The impending war with Iran

[Miulang]

With all the escalation of gesticulating from both the American side and the Iranian side the last few days, my guess is the next step will be the US will try to get the UN to step in with sanctions. Knowing, of course, that many in the Bush Administration have characterized the UN as being weak and ineffective, this will result in the US "having" to go into Iran to defeat the "bad" Iranians and establish democracy and freedom (hey, it's deja vu all over again! :rolleyes: ) just like we're doing in Iraq.

Hmmm...what will our excuse be? To keep the world from the threat of having Iran use a nuclear weapon on Israel (funny, we have 480 nuclear weapons in strategic locations in Europe, some pointed at Iran, so why shouldn't Iran want to protect itself from us?)

There was an article today that said the Pentagon was updating its plans for war with Iran, except they said this was a "normal" thing to do. Hmmm again.

Here's a story that was first published last October which hypothesizes about the real reasons why we declared war on Iraq (sorry guys, it wasn't to get rid of Saddam) and why we will be heading to Iran soon.

When will we ever learn? :( And if we do decide to invade Iran, we're gonna get our asses really whupped because these guys are armed to the teeth. What did Saddam have? A few rusty missiles?

Miulang

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html

[waioli kai]

Miulang, your link to www.globalresearch.ca is much appreciated. William Clark has hit the target. I enjoy his quotes from a couple of centuries ago, they are no less true today.

"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes...known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."

- James Madison, Political Observations, 1795
Bush2's foreign policy promises continual warfare. At the least, we can only expect ever more errosion of freedom as a result.
... ... ...

"I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts."

- Abraham Lincoln

Real facts? Bush2 et. al conceal real facts and bring us rivers of lies. The people are not given the truth. The majority seems content with just being given something, so a pabulum of lies, deceptions and arrogance sweetened with a humor of their leaders' imbecility satisfies their conscience.
... ... ...


"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government. Whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights."

- Thomas Jefferson

U.S. peoples are so well-fed with US misinformation that they confuse their being well-fed with being well-informed, so it would follow that they cannot be trusted with their own government. One can only wonder just how far wrong the Bush2 US government and economy must go, how much deserved domestic and international derision the U.S. must accrue before the U.S. peoples are attracted enough (away from their plethora of disatractions) to notice they must set things to rights.

[Miulang]

On Wednesday, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) introduced a bill called "the Iran Freedom and Support Act of 2005, which codifies existing sanctions, controls and regulations in place against Iran; expands the list of entities that can be sanctioned under the Iran-Libya Sanction Act; and authorizes $10 million in assistance to pro-democracy groups opposed to the current Iranian regime..."

"If signed into law, the bill would set in place standards that would make it more difficult for the government of Iran to have access to revenue and foreign investment that could be used to support terrorism and develop weapons of mass destruction. The legislation outlines that the sanctions the U.S. currently imposes shall remain in place until the president certifies that Iran "no longer poses a threat to the United States or its allies." ...

The kicker part is we're butting our noses into this by giving the "freedom fighters" $10 million to try to kill off the Islamic regime. Well, I suppose if they can off the mullahs in power without our having to have troops sent there, that's better than having the troops (who thought after their tour in Iraq was over they could come home) shipped off to Iran.

The part that pisses me off is that the $10 million will probably become a lot more than $10 million; in other words, it could become a bottomless pit with no accountability for where the money is going (again...remember the ghost security officers in Iraq?). In order to get those freedom fighters stirred up enough, we'd still have to send over "advisors" in the form of CIA or special forces to train the insurgents. And then we would have Vietnam and Iraq again.

Except this time, the armies that would counter any attacks on Iran are more heavily fortified and would probably wipe those forces all over the map.

Miulang

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/article2DC81E59658E429BA9522506CA91E17C.asp

[Miulang]

So who is going to out-testosterone the other? the US or Iran?
Iran (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4270859.stm) has stated that it will come to the assistance of their Muslim friends in Syria, meaning they will fight the US or Israel or anyone else who tries to accuse Syria of creating unrest in Lebanon.

And we've pulled out our Ambassador from Damascus for "strategic talks" in Washington, DC, all the while yelling at Syria to get out of Lebanon. In the meantime, Lebanon is accusing the Mossad of blowing up the ex-Premier.

What I see happening is the Middle East blow up in the US and Europe's faces over the control of Middle East oil and the Muslim religion. Sad sad sad.
:(
Miulang

[Miulang]

According to Scott Ritter (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8130.htm), a former Marine and a former member of the UNSCOM weapons inspection team, a plan to bomb Iran was submitted and approved by the President. The date of the aerial attack was scheduled for June, 2005.

