Look . . . the anti-war movement re Iraq was HUGE and
we were unable to stop the "illegal" attack.
Neither was the United Nations able to stop it -- !!!

The anti-war movement has only grown in opposition to Iraq, but we are still unable to either IMPEACH Bush nor to exit Iraq.

And, up pops Bush with his 24% approval rating telling us he's going to possibly NUKE Iran . . . !!!!

Is there no one who can stop the president from dumping a nuclear bomb on another nation?????

I'd really like to know the answer to that --- !!!!

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

"He said politics will prevent the U.S. from striking first.
'Public opinion wants us out of the war we are in and doesn't want to start another one,' Sheppard said. 'The American people are not going to support another war of choice in that part of the world.'"

Yep, just like every other war that the US has started throughout history, it takes a false pretext, i.e. a false flag attack like 9/11 or the staged Gulf of Tonkin attack in 1965, to overcome the reluctance of the American public to go to war.

So, the most likely route to an attack on Iran is to stage another fake terrorist attack, perhaps this time a nuclear attack on one or more US cities, to scare the hell out of the American people so that they will beg for war and beg for more violations of our civil liberties in Patriot Act number 3/4. More and more members of the establishment are warning about just such a pretext, including Senetar Gary Hart and Zibignew Brzenski.

When will the public ever learn? Doesn't this old shtick to stage fake attacks to trick the public ever get warn out?

I don't think its because the public is lazy I think its because the public feels helpless and does not know what to do and they are scared if they speak out they will endanger themsleves or their families under the Patriot Act. Anti-war leaders organize marches that take place on weekends. This is useless as Congress is not in session and its proving to be safe and not to have an impact which is what Congress wants.

True civil disobedience must be organized and must take place. This is the crux of the problem. The public must be empowered to take risks and true anti-war leaders need to show them how.

"We need to start waging peace with the same tenacity with which we wage war," Ritter said.

We certainly do! Sadly, the Holy Office of war mongers hiding in the temples on Capitol Hill and not answering to "we the people" have decided that the $$profits from war are more important than the lives of the troops who are fighting and dying to preserve the facade of democracy.

To make matters worse, the holies on Capitol Hill are borrowing from Communist China, Japan and other nations to support their elitist wars while digging the federal debt hole so deep you can't even see to the bottom.

And now we have Secretary of Treasury and former CEO of Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson, telling the government (Congress) that they should do something (give more welfare to corporations) about the subprime crisis to prevent the financial institutions and Wall Street scumbags from losing their shirts after they have totally ruined our economy with their insane lending and trade policies; and this request comes after Congress already issued a "corporate welfare" bailout to the tune of $235 billion for their predatory lending scheme.

What a useless government!

People in the military who are intelligent and observing the reality of iraq are aware of the failed Bush policies.

This is so tragic that these people were willing to give up their lives for us and they are being used now for political gains.

This is an article written by 12 former army captains who served in Iraq
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/15/AR2007101500841.html

and they are calling for a draft...

"There is one way we might be able to succeed in Iraq. To continue an operation of this intensity and duration, we would have to abandon our volunteer military for compulsory service. Short of that, our best option is to leave Iraq immediately. A scaled withdrawal will not prevent a civil war, and it will spend more blood and treasure on a losing proposition.:

(Personally I think there is no way to win in iraq with a military solution and it will take a generation at least to get that nation settled. Northern ireland still has not resolved some of its problems. If people want to hate its difficult to change them.)

Ritter was a marine and a Republican..but he has good values and he is a realist...and is aware of what has been going on in our White House and knows what Iraq is like

"I tend to agree with him that certain radical behavior does marginalize us," he said.

True. The question is, how do the rest of us redefine a movement that the radicals have defined? How do we un-marginalize us?

Disrespect breeds more disrespect, even if you're as right as rain.

Ritter is merely saying what is true: We need to re-frame the debate using words that show what we are _for_ instead of what we are _against_. It's very difficult to get anywhere when you're going away from something.

Thanks Colleen,

I have been yelling "Impeach the Parasites!" for a long time.

I have been waiting for one Rep in the House to call for getting Bush/Cheney as partners in High Crimes but not one congressman has the guts!

Oh Yea Dennis has bill 333 which calls for impeaching Cheney and the result, even if successful, would give Bush the golden opportunity to appoint a fresh VP.

But the very act of Impeaching them together would mean that no future president could pardon them. The Constitution says that the "President has the power of pardon except in cases of Impeachment".

This is why Nixon had to resign just in time as the Impeachment got out of Committee but before the House could vote on Impeachment which would have meant that even Ford could not pardon Nixon if he would have not resigned in time.

I am lookin for one brave Representative to at least make the call for real. To use the VP as a scapegoat is what every beginning protest writer does.....It is considered good form to attack the VP rather than the Prez..... and it is safer.

My only recourse is to support Cindy for Pelosi's seat since that will be the only poetic Justice we have so far and the only chance for real Peace I can see.

