OPINION & EDITORIAL
Bush laughs in face of new report, marches toward war
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Ben White:
- Bush's isolation on Iraq War highlights need for withdrawal (November 26, 2007)
- Biden, Kucinich true Oval Office material (November 12, 2007)
- Liberal arts merit alumni attention (October 29, 2007)
- Child gun access allows shootings (October 15, 2007)
- Myanmar protests mandate US action (October 1, 2007)
Related Stories:
- President Bush's trip to Latin America disingenuous, selfish (March 8, 2007)
- Fresh chance for Bush (December 8, 2006)
- Bush opposition needs backbone (October 31, 2006)
- Powell capable, ready for '08 (November 13, 2006)
- My numbers don't lie, Dems' ads do (October 19, 2006)
Share This:
by Ben White
Monday, December 10, 2007
I don't know about the rest of you out there, but,
personally, I'm scared.
With only 13 months remaining in President Bush's tenure,
nothing can stop him now. There are no more congressional elections, no
possibility of a third term and no possibility to salvage his legacy. There is
no chance for success and with the imminent completion of his failure on the
near horizon, he is willing to go out with a bang. And then, six weeks ago, the
vision of that explosion came forcefully from his mouth when he uttered to the
American people that we are on a crash course with Iran, one that could lead us
to "World War III."
Mr. Bush and his administration have, since October 2001,
been accused of fear-mongering of the highest extent. However, Mr. Bush's
warning of a seemingly inevitable military conflict with Iran had me nervous
for the first time. If Mr. Bush was able to deceitfully gain approval for war
with Iraq, what would stop him from doing the same with Iran? Moreover, if our
president has already started one war in which he lacked the necessary
background information to succeed, why wouldn't he do so again, even if on a
much more dangerous scale?
Well, last week, with the release of an updated National
Intelligence Estimate, the American people and I breathed a sigh of relief. Mr.
Bush, we assumed, would be forced to tone down his rhetoric in the face of a
new report saying Iran ended their nuclear weapons program in 2003 and has not
started it up again since.
But, as is the procedural norm, Mr. Bush did not use the new
information to accept any possibility of peace through diplomacy; he in fact
spun it into what he termed "a warning signal." Rejecting the obvious benefits
of an Iran with less of a nuclear capability than had been previously
conceived, he asked, "What's to say they couldn't start another covert nuclear
weapons program?" It is this sort of blind assessment in contrast to facts that
may lead our country into something as disastrous as we have ever seen.
First, Mr. Bush needs to understand that by increasing
threats to Iran, he is isolating a group of people who are not as anti-American
and anti-democratic as others are in the region. The Iranian people, for the
most part, don't align with the sentiments and grandiose judgments of their
president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A man without a significant amount of power,
Mr. Ahmadinejad is not the voice of his people. But by allowing them to believe
they are under the threat of attack from the most powerful military in the
world, Iranians might be led right into the arms of the man who is prepared for
the challenge.
Second, and perhaps the most important notion that Mr. Bush
seems to dismiss, is the regional upheaval that anti-Iranian rhetoric may
invite. Iran has close ties with both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in
Palestine. While geography might have been one of those classes that Mr. Bush
didn't do so well in at school, any of his experts can tell him that those two
terrorist groups reside extremely close to Israel, our most powerful, and most
hated, ally in the Middle East.
Mr. Bush, in attempting to isolate the Iranians as a state
that "needs to be taken seriously as a threat to peace," is serving only to
push their citizens into the hands of one of the most anti-Western politicians
in the Middle East, Mr. Ahmadinejad, while also infuriating violent groups of
people hell-bent on the elimination of our invaluable Middle Eastern ally.
However, the negatives of any type of Iranian conflict do
not stop there. Mr. Bush's rhetoric is causing most European investors to pull
their assets out of Iran. While this may seem like a positive punishment toward
a nation that is doing wrong (although the new NIE says they aren't), it is
simply leading Iranian industry to look elsewhere for investors. Here,
elsewhere means to their easterly neighbors, China — a nation with a booming
economy that represents the unquestioned future challenger to American hegemony
in the 21st century.
It must then also be understood that any military conflict
with Iran would be extremely difficult. Our American forces are stretched so
thin in Afghanistan and the quagmire that is post-Saddam Iraq that we simply
lack the manpower to take on a nation as large as Iran. With more than 70
million people and an advanced — although split — military, an Iranian invasion
would not resemble the walk in the park that was the overthrow of Saddam's
government.