"...On Iran, Ritter said that President George W. Bush has received and signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran planned for June 2005. Its purported goal is the destruction of Iran’s alleged program to develop nuclear weapons, but Ritter said neoconservatives in the administration also expected that the attack would set in motion a chain of events leading to regime change in the oil-rich nation of 70 million -- a possibility Ritter regards with the greatest skepticism. ..."

In light of the report by Seymour Hersh last month and the admission by the White House that we have been flying drone spy planes over Iran for over a year, something like this would not surprise me in the least.

Miulang

[Miulang]

So if natural disasters like earthquakes (one happened yesterday that killed approximately 300 people) don't destroy Iran, then we might outsource an attack of Iran by having Israel do the aerial bombing.

Here are comments (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=543087&contrassID=1&subContrassID=5&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y) by the Israeli Air Force Commander-in-Chief, who while he would not say that Israel would definitely bomb Iran, did say that the Israelis have to be prepared for anything.

Hmmm. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens in June.

Miulang

P.S. Israel has been privately pressing for the US to do something about the nuclear proliferation (http://washingtontimes.com/national/20050221-123842-3048r.htm) in Iran. They are saying if the US doesn't do something, they might have to aerial bomb the nuclear facilities themselves.

[Miulang]

On Feb. 21 in this thread, I reported that the Bush Administration had secretly approved plans to attack Iran on June 5. In the meantime, there has been much fist-shaking at Iran (being backed up by Russia) by Israel and the US.

Now comes reports that last week, the Israeli inner cabinet has given initial approval (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8254.htm) for Israel to attack an Iranian nuclear plant.

"...The plans have been discussed with American officials who are said to have indicated provisionally that they would not stand in Israel’s way if all international efforts to halt Iranian nuclear projects failed. ..."

The Bush Administration stated about a month ago that either Israel or the US would be attacking Iran if Iran refused to shut down its nuclear plants.

Hmmm...can Israel wait until June? What will Condi do now?

Miulang

[Miulang]

Another story about why if we attack Iran, it won't be because of WMD, terrorists or any other bogus reason we also gave for attacking Iraq. The real reason is to prevent Iran and the EU from destabilizing the American dollar by converting the currency for buying oil from petrodollars to the petroeuro bourse. (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8354.htm)
If that ever happens, that means we will no longer control this commodity and therefore will sink off the world economic horizon faster than a lead balloon. Losing control of the petrodollar would cause us to have huge economic repercussions...a stock market crash, another Depression to equal the one in 1929...And as we sink, so do the fortunes of all our "friends" like Great Britain, Australia and the "new world", and the new powerhouses of China and India will rise into the sky.

Miulang

[1stwahine]

Please go to my blogg to check how i truly feel about this topic. http://www.hawaiistories.com/lynn/

today's post 3/24/05 Hooha! My Son Is Coming Home From Afganistan...

war over oil again? ssshhhh boom shheee boom, she nananananana :mad: kaboom!

[Miulang]

Here's a Kashimiri's opinion (http://www.greaterkashmir.com/full_story.asp?ItemID=2836&cat=11) on the US and an impending attack (predicted for this June) on Iran. Will it be because of the nuclear capability that Iran swears is only for peaceful (i.e., power generation) uses, or for something more subversive, like the US attempt to keep Iran from selling its oil for petro eurodollars instead of U.S.-backed petrodollars and thus further diluting our influence and control over petroleum resources in the Middle East?

Interesting to note that this writer also says one of the downfalls of the US economy has been the outsourcing of manufacturing to other countries...as in, why our balance of trade and deficits have grown so much over the last few years.

"...The devaluation of the dollar was caused by the American economy shying away from manufacturing local products - except those of the military - by outsourcing the American jobs to the cheaper Third World countries and depending only on the general service sector, and by the huge cost of two major wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that are still going on. Foreign investors started withdrawing their money from the shaky American market causing further devaluation of the dollar. ..."


Miulang

[Miulang]

Cindy Sheehan, a cofounder of the Gold Star Families for Peace, gave the following speech (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8502.htm) during a bring the troops home rally on April 4.

She reminds us that the US goverment is the main reason why Iran has nuclear capability today...that in the 1970's when Gerald Ford was President, he had Donald Rumsfeld as his Sec of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz as the chief arms control administrator and Dick Cheney was his Chief of Staff. Gerald Ford decided that Iran needed to build nuclear reactors, and companies like GE and Westinghouse stood to make beaucoup bux by providing the materials for building the reactors. The Shah of Iran was an American puppet. Unfortunately for the US, the citizens of Iran had other ideas about their government and forced the Shah and his cronies into exile.

So now we've come full circle; we want to get rid of the very same capability that we were so willing to offer to the Iranians when "our boy" was in power, now that they have their own government which has ideas about controlling its own oil resources.

