home

Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 10:22:16 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Is Iraq just the first target in Bush's war? According to the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh, who uncovered the Abu Ghraib prison abuse, the U.S. has been conducting secret missions inside Iran since last summer looking for nuclear and chemical weapons.

One former high-level intelligence official told The New Yorker, "This is a war against terrorism, and Iraq is just one campaign. The Bush administration is looking at this as a huge war zone. Next, we're going to have the Iranian campaign."

The White House denies it, if you call this a denial:

"We obviously have a concern about Iran. The whole world has a concern about Iran," Dan Bartlett, a top aide to President Bush, told CNN's "Late Edition....."No president, at any juncture in history, has ever taken military options off the table," Bartlett added.

[Comments now closed, this thread has been hopelessly hijacked off topic. I will finish cleaning up the comments this evening.]

< Watch Out for Mandatory Minimums | Military Penalties In Perspective >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda | 90 comments (90 topical)
    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 10:36:46 AM EST
    We know they have weapons of mass destruction. We know where they are. They are north, south, east, and west of Teheran. There is no question they pose a risk to us. We better get in there. Let's send Rummy and Dick Halliburton Cheney in with the first wave, please. The chicken hawk brigade will lead us to the promised land.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 10:51:08 AM EST
    This is a very complicated issue. You simplify it, TL, by simply saying the White House "denies" it. Bartlett's comments simply reflect the reality of the situation. Nuclear technology (weapons?) in the hands of clerics who control huge oil reserves, and have called America the "Great Satan" (great Santa?), in a country from which many insurgents have gone to Iraq, in whichmany of the clerics ruthlessly oppress the democratic desires of the wider population (more than 50% of whom were born after the 1979 revolution). Much of the language of Angel's post above has an ironic ring to it, probably more than he realizes.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 11:05:57 AM EST
    et al - This isn't news. The preemotive strategy has always been Iraq neutralized and then Iran, if Iran doesn't neutralize itself. Makes perfect sense and is totally required.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#4)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 11:16:00 AM EST
    Gee I wonder why Iran would want nukes, what with the US on two sides of it and Israel with over 200 war heads. Then it looks out and see that NKorea isn't being threatened with invasion. So its the oldest reason for wanting nukes - deterrence. They have nukes we don't invade. The old mad mullah routine is getting old. There is not much evidence that they have grand expanionist desires. Nor is the threat of proliferation an issue, because if it truly were we would be clamping down on Pakistan instead of rewarding them for spreading nukes all over the globe. This is the same song second verse. The first was Iraq and WMDs. The reason for invading Iran is the same as invading Iraq is the same as for trying to over throw Chavez 2 years ago, is the same for supporting the dictator in Ubekistan, is the same for propping up the house of Saud, i.e. oil. Nothing more nothing less. I'm sure what they would like to have is an internal revolution in Iran which would establish a more US friendly government. Ironically it has been the actions of the US combined with what passes as US diplomacy these days, Bolton: "We don't do carrots", that has helped snuff out the democratic movement. The clerics have used the "we are under attack and can protect you" tactic to reassert their power. Gee where have I heard that before. Any strike against Iran either by the US or its client Israel, will result in an escalation in tensions and probably military actions. The US can't invade there are no troops. If the US attacks via air, what is to stop Iran from responding by sending troops to Iraq or launching missles at Israel. I think the latter unlikely. If they are to invade anyone it would be Syria, remember bullies always pick on the weakest.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 11:20:17 AM EST
    we f*d up iran once already by supporting the shah for so many decades. if we manage to do it twice in a quarter of a century, wow, now that's a nice record. then again, we just did that in iraq. so nothing would surprise me with this utterly inept, disgraceful and ignorant administration. as for the "great satan", please, that's a term arab nationalists have been using since it became clear that western oil imperialism prevailed over the nationalists themselves. learn your history, peeps. where are the genuine leaders? here, there, anywhere? wisdom, knowledge and imagination...find us, please!!

