I didn’t watch the GOP debate last night. In fact, I forgot there was a debate last night. Mittens declared stoutly that if Barack Obama is re-elected, Iran will get nuclear weapons, and if he is elected, Iran will not get nuclear weapons. I take it Mittens has more pull with the nuclear disarmament fairy.
At the first GOP debate that focused on foreign policy, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and former House speaker Newt Gingrich indicated that if either of them were commander in chief, they would be willing to use military force against Iran, if tightened economic sanctions and support for the Iranian opposition did not work to deter nuclear weapons development in the country.
“If all else fails, if after all of the work we’ve done, there’s nothing else we could do besides take military action. Then of course you take military action,†Romney said.
Gingrich agreed: “If in the end, despite all of those things, the dictatorship persists, you have to take whatever steps are necessary to break its capacity to have a nuclear weapon.â€
All kinds of military experts warn that neither a ground invasion nor a bombing campaign against Iran would likely succeed, and there’s a real question whether the U.S. has the capacity for such a military strike any more.
Ooo, but aren’t we so impressed at how cute little Mittens and the Newt look when they’re trying to act manly and chest-thumpy and show how mean and tough they are?
Herman Cain said he would assist the opposition, but “would not entertain military opposition.†What the bleep does that mean?
Texas Gov. Rick Perry said he would impose economic sanctions on Iran’s central bank — a move the Obama administration has backed away from, for fear of the economic damage that might occur if it disrupted international oil markets.
Hey, you know what they say … drill, baby, drill.
“Mittens declared stoutly that if Barack Obama is re-elected, Iran will get nuclear weapons, and if he is elected, Iran will not get nuclear weapons.”
I’d dispute the second part of that. I think a covert action or an overt action through a proxy (Israel) may be needed. Then again, Iran ended up WAY worse than before after their “revolution” in the 1970’s– they may be itching to try to get it right this time, after seeing some promise from many of the “Arab spring” actions.
Mainstream Americans – the voters in the center who decide elections – have lost their stomach for perpetual war. Its expensive. Young Americans come home in caskets. Thousands of vets return physically and emotionally scarred. The use of the taxpayer-funded military to protect the oil fields for multinational corporate tax-lodgers is a waste. Campaigning on a war platform works in the GOP primary, because neo-con love war. But its a looser in the general election.
Israel has a problem if Iran gets the bomb. Israel has a problem with the Arab world if Israel makes a preemptive strike. Those same Arab countries, however, don’t want Iran to get the bomb either. (Nor does Europe or China, Russia or the US.) SUPPOSE Israel was to embrace the idea of a Palistinian State – with the recognition that this opens the door to greater domestic terrorism in Israel. The idea of a Palistinian State is VERY popular in the GA. BUT – the only thing Israel asks from the UN in exchange is a VERY short VERY strong leash on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
NAH, it makes too much sense.
First, I’m much more worried about Pakistan than I am about Iraq.
And of course Mitt and Newt would attack!
First, with all of their years of combat experience – no, not in our military, silly, but gained from years of playing with their GI Joe’s, and later on, games of RISK at college; and also, all of the foreign policy experience they have from reading Kristol (Sr. and Jr.) and Krauthammer, and watching FOX News, who better to rely on for advice than them?
I mean, please, you can’t believe that the Kenyan Usurper who’s been sitting in the Oval Office for almost 3 years knows anything, can you?
And With the US drawing down and out in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Republicans will need another attack/war/occupation to justify increasing the military budgets to pay their contractor pals.
Republicans don’t know from peace.
Now, Cain and Newt may know from pieces of ass – but these asses don’t know anything about peace. Or war. Or much of anything, come to think of it…
Did anybody else have to turn it off after Perry’s obviously memorized blather about Afghanistan? You know he can’t find the place on the puzzle to put that oddly shaped little cutout.
The warmongers were just as sickening as the last ten years have been.
“I take it Mittens has more pull with the nuclear disarmament fairy”
Impossible. Second Amendment supportin’, abortion bannin’, tax cuttin’ American Jesus wasn’t a Mormon.
I’d be curious about how Mitt sees the outlines of a military operation against Iran that would guarantee they would not get a nuke. Given the intelligence that says their facilities would most likely be both distributed and hardened, is he thinking we reduce the entire nation to radioactive slag with nuclear carpet-bombing? Seems like that’s the only thing that would reliably work.
Of course, I have a feeling the rest of the world wouldn’t back such a move, but hey, American exceptionalism, right?
Say, since Mitt was being so definite, what’s the payment on that guarantee he was offering. What do we get if we elect him and then the Nuclear Disarmament Fairy doesn’t come across, and Iran still gets a nuke? Will Mitt resign, or what? Can we get Obama back? Just what is this deal Mitt is offering?