Somehow, this picture seems oddly familiar.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Another analysis (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/041105D.shtml) of why the Bush Administration is so antsy to invade Iran. No, oil is not the only reason, but it appears to be one of the main ones, and also the fact that Iran controls a very strategic piece of water (the Straits of Hormuz) which if they decided to blockade it, would prevent oil (and even more importantly, natural gas) from being shipped out of the Persian Gulf area.

As the price of gasoline creeps up to the $3/gallon level (and you guys in Hawai'i will see that probably before the end of the year), and with drilling in ANWR (even if they started today) not expected to be productive for another 10 years, does the Bush Administration really have any other choice? They know the US economy will tank again if people have to choose between buying gas and buying anything other than the bare necessities.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Hey, now that our President is advocating for the US to build nuclear plants (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0502nuclear02.html) in order to become more energy self-sufficient, do you think he'll change his mind about allowing Iran to start up their nuclear plant?

If he doesn't, doesn't that show him to be rather hypocritical? As in "It's OK for us to have newqular plants because we won't ever use the byproducts for weapons of mass destruction but it's not OK for Iran or North Korea to have them because we all know that the only thing they want to do is build bombs"?? :eek:

Miulang

[Miulang]

Let me see...in May, I wrote that some knowledgeable people were predicting that we or Israel would be attacking Iran around June 6. Well, here it is: June 19, and Scott Ritter (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7896BBD4-28AB-48BA-A949-2096A02F864D.htm), a former UN weapons inspector, writes that we already are at war with Iran. Maybe not with boots on the ground, but apparently we've been flying drones and other spy planes over restricted airspace.

Hmmmm....this sounds vaguely familiar, except we haven't started bombing out key defense installations yet. But there IS a Presidential election going on in Iran, and apparently the White House doesn't like the fact that the whoever wins the runoff elections will not dramatically alter Iran's stance on its government or its nuclear program.

Also greasing the skids is George Bush, who criticized the elections on Friday and Condoleeeeeeeza (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050619.welection0619/BNStory/Front), who went on TV today and said that the election results showed that Iran was out of step with democratic reforms in the Middle East. Ohmigawd! I hope there aren't going to be any top secret memoes leaked from the White House saying that we are advocating regime change in Iran, too! :eek:

Actually, Iran could get the US to back off by simply promising not to change their monetary system for selling oil from the petrodollar to the eurodollar. But of course, it won't. So of course, we have to figure out how to get rid of the Iranian government.

It'll be relatively easier for us to attack Iran now...Remember that clandestine trip that Rummy took to Azerbaijian not too long ago to talk with the dictator there? Well, methinks it was to pay that guy off for the use of his country as a staging area to attack Iran. Too bad we don't have enough troops available to stage a successful attack. But Rummy and Cheney believe that the high tech widgets that cost a couple of million bux apiece will be able to take the place of our soldiers. NOT. Can you say, d-r-a-f-t??? I think we should keep our noses out of Iran's business.

Miulang

[Miulang]

And now the pissing match (http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=9030) between Iran and George Bush begins. Tennis, anyone? I believe the "ball" is now in our (the US) court.

Miulang

[Miulang]

So I also trotted over to the newspaper in Baku, Azerbaijan to see if they were reporting anything interesting about the situation between Tehran and the US. There was a story from Asia Times (http://atimes.com/atimes/China/GF09Ad08.html) that says Tehran is becoming good buddies with China, by signing these huge deals for LNG.

"...Since the beginning of the war in Iraq, Beijing has worked feverishly to strengthen its ties with Moscow and Teheran in an apparent effort to prevent US military action against the remaining "axis of evil" members, Iran and North Korea. In addition to recent massive energy deals with Teheran, which place Iran in China's security web, both Beijing and Moscow have accelerated the transfer of missile technology to Teheran, while selling the Islamic republic increasingly sophisticated military equipment.

Armed with a vast array of anti-ship and long-range missiles, Iran can target US troop positions throughout the Middle East and strike US Navy ships. Iran can also use its weapons to blockade the Straits of Hormuz through which one-third of the world's traded oil is shipped. With the help of Beijing and Moscow, Teheran is becoming an increasingly unappealing military target for the US.

As in the Middle East, the China-Iran-Russia axis is challenging US interests in Central Asia. Washington is working feverishly to gain security footholds in Tajikistan and Kazakhstan to complement existing US military bases in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. China and Russia are working equally hard to assert their influence in Central Asia. A good portion of this work is being done under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO.)

Composed of China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, the SCO was created in 1996 and reborn in 2001 when it was bolstered to counter the initial eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The SCO is becoming an increasingly powerful regional mutual security organization. Joint military maneuvers between SCO member states began in 2003. In 2004, the SCO created a rapid reaction anti-terror strike force. According to Igor Rogachev, Russia's ambassador to China, the new force is designed to combat and respond to terrorist attacks in any SCO member nation...."

