simonhhh, agree with the bay of tonkin false flag possibility. i just think that bombing iran will not be economically beneficial and our military on the ground and at sea could receive blowback. bu$hco is greedy not insane. unlike vietnam, the considerations are more economic than idealogical. setting up democratic governments and leaving is not an option-creating a democracy (although we seem to prefer dictatorships) that bows to our economic issues and allows us to stay is. bombing iran will not allow us to occupy it and gain access to their oilfields or deny that country possible nuclear weapons forever.

It not so much about democrecy Iran or Iraq, those who bank the person to be selected president make war on those taht would displace the dollar from becoming the dominent currency. If we have to exchange EURO for dollars we are in deep caca. It takes $1.38 US dollars to get 1.00 EURO, you do the math what we pay for oil.

Its not the oil lobbies people. Halliburton tried to do business in Iran when Dick Cheney was in charge but due to sanctions could not.Those sanctions were put in place due to the efforts of the Israel lobby AIPAC which is also pushing for increased sanctions as I speak. Oil companies don't give a damn whether they are trading with a democracy or dictatorship their buttom line is stability and getting the oil out. Walt and Mersheimer devote a whole chapter in their new book about this.

A good example is the Afghan natural gas pipeline. Plenty of negoiations went on under the Taliban and those bastards were even brought to Texas by UNOCAL. In the end the pipeline project went to a different company under Karzai.

The lobby wants war with Iran. No one else in their right mind in the region does especially those with commercial/trade interests. I don't think our military wants this war either--alot of people are being removed (fired) in the military for speaking out.

Kucinich was the first one back in 2002 who said (during his presidential run), "I wouldn't buy a used car from this administration; I'm sure not going to buy a used war from them."

I wonder what China would have to say about this? Did they not sign an $8 billion oil deal with Iran? Also, Russia just tested a non-nuclear bomb they call the "daddy of all bombs." My guess is that both of these countries would not be too keen on the U.S. bombing Iran, although I would not put it past the Bush Administration to do so. Call it a haunch.

all hail the pro-life, compassionate conservatives!

Note: these powers come from Congress' authorizing him to impose martial law if and when he thinks it is needed. Satin.

"In an interview after his appearance before a congressional panel on Monday, General Petraeus strongly implied that it would soon be necessary to obtain authorisation to take action against Iran within its own borders, rather than just inside Iraq. "There is a pretty hard look ongoing at that particular situation" he said."

"British forces have been sent from Basra to the volatile border with Iran amid warnings from the senior US commander in Iraq that Tehran is fomenting a "proxy war."

Either we hit the streets and get radically disobedient right fu*king now, or fuggeddaboutit.

Bush has been given power to declare a national state of emergency, giving him the dictatorial powers he has always wanted. He then can suspend the 2008 elections and prolong his power as long as he sees an emergency justifying it, such as the hokey threat he sees in Iran. Satin.

The neocons will keep Iran involvement low intensity. That plan has more use to them at the moment because they can use Iran as a false threat to stoke fear. A large scale attack would only weaken them and inflame opposition at home and abroad.

If Little George follows up on all his sabre rattling and launches a bombing campaign of any type against Iran, impeachment comes off the table.

Don't forget, one of the House bills of impeachment against Tricky Dick was for unlawfully invading Cambodia without prior Congressional authorization. The only reason that bill was never reported out was because there were sufficient high crimes and misdemeanors arising out of the Watergate break in and cover up that there was no reason for the Ervin committee to go further.

Bill from Saginaw

Great! The US Dollar is falling through the floor, national spending on the prison-military industrial complex is out of control, the spending on the war of genocide against Iraq is out of control, not to mention the needless loss of human lives, and now the US want to expand the war by targeting Iran. Insane!

What's all this talk of bushco not doing something insane? Insane to whom? If they can think of a way to spin it, then it can become a reality. Be it a false flag incident or more WMD fears. LOL, they had an excellent practice round with Iraq. Hopefully this time they could at least make the effort to plant evidence of WMD in Iran. Remember those nuclear bombs on that plane last week? Just spray paint over the "u.s.a." and rewrite "death to america". I bet it would work.