So as I said, yes, I am fearful of the future. It seems like there is nothing to stop Mr. Bush from his mission to do whatever he pleases. America must have come a long way from times when we were told that there is "nothing to fear but fear itself." I guess we are now at the time when we have everything to fear. All we have now to do is wait, and hope 13 months isn't long enough for our president to ratchet up the beginning of World War III.
Ben White
(bwhite2wisc.edu) is a junior majoring in sociology and political
science.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 7:46am):
This Leftist meme is as ironic as it is phony. Are we to believe that Leftists truly have a problem with "fear mongering" while their own message is one that alerts us of President Bush's "deceitful" intent?
Even as Leftists warn America of Bush's "threat", they have the gall to climb up on their hind legs and howl disdain for the role fear plays in politics. Aren't these the same folks who insist (ad nauseum) that the imminent melting of the polar ice caps is sure to drown American coastlines?
In fact, the Left's "logic" in wartime seeks to paralyze Americans into a fatal complacency-- unconcerned with Islamic lunatics in search of atomic weaponry.
Careful study of our foreign threats leads most Americans to the rational conclusion that they are NOT being duped by "fear-mongering." Rather, Bush has accurately assessed the serious nature of America's enemies.
Iran has been in a declared state of war with America since 1979. And Iranian agents are now murdering US, Iraqi and Coalition forces on an almost daily basis. It's well past time America responded definitively to Iran's outrageous casus belli.
In a post-9/11 world, Americans can ill-afford to re-learn the lesson: that terrorism and apathy are a deadly combination.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 8:24am):
Why did Libya decide to end their weapons acquisition program in the spring of 2003? Was it strict diplomacy, or was it because Libya was scared about facing the Allied military like in Iraq?
I don't think that we should invade Iran, but we do need to not take military options off the table because of the scare factor.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 9:36am):
It's just a plot by GW Bush, Evil Genius!
bwah-ha-ha-ha!!!
The NIE may therefore be a Bush poker gambit, with the aid of Bush-hating liberals from the State Department. The Bush administration has become rather expert at deploying the relentless anti-Bush Left for its own purposes. The Left has made itself completely predictable, and a predictable poker player can be beaten.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/12/what_if_the_nie_is_a_bush_gamb.html
Rusudana (December 10, 2007 @ 9:41am):
Hi Ben,
First of all, don't even listen to Republicans such as the lame "Anonomous". He does what ALL Republicans do: Changes the subject (to "leftists" and then usually, they name-call, and of course, love to add "fear" into their blab). They do that because they seem to have an Attention Deficit Disorder when discussing reality.
You should be afraid. We are governed by a madman, who not only should be impeached immediately, but in my opinion, should be water-boarded as well, since he doesn't consider it torture.
If it is found that Bush & Cheney are "card-carrying" members of Al Qaeda.... would that be sufficent evidence for this lame, almost traitorous Congress to impeach these two? Is that what they are waiting for?
It took 3 months to impeach Nixon (before he resigned), it took 4 months to impeach Clinton. It should take only a day to impeach this dangerous madman & his "Darth Vader" (since everything is well-documented, on camera, written laws, etc.) - who seriously may be trying to bring on Armaggedon. Check out: www.afterdowningstreet.org or www.floridaimpeach.org
Bush certainly can be stopped - even if it is his last HOUR in office. It won't take time, it will only take will.
How many more lost lives, how many more bold-faced lies, torturing, and law breaking (with or without "Signing Statements") must we put up with? This administration is incompetent, deceitful and dangerous.
We must cleanse and restore the soul, integrity and respect of our country... OR watch as this malignant disregard for law, treaties and our Constitution putrefies our country into a perpetual war-making, lawless, corporate-controlled, fascist, militaristic, police-state! Is THAT the type of country we want to be? Is THAT WHO WE ARE?
Some rock star on tv said: "If you don't have what you want,...then you have what you deserve!" Remember that.
Our Congress no longer believes in America. They will not vote for hearings on Articles of Impeachment, because they are so pathetic that they don't believe they can walk and chew gum at the same time; and because they are lazy and no longer honor the Oath of Office they took to defend the Constitution. Since they don't believe that their Oath of Office, restoring our integrity and upholding the Constitution are important; I can only conclude that this country, this democracy and our founding fathers are also - not important. I believe in America and our Constitution. Congress does not.
The true strength of a country also involves integrity, honor and respect. Things this administration has no inkling about. Attacking a country that did nothing to us, ruining their infrastructure and killing thousands, then forcing "democracy and capitalism" on them naturally, doesn't work.