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#6)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 11:32:53 AM EST
    Here's some evidence that the great ReThug noise machine is getting revved up and ready to repeat what ever the admin wants to justify invasion of Syria. personnaly I think this is all wetdreams by the neocons. I think the US will push for the Iraqi elections, declare democracy established, and leave. The only thing thats going to change after the election is that the people on the tickets who have not revealed their identity yet, will finally have to, and will be systematically assassinated.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#7)
    by Sailor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 12:04:02 PM EST
    Wolf! Wolf! WOOOLLFFF!!! No, no, really, I mean it this time.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 12:51:16 PM EST
    SD - Farnkly, I don't care why Iran wants nukes. At best they are supporters of terrorists and will supply them with weapons and money when needed. You may think it cool to poise as the voice of reason as you tell us why. Most of the rest of us just consider it dumb. As for Iran sending massed troops to Iraq, you do remember cluster bombs, don't you? I would guess we would absolutely love that to happen. dadler - We supported the Shah to prevent the Soviets from having access to a warm weather port, a rather important tactical military consideration in the 50's and 60's. Although I doubt you would have been concerned about such mundane considerations. As for "oil imperialism" it would be helpful to remember that the countries of the middle east did not develop these resouces. It took western technology and assistance, which the radicals, even then, hated because it foretold a better life for the average person. The Shah's government was brutal, but had it survived, perhaps a secular more democratic government would have been its legacy. Thanks to Jimmy Carter, we have brutality surpassing the Shah and a terrorist state who's leadership thoroughly hates us.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#9)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    Farnkly, I don't care why Iran wants nukes. At best they are supporters of terrorists and will supply them with weapons and money when needed.
    As you know this argument is pur bulls**t. Pakistan hasalready given nukes to rogue regimes and supports many organizations that are consdered terrorist organizations, or are unable to dislodge them from parts of the country because it would destabalize them. So what proof do you have, oh neocon echo chamber, that Iran would be worse than pakistan. Again this has nothing to do with WMDs of any sort.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 01:14:47 PM EST
    SD - Proof? I am lol. What do you want, 100,000 dead in NYC? Try just a little common sense, if that is at all possible.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#11)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 01:21:00 PM EST
    PPJ no you are an idiot you have no proof and laugh it off. posing some potential disater as proof. Give us some evidence of your words. Common sense? Based on your incredible reservoir of ignorance. I think not. Pakistan has the materials and have given it away already and may continue to give them away. So why don't we deal with them? What a f**king moran. You are actually going to buy into this again.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#12)
    by jondee on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 01:28:51 PM EST
    Are you suggesting we should've invaded Iran "when we had the chance"?. Have you looked at detailed map lately,and checked out the topography,size,and "Ho Chi Minh trail"potential? Then factor in religious zeal - call to martyrdom, and the perrennial home ground advantage.Of course,if Bush,Cheney etc have "friends" in the body bag business,we may go ahead anyway.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 01:34:55 PM EST
    I think the US should invade Iran!. Seeing as they haven't been able to control a country with no army, (just a joad of pissed off residents), which had been softened up with sanctions and bombing for more than 10 years I seriously doubt they stand a chance in Iran. With casualties standing at about 10% (and no sign of the situation getting any better), seniour officers saying the army is nearly broken and the comander in chief (in that lovely navy blue airforce one flying jacket) saying he will not expand the military, I think seeing what a superpower looks like without an army will be interesting. Remember that discussion we had about the time of the seige of Najaf Jim? The one where you said the US could not but prevail because it had technology "that would stagger the mind". Well you were right, minds have been staggered and many corpses have been created. Thing is, you need more than technology. Leadership and objectives would be a start. Not getting any better in Iraq Jim. And nor will it, until the US leaves! US invades Iran? take a look at the supply lines and don't make me laugh. Coming to a planet near you. Neocons Inc. presents the "Arc of Instability". Anything that happens to the US from now on is your own fault.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 01:43:58 PM EST
    BTW, i also think Syria is a more lightly first target. Pretty isolated, pretty weak and according to recent reports, where ex-regime figures are funding the insurgents (according to some reports, seems to make sence to me). Okay, Syria would be the obvious next for the United Sadists of America, BUT! Israel could probably kick Syria's butt in about a week (and would probably like to). Main problem with Syria is NO OIL. No fat contracts for the corps and why do it when Israel will do it for you?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 01:55:40 PM EST
    How about some ideas from the progressives on how to transform Iran from the theocratic, human rights abusing, nation it is into a free, human rights respecting nation it could be.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 02:04:02 PM EST
    TJIT - Here's an idea. Keep your nose out of other people's business. The US might think it is the world's daddy but it ain't. Iran had a thriving (internal) democracy movement which has is just about dead now. Thanks to daddy US. If you want oil, then buy it like everyone else.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 02:07:33 PM EST
    TJIT, are you an American? If you are then words like: "..how to transform Iran from the theocratic, human rights abusing, nation it is into a free, human rights respecting nation it could be." are just a tad ridiculous in the current circumstances.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 02:57:37 PM EST
    If only I could be sure that soccerdad, Andreas, and all the rest of their ilk would be the only Leon Klinghoffer's then it probably wouldn't bother me nearly as much. Everyone who thinks that nuclear weapons in the hand of any second (Pak, India) or third (NK, Iran) world country is a good idea please raise your hands. Good, no hands. -C

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 03:22:44 PM EST
    Cliff, no worst than the USA, Russia, UK, France etc.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 03:24:59 PM EST
    Iran and then Syria and then Lebanon and finally Saudi Arabia and then the world can be free from the tyranny of Mohammadanism. New Jersey: an Islamic murder of Coptic Christians?Was this family brutally murdered because they provoked Muslims in a chatroom?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 03:30:28 PM EST
    BurgerBoy, still on the racism hit? Michael Moore has it that ther are in excess of 10,000 murders a year in the USA. Would you care to give us your analysis of the religous and ethnic backgrounds of the perpetrators?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 03:35:38 PM EST
    Burgerboy. I notice you list the easy targets. Going to invade Pakistan? How about the world's most populus Muslim country? (I'll let you find that one out, hint: it's not Egypt.) The US can't even "get the job done" in Iraq. Didn't your mum tell you to finish what you've got on your plate before going for seconds?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 03:39:10 PM EST
    IRAN IS NO THREAT TO THE USA! THE USA ON THE OTHER-HAND...

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 03:40:01 PM EST
    BurgerBoy, still on the racism hit? Posted by Foreign Devil
    Moslem is not a race! Mohammadanism has many different ethnic groups that make up its whole. So being racist against Islam would be a daunting task. Do you use words Foreign Devil without really knowing what they mean? Now I bet you will redefine that word for us. With your typical liberal rhetoric.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 03:45:22 PM EST
    'Michael Moore has it that' Posted by Foreign Devil I wouldn’t dare insult your god!

