Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThere is a Persian proverb that says, "EsfahÄÂn nesf-e jahÄÂn ast" or "Esfahan is half the world."
And there is the American zeitgeist that says, "Obliterate them."
Esfahan is a modern Iranian metropolis of three and half million people. Situated at an ancient crossroads, Esfahan has embraced the great ebb and flow of human existence for more than ten centuries. Once one of the largest cities in the world, and more than once the capital of Persia, it is renowned for its Islamic architecture, with beautiful boulevards, covered bridges, palaces, mosques, and minarets.
Esfahan is also home to Iran's largest nuclear reactor. Its university houses the country's nuclear research program. Enough said.
"U.S. Weighing Readiness for Military Action Against Iran," the Washington Post headline read on Friday. At a Pentagon news conference Friday afternoon, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair, Admiral Michael Mullen, said that the United States was considering "potential military courses of action" against Iran, and pointing to reserve capabilities in the Navy and Air Force said, "it would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability."
* * * *
"A few days after the raid the sirens screamed again. The listless and heartsick survivors were showered this time with leaflets. I lost my copy of the epic," writes Kurt Vonnegut, "but remember that it ran something like this: 'To the people of Dresden: We were forced to bomb your city because of the heavy military traffic your railroad facilities have been carrying. We realize that we haven't always hit our objectives. Destruction of anything other than military objectives was unintentional, unavoidable fortunes of war.'"
"The leaflet should have said, 'We have hit every blessed church, hospital, school, museum, theater, your university, the zoo, and every apartment building in town, but we honestly weren't trying hard to do it. C'est la guerre. So sorry.'"
Totally obliterate them. "That's a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that," says presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Candidate Obama assures us that he "will take no options off the table," while candidate McCain sings, "Bomb, bomb, bomb. Bomb, bomb, Iran." C'est la guerre. So sorry.
* * * *
Sixty years ago, as Europe lay in the ruins of war, Albert Camus was invited to the Dominican monastery in Latour-Maubourg. "What does the world expect of Christians?" the friars wanted to know. "What the world expects of Christians is that Christians should speak out, loud and clear, and that they should voice their condemnation in such a way that never a doubt, never the slightest doubt, could rise in the heart of the simplest man. That they should get away from abstraction and confront the blood-stained face history has taken on today."
German theologian and political activist Dorothee Soelle put it simply, "The truth is concrete."
In 1948 at Latour-Maubourg, the Dominicans told Camus that the Catholic church had in fact spoken out, but that the arcane language of papal encyclicals had obscured the message. The Vatican had indeed signaled its condemnations, but by necessity through diplomatic indirection.
Last week, Josef Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, eschewed the oblique and chose to come to the United States in person. Traveling under the banner "Christ Our Hope," his message took the form of a skillfully crafted literary inclusio, bracketed by the Willkommen of George Bush and the vaya con Dios of Dick Cheney. Into the vortex of an exquisite choreography vanished the wars of aggression, torture of innocents, destruction of civilizations, and desecration of law.
Camus told the Dominican friars, "When a Spanish bishop blesses political executions, he ceases to be a bishop or a Christian or even a man; he is a dog just like one who, backed by an ideology, orders that execution without doing the dirty work himself."
* * * *
"It is with some regret," Vonnegut writes, "that I here besmirch the nobility of our airmen, but boys, you killed an appalling lot of women and children. The shelter I have described and innumerable others like it were filled with them. We had to exhume their bodies and carry them to mass funeral pyres in the parks-so I know. The funeral pyre technique was abandoned when it became apparent how great was the toll. There was not enough labor to do it nicely, so a man with a flame thrower was sent down instead, and he cremated them where they lay. Buried alive, suffocated, crushed-men, women, and children indiscriminately killed. The method was impersonal, but the result was equally cruel and heartless. That, I am afraid, is a sickening truth."
In December Boeing completed work on a project that was conceived here in St. Louis and put on the fast track by the Pentagon. Tested in the New Mexico desert last spring, the Massive Ordnance Penetrator or MOP is a 30,000-pound conventional weapon designed to penetrate 200 feet before exploding. The Senate approved $83 million to retrofit the B-2 Stealth bombers to make the delivery.
The line separating conventional and nuclear weapons has been systematically eroded. The Nuclear Posture Review of 2001 says "nuclear weapons ... provide credible military options to deter a wide range of threats, including WMD and large-scale conventional military force ... U.S. military forces themselves, including nuclear forces will now be used to dissuade adversaries from undertaking military programs or operations that could threaten U.S. interests or those of allies and friends..." The National Security Strategy of 2006 adds that "the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively ... using all elements of national power ... Safe, credible and reliable nuclear forces continue to play a critical role..."
According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, a "limited" nuclear attack on the main Iranian underground site in Esfahan would result in three million people killed by radiation within two weeks and 35 million people exposed to dangerous levels of radiation in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.
"The occupying Russians, when they discovered that we were Americans," writes Vonnegut, "embraced us and congratulated us on the complete desolation our planes had wrought. We accepted their congratulations with good grace and proper modesty, but I felt then as I feel now, that I would have given my life to save Dresden for the World's generations to come. That is how everyone should feel about every city on Earth."
* * * *
"We are still waiting, and I am waiting," said Camus, "for a grouping of all those who refuse to be dogs and are resolved to pay the price that must be paid so that a human can be something more than a dog."
Last Sunday a small group of us stood in front of the Catholic cathedral in St. Louis for a few hours with a model of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator. While the pope was preaching at Yankee Stadium, we held a banner calling for him to go to Esfahan to begin the creation of an Iran Peace Shield. It was a small beginning. Conversations were opened. One young man disdainfully reminded us that we were in front of church, while an older women making her way slowly up the steps with a cane looked up at the MOP and said, "What? Attack Iran? We can't do that!"
"How can you excoriate the pope and make an appeal to him at the same time," we've been asked. As human beings, how can we not? As the humanist Vonnegut said, "If Christ hadn't delivered the Sermon on the Mount, with its message of mercy and pity, I wouldn't want to be a human being. I'd just as soon be a rattlesnake."
The crude reality is that our weapons of mass destruction, both nuclear and conventional, are prepared for an assault on Iran. Our warships are in the gulf. Our planes are on standby. And all of this is consummate human folly.
Some who are knowledgeable say that nothing save pure dumb luck can change the course upon which the United States government and its military have embarked. We can't live with that. We are taking steps to escalate the appeal, not only to the pope but to anyone of a stature who's presence in Esfahan would serve as a real deterrent to the launching of an assault by the United States. To put it simply, Dick Cheney would not drop an MOP on Josef Ratzinger's head. To whom else can we make our appeal? We are going to make the appeal as noisily and with as much public disruption as we can muster. And we urge everyone else reading these words to do the same. Make your own appeal to those with whom you have connections wherever and however you can. Disrupt things. We believe that we can create an effective shield with people in Esfahan and with noise everywhere.