If the Dems had a brain they would want even a token Dem in the house to show the courage to do what the constitution requires, "Impeachment for High Crimes", so that on Election day the voters would feel that there weren't enough Dems to get the vote to impeach and that would be a reason to pack the new Congress with Democrats because the majority of voters are ready for some action.

They are just cowards...all of them.

Go Cindy!

Our Best Defense:

The best we have right now to impede or at least throw off balance the new march to war with Iran, SHOULD be our Congress, but sadly (maddingly, insanely, and even illegally) it is not. It IS, rather, IMPEACHMENT.

At this moment all "antiwar", "war prevention" and "pro peace" groups should focus all energies on promoting sufficient public outcries for Impeachment so that representatives begin to realize that their futures depend on coming on board, not opposing impeachment.

The US Constitution is in many ways the "heart" of our nation (not the flag, anthem, etc.). It is in peril.

Our Constitution has a "built-in" defense mechanism, however. It's called: IMPEACHMENT.

The Constitution REQUIRES the Congress to act and use Impeachment when that founding document is in danger or being abused; that is not an option for Congress.

In other words, by law (the Constitution itself), Impeachment CANNOT be put "off the table." THAT position itself violates the Constitution, by negating its self-defense mechanism.

Go to: Florida Impeach.org

Watch videos describing WHY Impeachment:
• David Swanson
• John Nichols

Read about calls for impeachment.

-- Other important link:
afterdowningstreet.org

This is like a bad joke. This idiot who is our president and is clearly incompetent...look at what he says about Putin, a man who was in charge of the KGB and is now destroying what little freedom existed in Russia.

"Bush reiterated that he considers Putin a friend. "Do I trust him? Yes, I trust him," he said. "Do I like everything he says? No. And I suspect he doesn't like everything I say. But we're able to say it in a way that shows mutual respect."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/02/AR2007070200131.html

So how come the right wing isn't worried about this? You know the people who supported Mc Carthy? Why are they now supporting Bush?

Putin was trained to be a spy! He has probably ordered the killing of people who have opposed him.

The US is drifting with a weak and incompetent president. Everyone should be calling for his impeachment.

Jim Glover

I like the way you think. You are thinking about the interactions between the nations. Most Americans think as if America is in a bubble and as if national politics will determine international events.

I beleive there is a great deal of hostility towards Bush internationally and other nations are trying to weaken him. Unfortunately that is playing into the hands of some very bad people...like Putin.

You know the Putin that Bush looked into his eyes and thought he could trust him. Bush liked Putin !!!!?!

It just shows how bankrupt the right is to continue to support Bush. Bush has undermined so many American principles and has helped the enemies of America with his incompetence. And still no impeachment!

What can we do when the MS media reports official lies such as "the Iranians have enriched uranium to 97%", when the IAEA actually reported " they have enriched to 3%" ? and they don't point out the contradiction in the U.S. support of Israel's, India's, and Pakistan's nuclear development. None of these countries signed the NPT, whereas Iran did and has abided by its terms. How do we begin to join the debate when it's parameters are framed by the militants? When the message is controlled by Dick Cheney and Wolf Blitzer?

No tax payment = no war money...

www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm

www.nationalpriorities.org/Cost-of-War/Cost-of-War-3.html

Who is making a killing on this war?

www.alternet.org/waroniraq/41083/

Get with it America...

WE NEED A SECOND BOSTON TEA

April 15 2008 (What do think about this, Mr. Ritter...is it possible?)

Correction, maybe Ritter didn't imply the peace movement is fringe, maybe the author Morlock said: "Too often the peace movement isn't ready for obvious attacks and gets defined by its own fringe political tendencies."

My error.

Ken, Col Ritter is a military weapons intelligence expert, who career was charged with making determinations about whether or not a nation was gearing up for war! That is the man's job. If he gives an assesment of 80-100 percent in the next six months of a U.S. attack, then we should consider that he has sources that you and I could never have access to. Particuarlly disstressing to me is the fact that the marines are talking about massing in Afganistan. That is exactly what you would expect prior to an Iran attack. Forces positioned on both sides, with the air force coming from the northern Caspian Sea bases and the Navy striking from the South. (actually a four sided attack.) You would also expect Putin to show up and try to prevent his customer from getting taken out before he pays his nuke power plant bill!

Again, all indications are that the persian gulf and Red Sea is full of flatops and this is not a drill.

All just my opinions.

Barn Burner is right:

"The problem is the Public. The U.S. public is proud of it's ignorance. The U.S. public is a group of anti-intellectuals. They are intellectually lazy therefor are suspicious and contemptuous of anyone that sound a bit intellectual as in uses two syllable more than once in a conversation. The public like children must be entertained. The war in Iraq or Iran is like a game on playstation I, II and III- never ending and no one really gets hurt-it's fun." unquote

This is what fueled the civil war. That generation had no idea what war was really like, considered it a source of excitment and adventure...... the bloodiest mess we ever had.

You say the word nuke to a red neck today, and he thinks it's a big fireball on the NASCAR track. Absolutely no conception of what those things did in Japan, absolutely no conception what Cherynobal did in Russian (deaths may approach one million shortly.) These idiots vote! These idiots vote for war/chicken hawks and glorify war, firearms, death and destruction like it was a second rate runner up to HBO.