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 04:06:35 PM EST
    BurgerBoy, you're right. Being anti-Islamic is not racism. What would you call it? Bigoted maybe, considering you are generalising about over a billion people. Still pretty offensive in anycase. Would you like me to look up the murder statistics in the USA from another place other than MM's Bowling for Colembine. Or would you like to do it?, and refute MM youself instead of flinging around generalisations? I'd rather have MM as my god the GWB anyday.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 04:09:19 PM EST
    SD - You know, you can't stand to be disagreed with, without laying the vulgar attacks on. Can you tell us why? Do with you feel inadequate? Do feel intimidated around other men? Did you skip showers after gym class in high school? Did you hate Dodge Ball? I mean really, you are funny. Let's look at your reply: "Pakistan has the materials and have given it away already and may continue to give them away." For starters, you might provide some proof of the above, yourself. Secondly, the issue is not knowledge and material any more, the genie has been out of the bottle on that for years. It is the infrastructure and will to build the bombs that counts. Iraq and Iran had both. Iran still does. So we have a country that hates us, will not change and has the capability to build nukes...what should we do? SD says: I know! I know! Let's try to understand them! FD - You reveal your bias, and lack of understanding, when you bring oil into the conversation. BurgerBoy - FD is no liberal.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 04:11:27 PM EST
    Damn right I'm no Librul PPJ. THE USA hates Iran. The USA has always been at war with Iran... oh, forget it. What bias about oil Jim? I'm right aint I?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 04:19:20 PM EST
    Jim - "Iraq and Iran had both.". Iraq didn't have any since 1994. Iran's are known about (or are they?). If they're being quiet about it, who would blame them. North Korea boasts of it's nuclear capabilities. China's got plenty. Finish the job in Iraq! Ha ha. Can't wait to see GWB take his position as the president who destroyed the USA's superpower status.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 04:54:56 PM EST
    BurgerBoy, - "Iran and then Syria and then Lebanon and finally Saudi Arabia " All Arab countries. You could still be a racist, as well as a bigot; by any persons definition of the words.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 04:57:54 PM EST
    FD - And your point is?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 04:58:06 PM EST
    Oops, Iran not Arab country. My bad. Sorry BB.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:00:17 PM EST
    Soc, seems like Jim's got you thinking. You can always put that paper bag lover your head ike that little cat in the WB cartoons, "...I'm so ashamed..." FD, when the racism attack doesn't work, switch to anti-semitism, eh? Regarding your number list, middle class Americans have the lowest crime rate in the world. Typical leftist tactic to try and smear the innocent with the crimes of the guilty. Your irrational hatred of America stinks to high heaven.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:04:43 PM EST
    FD - Oh, wait ! I know your point. If we had been talking about a Moslem theocracy there would have been more killings by "embarassed" family and less by boyfriends. Not to mention stonings, beheadings and other neat little tricks. Not to mention 16 year old girls making big manly Moslems rape them.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:11:31 PM EST
    My POINT ? The USA should start acting like a member of the world comunity instead of a hyper-active juvenile. The actions of the USA in the last few years (come to think of it, probably it's whole history), has shown that the country that lords its VALUES to the rest of the world is nothing but a hypocritical lying theif and bully. You can't even provide security to your own people within your own boarders (i'm not even talking about 9/11). Nice one Jim, saw your repost. Yes, in a billion muslims there are bad people who do bad things. I take it there are no murders, rapes, torture etc ever comitted by any white "christian" folk in the good ole USA? (not in prison for sure). No I don't agree with these practices. I think they should be punished. The USA, by word and deed is not the moral (or military) force to do it. BTW, Jim. Did you see the Ford Motor Corporation has admitied that global warming is a reality?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:14:25 PM EST
    I DON'T HATE THE USA. I HATE I'TS DEEDS. NOTHING IRRATIONAL ABOUT THAT. I JUST DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOD'S OWN COUNTRY. YOUR ARMY IS GOING TO DISAPEAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:15:42 PM EST
    Frankly, I would love to see Bush invade Iran because 1.) it would necessitate a draft, which would raise all kinds of hell at home and 2.) it would bring the inevitable downfall of an evil empire that much quicker. I will leave it as an excercise for the student of history to guess which evil empire in number 2.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:17:18 PM EST
    BurgerBoy - FD is no liberal. Posted by Poker Player Sorry FD, I made an assumption and was wrong. I wouldn’t say I am totally anti-Islamic. But I do not hear the so called moderate Moslem speaking out against the likes of Osama Bin Laden. A really big part of Islam supports the likes of these jihadist for Allah. This is where I oppose Islam. I also oppose Islam because every peaceful Moslem in the USA would like Sharia law or Islamic law to be the law of this land. America was founded on religious and personal freedoms and that is not acceptable in Islam today. America has Mosques in it, but Saudi Arabia does not have any churches and will not allow anything but Islam. This is how Islam is practiced and all Moslems intend to make that the case hear in the USA. Example, Islam does not allow alcohol, music, dancing, movies, homosexuality, singing, sex outside of marriage, paying of interest (Money), pornography, women reading or looking at the Qur’an when menstruating, any infidel reading the Qur’an in public, the apostasy of Islam. Christians and Jews, Moslem are not to befriend, Jews and Christians are not allowed to practice their religion in public. Jews and Christians are to pay a special tax. Women are allowed to be beat by the husbands, polygamy is allowed, Women cant drive, vote, leave the house without a male relative as an escort, one mans testimony in court is equal to that of two women. If you don’t believe me just take a really close look at Saudi Arabia. America stands for everything that Islam detests. So why would a good Moslem want anything to do with the great Satan? Mr Osama Bin Laden called on all Moslems to kill Americans civilians anywhere possible, yet I don’t hear any American Moslems saying that Mr Osama is crazy and a very bad man. Not a word! Why because all Moslems know that Osama is well within Islam to call for killing of the infidel. Jiahd. The Noble Qur’an 009.005 “When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, beleaguer them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” 005.014 “From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We made a covenant, but they forgot and abandoned a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, stirred up enmity and hatred among them to the Day of Doom. Soon will Allah show them the handiwork they have done.” 005.049 “And this (He commands): Judge between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their [Christian] desires, but beware of them lest they beguile you, seducing you away from any of that which Allah hath sent down to you. And if they turn you away [from being Muslims], be assured that for their crime it is Allah’s purpose to smite them. Truly most men are rebellious.” 005.051 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other.” 005.059 “Say: ‘People of the Book! Do you disapprove of us for no other reason than that we believe in Allah, and the revelation that has come to us and that which came before?’ Say: ‘Shall I point out to you something much worse than this by the treatment it received from Allah? Those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom He transformed into apes and swine.” So why would a Moslem live in the land of apes and swine, but we must be smart apes and swine because it took us to pump their oil and invent the planes they crash in our buildings.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:17:34 PM EST
    Well, if this proves to be the case, I would strongly suggest that Iran "launch 'em if ya got 'em" and begin a preventative nuclear war against America, otherwise they're next. This, of course, would be advice I would be giving to North Korea as well. Or, for that matter, ANY nuclear state that feels threatened by America. Otherwise, think of all those wonderful nuclear weapons with short shelf lives, going to waste and not being used. What a damned shame! The United States does not the world make. The bully at the top of the food chain is merely the next and most obvious target.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:18:54 PM EST
    DrA - "middle class Americans have the lowest crime rate in the world" Care to provide a link to prove that? Only I was thinking that at a guess one of the Scandinavian countries (not the UK for sure) would have that honour. Or was it just something you heard on Fox?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:21:26 PM EST
    Lavocat:
    Well, if this proves to be the case, I would strongly suggest that Iran "launch 'em if ya got 'em" and begin a preventative nuclear war against America, otherwise they're next. This, of course, would be advice I would be giving to North Korea as well.
    Please ensure that your family moves to LA or some other likely landing site for these nukes you so eagerly anticipate. Good lord, it's amazing that so little upper mental actuity is required for breathing and writing. Lavo, please, please, please tell us that you're a dead end in the gene pool? -C