Will we give our lives for Esfahan?
Andrew Wimmer is a member of the Center for Theology and Social Analysis in St. Louis. The Iran Peace Shield is an action coming to birth. Will you join us? The website is skeletal at the moment but will be taking shape over the coming days at www.iranpeaceshield.org.
We invite your comments and conversation via email to wimmera@gmail.com.
178 Comments so far
Show AllKEM, Yeah, I saw it. I just posted on there.
Most of his posts are erased, even the one on April 14, on the 9-11 thread where he posted many times and often with pictures. The one about climate change yesterday is gone and the artilce by Audry Shulman, How to be a climate hero. I believe the pictures were not desireable for the site editors and understand that. It was getting to be a little annoying as there were so many. Haven't seen any of his posts today.
Yes, I read that link. Thanks. Say hello to Cindy for us and give her our very best wishes and regards. Unless she's been arrested and they won't allow you to see her. Did you see what Canuckchuck just posted on the Bloated In Baghdad thread? Incredible.
KEM, What the hell is happening? Could CD have removed them? I sent you a link before on the Hamberg article. It's a good read and factual. Did you read it yet? Check it out before it's removed.
I just wrote a longer one on the Cheney's attorney article.
Hey Peaceman, that other thread about Iran. Most of Namast's posts have disappeared.
Same thing on other threads. ___ Gone!
.
Five articles below this one is an excellent article on a possible war with Iran and many good and informative comments on it. The title for that artilce is NOT "Obliterate Them". A big difference.
You know ~Peaceman~, not one single person who blogged here, blogged on the enviromental threads that I could find. __ None.__ I wonder how many real progressive people are still here at Common Dreams?
That's what a very good man started this site for. Progressive people. The trolls are destroying it. Now not everyone here is a troll, but not everyone here is progressive either. Not even close. It's a shame in my view.
Indeed we should have ~Peaceman~, but the title of the article is ___ "OBLITERATE THEM.___
So where does that lead? Another Hillary bashing article naturally and we've sure had enough of it. Over a 100 in a month. What has that done to this site? Most of the posts are about Hillary and no wonder. They are not about the potential attack on Iran, ___which would be insanity.
So instead of another 101 Hillary or Obama bashing contest. I suggested we discuss something of real importance. ___ Which of course was a stupid mistake. Ho-hum.
Forget about Hillary, Dillary, Dock, the Mouse ran up the clock. The thing is, the military and the State Department and their corporate propaganda machine are working day and night fomenting fear and anger toward Iran. They are like rabid animals gone wild.
Maybe we should be focusing our attention span on the above.
BTW, what you did is "trollism". A Rove tactic. Take one sentence out of another person's post and attempt to show that they are screwed up, create friction, anamosity and dissention here, on this once very decent site.
Why do you hate to tell me your opinions ~Opeluboy~?
I don't hate to tell you that I disagree with you. In fact I'd enjoy doing so. There are millions of Neo-cons who are far more Neo-con than Hillary, so she's not about as Neo-Con as it gets. Check her votes as a senator. She's more progressive than Obama and far more than McCain.
You're just mouthing off to disagree with something I wrote. That's your perogative. Did you bother to read that article I posted? ___Of course not, like Misanthorpe, you already know it all.
Your post is precicely what I was refering to, some wishng to screw up a conversation and this site with shitty remarks and of course it's bashing Hillary. Knock yourself out.
KEM says:
"The Neo-cons who have invaded this site are doing cartwheels and Rove is probably laughing himself sick about it, or having orgasisms."
Um, hate to have to tell you this, but Hillary Clinton is about as neo-con as it gets. If it makes you feel better, you can call her a neo-lib, but a warmonger is a warmonger.
Obama just endorsed Betrayus for Commander of CinC.
cromerovich - yeah, I heard that one too - about the Russian radar. Who knows why the crazy Zionists do the insane things they do - they are psychopaths, after all, and trying to figure out what they're thinking will drive us crazy as well (a professional warned me about that - you can't use reason when dealing with an unreasonable person - or groups of insane people immersed in their own paranoid group-think. Sound familiar?)
Being a conservative, I know how easily consrvatives are driven over the edge - they are so damned paranoid, insecure, and fearful that they strike out against others, thinking everyone else is as crazy as they are! This 'projection' is apparent among all the neo-Nazis - they think everyone is as evil as they are, and can't imagine any other kind of life. There are DEMONS in their minds - and they attack real people while trying to kill the demons in their minds! That's what's been going on in the US since Nixon, and in Palestine since before WWII - it's insanity, but it's their only way to deal with mental problems.
elmysterio: Succinctly put and eloquently seconded by misanthrope. Most of you are shuffling deck chairs or fiddling while Rome is about to burn. All the pieces are falling into place for an attack e.g. Fallon out, Petraeus in, Syria attacked by Israel last year etc. etc.
According to your oh, so believable CinC, Israel hit a nuclear site in Syria in September 2007, one supposedly operated by the Syrians and North Korea.
The GWB admin states today that Syria was "within weeks or months" of completing its nuclear reactor.
Excuse me while I recover from a choking fit.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JD29Ak01.html
There are many theories, aside from the ludicrous one involving the nuke site, but one that is rather fascinating says the attack was contrived to turn on the Russian made defence radar in Syria in order to capture its signature and test countermeasures. The same radar is used in Iran. Anyone care to join the dots or comment on the technical likelihood of this being the real purpose behind a nonsensical attack clouded in such mystery?
I should also add that in addition to repeatedly ignoring and contradicting the NIE report that clearly states that Iran is NOT pursuing nuclear weapons technology, Clinton was the ONLY (yes, that is ONLY) one of the Democratic candidates (Edwards, Biden, Kucinich, Gravel, Richardson, Obama and Dodd) that signed the disgusting Kly-Lieberman ammendment, declaring the entire Iranian army a "terrorist" organization, thus giving Bush and the neocons another approved target. Clinton didn't just sign this ammendment, she rushed to sign it.
KEM, in defending Hillary Clinton, says:
When not aware of what questions will be asked, one is not always well prepared to give a reply which could suit ALL. She could have replied with, "That's a hypothetical question, Iran has no nuclear weapons and as far as I know and according to the latest NIE report, does not intend to ever have them as Bush claims. So lets just stick to the issues which are abundant and discuss them. I would act approprialtey if any nation attacked another with nuclear weapons."