Ritter is right. We need to ditch the flowers and peace signs and roll up our UNION sleaves and make an impact. A financial impact.

pacplyer

(Ritter/Nader 08?)

Here's a phrase that keeps Iraq and Iran on the front burner, and is a great organizing principle for current action or future elections:

IMPEACH BUSH/CHENEY.

I was just with some MoveOn Democrats and they explained how "Support The Troops" and "End The War Now" where chosen as their campaign slogans based on marketing test results. I agree that those terms resonate widely, perhaps too widely: even George Bush said from the beginning he was against war and of course he supports the Troops.

That's why I like other this other organizing phrase too as it makes a clear distinction as to sentiments as well as action:

IMPEACH BUSH/CHENEY NOW.

You might even embellish these war preventative organizing phrases with some exclamation, why not? The impeachment process would go back to Ritter's earlier writing on "repudiation vs. impeachment", and act as a re-confirmation of the US Constitutional social contract; for Jim Wallis and Thom Hartmann it can be an American Renewal, for the likes of John Conyers it can be reparations far beyond the level of reparations he's currently focused on, and to be carried out the impeachment process will need the civic action of millions and thus the repudiation Ritter seeks, and without which the continuation of the American experiment really has no meaning.

So what about those exclamation marks?

IMPEACH BUSH/CHENEY!

IMPEACH BUSH/CHENEY NOW!

Here is how I see it,

Similar to a week or so before JFK was assassinated, Khruchev heard (true or not) that the CIA was planning another invasion of Cuba after Kennedy promised that there would not be another invasion. So Russia told the USA that another attack on Cuba would mean War.

I think when the Russian Nuclear bombers Flew to the coast of Alaska last week or so and our Air Forces waved at each other like "I hope this ain't for real cause I want to see family again" this was the signal just like with JFK and now that Putin is in Iran....Well, Do you get the point Col. Ritter?

I think the big Boys who are not Suicidal Told Bush the facts of life on Planet Earth a year or so ago and his crazy, phoney Cowboy act is all the muscle he has left and he thinks this "everything is on the table option" will make it look like he is forcing the enemy to negotiate which is what everyone including Bin Laden has been calling for all along.

Bush now wants a different legacy than what he has now. His kids must have told him that nobody believes him anymore and he even admitted that is why he picked General Betrayus.

Bush is thinkin of just declaring victory in Iraq but again nobody would believe him but that hasn't stopped him yet.

Hope that I am right and Col Ritter ain't because We all could be gratefully dead if I am wrong.

War with Iran not only will destroy the Republican Party but also their enablers, the Democrats. Nationwide demonstrations will cripple the country, and Bush will impose martial law. Eventually, the military that's already tired of Bush/Cheney regime will step in and arrest the top Administration people___a regime change here in the US.

1. I agree that the Dems haven't done all they can. And it is true they can't break a filibuster. We need to elect enough, probably 9 and 10 for sure next election. And for sure a Dem Prez no matter who. The Supreme court is on the verge and one more conservative on it can undo everything that is still intact. And that will last for another 20 years. I don't contend this is more important than lives being lost isn't the most pressing issue, but it is important to realize that one more wingnut judge and they will overturn not just Roe v. Wade, but Social security, medicare, most large social programs. Remember Social Security only survived by a 5 to 4 vote in the 30s despite a court that at that time was liberal. Think of the damage that could be done, millions of seniors in poverty, no healthcare for them. Medicaid, Schip. If you don't think that the right wingers won't push for all of this as they become more and more emboldened, you are wrong. If you listen to right wing talk, their overall objective is to totally overturn the new deal of FDR, the new society of the 60s and 70s of the war on poverty, medicare, etc.
The electorate in the last 7 years has made the Dems extremely gun shy and the constant lies from prez and repugnets do echo across the land and it is unfortunate that this still resonates in the red states. I live in Georgia and hear the wingnuts exicited that this can occur in our lifetime; Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia are licking their chops for just one more wingnut Supreme court judge and we can begin. Justice Breyer, liberal is 87, Ginsberg, Stevens, and Souter in their 70s DANGER! DANGER! DANGER! Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, just licking their chops for one more wingnut
We must support the Dems and nurse them along no matter what!!! Don't vote for any 3rd party candidates, don't sign any petitions to get other candidates on the ballot in any state. THIS COMING ELECTION IS THAT IMPORTANT.
REMEMBER DIVIDE US AND THEY WIN!!!!!!.

"Too often the peace movement isn't ready for obvious attacks and gets defined by its own fringe political tendencies."

Whoever pointed out that Ritter didn't say that, the above author quoting him did - thanks. My ire stands intact, but more accurately directed now.

Isn't it unusual for a marine commandant Gen to suggest that forces be moved form one war zone to another without first clearing it with the defense secretary?

This seems odd to me.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hcWJu9bbzrJZ7uNHjvMn0BuTGqHQD8S9RVCO0

"Conway's comments come amid discussion at the Pentagon that the Marines pull its forces from Iraq and send them instead to Afghanistan to take the lead combat role there.