If spreading "democracy & capitalism" throughout the world by force and lies is "OK",... then I suppose spreading Islam, Communism, Buddhism, socialism, Catholicism and even Atheism through force and lies is "OK".
Bush lives in his own dangerous, arrogant, macho, bullying world - and it's time for the American people to show a little adult behavior and responsibility and love for a country that was founded to be "Of, for and by the people" - and was to be a beacon of inspiration to the world!
Call your Congressperson and DEMAND IMPEACHMENT!
cptneemo (December 10, 2007 @ 10:31am):
I fail to see how reducing greenhouse gases, lowering our dependence on fossil fuels, and embracing environmentally-friendly new technologies is a bad thing. There is nothing to fear from such policy and much to gain for the future of the human race.
However, there is much to fear and nothing to gain (sorry, maybe oil) - by making enemies of the Iranian people who are decidedly "pro-west" and do not feel that their leader speak for them (does that sound familiar?).
All that many of us are asking for, is sensible policy from our president - that makes friends rather than enemies, works for peace not war, and does not dismiss the wishes of the majority to pursue the politics of fear.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 11:14am):
7:46am--
What is the "Left"? You're clearly talking out of your ass if you think the Democratic Party here is at all close to the lefts of any other country in the world. Besides, the political spectrum is mere fantasy, political preference is much more complex than that. So whenever you want to stop your own "evil Leftist" fearmongering, go for it.
And have you ever thought that maybe they "declared war on America" because "we started it"?
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 11:20am):
Ben, you've got this all wrong. Take a look at the report. Intelligence estimates suggest the Iranians stopped their nuclear program in 2003 precisely because of the kind of pressure and isolation we are pursuing. Thankfully, the Europeans understand this, and leaders such as Sarkozy and Merkel are keeping up the pressure.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 11:29am):
Yeah. You weak-ass libs, freedom isn't free. We're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here. These colors don't run. Remember 9/11. Stop siding with the turrists.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 11:40am):
"In a post-9/11 world, Americans can ill-afford to re-learn the lesson: that terrorism and apathy are a deadly combination."
really? that's funny, because for me, in a Iraq war-world, Americans can ill-afford to re-learn the lesson: that invading a large middle eastern country based on dubious evidence of putative weapons programs can lead to a disastrous quagmire that costs the lives of thousands of Americans and citizens of that country, not to mention enough money to successfully combat the global warming crisis, and threatens to destabilize a region that is always politically precarious.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 11:41am):
Ben White's parents need to ask for their money back. "Ben White (bwhite2wisc.edu) is a junior majoring in sociology and political science."
Clearly Mr&Mrs. White have overpaid and young Benjamin has underachieved, in a BIG way.
Mr. White can do nothing more than vomit forth talking points from his classes.
"There is no chance for success and with the imminent completion of his failure on the near horizon, he is willing to go out with a bang." Exactly who is fear mongering here?
"no chance for success" is something we have heard less and less of from the Left, as it becomes increasingly clear that in fact we are winning! In spite of the treasonous bile we have been forced to listen to for the last 4 plus years, the truth is finding it's way out and Little Benny will have NONE OF THAT! "WHHAAA!....we can't win ever!" "Bush is evil" Yet we are succeeding, IN SPITE of fear mongering, sniveling little know nothings like Benny.
Go back to your classes Benny. Learn a bit more before you open your mouth.
Benny has not even read the NIE; or else he is willfully misrepresenting it. It is so full of contradictory statements that, in effect, it says nothing. NOWHERE does it say "Iran has stopped it's Nuclear Program" NOWHERE! Perhaps Benny should actually read the source material? Nah! that might interfere with his childish ranting.
Either site your source, where it clearly states that that Iran has stopped it's nuclear weapons program, or be enough of a man to retract this tripe.
You simply will not find it Little Benny; it's not there. There is plenty of "we thinks", "it appears likely" and "looks like" but not a single "we are sure".
By the way Benny, the NIE was cited as the source that told of WMDs in Iraq. When exactly was the last time you hailed the fool proof work of our nations various intelligence services?
Using your chosen fields of Politics and Sociology, Benny Boy, we find that you are a lying, fear mongering little twerp. A little boy who insists that he alone knows the truth, and has no problem lying to back it up.
Mr. and Mrs. White, I'm sure you thought you did better. Actually, I'm betting that you did; but Benny has decided most of your lessons are superseded by "Sociology and Political Science". Too bad really, just another over educated, under informed Liberal. Not even qualified to ask "want fries with that?"