The problem with this, KEM, is that Clinton has repeatedly stated that Iran IS engaged in aquiring nuclear weapons in complete disregard for the NIE report. I have seen her say this in at least 2 debates, after the report was issued, and no one called her ladyship on it.
You are so very right elmysterio, thanks for pointing this out. Unfortunately, we are plagued with Kem Patrick and his pathological need to hijack every discussion into a tiresome diatribe for his particular point of view. This always leads us astray and off topic. I don't even disagree with many of his favorite issues, but I do object to monomaniacal, and monotonous, intellectual bullying at ALL times on ANY issue.
Jeeze... Who gives a Fuck what Hillary said! You guys totally missed the point of the article which is that the US is preparing to bomb the shit out of Iran and has publicly stated that the use of Nuclear weapons on non-nuclear countries is perfectly acceptable. Yet all you guys can think about is "Hillary, McCain and Obama"... Give me a break!
Phew! Just read the article and hurried through the comments and verbal duels. For you regular readers of Common Dreams bloggers comments, you are familiar with my position concerning Iran, Israel, and the world's only "superbully," so no need to reiterate. I'll make four comments and the latter one upsets me more than anybody's opinion (including my own) on the daily articles we contribute to.
#1. I agree with RichM on Ms Clinton's record as a US Senator. Kudos to you, sir. She is an "enabler of the Bush/Cheney agenda, period.
#2. armybrat: Well said, my friend. You brought up some very positive approaches to this debate. Kudos to you.
#3. The Skeptical Cynic: An elderly English friend of mine lost a loved one serving in the army when one of the gangs you mentioned, blew up the British Army's barracks in 1947 or 48? Two wrongs never add up to one right.
#4. To each his own, but this is the MAIN REASON the Progressive Movement is losing in the United States. The usual bickering and disunity among ourselves. I'm tired of repeating myself but you don't have to be Einstein to understand how united the right-wing is when it comes to POWER and MONEY. They understand the ease of manipulating public opinion in the US and laugh behind closed doors at the lack of REAL RESISTANCE to their nefarious schemes. "Talk is cheap, action speaks louder than words." (they know it)
What are you all doing on May Day?
More than half of the comments on this article are wasted on arguing with Kem Patrick about his defense of Hillary.
Why are the commenters spending so much time on HIS opinion?
The article goes 10x farther than just being a criticism of
Hillary's hawkish comments. Read it again. It's about the implosion of the Middle East, if not the planet.
It's about what your conscience will or will not prompt you to do to protect this planet from an America gone mad.
Would you dump your cozy home, middle-class job, football
games, cable-TV, food on the table, etc. in order to be part of a Peace Shield in Esfahan, Iran? I'm not
important, as is the Pope, in the grand scheme of things but thousands of citizens of the planet gathering
in Esfahan as a Shield, could be an effective deterrent to U.S. warmongers. Would you do it?
I didn't think so.
I'm a fool__ but I love you dear and here's the reason why,__ now and then, dah de dah.
MESANTHORPE, ___ YOU ARE THE FOOL. ___ There actually is only one issue we should be horribly concerned with right now.
http://www.energybulletin.net/3647.html
Every post I've read above are good to read because one gets a good idea of how others are thinking, but tell me, what makes anyone think Hillary or Barak will bomb Iran? Bushy boy will have done it long before next January, IMO. Scares the s--t out of me!!!
DC BELTWAY said, "If Israel were the pawn there would be no need for the Israeli lobby, AIPAC to reinforce things and no need for taxpayers to pay billions." Here's the thing, lobbies in general lobby for what their puppet masters want done. A lot of dirty money is changing hands, and that does NOT mean that all interested parties have the same objective(s). Parties sit at the bargaining table and work to further their own agendas, but that does not mean they share the same exact agenda. Each is incidental to the others' ultimate goals and gains.
There is interesting evidence that does point to a ruling elite above and beyond our government, Israel's government, or any other. Whether it's the Trilateral commission, Bilderberg, the PNAC, etc some very well placed people are carrying out plans for their own version of a new order. Oil is significant to it. The religious zealots may have their own raison d'etre, but that doesn't mean that Israel is the MAJOR player. I saw the list of Jewish names posted on one of Sunday's threads, and there certainly are many in high placed positions. Still, it seems that US officials are taking their marching orders from a global organization/elite.
As for aid to Israel... most of it is arms deals, and as long as the US gets to pump out weapons and war, the economy sings along. It's a quid pro quo arrangement, we're not talking aid in the sense of building roads and school rooms. I have friends who still think the US is a very generous nation in its aid to poor lands. They have no understanding of the way trade deals and debt arrangements were done (as Naomi Klein educates us all) to make profits on the blood, sweat and tears of the world's "Les Miserables."
Once again, I am NO proponent of Israel's policies of aggression. Karma is an equal opportunity employer. Religious zealotry provides no impunity. When I chastise the churches, it's because so many have gotten behind Bush and thus maligned the teachings of Christ, teacher of peace, as a rationale for war/murder. It's quite fascinating that those who consider themselves most religious, think they have to pass some kind of "would you kill for your god" test. That to me is the ultimate "au primitivo" level of spirituality. Religion that is true to the Spirit must teach tolerance, compassion, and understanding across the illusory "lines" of diversity, rather than argue that to belong to any "chosen" flock (of any stripe), all followers must forfeit their own conscience and abide by usually IDIOT rules that suppress true desires thus leading to twisted, inverted responses. I'll quit here.
Hillary is so cool when she announces a policy of genocide. All you "liberals" should buy some handy-wipes to get the blood off your hands if you are stupid enough to elect her.
And knowing liberal democrats, you are plenty stupid enough to elect a goon like Hillary.
Hi ~Galen~ The difference primarlily is, Obama is the best orator we've ever seen. He's absolutely fantastic. His voting record matches McCains since he's been a U.S. Senator, he'll most likely be the Demo candidate and McCain will beat him in the general election.
If the Florida and Michigan votes aren't used at the Demo convention, when the General Election day arrives those voters will stay home.
Hillary offered to pay for anther primary election in those states herself and Obama's camp refused it. He's also refused to have the next two previously scheduled debates. Smart politics on his part for the short haul. Not so smart for the General Election. We'll see.
If eihter Obama or McCain are the next president, we'll have nuclear power shoved down our throats along with the high taxes needed to finance the insurance and subsudies. GE wants nuclear and McCain and Obama are both in their deep pockets.
Hey thank you for repeating my post word for word there ~Misanthorpe~. You think some may need to memorize? You left out the first paragraph. ___ Indeed it's obvious you need help, don't think a long nap would help you, unless it was a permanent nap.
It's also pretty obvious you're main intent here at CD is to show others I'm some sort of a nutcase. You and your friends here who are attempting to ruin this fine site and you're well on you're way of doing a good job of it.