On Monday, Conway declined to comment because he said he had not yet briefed Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Gates recently told reporters that he was aware of the suggestion, but had not seen a plan.

"My understanding is that it's, at this point, extremely preliminary thinking on the part of perhaps the staff in the Marine Corps," Gates said. "But I don't think at this point it has any stature.""

The marines are trying to get their units out of iraq and get them transferred into Afghanistan. Apparently there are no marines units in Afghanistan.
Are marine leaders trying to save the lives of their men from a lost cause..the war in iraq? Are the people who are the leaders in this war and intelligent beginning to wonder how to save the lives of their men? Lives that might be lost because of incompetence in the White House?

Also why is the US Congress now condemning the slaughter of Armenians in Turkey around the time of WWI? Is it to lose the support of Turkey and try to end the war by unraveling the tenuous support of Turkey? Turkey then would take over northern Iraq? Or is this just another instance of stupidity by our government...Why irritate Turkey now?

Intelligent people in positions of power must see what is going on. They must know that American lives will be lost and that the chances of any kind of good solution is unlikely because of the incompetence of the people in the White House. Some of them must be acting behind the scenes.

There are just so many unknowns in all of this...and the news is so biased and unreliable.

Note: Ritter did not write this article. His comments above were chosen by the author and are not the only things he said. I saw him in Phoenix on Friday and he said that based on a full analysis of the situation (applying the methodology of an intelligence officer which he used to be) he figured there was an 80 - 100% chance that we will attack Iran. He does not believe the WH is bluffing on this.

His prescription includes putting lots of pressure on Congress for continued investigations, hearings, and oversight to make them produce the actual evidence for this and other issues so that impeachment will become impossible to deny (build the body of evidence through subpoenas, etc.) I am not saying that this will work -- just telling you what I heard him say (but I didn't record it, so it is my recollection).

I think our biggest hope is that the military will stand down on this if we can create enough "doubt" as to the legality of this action. Therefore, we must not just let it slide that the invasion of Iraq was illegal. We need to give the commanders and soldiers a leg to stand on by getting some authoritative body to declare all this invasion stuff illegal.

Isnt it time we look at Sheppard as the analyst who promoted this war. He is just like every other talking head selling his career and soul. Ritter has been accurate and correct from the beginning.

I agree with Ricco and others about the draft, but it's not going to happen.

The current trend is toward all outsourcing of the military services. This solves alot of long-term problems .. These guys get paid lots (heck, it's dangerous!) but come home to no VA or any kind of guaranteed public medical care. And there is no military accountability for their actions, which means that they can more effectively carry out the death wishes of their masters.

Who would need a draft given this trend?

Is there a way to counteract this trend of mercenarization of our armed services? It surely must be illegal in some way. How do we stop it?

How to prevent a war?

First of all don't wait for it too begin by our administration conducting an attack, or authorizing, or assisting, or giving "the nod to Israel" to initiate attacks against Iran's infrastructure and people. Let Iran know that we hate our president and are struggling with our Congress to make them accountable to make the Administration accountable.

We, the people of the United States, need to choose a date that is closer than the primaries to hold a GENERAL STRIKE, this is to be a "pre-emptive" GENERAL STRIKE. We can not wait for the asshole in chief to get a brain transfer, or the republican party to get a heart transfer.

I choose the DAY of the DEAD, Nov. first, a Thursday, to be the first day of the US general strike against our administrations constant and increasing efforets to destablilize the middle east.

I will not work on on Nov. 1st.

Also the strike must last at least a week in order for the reality to ripple through the country. Close all offices: county, state, and Federal. Shut down the country. There are many people who want the war to stop but they don't want to be beat up by the police for nothing, they don't want to be imprisoned for demonstrating, etc. Well, not going to work will not draw prison terms or police brutality. There are many people willing to face off the gestapo if there is committment from the rest of their community.

Sisyphus

The numb nuts decider and his coterie of idiots had better hear Sindbaad- I believe from the syntax that Farsi is his first language---- having spent some time in that part of the world, I believe that he speaks truth. These folks were civilized long before our forebears stopped painting themselves blue. They have a long history of taking a serious toll on invaders and a long memory, as in fact does most of the rest of the world. We (the United States are on thin ice with the rest of the world. A nuclear attack will certainly break that ice.

For those who are doubting Ritter's assessment, he has already written extensively on his reasons why war with Iran is likely. One good article is here:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/27/4134/

Also, I would like to throw out the idea of tax resistance. WE are the ones paying for the war. If there were major tax resistance, then we wouldn't have to wait for congress to do something for us. We take the matter into our own hands. We keep our taxes and pay for community programs that we run ourselves (tutoring, community gardens, whatever). Of course, we risk eventually being put in jail... unless there are thousands and thousands doing it.

Are there other people besides me who are willing to do this en masse? What if we start a petition to get an idea of numbers of people who will do this?

