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

Sorry wasn't clear. I didn't mean to say it was but rather that government programs such as the one implemented by UoMd ...etc


This has crossed my mind especially since the leading Dems have stated Iran can not have nukes. Unfortunately that really doesn't address the real world issues. Iran is ostensibly working on fuel enrichment (the Russians are building a nuclear plant and apparently will provide some fuel) in order to capture the complete cycle of nuclear power within it's own borders (cut out the middle man for fuel).

Thus the Dems statements are meaningless in this context i.e. do they mean Iran can't have nuclear power? or is it they can't enrich their own fuel? etc. Neocon writers have argued Iran shouldn't be allowed even nuclear power. They represent the fear and paranoia of the right-wing Likud. In fact after the recent IAEA report was released the Israelis called for the resignation of El Baradei as he failed to report what the Israelis wanted to hear (I don't believe there is any other reasonable explanation for this).

Certainly the impact of that thinking can be seen through AIPAC which has been successful in preserving a pro-Israeli stance among US Congressmen. Based on this your and my concern should be heightened regarding Dems position on this issue. However, not one of the Dems have actually stated we should bomb Iran, only they can not have nukes, whatever that means.

Can Israel (either directly or through AIPAC) influence the Dems should they win the next election to the point they can get a guarantee that administration would bomb Iran? If the Dems haven't decided, I don't know. I suspect it would take more than just one or two in such an administration (the current administration had at least 30 neocons in policy making positions to help with their agenda). However Israel may use extortion as a means to force the US into action. Whether the US can be extorted, again I don't know, but some writers have suggested exactly that regarding the current status i.e. Israel told the US they would bomb Iran uni-laterally which scared the US into running interference for Israel (to protect from global condemnation. apparently foreign policy makers are aware of some things)and trying to make this a US/global issue.

I view the next year as the most dangerous I have seen in my life (including the Cuban missile crisis). Scary indeed.

Good post, rporter. As usual.

The Israelis accused El Baradei of "aiding the terrorists" due to his unyielding defense of the right of Arab nations to have less than 1/400th the nuclear capacity of Israel.

You have often noted that (likely future Speaker) Pelosi and (likely future President) Clinton are both well under the sway of AIPAC, with stellar voting, policy, and speechmaking records. If you want to find a Dem who has a proven track record of independence and total focus on human rights rather than the politics of imperialism, look to Dennis Kucinich.

Whether or not you believe "prayer works", I recommend hedging your bets at this point.

Looks like the intelligence agencies developed a spine. Pat Buchannan wrote that they may have derailed the President's plan to bomb Iran with their recent NIE. Buchannan also said that Pres. Bush missed a chance to normalize relations with Iran in 2003. If the President knew about this NIE, then maybe normalization was never on the agenda?

Joe

I don't think normalization was ever on the table. Exploitation is the only thing on this presidents agenda.

WWWD?

Bomb iran.

Exploitation of the American people, too, unless you're one of those companies with a no-bid contract. There's an agenda, which doesn't consider this country's or its peoples' interests. Both the democrats and republicans have enabled this Administration.

Joe

Why do people still think that the USA will bomb Iran? Is this Administration that nuts? Does Congress have any say?

Joe

In a nutshell: absolutely!
Now that things are heating up in Pakistan, maybe they will give us a reason to attack them instead. IMHO, this administration is war crazy and it will be a miracle if we do not attack someone before Bush leaves office. Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, who knows. There are plenty for them to choose from.

They do, but for some reason they won't!

Then again, I am just another conspiracy theorist. :tinfoil-hat"

Kaine,

I hope that you're wrong. Surely, Pres. Hillary Clinton wouldn't?

Joe

Oh no! I think she would! That's one reason why I will not vote for her! We don't need a continuation of, what looks to me like, the same "strategies" as the current administration.

There are exactly two Presidential candidates who can be trusted not to bomb iran. One of them isn't John Edwards. One of them is a Republican.