This site is not at all what it was three months ago, mostly just a lot of anger and people such as yourself starting shit fights for no reason. Rove should be proud of your efforts.
On and on and on, this stupid argument about Clinton's stupid remark in response to a stupid question, when the article is about the perhaps real threat that the madmen in the White House will launch a war, possibly nuclear, against a country that has not attacked or even threatened us. If this happens it will be the end of the the US; if it launches a nuclear war it will be the end of the human race. We must stop it, but how? ticonderoga wonders whether US or European civilians putting themsleves in Esfahan could act as a human shield--but that's what Witness for Peace and Voices in the Wilderness have been doing for a couple of decades--yes they did it in Baghdad in '03. Didn't stop the war. Neither did the biggest worldwide demonstrations in history. As for "let's all call our Congresspeople," it is to laugh. All I can think of is a general strike if Iran is attacked--nobody go to school or work or buy anything, on a preset basis like Monday and Wednesday and weekends...the depressing part is that NOTHING we can do can stop a war unless we have a very solid majority of the people with us, and the stupidity of the American public is evident in the fact that Clinton thought it safest to utter a belligerent remark threatening the killing of millions of innocents (in response to extreme provocation, it's true, but not on the part of those millions).
Sounds like somebody needs help, or maybe just a nice long nap:
"I've never seen your name here at CD previously and so don't know anythhing about your opinions, except for the one you just posted concering me. What's your problem, what exactly is it that I've ever posted that would entice you to blast off on me like that? Have I expressed a diverse opinion than yours on some issure and so that makes me a person who loves myself. What are you on? Whaterver it is you should go seek help.
Every single one of my posts that I've ever written is avalilabe in the CD archives and any are free to read any or all of them. What you just posted about me is a damn lie.
And ~Namaste~, apparently you have some grude with me now also since we have disagreed on two seperate issues. Have it however you desire. I'll sleep fine tonight. Maybe you're on mind altering drugs too??? Funny, it wasn't eventhree weeks ago you posted what a swell person you thought I was and how glad you were that I was here at C/D learning and having fun with you and so many others. ~~Bye~."
They are ALL the same! McSame. All of this tripe after the article, and having nothing to do with the article (war upon Iran ~ remember that?)goes a long way toward affirming the story about the cows not giving a shit.
I used capitol letters when I first signed on here because that's the way the caplock was set. Wasn't anything more evil or suspicious than that ~Skepticl Cynic~ and I don't criticize others for how they type their names or code names if that's their choice. Sniff up bud.
Obama has just said he would back Gen. Petraeus as head of CENTCOM.
So what make him different from Clinton or McCain?
"No comment "KEM" on the sweeping historical trajectory? It does kind of fit together as neat as a pin, (perhaps too neat for you)"? What kind of bullshit is that? __ Stuff it.
I'm not one bit tired, so don't be another assumer.
If Israel were the pawn there would be no need for the Israeli lobby, AIPAC to reinforce things and no need for taxpayers to pay billions to Israel. http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011
With the most recent rhetoric coming from the bush administration defining Iran as the second greatest threat America faces, I find it doubly troubling that Clinton can so blithely threaten obliteration. When w unleashes an attack (before the elections?) will she obediently "support" her president?
Well you couldn't possibly be more wrong ~THE SKEPTICAL CYNIC~. I have never, ever had a single good word to say about Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter or any other neo-cons, or the Bush Cartel.
I've never seen your name here at CD previously and so don't know anythhing about your opinions, except for the one you just posted concering me. What's your problem, what exactly is it that I've ever posted that would entice you to blast off on me like that? Have I expressed a diverse opinion than yours on some issure and so that makes me a person who loves myself. What are you on? Whaterver it is you should go seek help.
Every single one of my posts that I've ever written is avalilabe in the CD archives and any are free to read any or all of them. What you just posted about me is a damn lie.
And ~Namaste~, apparently you have some grude with me now also since we have disagreed on two seperate issues. Have it however you desire. I'll sleep fine tonight. Maybe you're on mind altering drugs too??? Funny, it wasn't eventhree weeks ago you posted what a swell person you thought I was and how glad you were that I was here at C/D learning and having fun with you and so many others. ~~Bye~.
Attempting to "reason" with the narcissistic KEM PATRICK (note the username in uppercase) is an exercise in futility. It is like trying to blow out a light bulb. Regardless of its/his dimness, the glow continues from the constant caustic "juice" he pumps into his now atrophied brain from such intellectual colossi as Hannity, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Coulter and that ilk.
The Nazis persecuted the Jews of Germany and occupied territory for approximately 12 years (1933- 1945). The Irgun and Stern Gang terrorists began their terrorizing persecution (genocide - ethnic cleansing) of Palestinians before Israel achieved statehood in 1948 and continues the same acts of genocide, ethnic cleansing, ghettoization and imperialist expansionism including preemptive aggression against a sovereign nation up to the present day. That's more than 60 years of war criminality. That far and away exceeds anything that Saddam Hussein did. Israel is the only nation in the Middle East with nuclear weapons. Using the new war waging paradigm established the Mad King George, Iran has every right the take whatever action it deems necessary in its interest. And, we should keep our freaking noses out of it! Anyone who believes that Israel has been the "victim" is a deluded dolt or worse. Your posts remind me of harbor tug boats - they too make their loudest noise when in the deepest fog.
Perhaps KEM, you are merely tired ?
My "challenge" email (at 3:24 pm) was referring to and earlier one ( at 12:52 pm ), to ticonderoga
My proposed "Globalization Conspiracy", running over multiple decades that ties so many pieces together, ALL right back into the hands of the central bankers … , is hardly news and MiMiCcS has been espousing the same ideas for years now.
After reading over 100 comments, I gave up on finding much regarding the issues raised in this article. You people are hopelessly addicted to trivia and nonsense.
Before the Iraq invasion, Deepak Chopra wrote '10 Ways to Avoid War' (03-11-03) which was similar to this article. If there were enough courageous world leaders defending Iran, there would be no threats - just as there would have been no attack on Iraq if the 'leaders' of the world had gone to Iraq and refused to leave until the US withdrew. The problem isn't just this administration - it is the cowardice among world leaders - even the respected ones - who refuse to do anything, just as they refused to do anything about Hitler's invasions. That's why Hitler kept going until he destroyed Europe and half of Russia - because nobody had the nerve to defy him. The criminals in the US government are operating with the same impunity - because nobody (short of Voices in the Wilderness) dare do what has to be done - defend the weak, vulnerable, and defenseless against the bullies of the world. You know, the Stalins, Hitlers, Cheneys, Saddams, etc.