Sinbaad lays out some differences between Iraq and Iran quite well and clearly illustrates the challenges of the neo-fools' next crusade. A couple of important issues he did not touch on should be considered. That Iran actually has an army, complete with military strategists and cohesiveness, national unity and pride, unlike the completely unorganized yet increasingly effective "civilians" in Iraq, could prove problematic for an inept military such as our own. Secondly, China and Russia have as much economically at stake as the US does. The two countries are already engaged in cooperative military excercises, and would almost certainly assist Iran in ANOTHER unprovoked, illegal attack. Also, our military personnel are already way over taxed. Recruiters are lowering standards just to maintain troop levels, where will the manpower come from?

But to me the issue is still about killing for profit. That we should "put Iraq on the back burner" and focus on Iran is paramount to saying, that some killing for profit is ok, as long as it doesn't hurt the Good ol US of A. Apparently, much of the citizenry in this once good country already think a little sport killing is good for the economy, and quite entertaining. But to read on a progressive site that it's either morally or strategically adviseable to ignore the criminal activity going on in Iraq because it would be in our own best interest to focus on the next catastrophe, implies that the concern lies with US only. To me this is about killing and maiming innocent Iraqis. Not because we are totally incompetent and unable to win what we seem proud to call a war, but because it is slaughter, not war, and innocent people are being splattered about as if it didn't matter.

A draft would certainly curtail some of the enthusiasm with which our elected idiots rush headlong into international mass murder, but it will never come to pass. It was put to a vote in the run up to Iraq and failed. Yes it was a political maneuver to produce the desired result, but it was voted down nonethless. How could mercenary companies like Blackwater profit if there was a draft? Exactly.

Demonstrations do not work. Elections don't either. If we have an election in 2008, the chances of all votes being counted accurately are, let's see, I put the odds between 1% and 2%. I have no facts to back up those numbers, they are used to make my point. Much like Ritter's 80-100% which Ken Hausle points out are mathematically unsound. But surely we progressives don't expect the Diebold machines to function properly come November do we?

So in short, it's back to the same old principle. The only way thinking or caring people will make any difference in the current or the upcoming disaster, is by withholding OUR money. It's the only way to effect any change in this corporate-right-neonut-armaggeddon-passing-through-the-eye-of-a-needle-camel-hating-idiocracy.

whirlled peas

You all can give me all the hell you want to. All i did was ask where the numbers (or the range if you prefer) came from. That is a fair question. Back it up. That is a fair request.

Mr. Ritter seems to be an outstanding individual. I just think if numbers like that are going to be thrown out there they need to be substantiated. Is that asking too much.

Peace,
Ken Hausle

I apolozize being longwinded.
Scott Ritter and many others who know the facts are all saying that the war with Iraq compared to war with Iran would be like a Sunday picnic. However nobody explains in detail why;
Here are a just a few facts to only scratch the surface;
-Iran has 4 times the size and 3 times the population of Iraq;
-Geographic makeup of Iran is quite different compared to Iraq, where the US armed forces have gathered their experience in fighting in the ME
-Despite all propaganda to the contrary, Iran has a homogenous people and almost 90% are shiites. Iranians have defended their country against the invaders since Alexander, followed by the Arabs and The Monguls. Although each time the country has come to the verge of annihilation, it still exists on the map.
-There is nothing more effective in uniting Iranians than a foreign attack. The Iran-Iraq war 1980-1988 being the most recent example.
-Iranian government structure is a polycentric one. Therefore "Shock and Awe " attacks would not be effective even if a number of the heads are taken out.
-Iranians have fresh experience and know how of fighting a war for 8 years with Iraq despite international sanctions
-Iran has been declared a member of the Axis of Evil since 2002, giving them a foolish 5 long years of warning
-Iranians have been in Iraq and watched the US fighting machine closely. They know a thing or two on how to fight
them.
-Having 5 years of forewarning Iranians have filled all their mountains and deserts with caches of weapons and explosives, awaiting the attacks.
-Iran occupies all the northern border of both Persian Gulf and Gulf of Omman. The coastline is a mixture of desert and rugged hills. Unless the US navy and Air Force has the possibility and the power to annihilate a long and difficult close to 1000 miles long coastline, even a few remaining surface to ship missiles supplied by Russia and China may play havoc on the US Fleet at sea. The closure of the Straits of Hurmoz is beside the point.
-Iran has a long border with Russia and lately Russins have not shown any tendency to act as our buddies. On the other hand Iranians have been a very generous client of Russian arms and other toys
All these facts that are not hidden from the US military strategists. They know that any troop movements into the Iranian territority is foolhardy and not practical.
The only probable solution to the Iranian problem, coveted by the Air orce, is thought to be the use of nuclear bombs with its known and clear consequences.
In my view it would be the height of political desparation and require total geopolitical ignorance to even think of undertaking such an action.
However I see nothing past the present adminstration especially with Mr. Cheney and the Israelites such as Mr. Liberman calling the shots.

The peace movement should be united in one single body and in one place join peacesource.net
book office space in our transnational offices. Flood your local politicians and candidates and local media stations with emails and demands.
Ask teh International Criminal Court to arrest Cheyney and Bush
http://peacesource.net
have a look particularly at projection and demonization and lying and disinformation.