Oy!
Watching David, Lord Gregory for the first time in a long time.
Why?
I guess my life doesn’t suck enough yet.
When he has Republicans on, he’s happy as a lark, busy spinning and giving them cover.
But when he has Democrats on, he gets worse and worse, and lower and lower! And he wasn’t much higher than flounder poop to begin with.
Twice though, Debbie Wasserman Schultz kind of smiled and laughed when Lord Gregory said, “Well, my own sources tell me …”
Pillow talk with Karl again, Lord Gregory?
OMTP – Occupy Meet the Press!
Why does he still has a job?
Never mind, I DO know!
ARGH!
And here’s David Brooks – shilling, spinning, dancing, singing, humming, and twisting himself into a pretzel trying to polish that Mitt turd. And Lord Gregory nods his head, and lifts his greying eyebrow of knowledge, acceptance, and approval.
Aye-yai-yai!
And now, Brooks is trying to polish Joe Paterno’s turd – blaming society (code: Liberals) and saying we don’t know right from wrong anymore. Thankfully, EJ Dionne was on and called him on his bullshit saying, “Yes, we do know…”
ENOUGH!!!
Ok, time to blind myself with my Grandma’s old knitting needles, and deafen myself with battery acid.
I have yet to understand just exactly why Iran is the ‘enemy.’ She signed the NPT in ’68 which gives her the right to pursue nuclear energy research and development. (Israel refused to sign it – there are about 168 signatories – citing, basically, our nuclear status is nobody’s business.)
Of the ones I’ve read to date, none of the ‘explanations’ of Iran’s enemy status has justified or explained why. Frankly, having the bomb and a delivery system to go with it is probably an excellent way of avoiding the fate of an Iraq or Afghanistan or Yemen or Somalia or…who knows how many other countries we’re presently, randomly droning.
Anyone on this site know the ‘why’ Iran’s possible development of the bomb is a direct threat to Israel and the US?
Felicity; BINGO babe!
Iran has no desire to occupy or invade any other country.
Anyone who thinks they do is a wee bit short o’ grey matter.
They feel they need nukes to avoid the fate of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya; and they are right.
Iran knows that it is surrounded by US bases.
Iran knows who makes foreign policy in the US (AEI, and several other Israeli occupied “think tanks”)
Iran has “observer” status in the SCO. It’s kinda like NATO, but the big guns are Russia and China. We don’t need that hornet’s nest to stumble into.
Unless this problem is solved, there will be a never ending war against the Muslim world, from the ME, to SE Asia, and all places between.
All this because of a nation the size of New Jersey, with an ego the size of Jupiter.
The Likudniks need to stop being a bunch of horses’ asses, but that’s impossible.
When Bibi can address both houses of our congress and get standing ovations while speaking out against our President, we have a BIG problem.
When our Vice President goes to Israel, and says he is a Zionist with a big smile on his face, then gets bitch slapped by the Likud party, there is a big problem.
Israel, and the Israeli think tanks in our country wanted Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, and Libya taken out; we’re about half way there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxeY6bq7lY0&feature=related
Felicity… I know the tensions pre-date this particular incident but, Ahmadinejad made an ambiguous comment about Israel and it’s survival as a state. That incident has become the most recent jusification for Israel to stop the Iranians from gaining a nuclear capability. And therefore the United States is bound to serve the interests of Israel regardless of what might be in our best interests.
Looking at the link that erinyes provided it makes you think that all the Repuglican’t war hawks are really just talking out their asses trying to sound tough and leaderly. If you think about the possible consequences and fallout you can see that it’s easier said than done. ” Oh yeah, I’ll kick their ass” Watch me!
THANK YOU ERINYES AND SWAMI. I’ll add that since 1948, Iran has been the most consistent, and sometimes the only supporter, of Israel. (To pin the label enemy on her based on the remark of Ahmadinejad is so weak as to deserve zero attention.)
And wasn’t it Israel that played the middle-man in the Iran-Contra fiasco (under Reagan, I might add.) Chances are that the weapons Israel sold to Iran at the time are still stored in her arsenals – apparently aimed and ready to go (against Israel) if Israel is to be believed.
Needless to say, it’s extremely difficult to keep up with, or understand, the ever-changing machinations which take place almost daily on the world’s political stage.
Pingback: Would a Republican president bomb Iran? (The Week) | News Bulletins
Pingback: Would a Republican president bomb Iran? (The Week) | Elections News
Pingback: Would a Republican president bomb Iran? (The Week) | Breaking News Today