Yeah, go ahead and squabble over idiotic US politics instead - smart move. If this is the best the 'progressives' have to offer - then we are really in deep doo-doo.
PS - for just 'regular people' to go there won't stop anything - lots of people tried that in Iraq, such as Voices in the Wilderness. The Americans just warned them they'd be bombed along with the rest of the 'heathens' - so it MUST BE well-respected world leaders. And if they don't do this - after what they've seen done to Iraq - then they don't deserve any respect. Period. That does double for the slimey Nazified pope that kisses fascist ass every time. After all - that's where fascism really began - with the 'Holy Roman Empire'
(I'm ashamed that my ancestors allowed their empire to be corrupted into that ungodly mess.)
You totally lost me with your last Post ~Namaste~. I don't have a clue of what you're talking about there. __ Course I'm stupid and NAIVE.
There is an excellent and important article here today which concerns our enviroment, if there are any Progressives still here who care about truly serious issues.
It's titled, ____ "How To Be a Climate Hero".___
The threats against Iran are becoming more hateful and bloodthirsty. I am shocked - but perhaps there is no reason to be shocked any more by the appalling nature of the US's foreign policies in the region.
I definitely believe that the anti-war with Iran movement should become more outspoken and determined.
WTF: I don't recall vehemently disagreeing with you in the past, but your last comment sounds just like Ann Coulter. Use your head! Knock it off!
Hmmm, CAKE it is ( but what of the underlying infra-structure that bakes the cakes ? )
No comment KEM about the SWEEPING HISTORICAL trajectory ?
It does kind of fit together neat as a pin, perhaps ( too neat, for you ) ?
-- Especially as I left out the War of 1812, Prez Jackson,
and the 30-yr war, and a little thing other called 9/11 --
Not to worry, we'll JOUST another time, for truth
( and the fare maidens' attention )
I often thought about the insane leaders of other world nations in the distant past, like Henry the Eighth, Nero, Caligua, Vlad the Impaler, and more recently, Hitler, Stalin, Poppa Dock, Saddam, and so many many others, and I always wondered why their people didn't do anything about them?
Now we have our "King George" and I'm beginning to understand why. It's the people who are actually insane. They don't get pissed until there's no food except cake.
What message did the Pope have for Bush?
The Pope placed his hand on Bush's head as Bush knelt obediently and respectfully kissed his ring and said, "My God George, that's a terrible haircut, you should make an appointment with John Edward's barber."
Essayist Andrew Wimmer puts a focus on the troubling matter, at least to some Catholics, of the Papal trip to the U.S. recently. It served as a photo-op for Bush and Cheney to cast two war criminals in such a favorable light.
Over a year ago this pope was reported to be a fan of Henry Kissinger, just Google the two names and read of their kinship.
The pope has a serious addiction to warmakers.
One can only wonder what message the pope had for Bush on the occupation of Iraq.
Love the intelligent posts written by ~MISANTHORPE~, they are so intelligetly written and loaded with informative information that we can all cherish. Sort of like having a Karl Rove here. __ We are blessed. Thank you so much mess-and-thorpe, way to go.
Way to go ~MEDUSA~, you fully explained why your strange opinion that Hillary is aligned with Bush is correct. Gosh is this a spelling contest and English 102 course here? ___ LOL.
KEM PATRICK -bakatcha - it's all you deserve.
You're deliberately blinding yourself to the obvious - go get that valentine ready. And maybe some koolaid. You might benfit from a book on punctation and syntax so people know what you mean when you cuss at them and throw an abuse bomb.
Yes, she had a couple of extra modal auxiliaries in there, but her track record reveal her to be a rabid warmonger nevertheless. Though she did not say "We will bomb Iran" for the obvious reason that this would set off a firestorm of international protest, she came as close as she legally could.
So, baby boy, stop being such a freekin' naive PUTZ! Bakatcha.
… mostly on _ t a r g e t _ ticonderoga:
The BAMFORD memo set this all into motion in the 1920s, when the ZIONIST and BANKERS hatched the OIL plan.
Isn't it amazing ( near to unbelievable ) to consider that these CRAZY psychopathic MANIPULATORS, actually created BOTH WW1 and WW2, FASCISM/COMMUNISM, POGROMS, the massive holocaust deaths and suffering, migrations of millions -- JUST FOR SOME TRILLIONS OF OIL PROFITS ? --
Now that's some really insidiously devious and wicked ___ B __ I __ G___ _P I C T U R E _ Unwholesome dissociated from reality _ T H I N K I N G _, isn't IT ?
IT puts EVIL like blowing up frogs into perspective of being a PIKER-IN-TRAINING.
Siouxrose, I suspect you're right about Israel being a pawn. I have no proof, but it looks to me like Israel was created because the allies knew there was oil in the Middle East, and also knew that if they recreated the Biblical Holy Land in the region they'd have a reason to keep a military presence there.
Without Israel the US would, if it wanted to keep a military presence in the Middle East, have no choice but to admit that it was there for the oil. Can't do that. Gotta have an excuse.
So Israel is using the US as muscle to keep it untouchable by the Islamic countries in the region, and the US is using Israel as an excuse to beat up Islamic countries for their oil. And the Bible is the glue that makes all this possible. And nobody wins.
Any country attacking israel would be treated as if they attacked the US. There is no difference between the two countries.
OSTROGOTH: I am fully aware, as per wakey, wakey, and I see that politicans pander to Israel. What is not often realized is that ISRAEL may well be the PAWN in this little game of empire, chasing the short end of the energy stick and causing calamitous violence in the process of seeking possession of something all too transitory. I do NOT support Israel's policies, but I find it irresponsible to blame that nation for what US politicians, UK and up until recently Canada and Australia also fostered very much on their own. It's a money game controlled by elites. Israel has players at the table, but let's not let that blind us to who else is sitting there calling shots. Literally.
Hillary should watch Threads. It's on Youtube. It also starts with a crisis in Iran. It is perhaps the most shocking and depressing film ever made.
Here's a short version.
"Some in this forum act like Israel is wagging the U.S. tail but that is absurd!...The Palestinian situation is horrible. No one can dispute that. To jump from that fact to one that projects Israel's TOTAL influence over U.S. foreign policy represents tunnel vision."
- Posted by Siouxrose @ April 26th, 10:41 pm
___________________________
Read Walt and Mearsheimer's "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy." Only then will you realize how disproportionately powerful the Israel lobby is, especially when you include the Christian Zionists. I don't think anyone has argued that the Lobby has TOTAL influence over US foreign policy. Let's just say they have enormous influence over US foreign policy in the ME, which is their bailiwick. They don't give orders to US Congressmen, all they have to do is distribute tons of cash to influence their votes. This is straight out of Political Science 101. The Congressional authorizations for war against Iraq and Iran would probably never have passed without heavy arm-twisting from the Lobby.
