You know, what's funny is that on Red State blogs they state Bush would NEVER wage war on Iran, unless he TOLD us he would beforehand.

Idiocy and, I'm afraid, gibbering madness.

Because losing two wars just didn't look good enough for his legacy.

Considering? The fucking decision was made two years ago. It's only a matter of when. And if you think Bush fucked up badly in Iraq, you ain't seen nothing yet.

NOte, Alex---Bush is considering bombing Iranian oil production---Thus assuring the $9.00 per gallon gas prices he warned us would occur if we pulled out of Iraq.

Idiocy. And (gibber, gibber) madness.

Cool. Another "bush plans to attack Iran" story. Can't get enough of these.

It's supposed to happen by the Sep 20th, right? Isn't that what one of these "papers" declared a few weeks ago? I see this "paper" is pushing out the deadline a bit further.

*yawn*

An interesting thought put forward by another---

B-2 strikes on Iranian nuclear facilties with tactical nukes----The cover story for resultant radiation being it came from the Iranians and not from us---We'll say we used conventional explosives, so sorry.

I'll bet that every president after Carter has done that, including the guy that dodgeged the military completely, Clinton

All the dems wear skirts when it comes to military issues. That is why Dick Cheney's "help is on the way" assurance provided comfort to the people in uniform and translated into plenty of votes.

Seal the entry points between Iraq and Iran, and take out the nukulear facility. For once, shut the mouth of Ahmadinerojihad.

B-2 strikes on Iranian nuclear facilties with tactical nukes----The cover story for resultant radiation being it came from the Iranians and not from us---We'll say we used conventional explosives, so sorry.

Different type of radiation, blast pattern, lack of conventional explosive detritus. You can't hide the fingerprint of an exploding nuke.

"Seal the entry points between Iraq and Iran...."

Glad to take your estimate on the number of American divisions required for that.

"You can't hide the fingerprint of an exploding nuke...."

You have way too much faith, Goatman. They'll nuke the place and then scratch their asses while you debate "blast patterns".

They'll nuke the place and then scratch their asses while you debate "blast patterns".

There would be no debate. The international community would know immediately whether it was a nuke or not. Satellite data, type of radiation would determine that. Don't even need to look at blast patterns.

I don't think you understand me. They'll stick to their story and ask you to mate with yourself.

Goatman---Look what Bush just did with "benchmarks"---Things are what he says they are---What are you going to do, arrest him?

"Seal the entry points between Iraq and Iran...."

You mean, take the crews and material that are left over after we build a wall between the US and Mexico and export our "thick, tall walls build friendship between countries" strategery by constructing a horizontal "bridge" separating Iran and Iraq?

You have way too much faith, Goatman. They'll nuke the place and then scratch their asses while you debate "blast patterns".

Posted by Zed

Then the problem is solved.

"Then the problem is solved...."

Sniper understands how these people think. I'm not being snarky---he has it entirely right.

-he has it entirely right

As long as you use the term "think" rather loosely.

By seal the entry points, I mean to put those smart planes in operation to target cross border activities at the height of reaction from destruction of nukulear facility.

No need to build a wall.

We need to dust off the invasion plan for Canada. It's already a renegade colony of the U.S. (We import raw materials from Canada and export technology).

We just need to slap it back in line.

And kill some polar bears, too.

Shut up Spermin.

You embarrass yourself on a daily basis.

The hard fact is, Bush is likely to see enough "good" news out of Iraq this week to feel free to attack Iran.

What are you going to do, arrest him?

"Because losing two wars just didn't look good enough for his legacy."

Don't you mean "losing ONLY two wars"?

But on the flip side its nice to see that others agree with me that the Iraq war has nothing to do with Iraq anymore, only with Bush frantically trying to put the Iranian genie back in the bottle. Too bad it won't work unless we help the saddamists overthrow the Iraq government we spent 4000 lives creating and install another sunni strongman. Too bad we whacked Uday, rapist or not, he would at least have een our rapist.

Bushling thnks creating bigger problems solves the problems he can't. Fucking murdering asshole.

fucking bill clinton is what caused all of this madness in the middleeast. george bush is just cleaning up his mess.

George W Bush - WINNING HEARTS AND MINDS (for Al Qaeda)

Bush --- kicking liberal and al queda asses.

Bush --- kicking liberal and al queda asses.

Wanted Dead or Alive
They Can Run, But They Can't Hide
WMD
...in Africa
Mission Acomplished
Bring 'em on
We're Kicking Ass
...as the Iraqis stand up
Return on Success

It's supposed to happen by the Sep 20th, right? Isn't that what one of these "papers" declared a few weeks ago? I see this "paper" is pushing out the deadline a bit further.