I agree with ricco - we need a draft, and the sooner the better. It's the only thing that will make the average 'merican sit up and take notice.

I forgot to mention, Ken Hausle stated ___ Iran might attack the United States, but the U.S. sure as hell would NOT attack Iran.

Wow, now that is something to worry about, wonder if they will attack by land, air, and sea all at once. Since Iran so far has NOT managed to en-rich uranium to the point where they can even use it for a nuclear power plant, I guess we don't have to worry about their attacking us with atomic bombs. It must be their navy and air force that is their strength. Or is it some secret death ray Iran has Ken? ____ Please do enlighten us with your wisdom.

Wisdom sometimes appears on earth as a vulture, alerted by strong whiffs of carrion (Nietzsche)

Metaphor Development:

America's political brain is dead in the head.

What moves its body politic now is only a re-animated dead brain. In sum, a monster controlled by behind the scenes Frankensteins.

The vultures can now only appear as Other nations' wisdom, come to consume America's dead brain and put the full monster to rest.

Pretty ghoulish metaphor for a Federalist, huh?

(Actually, I'm hoping for a better outcome, but it's not a very believable hope at this point)

Wow, I was a bit concerned after reading Scott Ritter's remarks about the possibility of the U.S. starting a war with Iran. Thankfuully, Ken Hausle has straightened it all out and obviously there is little if anything to worry about that scenerio.

The odds of a war with Iran are next to nothing according to Hausle, Ritter's data is all BS, since he stated the odds of us starting a war with Iran at from 80 to 100%. How does Ritter figure his odds Ken asks? Let's see perhaps he figured ___ if a pig looks like a pig, oinks like a pig, smells like a pig and tastes like pork, the odds are from 80 to 100%, ____ it's a pig.

Sure glad we have other experts besides Scott Ritter to listen to here at CD. Of course I do see where Ron Hausle may be waffling a bit, he had to clarify his opinion twice with in a five minute time frame. Hmmmmmm, who to believe?

"The American people are not going to support another war of choice in that part of the world."

thewy dont support the one they are in now..what difference does that make?

""The American public is being imprinted to accept at face value that Iran poses a threat."

Much like training sheep to eat grass....

And let me make my final post. There ain't no way the odds are 100%. You do not know all that you think you do.

When i placed my odds a while ago, i still left out a chance....

Peace,
Ken Hausle

I mean i see a bunch of issues pushing towards attack, but i don't see how you arrived at the odds?

This is a fair question.

Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC

OK Ritter - you say 80-100% for an attack on Iran. I laugh at that. Iran might attack US, but we sure as hell ain't going to attack them, but ok, i suppose, i could be wrong.

Even so, all i can say about these odds is BS = BS double BS; and quadruple plus quintuple and some sextuplet neptupet also. Understand that.

Tell US how you arrived at your odds?????

Honestly, People.

Peace,
Ken Hausle

Have not read this whole thread, so if someone else has already made this point, I apologize, but it appears that the Bushies need only about 30 % of the public to fall behind a war or invasion for it to take action. I expect that the 30% or so who normally fall behind Bush will do so in this case as well. Of course, 100% of us will get to pay for it in reduced respect around the world, lowered moral authority and in lost program money for all kinds of infrastructure improvement. We ALL lose! But hey! Our P-resident wants it, so what else can we do?

Bush wants to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran, but didn't he ever stop to think that within a few days the nuclear fallout drift would make its way over to Iraq where 150,000 American soldiers and those dear boys, the Blackwater mercenaries are stationed?

This makes no more sense than before Bush invaded Iraq - he put forth comments that our bombs are designed to only blow up buildings and not kill people.

What planet is he on? I heard Bush started drinking again when Laura had cancer surgery on her leg in January. Also heard Bush started drinking again when his disapproval rating reached 70%. I think he's gone off his nut.

So Bush's plan to nuke Iran is actually reminiscent of Saddam Hussein and Adolf Hitler killing his own people!

Drunken Cowboy drives nation into ditch.

The Cure for Mad Cowboy Disease is IMPEACHMENT.

Impeach Bush/Cheney and Jail to the Chief!

A war with Iran will make Iraq look like a snowball fight. Why do you think we didn't invade them when they stormed our embassy during the Carter Administration? Even though Iran and Iraq hate each other, theres an old saying in the Arab world "...me an my brother fight our cousin. but me and my brother and our cousin fight the enemy." We are their enemy.

it is time once again,,the mercenaries are all over afganistan and prepare for another'cleansing'do something,now,please,no more blood !!

Push for the draft. With a draft in the USA - a war would either not be fought - or an armed revolution will take place in America (how else do fascists get expunged - not by a vote)

When dunce America thinks they may be flown to Iran to die (a draft) and the nakedness of the murder for greed creed is exposed - either fear or shame will make even the most ardent right winger think.

Probably a lot are OK with murder for profit but if they had to be at personal risk (no blackwater) no war would ever occur.

Iraq-nam is perfect moniker on this mess.

...

Ritter is suggesting preventing a bigger catastrophuck??

