Is Iran Next?

[dannyboy]

Pakistan and India have long been at each others throat, and tried to develop nukes to get a leg up on the other. But now that both have it, and understand that it would be a total loss to both should either one try, they now seem to put a higher value on peace.

Of course having China that close didn't hurt either.

North Korea is one of those areas where there is no really good answer. Only taking out the mad man and his generals would solve things there perhaps. Then again maybe not. And while the Korea's attempt to gain world prominence, their focus is the results instead of the method, as seek with their cloning program.

Time will tell.

d

 

[wkmac]

This op-ed concerns Iraq rather than Iran but the same forces are there either way.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north423.html

 

[wkmac]

This anti-war writer doesn't let the democrats or MoveOn off the hook in any way. Matter of fact he's dead on IMO!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/frank/frank21.html

I believe we would have had an Iraq war even had Gore been elected and I'll also go so far as to say we would have had an Iraq war even if 9/11 had never happened.

Really? You mean that? Yep!

Hint: Follow global currencies, follow global oil transactions and how they are paid for under OPEC rules and look closely at the Euro. Why would George Soros, a global currency hedgefund investor pump money to unseat Bush? What was happening at the time with his investment position with dollars and Euros. What was also happening with the currencies, oil and Iraq that connect the 3 together? Oh yeah, there's a connection. A big one! I've said it before and I'll say it again, no matter who got elected in 2000', we were going to have to go to Iraq. The empire required it.

It's in the money my friend's, it's in the money!

Desert Queen, I know it pains you to admit this and I understand and respect that but you know it's true and we both have seen the truth on this. It's ok to ponder this on your next journey in the mountains.

 

[Information Please]

Are you sure about Gore?

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/gore/gore092302sp.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20060310170101/http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0925-01.htm

 

[wkmac]

Positive! Once events began to move and it appeared Republicans were gaining ground in the arena of opinion it was important to rally the voter base in order to prevent a slaughter at the mid-term elections in Nov. 2002' which was about 6 weeks after Gore made this speech. What do you think Bush has been up to recently in his comments about the Iraq war? Elections BAY-BEE! The late Congressman Larry McDonald once told me the sole purpose in Disneyland East (Larry's name for Washington DC) is to "TAX! TAX! TAX!, SPEND! SPEND! SPEND!, ELECT! ELECT! ELECT!" That nails it to a tee!

Are you sure you want to use this speech as your proof oh my little desert flower? There's tons of ammo to launch back at you from this speech alone for the Bu****es. I'll say nothing to see how sharp they are but a dull pencil could point many things out Gore said.

Let me ask you this one question. Anywhere in that speech did Gore ever say the war against Iraq was totally unjustified in any manner at all? Answer is No he did not. Did he suggest a need for regime change? Oh yes he did. The only difference between Gore and Bush may only be at best the method but the real motive of vocal opposition is nothing more than political leverage. At the time of Gore's speech, if Bush does succeed and the republicans are seen in a very favorable light then the effects at the polls could shift the balance of power in Washington and in 2002' and 2004' this did happen somewhat. Even more concerning to the democrats was the fact that Bush won in 2004' and this time there was no voter muckup to sway opinion with. I know the argument of voter fraud and that's a whole other issue but the simple fact is Bush and the republicans solidified their hold on the reigns of power. In 06' they want veto/filibuster proof power and the democrats are out to stop that and even gain back on house in order to lameduck Bush through the end of his term. I would to if I were them.

A good example is the whole Alito hearings as they are a big joke if you ask me. It's all about the mid-term elections coming up. Everyone in Washington knows abortion is a straw man to beat the public with and no matter who is on the court we will have abortion. Even if SCOTUS overturns Roe v Wade this will just throw it back to the States to regulate (which is where it should be anyway) and you can bet your bottom dollar not every State in the Union will outlaw abortion and I'll go so far as to say very few will. Oh there will be some but not many. And if you live in a State that it is, well that's what AirTran is for!

While I'm on this straw man let me just say this about the anti-abortion crowd. They don't want Roe v Wade overturned either. Yep, you heard me. Overturning Roe v Wade strips this issue from the federal level and lands it back into the States where the anti crowd must now fight 50 battles instead of just 1. 50 battles is vastly more expensive than a single battle. Hint! Hint! as to why everyone wants everything in Washington. It's the money again!

They want Roe v Wade to stand but a Congress and President to legislate from the federal level and then a court to uphold a complete ban on the procedure. It'll never happen because there's no basis in law for them to do that and Congress won't ever entertain it because of the variety of international treaties we have entered that protect such a practice. Go look around many of the UN resolutions and treaties we have entered and what our gov't has to guarantee as a signer. Hell these clowns know this but they'd rather keep our attention elsewhere so we don't really see what's going on.

It's all about politics and Empire my sun goddess! Both sides are in lock step and you know it! Be Sweet!

Ribs anyone?

 

[Information Please]

I dont believe that a war in Iraq was inevitable, regardless of who was president. I see no facts that would lead me to believe that, no matter where Soros puts his money. We would all be richer if our money was in Euros five years ago, rather than say, UPS stock. Now if you are talking about the inevitability of a war somewhere in the Mid-East; that I will concede. I would have thought that a war against Iran, or even Syria was more likely five years ago. After all, those countries did actively support terrorists bent on toppling the American way of life.

Gore was/is a hawk, and I never supported him, other than preferring him over what we ended up with. Anyone that could live with Tipper was not my idea of someone I would choose to be in charge of anything, unless the alternative was what we are stuck with now. He did; however make a number of correct calls in the referenced speech. I would take his influence in the 2002 mid-terms to be minimal, at best.