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:28:42 PM EST
    Cliffy, you unilateralist, you! Go Cheney yourself.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:42:36 PM EST
    Noname, I'm assuming it's BB. I am impressed with your quotations from the Qur’an. I'm am not able to argue with the fact that religons are irrational and quite often unpleasent, which is why it was an act of pure genius for the founders of the USA to BAN religon from public life and why I do not follow any religon (ex-catholic). The extreem form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia (and Osama bin Laden) does indeed have very nasty views of non muslims but this is not fair view of Muslims in day-to-day life. As to this list "Islam does not allow alcohol, music, dancing, movies, homosexuality, singing, sex outside of marriage, paying of interest (Money), pornography, women reading or looking at the Qur’an when menstruating, any infidel reading the Qur’an in public, the apostasy of Islam." Apart from the bits about the Qur’an, these strictures ARE applied by extreem Jews and Christians. As to the music restriction. That's true up to a point. Islam is diverse and there is one branch (Sufi) who have music as a central focus for praising god. (They were BTW persicuted in Afghanistan by the Taliban as infidels). I actually really like Sufi music. There is also plenty of Arab music produced. "But I do not hear the so called moderate Moslem speaking out against the likes of Osama Bin Laden." - Well I have, a number of times. I suggest you widen your selection of news channels or go ask some muslims. Saudi Arabia is a key US ally. Don't you think this is a bit strange if you consider their religon's oposition to "everything the US holds dear"? The US is a county ruled by fear. Al-Qaeda is an extreemly minor theat. You are being played for fools by your government. Thankfully, they are fools so will never achieve the 4th Reich.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:43:19 PM EST
    FD, my 1st comment about invading Iran, Syria etc.. was kinda facetious. It pains me to see American soldiers dying in some God forsaking land such as Iraq, yet at the same time I can not help but notice that Islamic jihadist loyal to Osama Bin Laden (an enemy of America and its people) are flooding into Iraq, and being promptly killed by our military. I remember the people who jumped out of those burning towers and fell to their death. I remeber that day when Islamic jihad killed American civilians. This makes the crap in Iraq, worth the wait. And worth the fight. If all of America could only rally behind our soldiers in Iraq and lift their spirits then maybe just maybe we can bring them home sooner. If we selfish Americans (me included) really cared about our soldiers like we say we do, we would put aside our differences for their sake.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#45)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:44:43 PM EST
    PPJ i get vulgar because you are a dishonest, lying, piece of you know what. We have had these same discussions 2x before so either you can't remember or your dishonest. How about this google. pakistans role in spreading nuke material is known by all but those with their heads up neocons butt. Cliff have any substance - didn't think so

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:50:47 PM EST
    Islam doesn’t scare me. But I do not take what Osama Bin Laden says lightly. SIG Sauer and a bag of pork chops, BurgerBoys close up anti-Islam weapons. And a mini 14 with a scope for them hard reach jihadist. Their will be another 9/11 as long as there is Islam. It is just a matter of time.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#47)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:51:59 PM EST
    BTW for all you fear mongering a**holes, Iran does not have ICBM's I have an idea that I have proposed at lease 5 times on this site. Removal of all nukes from the ME including Israel. US policies includeing the withdrawl from a number of nuke treaties combined with our invasion of Iraq has started a mini-nuke race including increased funding by Russia. Oh and by the way with the successful testing of the SS27 by Russia the missle defense were deploying ain't worth s**it