As for Palestine, it's not the "situation" that's horrible. It's the Israeli ethnic cleansing, collective punishment, and terrorism against Palestinians, all at US taxpayer expense, that's horrible. Why do US politicians almost unanimously support these crimes against humanity? Out of conviction? Haha. And Israeli atrocities against Palestinians are just a taste of what Israel has planned for the rest of the ME. The Zionists have long plotted the destruction of Iraq and Iran to eliminate obstacles to Israeli apartheid and expansion. Wakey, wakey.
The US military industrial complex is obligated by law to exploit the ignorance/apathy of the taxslaves for shareholder profit, and drive another bombing campaign into their minds to displace ideas of peace. Destroying the public will brings the elites a twofer - wealth redistribution on both the economic AND political fronts. Terrorizing those who sit on the oil makes it a threefer. At the very least the elites will distract the public from everything that's being neglected. ticonderoga, the Congress serves as the White House's enabler (Israel's benefactor), writing blank checks, etc.
Where is Oswald when we need him?
Esfahan is a modern Iranian metropolis of three and half million people. Situated at an ancient crossroads......Esfahan is also home to Iran's largest nuclear reactor....
Beruit and Bagdad also once housed historically significant museums and architecture, with beautiful boulevards, covered bridges, palaces, mosques, and minarets.... etc etc etc. Look what happened to them?
The US is systematically destroying Islamic culture and history.
As always, when this topic comes up, my comment is Crazy Bird's call:
"ALL the bombs are in the hands of terrorists!"
One more:
Don't really think the US is going to attack Iran at all, nukes or no nukes. Think it's all bluff work. Reason why is because, no matter how rotten or greedy the current administration is, its members are neither stupid nor crazy, except possibly for George Bush, and he doesn't matter, being little more than a puppet.
The real boss, Dick Cheney, is a smart guy and he knows perfectly well that bombing Iran would mess things up totally for him, as well as for us, so he won't do it.
But he'll keep on faking and bluffing to keep us all distracted from the fact that there's a three-trillion dollar deficit and the economy sucks and gas prices are growing every day and global warming is real and we're responsible for the deaths of a million Iraqis and etc.
What Hillary said in the interview, besides being completely absurd, irrational, inflammatory, and contradictory, serves only to encourage the lunatics currently in control of US policy in their drive to nuke Iran. She is complicit! She's complicit in promoting their aims.
While her intention was obviously to pander to AIPAC (which one must do to get elected to any office in the US), Clinton's statement that if Iran launched a nuclear attack on Israel while still developing a nuclear weapon – that's what she said, launch an attack with a weapon they have not yet developed - the US would "obliterate" that country. Her proposed sequence of events is illogical. It sounds to me that she just needed to throw a handful of words together to sound tough, regardless of her imprudence in the choice of those words.
In addition to the fact of the absurdity of her comment, another argument not presented by anyone commenting on her statement is the fact that Israel is quite capable, with its 300 plus nuclear weapons, of obliterating Iran by itself. If we must have the carnage, I'd rather it be Israel using its nukes than the US. And no one has seemed interested in pressing the point with Clinton as to whether she intended to mean with her use of "obliterate", to kill every man, woman, and child within the confines of Iran and many others beyond the confines of Iran.
Lastly, in addressing Mr. KEM's arguments in support of the Clinton Doctrine, I believe Mr. Vonnegut - were he still alive – would relegate Mr. KEM and Mrs. Clinton to the company of the cruel and heartless and Camus – were he still alive – would consign them to the pack of Spanish bishops and dogs.
It occurred to me the other day that after all the bloodying, should either candidate get the nomination and somehow get elected after all the turmoil, maybe even with a "scream ticket", they would become President of what? We need a decent environment if we are to even live. Everything I am hearing indicates to me that we are living on borrowed time now because when we had a chance to save this world, the people in charge fiddled around and let things fall apart. Take care everyone and pray that we can die comfortably in our sleep rather than be part of a global catastrophe that it now seems to be too late to stop.
Oh, there are far greater humans than this pope mortal that tells other mortals what they may and may not do. CodePink will be there, in Iran, Gaza and Jerusulum in October as Ambassadors.
Certainly with this many players whose to say where it will erupt. Since Llewellyn is building an Amusement Prk/Zoo(we loosed and murdered the Baghdad Zoo upon arrival)/skate park/hotels with culturally appropriate Themes and Pools. And we are coming home, um hum. Built and designed by the same guy that did Disney.
Jimmy Carter will do it, no Zionists wish his presence to be allowable in what used to be Palestine, per chance since Persians are incredibly hospitable and courteous they would most assuredly meet with him. Too many players , though. Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan and us with the EVIL-DOER leading the Psychopath in Chief.
Damn, shameful, how to stop this, how???????
Pal of mine, gave TRUTH at the 1st Winter Soldier with Kerry, told me 4 months ago Iran would be hit in October, 2nd or 3rd week. Did not say if we were the provocateurs or attackers or attackees, doesn't matter end result = same.
Whine about Hillary for 15 hours, probably could have acted as an Ambassador and created World Peace with all of those hours.
I just keep hearig, Tick-Tock, Tick-Tock, Tick-To...........
Hi anne faith. Nice to see you here, too.
Since heavyrunner already answered your question (better than I could have), I'll just say this: Although Hillary's "obliterate Iran" was just rhetoric, it was dangerous rhetoric. Somebody out there with a finger on a "nuke 'em high" button might actually be dumb enough to believe it wasn't rhetoric.
Threatening nuclear war, even if you don't really mean it, for political gain is the opposite of cool. Hillary should be ashamed of herself for doing that, and we should be ashamed of ourselves for letting her get away with it.
Since I forgot to yak about the real point of Mr. Wimmer's article in my earlier posts, I guess I'll do it now:
Why doesn't somebody actually do something about the US's war threat against Iran, instead of just talking about it? Why don't we call Bush and Cheney's bluff? Why doesn't the Pope, along with a bunch of other higher-up Vatican muckety-mucks, go live in Esfahan so the US won't bomb the place? After all, would the US dare blow up, or threaten to blow up, the Pope? How about a couple hundred American nuns? How about a couple hundred Peace Corps volunteers? They could do a tremendous amount for world peace simply by just living in Esfahan for however long it takes. A few hundred photogenic American college students living in Esfahan might help, too. They'd be a group of conscientious Americans holding themselves hostage for their country's good behavior. Heck, I'd go live in Iran if it would do any good, but I'm just one unimportant guy, and for this to work it would have to be a very important and high-profile guy like the Pope, or a large number of fairly high-profile people, like a bunch of nuns or Peace Corps volunteers.