To attempt to stay on topic, you may want to read what Pope Benedict had to say about Islam. Maybe our leaders should talk with him about what the next move should be.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA10Ak01.html

PSwhat are these ribs of which you speak? Do you have me confused with someone else?

 

[tieguy]

great post. I sense a a little fire and passion in the post. The ribs should turn out great

 

[wkmac]

PSwhat are these ribs of which you speak? Do you have me confused with someone else?

I guess I do. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[wkmac]

Hey Cheryl,
I just noticed in a previous post where I used the word Bu****es
(Bush ites if it does it again) where the word was posted "Bu****es. Is this a banned word? I don't have a problem with that but just curious.

Wait a minute! I just figured it out when I noticed the 4 letters put together what it spells. So to the system it interprets Bush ites as

Boo Schitts!

That's to funny!

 

[wkmac]

I dont believe that a war in Iraq was inevitable, regardless of who was president. I see no facts that would lead me to believe that, no matter where Soros puts his money. We would all be richer if our money was in Euros five years ago, rather than say, UPS stock. Now if you are talking about the inevitability of a war somewhere in the Mid-East; that I will concede. I would have thought that a war against Iran, or even Syria was more likely five years ago. After all, those countries did actively support terrorists bent on toppling the American way of life.

Gore was/is a hawk, and I never supported him, other than preferring him over what we ended up with. Anyone that could live with Tipper was not my idea of someone I would choose to be in charge of anything, unless the alternative was what we are stuck with now. He did; however make a number of correct calls in the referenced speech. I would take his influence in the 2002 mid-terms to be minimal, at best.

To attempt to stay on topic, you may want to read what Pope Benedict had to say about Islam. Maybe our leaders should talk with him about what the next move should be.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA10Ak01.html

Sorry IP for the confusion because had you been who I thought you were we'd already had the discussion via PM's of the Iraq/Euro connections and it has to do with the fact that several years ago prior to the most recent invasion Saddam was planning on by-passing OPEC policy that all oil trades take place in dollars and are either made at the NY or London Commodities exchanges. Many believe, myself included, that this has more to do with the situation in Iraq that any weapons or the effort to democratize the country. Everyone already agreed Saddam must go, even Gore did and said so in his speech. It also made sense to regime change in Iraq rather than Iran or Syria IMO because Iraq was in fact a more secular society. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, Osama was the first one to stand up and cry for them to go in and remove Iraq forces from Kuwait. He has no love for Saddam. Osama got mad because instead of it being Arabs solving an Arab problem, the Americans came and built bases and stayed. I'm no fan of Osama but I can understand and respect that feeling. The powers that be feared an internal Arab struggle would lead to disruption of oil flow so we rode in to protect our own interests. Another good reason to eliminate our need of foreign oil.

As for euro's well it's no different than our so-called dollars. It's all fractional reserve banking and a myth on paper anyway. I say scrape it all and go back to gold and silver or let individuals determine what they agree to make in trade. Problem with that is it's had for a super-state to tax that because they can't control the entire business process. That's the beauty of it IMO!

Couple of articles to read with the first having come out about the time of invasion of Iraq by GW and forces. The second is only a couple of weeks ago and oddly notice the similarity of events and the resulting saber rattling.

http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/IraqWarFRN.pdf

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/27/115725/53

Oh, and forget the comment about you being a desert flower. Since you are not the source of ribs neither are you a desert flower, unless now if you want to be and want me to call you that but people might begin to talk about us! Have a good one!

BTW:For those who don't understand my comment "so-called dollars" I invite you to read the 1792' Coinage Act just for starters.

http://landru.i-link-2.net/monques/coinageact.html

 

[cheryl]

Hey Cheryl,
I just noticed in a previous post where I used the word Bu****es
(Bush ites if it does it again) where the word was posted "Bu****es. Is this a banned word?

um... well... of course, wouldn't you always assume that bush.ites would be a banned word?

BTW, I edited the word back in to your post, now we can see if the magic genie in the obsenity filter puts the **** back in...

 

[wkmac]

um... well... of course, wouldn't you always assume that bush.ites would be a banned word?

BTW, I edited the word back in to your post, now we can see if the magic genie in the obsenity filter puts the **** back in...

Thanks.
So does this mean the word ass will be *** and the word pass will be p***?

 

[moreluck]

When in doubt, use the dollar signs.....

.....see, it works!

 

[wkmac]

When in doubt, use the dollar signs.....

.....see, it works!

BUES

or

BUE$

Yeah they work but I still like Boo Schitts better.

 

[jamescar]

When in doubt, use the dollar signs.....

.....see, it works!

avatar test

 

[wkmac]

This is interesting! Not exactly pinko lefties in this bunch.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/18/25820/4474

 

[tieguy]

Wkmac,

To me its a natural progression. The government has been given liberties since 9/11 in the interests of national security. Those liberties cannot extend forever and eventually the government has to be reigned in as the pendulam swings back the other way.

 

[wkmac]

Wkmac,

To me its a natural progression. The government has been given liberties since 9/11 in the interests of national security. Those liberties cannot extend forever and eventually the government has to be reigned in as the pendulam swings back the other way.

You aren't suggesting the gov't is out of control are you?

"IF" Susie's lurking, she'll lurk no more as she just hit the floor with a massive coronary!

 

[Information Please]

Wkmac,

To me its a natural progression. The government has been given liberties since 9/11 in the interests of national security. Those liberties cannot extend forever and eventually the government has to be reigned in as the pendulam swings back the other way.

Once you give something away, it's very difficult to get it back. Just ask the American Indians if you don't believe me.

 

[quebec_driver]

what ever happens with Iran it will have to be done soon, their new president is one sick puppy. The israelies will probably take care of it soon.