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#48)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 05:54:18 PM EST
    Their will be another 9/11 as long as there is Islam. It is just a matter of time.
    especially if nothing is done to address their concerns including the killing of innocent civilians by the military in Iraq. What about the home grown kind, like the guy they arrested with ricin last week and no he wasn't arab

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 06:04:37 PM EST
    BB - The current estimate of foreign fighter in Iraq is currently 6%. I think this figure is arrived at by prisoners taken and other evidence. Even the interim Iraqi government (not Alawi) don't think this is a major component of the insurgency. Al Qaeda did not have a presence in Iraq. (Zarkawi's group operated in Kurdish controlled northen Iraq before the invasion, his grandparents were Palestinians who had to move to Jordan for some reason that escapes me. Funny how things come around). What's going on the the dark corners of Iraq now is anyone's guess. OBL and 9/11. He got lucky. Your government has bigged him up as a Dr Evil but really, he is not the global threat portrayed. You are a country who can take 20,000+ violent deaths a year and not think a thing about it (GUN CONTROL!!). 3000 on 9/11 was spectacular (and embarissing) but peanuts compaired to the attrition you allow on your own citizens, by your own citizens. The biggest threat to you freedoms is not OBL, it's GWB! All the loss of life in Iraq pains me. The money the USA has poured into this mess. The USA's failure in Iraq is down to your civlian government deciding they could do war on the cheap and ignored military advice. (half a million men is a number that sticks in my mind. Gen Shinseki I think). It is also down to the fact that you ignored international opinion, fabricated evidence and awakened the specter of pre-emtive war. This makes the adventure illegal and hard to support. The way to help your troops is to get them the hell out of the middle-east, where thay have no business or sanction (and they are hugely outnumbered, despite the technology). SD - I too have had this conversation with jim. Here's a link from Jane's about AQ Khan for anyone who has not had their lobotomy yet.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 06:20:01 PM EST
    "Gee I wonder why Iran would want nukes, what with the US on two sides of it and Israel with over 200 war heads. Then it looks out and see that NKorea isn't being threatened with invasion. So its the oldest reason for wanting nukes - deterrence. They have nukes we don't invade. The old mad mullah routine is getting old. There is not much evidence that they have grand expanionist desires. Nor is the threat of proliferation an issue, because if it truly were we would be clamping down on Pakistan instead of rewarding them for spreading nukes all over the globe." Rather than writing my own post, I'm going to "here here" Soc's eloquent description above. Soc, your posts are usually right on point until you let PPJ drag you down in the muck. Lay Conservatives are like lemmings. The Neocons could declare Greenland a threat next week and PPJ would start telling us how Greenlanders have hated America ever since Leif Ericsson.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#51)
    by soccerdad on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 06:30:55 PM EST
    Tampa Thanks for the nice words and of course you are right about my getting dragged down. My anger gets the best of me sometimes. Thanks for trying to keep me on track

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 06:43:28 PM EST
    Greenland? - B**RDS!! - Shock and Awe them right NOW! [Ed. Please check our comment policy and lose the profanity. Thanks.]

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 06:50:18 PM EST
    Excuse me Ed. I had no idea that word is profane. It is a fairly mild form of abuse or exclaimation where I come from and it is a proper (and old) english word, not slang. Sorry but I think you are over-reacting, and it's spelt B***ARDS.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 07:04:39 PM EST
    Sanchez tried to get the British to attack the Iranians during the illegal invasion, but the Brits refused. "Nuclear technology (weapons?) in the hands of clerics who control huge oil reserves, and have called America the "Great Satan" (great Santa?)," Gee, how did those clerics get into power in the first place? Could it have anything to do with the CIA putting the Shah back in power by removing the democratically-elected Mosadegh? "(Iraq), Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Iran, Sudan, Somalia" and "partition Saudi Arabia." That's the USPNAC list going back one entire unelected term. Unlike Iraq, Iran has a functional military, similar to Venezuela as far as predictable invasion bloodshed. Since Bushliar goes through American GIs like he used to go through Scotch or cocaine, the arguments about the Great Satan are not going to go down without some serious US bloodshed to trigger it. That's the beauty part of giving hostiles 280 TONS of high-explosives, 650,000 pounds of ammo, cannisters of cesium and strontium, and 4,000 shoulder-fired missiles!! Playing both sides of any fake war -- GWB, unelected traitor. --

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#55)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 07:05:22 PM EST
    "The U.S. has been conducting secret missions inside Iran since last summer". In other words, the U.S. has taken it upon itself to continue to violate international law and completely ignore the sovereignty of other nations. The arrogance of U.S. power is amazing! Imagine if Iran was running such operations in the U.S. (during the course of which they would no doubt be uncovering LOTS of WMDs)!!! We would IMMEDIATELY declare war on them. But the normal rules of law simply do not apply to the American colossus. It would seem that 9/11/01 taught us nothing. Perhaps we need a few kilotons to rid us of our hubris. Another amazing aspect of this whole story is that the "mainstream" media has completely abdicated its role in a democratic society by failing to fiercely criticize this outrageous policy.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 07:46:49 PM EST
    Paul, if I understand your point (and it is late for me) then you're saying that Iran's military might stand up in the field against the US? Uh, no. Think how well the Polish Cavalry did against the Whermacht. And then not so well as that. But the macro-point of "what then" is well taken. _C

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 07:49:57 PM EST
    and all this time I thought it would be syria to get the nod