The youth of today are the hope of tomorrow, and looking at the level of reason, intellectual rigor and just plain truth displayed by Benny Boy; America weeps.
Move to Iran Benny, you don't deserve the freedoms accorded an American, and America certainly does not need you. Once there you might wish to reconsider your habit of shooting off your mouth regards the President; they handle things a might different there.
Fool.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 11:45am):
but i do agree, mr/ms "bloody measuring stick," people are misreading this report, it does not mean that iran is suddenly anything but a serious threat to world peace, and they still have a stockpile of nuclear material that is characteristic of those used for weaponry. besides, i question the incentive of such an oil-rich country for a nuclear energy program.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 12:03pm):
why is the right always accused of fear mongering when the left has mastered it?
for instance,
i am so afraid that my reproductive rights will be taken away and i'll die in a back alley because i used a hanger for an abortion. i couldn't go to the hospital because i have no insurance thanks to evil right wingers and corporations and this class warfare. the alley i'm in is 120 degrees and flooding because of evil global warming. my mom can't help me because evil conservatives privatized social security and stole it from her. i guess my only hope is that i get drafted by a right wing president's war and then maybe i can get some help. of course, if the anti-science dummies in the south get their way, i'll starve to death if i don't get a disease that could have been cured if not for these fundamentalist christians who are trying to bring about the rapture. geez, i hope that republicans aren't reading this posting or they'll surely come and get me since they destroyed our civil rights.
Dan (December 10, 2007 @ 12:21pm):
When I was your age, I was as fearful as you are. Not long before, that warmonger, Ronald Reagan, had stood at the Berlin wall and challenged the Russians to tear it down.
A year or two later, the damned thing fell down. You could have knocked me over with a feather. That's when I stopped being so sure of my own political judgements.
And don't kid yourself: Bush is SMART. You don't get to be president as the kind of idiot Bush's detractors paint him as. Dangerous? I don't think so, but it very well could be. But not dumb.
Bellicosity isn't always a horrible thing, and things aren't always what they seem to someone like you or me who doesn't know all the factors involved. Whatever your poli sci profs are feeding you, be aware that ALL my profs at that time, poli sci and otherwise, HATED Reagan with a white-hot passion. Hating conservatives is what profs do, though I don't think Bush is that conservative.
Something to think about.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 12:23pm):
COWARD
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 12:36pm):
We're all scared
Everyone is
at least everyone should be
communication systems have turned this world into a tiny place, a tiny place with millions of secrets with only a few people knowing a few of the millions of secrets.
I just hope that in years to come hindsight will allow the American people to see that something good has come out of this mess.
Keep hope!
Obviously Bush is not the most wonderful but I really don't think he wants a WWIII. So many people seem to think he is the most evil person when in fact I'm sure he has more love and devotion for this country than all the people who think that put together.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 12:43pm):
Don't worry, Ben, the president needs congressional approval before going to war... doesn't he?
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 1:03pm):
Wow. 7:46am really knows what he's talking about here. To actually believe that we are in any sort of grandiose danger as a nation is absolutely rediculous, yet exactly what Bush wants you to think.
You conservatives are such pansies. What is the "serious nature of America's enemies" that you speak of. We are fighting a group of people with zero capability to hurt us. It took these terrorists years to plan one attack on us that killed 3,000+ people and they have yet to attack us again.
You need some historical perspective my early posting friend, the enemy that we face is far less dangerous that any enemy we have EVER faced. Think of the devastation that could have taken place had the Cold War not remained Cold. Think of the fear we had during the World Wars when millions were dying. We face a tiny little enemy that has next to no capability of hurting us, no matter if Bush tells us that "they'll follow is home." They will NOT follow us home, they are a gnat that we should be swatting at with a fly-swatter, not a gun.
It is the ultimate "wussiness" that conservatives like yourself possess that allows Bush to run wild like he has. Smarten up and face reality. Americans have killed more Americans than terrorists have in the past six years. Lets focus on domestic problems that are killing Americans everyday rather than obscure threats that in the scheme of history don't amount to anything near dangerous.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 1:08pm):
Go ahead and invoke Goodwin's law there Anonymous poster 1. You've already lost all your credibility saying "post 9/11 world."
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 2:24pm):
The seads of empire are spreading! Love Live George Bush.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 4:41pm):
Response to 11:41:
You need to learn more background information on the National Intelligence Council and their reports before so aggressively writing what you did. It is never their job to include langauge that makes statements that include words such as "we are sure." They never do that. Here is their description of why this is so:
"Because analytical judgments are not certain we use probabilistic language to reflect the Community's estimates of the likelihood of developments of events."