Anybody got an idea as to how a peace organization could get something like this off the ground? Is it still legal for an American, or a large group of Americans, to visit Iran? Or am I just nuts?
C'mon, your Popeness, why don't you and some of your fellow priests fly to Iran and take up residence in Esfahan? You'd be doing the world a favor. There's no way Bush and Cheney could get away with bombing you.
Well said ticonderoga.
I dont know why or how your country has come to this sorry state,but you have. Maybe indifference and complacence, ethnocentricity and misguided patriotism. The Romans used the expression "Bread and circuses" "Panem et circenses" is an ancient Roman metaphor for people choosing food and fun over freedom. It often appears in commentary that accuses people of giving up their of civic duty and following whichever political leader offers to satisfy their decadent desires.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.
~Jim Garrison
"There is no telling how many wars it will take to secure freedom in the homeland." - George W. Bush(1946- ) 43rd US President: Source: In a speech on August 7, 2002
------
Probably, no nation is rich enough to pay for both war and civilization. We must make our choice; we cannot have both.
~Abraham Flexner
"The war made possible for us the solution of a whole series of problems that could never have been solved in normal times." - Joseph Paul Goebbels (1897-1945) Nazi Propaganda Minister
--------
"Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind...War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today." : - John F. Kennedy
KEM -- I am beginning to suspect that Walt Kelly had the POGOism well thought out long ago¿ As what is more SPRINGing BACK at ONE, then a POGO stick ?
This article used the horror of Dresden to highlight the destruction of Iran. At one time, we were determined that such things should never again be done on this planet. Apparently, never has come and gone.
It is sad that few people look into history and learn from it. Santayana was right, and O' the many millions that have proved his thesis correct with their innocent blood and their devastated cultures.
I think while the merchants of greed and death do their thing, promoting war and counting their profits, our Mother Earth may well be dying of exploitation and neglect.
Or, as some have said, perhaps God is getting tired of the experiment and is about to throw out the petri dish and try something else.
Kem___You are doing pretty good for being outnumbered. I agree with you that Edwards or Kucinich would have been better candidates but now all we have is Obama & Clinton. I cannot see that much difference, one is better here, the other there, so either one will work. However Hillary may have a better chance against McCain and it appears the Repubs think so too.
This may all be a waste of time, as Bush and Cheney are the ones that are ready to go after Iran, so none of the three candidates may have to worry about it. Some posters seem to forget who the real threat is on attacking Iran.
I think that some posters like Kem Patrick should think of taking ex-lax to remedy their situation. He seems to be spouting out of his mouth way too much. It seems like he wants to oblieterate anyone who doesn't agree with him.
He may think that people like me are old farts because my support for Nader got Bush elected. However, I think that old farts like him are the reason that we have supposed democratic candidates like Gore, Kerry, Obama and Hillary, which is why Bush got elected.
so it goes...
As soon as I saw Kem Patrick posting first on this thread, I knew it was only a matter of time before he brought up his Methane Apocalypse obsession. By the way, I thought the original article was quite good but, unfortunately, the meaning was lost in the whole pointless argument about Hillary. Of course, in the end, I suppose we needn't worry about starting a nuclear war by attacking Iran...we're all going to be killed by giant farts anyhow!
Thanks ~Ticonderoga~, you are correct.
So was POGO. Think he said, "and it is us" though. __ Same thing.
I'm not talking ONLY about Hillary, Kem (not even primarily). Of course she didn't say she was planning on attacking Iran. Of course she was just trying to look tough when she said she would "obliterate" Iran IF Iran attacked Israel (which isn't going to happen). Of course it was just rhetoric.
The point is that the rhetoric shouldn't work - but it does. The point is that an American politician's threatening to use nukes against another country shouldn't be tolerated by American citizens. The point is that if we didn't put up with this kind of garbage, the country wouldn't be where it is today.
It's our fault, Kem, not Hillary's. She's just doing the "obliterate Iran" rhetoric dance because she knows it will gain her election brownie points. We should be ashamed of ourselves, collectively, for letting her get away with it. If We, the People didn't respond favorably to that kind of rhetorical garbage, politicians wouldn't use it.
In the words of the immortal Pogo, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
On this site, I am amazed that we all can't all agree on one thing and one thing only---that attacking Iran would be dispicable, immoral and a world encompassing disaster.
I loved Kucinich but if he had been the one to say such a thing I would be every bit as appalled as I am with Clinton or any other politician saying it. WAR is always a disaster! And obliterating a nation of people under any circumstances are words that should never be uttered, not even hypothetically. Any so called leader who does not speak first and foremost of finding ways to live peacefully will never get my support.
KEM most Americans are just sick of our politicans pandering to the AIPAC crowd. This pandering makes headlines all over the world and the world resents us for it. They see as as biased and one sided and they are absolutly correct. This in turn endangers Americans when we travel abroad.
~Ticonderoga~, I'm truly sorry, but I don't see where Hillary threatened to attack Iran or obliterate anyone. Please explain it to me. She said if Iran were foolish enough to use nuclear weapons on Isreal, as president she would attack Iran and we could obliterate them.
That'not the exact words but essentially what she said. The transcript is posted here and the entire interview is not included. It is really silly to say Hillary would attack Iran.
Never did she say she planned on doing such a thing if she is the president. It was an answer to a hypothetical question. So tell me where she ever said she actually intends to attack Iran and based upon what? She has always said that she disagrees with Bush on his opinions concerning starting a war with Iran.
Hey, Kem Patrick, why the many, many posts defending Hillary's use of the vile word 'obliterate', which is a war-threatening word she certainly did use? Or does it depend on what the word 'obliterate' is (is)? Why do you, especially when you know it is relatively unimportant? She certainly did not need to remind the Iranians, who weren't watching anyway, of their precarious situation.
I don't see she cares one way or another whether she obliterates Iran or not, just so long as she can be President-Top Bitch, in what has become an unseemly grab for power by the quintessential Power-Lust couple, the Clintons.
Like Mao's wife said, there is no better aphrodisiac than power. The Clintons certainly seem to believe this. They will do Anything to get the Fix of Power back, including betray and burn down the liberals, the progressives, the environmentalists and the Democratic Party. The Clintons will walk over all their dead bodies to get to the White House. And then sell them out... kinda like they did last time.
I believe that, just for their overt atrocious and selfish behavior alone, there should be no more Clintonistas in office. Along with no more Bushites or McInSanes.
And by the way, I believe you are correct in your statement that the methane gas/global warming problem is an orders of magnitude more important issue than terrorism or taxes... or whether you wear a flag pin or talk to a neighbor that used to be a radical in the 1960's.
