Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Foreign Policy & News Bomb Iran

Did you read my analysis?

NO!!!

None of the articles state he bought the two firms known to have business relations with Iran prior to 2003 when he opened a blind trust for his investments. Malt, the trustee, stated he sold the assets. That would be sometime after 2003. The articles do state Bain & Co, Romney's former employer had business dealings with companies which did business with Iran in 2004 and 2005. This suggests to me that the blind trust bought the assets sometime after 2003 and when it was sensed that could be a political liability the trustee sold the offending assets.

An alternative interpretation to which you allude involves Romney's statements that "from this time forward" he would not tolerate etc etc. This may suggest to some that Romney bought the assets prior to 2003 but his statement is still consistent with the trust buying the assets.

Regardless none of the articles makes that statement Romney knowingly bought the assets himself.

Pretty much these are fact filled articles and the only reason I read this branch was because it is the "bomb Iran" thread, otherwise I consider this a non-issue.

According to the CNN article of October 2007, he divested himself of the assets that were exposed by, among other sources, the Boston Globe, in Feb, 2007. As rporter has pointed out, the Romney people admitted to those assets. So please, Senator, describe which "facts" you are referring to that have been "refuted".

"Guilt by association" is when a candidate like John Edwards discovers as a result of someone else's investigative work that a company he once worked for and in which he has heavily invested has subsequently engaged in unacceptable behavior, to whit: foreclosing on Hurricane Katrina victims. When said candidate then immediately and without equivocation divests of those holdings, then one can fairly say it is a case of "guilt by association".

On the other hand, we have a candidate who has been criticized for over a decade, through two election campaigns about practices he instituted, policies he established, and investments he advised, who only relinquished his holdings when he finally sought the Presidential nomination. That is not "guilt by association". Rather, it is "innocence by disassociation".

Has any interview ever addressed the issue of who bought the Iran-related assets?

OK folks here's an interesting study on the possibilities of bombing Iran

Considering a war with Iran: A discussion paper on WMD in the Middle East

Written by Dr. Dan Plesch, Director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) at the University of London, and Martin Butcher, a former Director of the British American Security Information Council (BASIC) and former adviser to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament

If you don't have time to read the whole paper see Study: US preparing 'massive' military attack against Iran

Written by Larisa Alexandrovna and Muriel Kane

Interesting stuff, rporter. They make a good case for the "shock and awe" approach.

Therein lies the rub, and IMHO the reason we have not already launched such an attack. The colossal failure of the Administration's Iraq offensive has emboldened the naysayers in both State and Defense, overruling (thanks be!) Cheney and the neo-con's.

Since it appears highly unlikely that President Bush will depart the Oval Office with the laurels of a successful Iraqi campaign firmly planted on his graying pate, wouldn't a "shock-and-awe" victory over the Evil Iranians™ be a suitable cap to an otherwise dismal and failed presidency? I'm certainly not discounting the possibility. It's not like we have a sane person in the White House...

WAR WAR, RAH RAH, WAR WAR, RAH RAH


marvelous.

to those of you who think that he needs Congresses authorisation to attack Iran i say: behold

..... drumbeats on the western horizon..... can only mean the war loving Bushmen are on the warpath.....

And the liberals make light of it: the Struggle of the Century, the greatest challenge ever faced by our nation, a Clash of Civilizations, the choice between Good and Evil.