They thus rate their statements on one of three levels, high, moderate, or low confidence.
They then go on to state as their first judgement that "We judge with HIGH CONFIDENCE (note that this is their highest level of sureness) that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program."
The report goes on to say that "We judge with high confidence that the halt lasted at least several years."
It takes extremely good judgment from our NIC to avoid the language you seem to think is necessary to make judgments. By avoiding such language as "we are sure that Iran has halted its program," the NIC will not allow for rash decision to be made in the name of its report.
However, the reason that this report made such a flash around the world was the notion that the NIC used their highest level of confidence to contradict something that our President had been claiming just the opposite of. Such a bold statement from the NIC should resonate as it did.
As to your other ramblings. We are not "winning" anything in Iraq. While a temporary surge may quell violence it will do nothing to repair the infrastructure that was damaged during the first year of the invasion when we did not send the requisite amount of troops. Periodic halts in violence are possible but any hope of political success is gone and "imminent failure" is in the horizon when we eventually do pull out. I suggest you do some reading into the subject. I suggest "Imperial Life in the Emerald City" by Rajiv Chandrasekaran, the National Editor of the Washington Post, a first hand account of how mistakes in the first year have all but removed any possiblity of success.
Yes there has been less talk of failure on the side of the Democrats, but that is due more to the decrease in "suicide blast" headlines and not in the possibility of any positive political outcome for Iraq.
Please, in a response like this one, less rambling, stay on topic, do some research, and keep the parents out of it.
-Little Benny
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 4:52pm):
So they stopped thier program in 2003?
hmmmmmmm, what else happened in 2003? Oh yeah, Saddam had his arse kicked for not cooperating.
Well, after the Defeatocrats surrender in Iraq I'm pretty sure that Iran will rev that program back up - they might even be at it right now, how would we know?
The CIA will find this out 5 years from now, maybe sooner if Iran uses their a-bombs sooner.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 6:55pm):
12:03 - that was amazing.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 8:32pm):
Benny, I do know about the NIC and how they word their docs. I was speaking to the fact that YOU (not the NIC via this latest NIE) said "...would be forced to tone down his rhetoric in the face of a new report saying Iran ended their nuclear weapons program in 2003 and has not started it up again since."
Where is the "judge with high confidence" ? You stated it AS FACT with out any caveats. I know as well as you how these "estimates" are worded, why misrepresent their "high confidence" as a statement of fact? You gloat at the chance to school me, but all you really do is show that you KNOW they did not state it as fact. YOU sated it as a fact, the NIC did not. Again; either you did not read the report, or you misrepresented it. I repeat my assertion that you lie by omission.
"Yes there has been less talk of failure on the side of the Democrats, but that is due more to the decrease in "suicide blast" headlines and not in the possibility of any positive political outcome for Iraq."
Ahh...violence is down but that does not matter...nothing positive can ever blah blah blah. Another poster schooled you regards the Cold War and how Regan won it, please ask your Profs if they were teaching that we were winning nothing, that it was a quagmire, that we could never win. I'll save you the time, if the were "teaching" then, that is exactly what they were saying. They are still wrong.
Seven paragraphs on the NIC and how they word their docs, when a simple "..you are right, it does not state as fact, but..." would have done? Who is rambling? Each point I made was directly tied to statements made in you editorial, but you say I have strayed off topic?
"I suggest you do some reading..." Benny, I have read widely, so widely in fact as to include some of your pieces linked here. I can only suggest that you get an education; and no that is not what you are currently getting, that would be whats known as "indoctrination"
Try again Little Benny.
As an aside, I am sorry for bringing your parents into the discussion. I did so in an attempt to highlite how childish this piece is. You are right; it was simply unworthy and I apologise.
Anonymous (December 10, 2007 @ 9:13pm):
Oh, how courageous anonymity is...
Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 8:55am):
8:24am observed: "Why did Libya decide to end their weapons acquisition program in the spring of 2003?"
quod erat demonstrandum!
"I will do whatever the Americans want
because I saw what happened in Iraq
and I was afraid."
[--Colonel Kaddafi-- Source: DAILY TELEGRAPH (UK), September 04, 2003]
More sticks... less carrots.
Anonymous (December 11, 2007 @ 9:17am):
Earlier posted comment mentioned a good point. The one I am always bringing up,with no answers,no comments,no refutals,no political respondents, just plain no comment.