I a currently watching a cartoon fantasy "Mae Otome" where a young queen is forced to come face to face with a constituency that she severely neglected. She was raised as a totally spoilt brat, and she cared not one bit for the less fortunate. She did things that cause poverty and grief, and then instead of caring for her victims, the new poor, she had her guards clear them out. Later, she is forced to re-evaluate herself with much tears. She comes to realise what a worthless piece of shit she had been. And part of the story is that she changes much for the better.

Could we possibly make George W Bush understand his true worth? Here is a guide to the worthiness of GWB:- http://www.bordergatewayprotocol.net/jon/media/bush/

mirf59

Hey Nazi, it's already working:
HEALTH-US: Soldier's Tragic Suicide Just One of Dozens
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39203

Way to go High RWA sheep, you're a model boot licker, spit and buff, spit and buff.:

Bob Altemeyer's - The Authoritarians
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

The corperate criminals are losing their foothold in Central and South America, so they're moving to dominate other peoples in other regions.

Yeah the war is about oil to some degree, but the wars of afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and in turn Syria and Turkmenistan (don't forget about them) are all about corperate imperialism and control of these nations. It has nothing to do with liberation.

Oil, Military industrial profits, other war profiteering, while corrupt and twisted in and of themselves are only secondary to the real motive and primary reason behind the war. Domination and subjugation of (what they think) is a helpless region. Regardless, "opening up" this regions brings massive profits to the financiers, far beyond that of the oil/energy and military conglomerates.

Democracy...Freedom... Liberty...human rights. The financiers couldn't care less (Saudi Arabia, Nigeria for example) as long as the cash flow keeps coming to them, and remains stable (ie the nations and the billions of people remain dependent upon them).

We have only to look in the mirror to see who is to blame for the current state of affairs.

I hate those simplistic metaphors, curmudgeon99, maybe when you look in the mirror you see this completely rational being, far from poverty, nice health plan, a 401K retirement fund. You belittle people in desperation. But you put the blame on them. You bushco sympathizer.

are you going to play the victim right up until it is your eyes looking out the little crack in the side of the rail car door?

Iran is more useful to BushCheney Inc. as a bogeyman than as a enemy in a real live shooting war.

Iran is the excuse they use to cover their own massive failures.

Iran has been blamed for supplying high explosives to Iraqi insurgents (pay no attention to the tons of HE the U.S. Army left unguarded at Al Qa'qaa in 2003).

Iran has been blamed for training Iraqi insurgents to fire mortars accurately enough to hit the Green Zone several times a day (pay no attention to all those Iraqi Army artillery men disbanded and sent home to unemployment in 2003).

With Saddam gone, Iran is the new excuse for supplying Israel with $billions in American weapons (courtesy of the U.S. Taxpayer).

The only reason I can see why BushCo would start a hot war with Iran is to make it impossible for President H. Clinton to do anything constructive in Iraq... anything that would threaten the predatory contracts that BigOil Inc. is forcing upon them at gunpoint.

That's reason enough to raise a ruckus now:
HANDS OFF IRAN!

The only thing I would buy from Bu$h the inferior is a grave, only if he moves in immediately.

I believe that our so called congress gave the dictator the power to proclaim a national emergency - martial law and concentration camps or starvation for desenters. Heck of a job Congress!

Unless the Democrats in Congress take action to stop Bush's authorization, Iran WILL be bombed producing Shiite escallation of warfare in Iraq, at the least The Neocons need perpetual war and chaos to hold power. They are looking to reduce the oil production in order to raise their profits just as they have with the Iraq occupation. Do not confuse the US government as acting in We the People's interests. There was a takeover in 2000. The law was overthrown by corrupt justices. Again in 2004 the elections were corrupted. Bush and his cohorts have demonstrated repeatedly that they are not public servants and do not uphold the Constitution as they swore to do. Bush has been recorded boasting of his loyalty to an ultra-wealthy elite early on. Nothing has changed.