*yawn*

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-15 11:09 AM

I wouldn't say "supposed to." When someone takes out $3.5 billion in puts betting on a severe stock market drop, either they are very stupid, making a payoff or they know something we don't. The drop could be for purely economic reasons too, say China suddenly dumped its bonds. Or there could be a terrorist attack on the scale of 911. We have one week to go.

"Bush --- kicking liberal asses"

Voting preference - September 2007

Democrat 50%
GOP 32%

"...and al queda asses"

In the wrong country where new recruits replace Al Qaeda dead as fast as we can kill 'em, and Al Qaeda leadership eat lamb on the lamb.

Doc: You missed November 2006-the Permanent Republican Majority.

Bush --- kicking liberal and al queda asses.

Yeah, right.

Bush --- kicking liberal and al queda asses.

Only in the recesses of his little mind, his very little, shallow, arrogant mind

I don't think you understand me. They'll stick to their story and ask you to mate with yourself.

Posted by Zed at 2007-09-15 11:33 AM | Reply | Flag:


He's right...

It seems like NeoCon Hawks all assume that if we bomb Iran, they'll just curl up, beg for forgiveness, and never ever do anything bad again.

No matter how much ordinance we drop on them, they'll still have millions of military age men. You can't win wars with airpower alone, it's been proven time and time again. Like every population, they'll rally around their leaders, no matter how deluded (just like us). They won't surrender just because the NeoCons want them to.

We don't have enough troops to invade, and we won't have any allies to provide us with meaningful help. Within a few days after the bombing, Iranian tropps would be pouring over the border into Iraq and Afghanistan. Our 169,00 troops wouldn't be enough to hold Baghdad, much less the whole country. Within weeks we could lose anything we might have gained in the past 4 1/2 years. At the same time, China, Russia, and North Korea would suddenly find themselves in a world with a very diminished US presence. If we were stupid enough to use nukes, every US friendly government on the planet would fall.

Just because we're a superpower, it doesn't mean our power is unlimited. It has to be used wisely. We can beat any ONE country if we're smart, but we can't beat everyone, especially if we squander our strength as we have in Iraq. Attacking Iran would would be a disaster, potentially taking us off the world stage for decades, just as rivals far more powerful than AQ are modernizing and developing their own resources.

What two wars have we lost?

Marie, any war we are currently involved in are lost. According to the crybaby lefty DR types.

What two wars have we lost?

Posted by Marie3 at 2007-09-15 06:34

Under Bush what wars have we won?

Why Would 3 Aircraft Carriers Be Sitting In The Gulf For 2 Months So Far ?


intimidation

I wouldn't say "supposed to." When someone takes out $3.5 billion in puts betting on a severe stock market drop,

I explained why this wasn't true, Ray. I can't believe someone still believes this story. Here we go again:

1) no one puts $3.5g on anything.
2) if someone DID make such an investment, he would have to sell a lot of other securities to get the cash. No one has that amount of liquidity.
3) by SEC law, such a large options has to be declared with the SEC. Even corporate officers have to declare options over $1m. We are talking 3,500 times that amount!
4) what security only goes up during a major disaster? WHy wasn't its name mentioned in the original story?
5) It would do no good to mention the first time this story came out it was on a conspiracy web site. Wonder why the WSJ didn't report it?

THis is hilarious that the left wing accuses the right of being afraid of the bogeyman by wanting increased security and illegal wire taps. Who's afraid of the bogeyman now? Not one shred of proof this story is true.
I can't believe you are so gullible.

They'll stick to their story and ask you to mate with yourself.

So?

Bush just wants to make sure that the republicans get the lowest vote percentage in history with this move.

Go Dumbya!!!

THis is hilarious that the left wing accuses the right of being afraid of the bogeyman by wanting increased security and illegal wire taps. Who's afraid of the bogeyman now? Not one shred of proof this story is true.
I can't believe you are so gullible.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-15 10:10 PM | Reply | Flag

"illegal wiretaps"

You're finally starting to see the light. Congrats.

You're finally starting to see the light. Congrats.

Bad memory or twisted memories? I've always said I was against illegal wiretaps. Take notes.

M112 Composition C4 Block Demolition Charge

It seems to me that everyone wants to rank the war just as we do college football polls. the military should only be used after diplomacy has failed, and after that call is made, there should be no more talking. just agressive negotiations from our young ambassadors using rifles and blood util the enemy is dead.

"Take notes."

goatshill



Boob -- It is a post of substance. Just because you don't agree with the substance doesn't make it unsubstantial. Even your conspiracy theories are substantive even though you and Bani are the only ones that believe them. Fail

Posted by goatshill at 2007-09-11 08:18 PM on Tues retort

take notes on these lies of yours? or is it just a typical bit of slander?:>)

take notes on these lies of yours? or is it just a typical bit of slander?:>)


Bani -- I'm sorry, but I simply don't understand your posts. Maybe you think by beind cryptic that you convey a deeply relevant yet secret message that we mortals fail to grasp. Whatever it is, I don't get it. But I'm sure you have a conspiracy to explain.