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 07:53:51 PM EST
    FD writes - "Nice one Jim, saw your repost. Yes, in a billion muslims there are bad people who do bad things...." You brought the subject up, not me. But did you read the link about the 16 year old girl who was hanged in Iran because she seduced and caused a man to rape. I tell you FD, you gotta watch those 16 year old girls. " Apart from the bits about the Qur’an, these strictures ARE applied by extreem Jews and Christians." Yeah, but they don't try to behead you for doing them. SD - Yes we have, and you keep on spouting your nonsense. Repeat after me. Just because you say it twice doesn't make it true. "I have an idea that I have proposed at lease 5 times on this site. Removal of all nukes from the ME including Israel." If you want to get into a real sure enough war, just talk Israel into doing that by signing a mutal defense treaty with us. TS - Yeah, I do pick on SD so much. I'm gonna have to stop disagreeing with him.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#60)
    by Al on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 08:16:34 PM EST
    PPJ: As for "oil imperialism" it would be helpful to remember that the countries of the middle east did not develop these resouces. It took western technology and assistance, which the radicals, even then, hated because it foretold a better life for the average person. PPJ, can you spell s-o-v-e-r-e-i-g-n-t-y? Cliff: Everyone who thinks that nuclear weapons in the hand of any second (Pak, India) or third (NK, Iran) world country is a good idea please raise your hands. Cliff, I think nuclear weapons in the hands of the US is a terrible idea.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#61)
    by kdog on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 08:27:20 PM EST
    where are the genuine leaders? here, there, anywhere? wisdom, knowledge and imagination...find us, please!!
    Genuine, good leaders work to avoid war. It seems our current leaders are always looking for one. Soccerdad said it right, the obvious reason any country on our hit list would want nukes is to keep us from invading them. Mutually assured destruction kept us out of a war with the USSR for 40 years. Nations on our hit list know this, so if they get a nuke, they can't be f*cked with. Common sense 101. Do I want them to have nukes? Of course not, but I prefer we didn't have them either. We do, so those who don't will try like hell to get them. It's the only way to keep other countries with nukes out of their affairs.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#62)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 08:29:13 PM EST
    SD: Only 20% of Moslems are Arab. So get off the Arab kick

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 08:40:04 PM EST
    ‘Al Qaeda did not have a presence in Iraq. (Zarkawi's group operated in Kurdish controlled northen Iraq....’ Posted by Foreign Devil So Al Qaeda is not in Iraq, but yes they are in northern Iraq? Say What? I believe President Clinton said that Al Qaeda had been training in Iraq.. I think is was around 1998... check the link!

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#64)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 08:52:12 PM EST
    War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. John Stuart Mill English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873) Did he read the comments posted here? One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Sir Winston Churchill British politician (1874 - 1965) Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. Sir Winston Churchill, Hansard, November 11, 1947 British politician (1874 - 1965)

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 10:02:07 PM EST
    I believe President Clinton said that Al Qaeda had been training in Iraq.. I think is was around 1998... check the link! He also said they had WMD. Whoopsie!

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#67)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 10:04:18 PM EST
    The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. John Stuart Mill English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873) Hey is that why there are so many "insurgents" in Iraq these days?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 10:16:25 PM EST
    I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. Sir Winston Churchill British politician (1874 - 1965)

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 11:14:05 PM EST
    [off topic comment deleted. Burger Boy, you are limited to four comments a day.]

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#69)
    by BigTex on Sun Jan 16, 2005 at 11:43:01 PM EST
    Foreign Devil - you make the ebst case fer targetin' Syria first. Plus there's th' added benefit o' whipin' out hezbolla which is based in Syria, and cuttin' lebanon free t' chart her own destany. But still we shold go t' Sudan befoe goin anywhere else.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 12:25:54 AM EST
    I wrote: "Unlike Iraq, Iran has a functional military, similar to Venezuela as far as predictable invasion bloodshed." Which didn't come out right. Obviously Iran is FAR more powerful than Venezuela. I meant to suggest the analogy: Iran : Iraq as Venezuela : Haiti Hussein threw everything he had (and everything Reagan/Bush I would give him, including chemical and biological arms, which Hussein used against Hallabja, in the most famous instance) at Iran for a long, long time. One million men died; NOTHING was accomplished. Attacking Iran is a sure path to destabilizing what's leftover from the other destabilizing acts and sins of omission of Bushliar. 911 was when he should have defended us; but that wasn't in his interest, was it? Now he wants to 'defend us' by destroying our military, and making us thralls of a corporate profit dismantling of America. If Bushliar is such a cleric of god, how come his numbers never add up? [Ed. Please leave the dashes out of the end of your comments, thanks.]