Curmudgeon99 @ 8:21pm:
"We have only to look in the mirror to see who is to blame for the current state of affairs."

Unlike the ubiquitous denigrator, I think that epigram has a lot going for it, ~ thankyou. Many other comments above also have the ring of pertinence, thanks too for those.

Whatever the lunatics in the Grey House may *actually* be plotting, for them to be just SPEAKING of yet more wars (in an already war-torn world) is the very epitome of madness, ~let alone for them to be actually *planning* still more catastrophes for the human race! -Just how low can this group of maniacs sink?

I agree with the point of view which opines that these war-obsessed scorpions could not be speaking of increased warfare without *some* sort of complicity on the part of their electorate, (even if that's only by a majority of people not making enough NOISE, or taking enough effective ACTIONS of protest, to prevent those obtuse leaders play their highly menacing game).

I think it's always useful to bear in mind that there are numerically FAR more of us, than there are of them.
True, -they are armed to the teeth and well-organised, so pitched battles on the street with their henchmen are of questionable use, but there is, [surely] more than just one way to rid ourselves of their despotic tyranny?

I believe that creative, original thinking, alongside *unity* of vision and purpose, coupled with *persistence, courage and commitment* is probably our best way forwards.
- Cindy Sheehan and Dennis Kucinich are maybe good examples here?

It's apparently not known exactly who originally gave us the quote "It's only necessary for evil to succeed if enough people of goodwill do nothing" ~ but it holds true anyway...

The above is not intended to point blame, but more an amateur's attempt to look at how we might best take power away from the nit-wits in charge, and put the train of Civilisation back on it's tracks, - heading somewhere sensible, - not into oblivion!

US of A Your atitudes are beyond me. Our ancestors survived beyond oil otherwise none of us would be here today. To butcher our neighbours for our suposedley well being is worse than obscene Peace and batter those evil basta$$$rds. When you strip aside the nice numbers and oficial reports. What is left - Bullshit and Death.

Yes, Joyce, not only I would buy one, but would buy as many used cars as I can afford from our dry drunk president, because I love to witness his ass kicked hard and the fascist military-industrial complex destroyed for ever, so that humanity can live in peace thereafter.

Bush has had it easy in Iraq, real easy. Iran is not Iraq. If bush unleashes his bombing dogs on Iran and destroys its infrastructure and murders its people, no American will dare to walk safely on the face of this earth. Having read about Iranians, I imagine that the entire family members of those responsible for this war crime and crimes against peace will not die a natural death should they start the war. The Iranians are very friendly, but at the same time extremely vindictive, and will never forget a wrong. They're not like Japanese who got A-bombed, then later became friends. This is a horse of a different color.

forextrader September 12th, 2007 6:38 pm

Hey you'd appreciate this....One of the reasons {since there are many reasons} the US dollar is self-immolating is the REAL M3 figure is running at 13.9%....Yeah I got it right...Holy Crackers....

One of the immoral {or even perhaps illegal} ways Bu$hCo is paying for his imbroglio in Mess-O-Potamia ...they're simply monetizing it....

This has not gone unnoticed by every Federal Reserve Board in every Western Developed country....also why Gold is currently at US$705....jeeeessss where is the jewelry box...lets melt it.

.
We have let madmen lie us into madness.

Now they want to attack Iran.

Does anyone think that will end the madness?

Impeach Bush. Stop the madmen. Stop the war while we still can.

.

If only half of what Chris Hedges predicts were to come about, the Republican Party would be dead meat. Rational Republicans (if that's not an oxymoron) know it. Therefore Jaded Prole's (@4:56 pm) scenario is the most likely.

By the way, here is the link to the Hedges article.

www.truthdig.com/report/item/200601009_bushs_nuclear_apocalypse/