Why does an oil rich country need nuclear power plants? A small country to boot.
It sure looks fishy to me.
And ,can you tell me why all you hear in the news is about makeing nuclear fuel. Where are all the headlines about Iran building cooling towers for the power plants, water diversion systems. There hasnt yet been a picture,let alone talk, of power plant construction.
What are the Iranians going to do with all those "fuel rods" ??????????
sign me Citezen Joe
Rusudana (December 11, 2007 @ 6:17pm):
What is this? A Blog for a guy called "Anonymous?"
Weird.
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 3:39am):
Thank you for your great article.
I think the American people in field of history and politic are very uneducated. You need to read more and be able to make connection to reality. The rule of US in the world is very negative. You support all totalitarian governments in the Middle East and in same time talk about democracy. You use WMD on civilian and attack others for only having them. You have the most corrupted government and you talk about containing it in other countries. You have a stupid and liar president that is like a Saturday night show for others and you want to build new order in world. You think that history started from 9/11 and you don't have any clue that what is your past. I don't talk about your racist attitude about African in your country. Only 40 years ago you had an apartheid regime in your country and in the same time you had a big mouth that you freed European. You used nuclear weapon against civilian and even now you don't apology for it. You are the number one supporter of apartheid regime of Israel and you think people hate you because you support freedom. I don't talk about your record in South America or Far East. You must shut your big mouth and think more.
Canadian
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 4:00am):
Those that support war against Iran:
What are you doing here? You must be in Iraq now. War is not a computer game. Wake up. You attacked the most weakened country in the region and you don't know how to handle it. If Iran starts to support Iraqis only with anti thank weapons that destroyed 120 Israeli tanks in Lebanon war, you will see the result. Iraqi people hate you. Hellooooooo , they just need weapon that show you how much they love you. The level of resistance that you see now is only a small part of their love for you. I don't mention anti aircraft missiles that work fine for helicopters. The coward people that here sing war songs must go to Iraq. The problem is that you use your mouth more than your brain. Same as your president.( in his case I'm not sure about the brain.)
Jean
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 4:37am):
Now that we know George Bush knew the nuclear threat from Iran was non existent some time ago, why isn't he held accountable for spreading false fear about World War Three?
Why isn't an immediate campaign being launched this very moment to investigate impeachment proceedings against this White House resident? The tarnished resident who many believe never legitimate was elected president even once.
To refuse to impeach is to refuse to fulfill your sworn duty to uphold the laws of the United States, for the president to obey all laws and treaties the United States has signed.
To begin with, to trash the constitutional guarantees of freedom of American citizens is a serious breach of their rights.
Has Americans' apathy concerning their own Bill of Rights degenerated to where the current citizenry would become more outraged over a TV sports event or soap opera not being shown on TV as opposed to stopping an unneeded war in Iraq?
At last, obtaining proof has revealed that the reputation of U.S. integrity has been horribly threatened by Bush and Cheney. We have the earlier example of the Iraq War and now there is the World War Three threat made by Bush before the truth outed him.
All of this displays a sad day for the U.S.A.
Why hasn't the Bush administration been held accountable for Iraq War intentional deceit leading to death, destruction, serious injuries and millions of Iraqis escaping to other nations as refugees?
We have heard Bush and Cheney rant on about Iran, while the entire world is in shock and awe at the arrogance of the U.S. Iraq War debacle.
After hearing about scientific discoveries for alternative stem cell research not involving embryos, Bush issued a statement saying that he approved of this alternate stem cell research when it falls within ethical boundaries.
The question that must be asked: "Is launching a war on a series of lies, conducting a war killing hundreds of thousands, within Mr. Bush's ethical boundaries?"
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 3:14pm):
And what do you think of the very popular view by a leading Israeli analyst Obadiah Shoher? He argues (here, for example, www. samsonblinded.org/blog/america-arranges-a-peace-deal-with-iran.htm ) that the Bush Administration made a deal with Iran: nuclear program in exchange for curtailing the Iranian support for Iraqi terrorists. His story seems plausible, isn't it?
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 7:53pm):
i guess The Economist agrees with the language used in this article that an earlier poster took offense to:
"A report by America's NIC concluded that Iran did have a nuclear-weapons programme up until 2003, but that it had been halted."
that sounds like pretty definitive language to me, and also, get a clue: victory in Iraq is no longer possible...the condom-in-chief and Dumbald Rumsfeld made sure of that
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