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#70)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 12:33:09 AM EST
    hey Tex we already tried "cuttin' lebanon free" in 1983. It didn't work out so well. When you ducks gonna learn t' quit messin' with "rattlers"?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 12:54:09 AM EST
    "Posted by Cliff: Paul, if I understand your point (and it is late for me) then you're saying that Iran's military might stand up in the field against the US Uh, no." Cliff, don't you realize that Rumsfeld does it on the cheap? He told you so, weren't you listening? Instead of FIVE tank batallions during the illegal invasion, one, cobbled together with tanks in Kuwait. A lot of GIs died because they had no flanks. Like the two Marines in the first days who were ordered to cross an irrigation canal to take up the flank. Never seen again. So the issue isn't the power of the US over Iran. Not as much as you think, but that disregarded, a BLOODBATH for American GIs. While Bushliar hides out in the rear of the rear. "Think how well the Polish Cavalry did against the Whermacht." You've certainly got the right kind of dictator, but the Poles fought on horses with swords against tanks. I guarantee you that the Persians know how to fight a modern war. But the winger military jerk-fests need no help from me. Bushliar has already shown he has NO regard for civilians, you know, innocent people...so wipe the slaver from your lips. Plenty of returning soldiers are telling tales about the 'bring them on' C-in-C, who wants to do it on the cheap so the money goes into his friends' pockets.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#72)
    by BigTex on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 06:03:37 AM EST
    LOL no name. Good un. Thanks fer referrin' t' them as rattlers. I'm aware o' th' history with Lebanon. This time though we won't be goin' into Lebanon, we'll free them by takin' over Syria. No strings and hezbolla left, and Lebanon can't be a puppet state anymore. Still Sudan should come first.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#73)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 06:49:14 AM EST
    BB & PPJ:- We're on the Islam-bashing thing yet AGAIN?? Repeat after me:- Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim country, elected a secular government. At the moment, they have on trial a cleric accused of being the spiritual head of Jemmaah Islamiah. In brief: they don't want radical Islamists representing them. Clear? And as for cutting people's heads off, well, on the other hand, they don't come to my country and drop explosives on me from a great height 'cause my next door neighbour might've said something they disagree with.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 06:50:01 AM EST
    Actually, thinking about that, it's actually good Irish Catholics who do that sorta thing to my countrymen. Lovely.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#75)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 07:00:01 AM EST
    FD - Too bad we can not tell Jose that the lovely Christians in Iceland would not let American service men off base during the Cold War. Never mind that the only thing that kept them from being taken over by the Soviets was the fact that there was a US airbase there. Radar picket flights flew out of there east to near Murmansk and west to just north of Greenland to keep an eye out for Soviet ICBM's. It was part of MAD. Yes, they were real sweethearts. Racially pure and totally elite. I learned to love'em so much I won't eat Icelandic fish products. They were typical. Hiding behind the skirts of the US. A lot of other countries did the same thing. Paul In LA - Are you really dumb enough to think that the Iranian military would last a month against the US? kdog writes - "Soccerdad said it right, the obvious reason any country on our hit list would want nukes is to keep us from invading them. Mutually assured destruction kept us out of a war with the USSR for 40 years. Nations on our hit list know this, so if they get a nuke, they can't be f*cked with. Common sense 101." You need to refurbish your common sense with some historical facts. Problem is kdog, is that al-Qaida and the other terrorist groups are not totally controlled by the countries that sponsor them. So MAD doesn't work in that context. Plus, the Soviets were rational, and in their view, dead was dead, so living well and as long as possible was their best option. The Moslem radical thinks he will go immediately to paradise and be attended to by 72 virgins. So dying isn't all that bad. Al writes - "PPJ, can you spell s-o-v-e-r-e-i-g-n-t-y?" Yeah. Can you spell d - u - m - b? And tell me what your comment has to do with my comment that the ME states could not have developed their oil resources with out western technology? And the radicals, even then, didn't want us there, even though it meant a better life for them.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#76)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 07:12:53 AM EST
    What we will see in the coming months is a lot of posturing by the US seeking to give teeth to UE diplomacy. To those speculating about a possible invasion I would remind you of the same talk about Syria last year. Before the US gets involved in any meaningful (read military) way I imagine Israel will hit these sites.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#77)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 07:13:43 AM EST
    Uh...EU rather.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#78)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 07:18:12 AM EST
    Why not invade? 62 Million people voted for Bush, so they should all be signing up and giving all their wages to Bush to fight the war they fight. Can't wait for PPJ to go.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#79)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 07:46:56 AM EST
    FD- I see why you posted absolute murders in place of murder rates, the latter is less dramatic. The UN publishes something very similar to the kinds of analysis the US DOJ does; reported crime rates, actual crime rates, perceived crime rates. The US is not exceptional, those that would have you believe so most likely have some driving agenda. In the absence of context select statistics can be misleading. For example, rates of RAPE in Canada are double that in the US. I’m not certain what this means, if anything. Different countries track crime in different ways. The US lists all charged murders as murders where the UK lists only those murders that resulted in convictions as murders. I am unaware of any independent organization that does or is capable of tracking crime in all countries, and further treating it in a consistent and statistically rigorous manner. The UN is perhaps the closest to this ideal, but their states are sparse and more oriented toward crimes like corruption and racially motivated crimes.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#80)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 07:53:58 AM EST
    Have troop movements begun? Have combat-ready units been moved to forward domestic positions? No and no. The U.S. is waging its little war on the cheap against a nation it took 10+ years to bleed dry with economic sanctions. Meanwhile, the U.S. itself is hemorrhaging money at an amazing pace. And people expect such toadies like Rummy and Wolfy want ANOTHER, much worse version of this - with a country that can actually fight back against the bully? Syria? Maybe. Iran? Never.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#82)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 08:19:53 AM EST
    “Would like a link which refutes Michael Moore's film (Bowling for C.) where he compares murder rates in different countries, if anyone has one.” I’ve done this myself. The DOJ and FBI both maintain statistics concerning murder and specifically murders by firearm and type of firearm. Juristat, the Canadian equivalent of these DOJ’s and FBI’s stat departments, also has the data you want. I have access through my university to the Juristat statistics; you may need to look hard to get free access. The long and short of it is that Moore did use actual stats but cooked them relentlessly. As you may know crime is very dynamic and fluctuates dramatically. I was able to replicate Moore’s results by choosing a specific low crime year for Canada and a high crime year for the US, exactly replicating his numbers. Additionally, if the RATES are compared and not the absolute numbers the gun murder rate is around double, if I recall (its been a while). Moore, correctly, assumed that most Americans have no idea that Canada has only slightly more residents than California, making the absolute numbers seem more dramatic. Moore clearly has an agenda and he will be the first to admit it. It is sensible to suspect numbers put forth by ideologs like Moore, Gun Controll Inc, the Violence Policy Center, the National Rifle Association, and so forth. Fortunately, the numbers are usually clicks away, archived on the internet fro all to analyze. Don’t settle on some website for your analysis, do it personally and be confident of the results.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#83)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 08:52:42 AM EST
    FD, seems it's time Pig stopped trying to conduct a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. But then, it may be news to some that others here are posting over your heads to the larger audience of lurkers out there to whom many of you are inadvertently making fools of yourselves to.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#84)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 09:54:28 AM EST
    "Posted by Paul: "Why not invade? 62 Million people voted for Bush" No one knows how many people voted for Bush. 28 states and 80% of the people vote with NO RECORD of their vote (other than an easily-flipped electronic scorecard). It took every dirty trick in the book to reinstall the lying traitor. And we caught them stealing the election in Ohio, which is the only way they got the shoehorn into the back of the boot. --