HillBilly could have used the term 'obliterate' instead in the following way: civilization, and perhaps life itself, can be obliterated in our lifetime if the environment is not respected, and we do not take these ecological problems as far, far more important than the Iraq BushWar idiocy, or the BushNoTaxes idiocy.
So she should have dismissed the stupid question on Iran, and turned to the methane/global warming problem for a response, if she believed this problem was important. She did not, and as far as I can tell, does not believe this to be important.
And damn Al Gore, that he chose not to run, so we have to choose between these far lesser three that are left (McInSane most especially, as he is actually actively Anti-Environ-Mental).
Gore really damaged the environmental cause by not running. Because now the MSM... with the total collusion of the calculating cynical campaigns of the three remaining contenders... can Totally Ignore the environment altogether.
Because the tiny brains of the MSM 'journalists' apparently cannot comprehend anything more complicated than a flag pin.
Reference the site: www.planetextinction.com. And weep.
Hillary Clinton is another of the vile disgusting human garbage running/ruining US.
BTW ~Medusa~, you can write bullshit that Hillary is Cheney in drag, but if you checked her votes, she is so far to the left of Cheney she fell off the stage.
Hi ~Siouxrose~. Your friend is 100% correct, not 99.
You're correct about one important thing. ~WORDS ARE IMPORTANT~. YOU SAID, I cannot confirm correctness. Right you are, you get a cookie. ___ Feel better?
Transcript (cannot confirm absolute correctness)
CHRIS CUOMO: You said if Iran were to strike Israel, there would be 'massive retaliation." Scary words. Does 'massive retaliation" mean you'd go into Iran? You would bomb Iran? Is that what that's supposed to suggest?
CLINTON: Well, the question was, if Iran were to launch a nuclear attack on Israel, what would our response be? And I want the Iranians to know that if I am president, we will attack Iran. And I want them to understand that. Because it does mean that they have to look very carefully at their society. Because whatever stage of development they might be in their nuclear weapons program, in the next 10 years during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them. That's a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that. Because that, perhaps, will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish, and tragic.
""I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them." …"
What she could have said.
"Thats an absurd question. What country on the planet, even if they had a nuclear weapon and were ill disposed towards Israel, would face obliteration by attacking Israel with Nuclear Weapons, knowing full well, that even if the attack succeeded in wiping Israel off the map, that they would also face the same fate?.
One reason why the Soviet Union and our country never had a nuclear exchange during the Cold War is that we both knew what the consequences would be if we were unable to prevent retaliation by obliterating them with a first strike. Iran could probably get away with it with israel, as it is a small country geographically. But what about Israels friends like America and Britain. It would be sheer lunacy. Besides, Iran has not invaded another country in over 2000 years. With our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, they are unlikely to start."
~MEDUSA ~ I never said I supported Hillary dummy. I supported Edwards or Kucinich. I said Hillary never said she would nuke Iran and 'obliterate' anyone. __ She didn't, if you or any others want to say she did, I don't care.
BTW, Daniel David and I seldom ever agree on anything. But at least he can understand what is written. ___ BTW, did you take the two minutes to read the link I offered, or is something of real importance over your head and you'd rather post some dumb remark and offer me your wisdon and lessons?
KEM PATRICK, DANIEL David - Why don't you just chill and maybe send Hellary a Valentine.
Her entire track record on related issues puts her somehwere to the right of Madeline Albright. Not pretty. Hellary is just Cheney in drag.
You're going to have to see it sooner or later - don't fight it.
I visited with a male friend who spent time in the Air Force and asked his opinion of this news about aggression against Iran. He was adamant that our military can't handle it. I argued back what Seymour Hersch described as the use of AIR power so that troops on the ground would not be needed; but he said they are ALWAYS needed in the aftermath.
What troops would willfully enter a zone that is rendered radioactive? Can they still justify their own wounds for the fallen ideals that sometimes legitimize so-called just wars? Or is it painfully apparent this is about blood for treasure?
Some in this forum act like Israel is wagging the U.S. tail but that is absurd! Are there mutual interests at the moment? Yes. Are both nations controlled by amoral elites. Yes. I would not be surprised if the whole Middle East blew up and ISRAEL became the fall guy... it would not be the first time Jews went down as scapegoats. Many social justice advocates who do NOT support Israel's policies of aggression happen to be Jewish. I get tired of all the castigation against Israel. The Palestinian situation is horrible. No one can dispute that. To jump from that fact to one that projects Israel's TOTAL influence over U.S. foreign policy represents tunnel vision.
TICONDEROGA, THOREAU 245: Excellent posts.
Every nuclear weapon has a fingerprint, that is,experts can trace the country of orgin and site on where that nuclear material was made. What if a nuclear device was exploded here in the U.S. say in Miami,Fla.,and over 200,000 people were killed, and it could be proved beyond doubt that the weapons grade material was produced in Esfahan,Iran, what would be YOUR response. Turn the other cheek,or turn Esfahan Iran into a glass slick? I am against war for any political reason,but I know what my answer would be.
Of course you're the wizard who does 'get it' eh Crumudgeon99? What's wrong, not (100), you miss one? ___Love the first part of your name.
I'll tell you 'wise guy' what I don't get, it's that here at commom dreams, we so called highly intelligent "progressives", will blog 150 comments on a stupid issue like this and a truly important issue that should be of the very most interest to all, gets 10 to 20 posts.
This month two articles came on about 9-11 and there were over 1,200 posts combined, arguing if it was explosives or the aircraft crashes that caused the Twin Towers to collapse. One set a Common Dreams record for posts. ___ Any good come of it all? __ Balls!
Recently Russian Scientists were scared shitlees of what they're seeing in the Arctic perma-frost and lakes there where the surface water is boiling as methane escapes into our atmosphere. The vast majority here don't even bother to read the articles on the subject. Didn't see your name there ~Crumudgeon99.~
An artilce about the danger of the Arctic Methane gas came up this week and there were ten seperate posters who commnented. Guess we have to set our priorities.
The word "obliterate" gets a lot of attention, but it's the Arctic Methane gas that's going to "obliterate" every person on the planet if we humans don't start right away to fight a real war against global warming.
So I think I 'GET IT' well enough and I think you're a jerk. It wasn't just Daniel David and I who are in disagreement with others here on this issue, so why point us out?
BTW. If any here do care about their family, here's perhaps the most important article you will ever have the pleasure of reading, it takes about two minutes. The best part is where the world renouned geologist and author states, "Once it starts, there is no turning back, NO do-overs, once it starts it will play itself out."
Well, it's about to start, time is running out. ___ Ya get it Crumb? Don't want to learn anythig of real importnce? ___ Ignore it and blast Hillary. Knock yourself out.
http://www.energybulletin.net/3647.html