Sure, you should. Everybody should.

"Public opinion wants us out of the war we are in and doesn't want to start another one," Sheppard said. "The American people are not going to support another war of choice in that part of the world."

Unless a false flag operation is performed to convince Americans they're being attacked (again). See http://www.oregontruthalliance.org/

"Scott Ritter, ... argued that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction."

Yep, well he was kinda one of the only ones (of a very few) qualified to give that opinion at the time, but it was lost amongst the media hype and the ratings grabs because peace, it turns out, is less profitable.

That's pretty sad, really. But what you gotta do is, you gotta get mad.

"Grrr... Hulk smash!!!"

The problem is the Public. The U.S. public is proud of it's ignorance. The U.S. public is a group of anti-intellectuals. They are intellectually lazy therefor are suspicious and contemptuous of anyone that sound a bit intellectual as in uses two syllable more than once in a conversation. The public like children must be entertained. The war in Iraq or Iran is like a game on playstation I, II and III- never ending and no one really gets hurt-it's fun.
Until our public becomes responsible adults they will continue to believe the spin-it's more exciting. They will make the Presidential race a popularity contest-who the hell cares what they say, we don't understand it or the consequences of what they say.
Turn the TV on when you get up in the morning and leave it on all day, put your kid in front of it to watch a few adds. let's have constant noise, turn up that Ipod so you don't have to think

Ok I take that part back. There were some marches. The point is that they didn't do any good.
I'm trying to state that we cannot wait "for something to happen" before taking action. It's already happened and is continually happening. All our time and energy needs to be spent waking people up. The demonstrations are a failure. The only way is talking face to face to persuade 1 person at a time.

Plus Mr. Ritter is world renown. An international presence. A respected figure. Me. I just live in my house, try to interact in my community, and type on the keyboard. Like a bunch of us here as best i can tell. There is a difference between someone like myself and someon like Mr. Ritter who is "famous".

I have been posting here for months about my sentiment. I have been sending e-mails to my family and friends for years that is consistent with this sentiment as far as i know.

If there is someone in america who thinks we need to attack Iran then i want them to explain how it helps me and my family. I can't think of one good reason.

Iran on the other hand is sitting there. A huge monstrous military presence just at their doorstep. This presence could literally wipe out the country by some barbaric act if some insane individual made such a horrendous choice. Think about it. What would you do. So far it seems to me that the Middle Eastern Countries have shown patience and deliberation. For example, the situation with the Israeli planes flying into Syria??? Syria just reported what happened from their perspective but apparently did not retailiate. Well i'd like to know some other perspectives.

Plus, i'm sick and damn tired of folks from the US of A being in the middle east. Why are they there. We have been fed a bunch of lies from the get go. Who wants to keep listening to the spew. Not i.

If you want to get in a fight, come over to my house and we will have a boxing match fair and square. If that ain't how you play, then you ought to look in the mirror, and think about the kind of person you are.

Enough said.

Later,
Ken Hausle

To TheLorax: "Iraq was attacked and hardly anyone marched." I beg your pardon, there were anti-war protests BEFORE the Iraq war started all over the world! We in the United States weren't the only ones who KNEW this was a BAD idea.

Ritter is right -- as usual. War-prevention makes far more sense than "bring the troops home." Bring them home for what? So they can rest up for the next war?

People keep talking like an attack on Iran is the trigger point. It won't change anything.
Afghanistan was attacked and hardly anyone marched.
Iraq was attacked and hardly anyone marched.
All I hear is "Ok NEXT time we'll really put it them!" or the various IF/THEN statement. The truth is, the administration will attack Iran and there won't be any change in the demonstrations.
There is no NEXT time. It's happening RIGHT NOW! An attack on Iran is simply a continuation, it isn't a new event.

Continual, unrelenting EDUCATION directed at the gullible or the foolish is what is needed to stop this conflict and save our country. You can't say "NEXT time I'll build an Ark." The flood is upon you.

Demonstratons won't help. National strikes will.

I too was a lifelong-conservative-Republican- turned-anti-war activist...and a military man. Redemption is possible.

SCOTT RITTER=FREEDOM FIGHTER !!

This is a good thread, but I wonder what percentage of the population is listening, maybe 1% or 3% at the most. What I mean is enlightened souls, genuinely intent on sorting through the MSM propaganda storm. I was watching glimpses of David Letterman, and honestly the majority of Americans are as stupid, as stupid gets. This silent majority of lemmings have no idea Armageddon is close enough you could spit on it.

One shonky move from 'decider [dunderhead] in chief' and 'darth vader cheney' and the Middle East is toast. Back on Letterman and the pure brainwashing and stupefying power of MSM oozes bullshit galore.. Noam Chomsky was dead right [pardon the sardonic pun] about the 'Manufacturing of Consent'...

Mr Ritter, with all due respect for his courage, may not be the best "war prevention" advisor. Some of his own choices of words and phraseology don't seem to exhibit a lot of political acumen.