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#85)
    by pigwiggle on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 10:06:31 AM EST
    I love to quote myself, Posted by: pigwiggle on January 7, 2005 04:51 PM "I would like to point out that the elections were monitored by international bodies, i.e. OCSE. The link takes you to one of their publications, where you can find the following; “The mission concluded that the elections had been conducted in an environment reflecting a long-standing democratic tradition, comprising institutions governed by the rule of law, free and professional media and an active civil society involved in all aspects of the election process” and further, for you folks who think the media is in on the big cover up; “although the media and others seemed content with the mission’s findings, some made known their disappointment with the outright lack of criticism of the process” followed by some anectode about a TV producer." So PinLA, you might want to revise "It took every dirty trick in the book to reinstall the lying traitor." to acknowledge that only those tricks easily passed by international election observers were use.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#86)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 10:32:15 AM EST
    Posted by at January 16, 2005 11:02 PM I believe President Clinton said that Al Qaeda had been training in Iraq.. I think is was around 1998... check the link! He also said they had WMD. Whoopsie! Which they did until he got authorization to destroy (I believe it was Scott Ritter who reported this) over 98% of the WMD. The WMD removal team believed that the other 2% were unnacounted for, and expended on the battlefield. The Torturer in Chief then proceeded to ignore anything Clinton tried to tell him about Iraq, Saddam, WMD and Osama bin Laden. Then he and the rest of his Republic hypocrites tried to blame everything on the Clenis. Whoopsie! By the way, are you sleeping well knowing your vote (and your continued support of torture and religious theocrats) is helping to murder innocent Iraqis, as well as your own countrymen, every day?

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#87)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 10:46:24 AM EST
    DrA - An unexpected thanks to you. You must have gone back and read what PW and I were talking about. I comment here with my own opinions. When people don't agree, (and what fun would it be if they did all the time?), I'll try and clarify my opinion and why I don't agree with their take. Sometimes someone says something that makes me think they know more about a subject than I do and then I want to listen and maybe learn. No one has the 100% truth, (unless you are religous) and we can all learn from others. Cheers.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#89)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 12:01:42 PM EST
    DrA - "Al Qaeda has no compunction about killing innocent women and children literally out of the blue " I'd say that's a pretty good description of how the US military treats innocent women and children in Iraq because their compatriots refuse to grovel to illegal occupiers. A bit of perspective indeed. About time the USA started to live up to it's VALUES, which I admire. In freeing millions I assume you mean WWII. Well cheers for taking all the credit. Don't you think any of the other allies had anything at all to do with it? And the USA came in late (as usual). Just because the US did something we can thank them for 60 years ago does not excuse the current barbaric behaviour in the middle-east. I'm not saying everything the US does is bad but on balance I think Usama bin Laden is a far smaller threat to the world (or western order, if you prefer) than an arrogant, violent USA.

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#81)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 12:46:11 PM EST
    [deleted. Foreign Devil, you may not change the topic of threads on talkleft. If you do it again, you will be banned. I am now going to go through and delete the off topic comments.]

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#88)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 12:51:52 PM EST
    [deleted, this commenter will be banned if he doesn't stay on topic.]

    Re: Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda (none / 0) (#90)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jan 17, 2005 at 12:54:04 PM EST
    DrA - "Bush gave Saddam ample warning;". And what was Saddam supposed to do with that warning? Get rid of his already non-existant WMD? PNAC were lobbying Clinton to invade Iraq in 1998. It was a fore gone conclusion. An how much warning does the the US airforce give women and children before it drops a 2000lb bomb on them? "What about the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989?". That's a moot point. The Soviet union's colapse was economic brought about by having to compete in an arms race with the USA (a far more powerful country, despite what the cold war propoganda said), for 40 years. The US didn't even handle the colapse well. Mikael Gorbochov offered to destroy the whole Soviet nuclear arsenal, with the USA's help. Reagan ignored this offer because the US hawks were thrown into a panic about how to justify the huge US spending on arms to the US people now the "Evil Empire" was gone. As a result the old USSR is littered with nuclear devices which are god knows where now. In the wake of the economic colapse many (don't know the figure, don't even know if one exists), STARVED in Russia. I would not exactly describe what has happened in Russia over the last decade and a half as setting millions free.

    Iran May Be Next on Bush's Agenda | 90 comments (90 topical)