Bani -- I'm sorry, but I simply don't understand your posts. Maybe you think by beind cryptic that you convey a deeply relevant yet secret message that we mortals fail to grasp. Whatever it is, I don't get it. But I'm sure you have a conspiracy to explain.

Posted by goatshill

that you lie now & then & slander, too? nothing personal, I'm sure...& certainly not a conspiracy at all:>)

that you lie now & then & slander, too?

Don't think so, but I'm welcome to examples that I have.

on't think so, but I'm welcome to examples that I have.

Posted by goatshill

start with the above post in last Tues Retort about Bani & BB being the only 911 truthers around in DR...or is that just a hyperbole...my bad if so:>)

start with the above post in last Tues Retort about Bani & BB being the only 911 truthers around in DR...or is that just a hyperbole...my bad if so:>)

You got me. IT was pretty outrageous of me to claim that you and Bob tell the truth.

You got me. IT was pretty outrageous of me to claim that you and Bob tell the truth.

Posted by goatshill

ff for shill

let's bomb Crawford, Texas and Kennebuckport, Maine.

"So...."

Goatman, so you not only don't mind of you're lied to, but also if you're bullied? OK.

Goatman, so you not only don't mind of you're lied to, but also if you're bullied? OK.

I look forward to logging onto the DR and finding what new attributes have been assigned to me that day. Very amusing. But actually, I don't consider what you DRers tell me as lies. At least not malicious ones. I just think a lot of y'all are delusional. Bullying? Really. My skin is thicker than that, zed.

I hate Bush. I am a Democrat and I will always vote Democrat, but I wont cry if shrub nukes Iran.

I hate Bush. I am a Democrat and I will always vote Democrat, but I wont cry if shrub nukes Iran.

Posted by Secret_Squirrel at 2007-09-16 09:56 AM | Reply

ANd what have they done to anyone lately??

Larry

ANd what have they done to anyone lately??

Kidnapped some British sailors. Provided munitions that are killing and maiming people in Iraq. Threatening the destruction of a sovereign state.

Other than that they're a jolly bunch of fellows.

Goatman
If say China was occupying Mexico or Canada. By your logic, the US should keep out of it. Think man! Think!

Provided munitions that are killing and maiming people in Iraq. Threatening the destruction of a sovereign state.

Are you talking about Iran or the USA?

If say China was occupying Mexico or Canada. By your logic, the US should keep out of it. Think man! Think!

Read, man, read! Did I justify what the US is doing in Iraq? No. Larry asked a question. I answered. You chose to twist it into something I didn't say.

Are you talking about Iran or the USA?

Larry asked about Iran, so that is what my reply was about.

I suspect that if China invaded Canada we'd be supplying munitions and men. Better example might be Mexico because of the terrain. Bottom Line: We wouldn't allow a foreign power to invade and control our neighbor.

Considering all the people who fled to Iran when the Shiia rose up after the Gulf War and Saddam had a free hand in their slaughter, it's not hard to imagine they might feel abit closer to the Persians than the Yanks.

And if they did rise up in numbers do you really think our Army could control that?

Our failures in Iraq all stem from a failure in political strategy. We might have considered that all Iraqis lived in fear of Saddam and his sons, even those in the inner circle. We should have stuck to the card deck, and excused all but those who assisted in torture, unless convicted in a court of law.

Bremer turned that upside down on the advice of Wolfowitz. Hence the de-Baathification orders and within a week the IEDs started going off. End of story.

Defense Contracts and Oil Profits are up. Makes all the blood and misery worthwhile.

Through the entirety of the Cold War, there was never a more dangerous state of affairs than the one to which the Bush/Cheney administration has brought us. The "wise men" who used to prevail are dead. Republicans like John Warner and Chuck Hagel have been castrated by Dick and Lynne Cheney the neo-Con cabal. The President hasn't a clue, no matter what you apologists say about his intelligence. If he ever had any it's long gone, replaced by delusional weeping on "God's shoulder" which probably isn't even Laura's shoulder. He really believes he is in communication with the imaginary Lord himself.

If it were not so tragic it would be rather like another volume of "Harry Potter" but unfortunately though we have Voldemort and lots of potential Snapes and Umbridges and Malfoys, we have no Harry Potter.

If there is a serious argument for attacking Iran, it may well be the start of the apocalypse these foolish people of "faith" seem to believe in.

We need to stop insanity in the world, not just in the United States, of course, but the United States is where most of us on this blog seem to be and we have got to start where we can have an effect.

The Congress must be serious. End the Iraq occupation. Stop an attack on Iran!!!!!

i agree...Fuck Bush and Cheney.