Putting Iraq "on the back burner", for example, most certainly is "as distasteful as it sounds" in more ways than one. Surely the emphasis should be a positive one -- i.e., putting the potential for an attack on Iran in the forefront.

It seems to me that the two issues are complementary and, in any case, they're certainly not mutually exclusive. I don't know what kind of "stove" Mr Ritter uses, but mine has more than one "front burner."

to Jassim:

i dont think mister Ritter was implying that we forget about Iraq, i believe what he meant is instead of focusing "all" efforts on stopping th eIraq war which is already being fought, we should at least try to stop the Next war before it starts. Actually we should start with afghanistan first we dont hear much about them anymore but NATO has been on a civilian killing spree there lately too, why do they alsways call in air strikes no matter what anyway?

to Jassim:

i dont think mister Ritter was implying that we forget about Iraq, i believe what he meant is instead of focusing "all" efforts on stopping th eIraq war which is already being fought, we should at least try to stop the Next war before it starts.

The unpleasant truth is you can't fight every battle nor win every war. Strategy is about picking the fights you can win and then winning them. The US has done a lousy job of fighting its wars in Afghanistan and Iraq-Nam largely because they never considered reaching objectives by relying on available resources.

Sadly, the war-prevention movement isn't a whole lot better. I'm certainly not smart enough to come up with a solution to it, but the problem is as plain as the fat around my middle. We have a bunch of people in the US who don't want another damn war, and certainly not with Iran. We also have a crowd of evil bastards who seem intent on starting such a war, and it's these guys who hold the levers of power to move the troops into Persia.

The resources we have are the millions who know a war in Iran will be a disaster for everyone involved. The objective is to ensure the war-mongers don't move the troops. There is an election that could remove the crazies but not for 15 months. We don't have time. Is it already to late?

' "As distasteful as it sounds, we have to put Iraq on the back burner for now," Ritter said.'

Yeah right. The plan is to bomb all Iran's nuclear installations, with nuclear weapons. Chernobyl was equivalent to four thousand Hirishimas, it seems. Now we are to blow up many, many Chernobyls - with a clean bill of heath from the IKAEA.

The US Administration my not give a toss for the people of the region, in their shameful wickedness, but how do the parents of the US soldiers in Iraq, Turkey, Kuwait etc.,feel about them being fried by their own government.

Anyway, if they do this,it is Armageddon. WAKE UP FOLKS, NOT TERRITORY, NOT OIL, JUST 'THE DAY AFTER', THIS IS FOR REAL IF THE CRAZIES GO FOR IT. ENDTIMES.

As for Ritter's 'Iraq on the back burner', the slaughter, the holocaust we have brought. He appears to think it is a throw away country. If one cut through the ice, would one find a heart in Mr Ritter, I wonder?

J.

"Too often the peace movement isn't ready for obvious attacks and gets defined by its own fringe political tendencies."

Bzzzt! Wrong. It's the combining of strategic and tactical smarts, combined with the willingness to be on the so-called fringe (which is more often than not the suppressed majority) that pushes things forward. King, Ghandi, Malcolm X, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc...

Perhaps Mr. Ritter thinks letter writing campaigns will stop the juggernaut that ignored 15+ million people on 2.15.2003, but I don't.

what was Sheppards voice before the invasion and occupation of Iraq? We know that Ritter warned us and told us that there were no WMD and that the war war was preplanned long before 911. He was right then and my guess is that he's right now. However, I appreciate that the author chose to show opposing views. I remember when that was common in journalism.

How to prevent a war (if there's any hope at all):

be prepared to shut down the government the day the war starts. Shut-down demonstrations at every government office, general strike, stop shopping: we need public, noisy preparations for all of those, to be triggered automatically by any attack. That should at least give them pause.

Gen. Sheppard's theory that mere public disapproval can prevent it is lame: what about the Iraq war? Neither the Bushies nor the Dems in Congress care a hoot for public opinion, as they have both made quite clear. Apparently Bush is perfectly willing to take the Republican Party down with him. That's exactly what the Democrats are counting on: an immoral but probably effective strategy. That's why they want Bush in office and the war on until the elections next year.

To stop the war in Iraq? That's a hard one: the sheer futility of pressuring our "representatives" in Congress is a good reason to focus on preventing a new one.

The only thing they take seriously is the prospect of real difficulty in the next election. They're counting on a landslide. So if you want to stop the war, RUN AGAINST THEM. Or help someone else do it. I don't mean the primaries, unless you have a really good chance. I mean the general election, the one that matters. Join the Green Party (or start one if there's no local chapter) and seek their nomination. They are now looking for anti-war candidates in most states. If not where you are, give them a shout. It's the only action the Dems take seriously. You can't shut off those big corporate (Murdoch!) bucks flowing into their coffers.

To contact us: www.GPUS.org.

I am not "anti-war"

I am "pro-peace"

Big difference.

I wish peace activists would stop using the phrase anti-war and start using pro-peace. It is more positive and life affirming.

The bulk of his comments were very loose and vague - it's fine with me if he criticizes the peace in iraq movement because let's face it - we have utterly FAILED in nearly five years to end this obscene, illegal, genocidal war.