And then there's this "non-aggression" agreement (http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=6/16/2005&Cat=2&Num=006) that was signed by Baku and Tehran which states that neither will allow a third country to set up a military base for the purpose of attacking the other country. Yeow.

Looks like the Americans have been duped again. We paid the Azeri regime big bucks to have a military base there. Is the dictator going to kick us out, now that this non-aggression treaty has been signed with Tehran, or is he going to be cagey and take what he can get from both sides?

There were demonstrations (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4107864.stm) today in the capital of Baku demanding free elections and the overthrow of the current regime. My guess is we have a little hand in "helping" the protestors with advice and money, just like we did in the Ukraine.

And a report from TimesOnline (UK) (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8209-1653124,00.html) today says that according to a British energy consulting company, the discovery of new large reserves of petroleum by the large multinational oil companies has not kept pace with the demand.

"... In the face of steady annual increases in demand for oil over the past decade, the West’s big oil companies largely have failed to improve the yearly exploration yield of new reserves to their portfolios, the study shows. Smaller discoveries and diminishing reserves per well are adding to pressure on oil companies in the West to gain access to large, unexploited oilfields in Russia and the Gulf states.

The Wood Mackenzie report, Global Oil and Gas Risks and Rewards, shows that typical annual returns from oil exploration — in the region of between three billion and five billion barrels — have not changed since the early 1990s. The only exception to the largely stagnant exploration trend was the discovery in 2000 of Kashagan, a ten billion barrel oilfield, in the Caspian Sea.

Graham Kellas, vice-president at Wood Mackenzie, reckons that the international oil companies were highly successful in finding oil during the past decade, but now are working in a diminishing field of opportunity. “The hunt for oil continues, but it is becoming increasingly difficult,’’ he said. “There are few areas of the world that are unexplored and that is why the larger companies are so keen to get access to areas that are off-limits.”

I tell you, this is like playing "Risk", except the fate of the world is at stake.

[Miulang]

I really wish the White House would just keep its yap quiet and stop fueling the flames against the new President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-07-01T004222Z_01_N30527461_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-IRAN-USA-AHMADINEJAD-DC.XML) by claiming he was a leader in the 1979 U.S. Embassy siege as some former hostages have said.

I was watching one of the cable news shows today where an expert on faces compared a picture of the new President and an old picture of the terrorist leader and the expert said there was no way the two men in the pictures were the same person ("eyebrows and noses are different").

Secondly, it appears it was a "fair" election, our only problem being that "our" candidate didn't win. Boohoo. I think we should just leave the Iranians to themselves.

Of course, in my cynicism, I also believe this is the opening salvo to the White House ordering an invasion of Iran (either by us or Israel). I mean, they're only one month behind schedule right now (an invasion was supposed to happen around June 6). Regime change? Hmmm...violation of the Geneva Convention and the UN sanctions against regime change? Violations? what violations (wink wink).

Miulang

[1stwahine]

Miulang, I once told you why I stayed away from subjects of this nature. Well, tonight I can not hold back. As a mother of three soldiers, two who were in Iraq at the same time while my other child was in Korea...yes, three in War ones. One who came back with sharpnel imbedded in his chest and I think his head too. Medals, awards and certificates. Upon his return he gave me his flag...the one that every soldier carries in gear....

Yes, I am worried and now I am going through the same nightmares when it all started for Iraq. Before the war of Iraq I felt that my children were going there and two did. Christy was sent to Korea when that Korean nut was acting up. I became depressed and wanted to say many things a mother in my situation could. However, I couldn't due to the fact that all three of my children volunteered to serve. Two re-enlisted and my son was sent to Afganistan less than a year. There is no end to the feelings of worry and heartaches that I have gone through.

If we invade Iran...we will get our ass kick. They are more equipt and have the men power. It will be like sending our soldiers to a slaughter house. I will not stand by this time and not say nothing. I didn't give birth to my children to recieve them in a casket with a flag draped over.

Protect us on our shores. Not get them killed in some forsaken country half way around the world. Please stop the madness and send them home. Enough is enough.

Lynn Vasquez

[waioli kai]

Re: a case of mistaken identity?

When Iranian peoples drove United States' US corporatUSt$', militarUSt$ puppet Mohammad Reza Pahlavi** out of Iran, they were acting in Iranian peoples' best interests. The United States' US interests in Iran were contrary to the best interests of the peoples of both the United States and Iran, as it turned out, and still turns. The identity of "the bad guys" in Shah Reza Pahlavi's Iran is, in the U.S. generally, mistaken to be those Irani who opposed the Shah and opposed the U.S. corporate/government which had coopted the Iranian peoples to serve the interests of US.

The new President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is not the villain from Iran 1979-1980; but, United States' US is.

**Mohammad Reza Pahlavi replaced his father on the throne on September 16, 1941. He wanted to continue the reform policies of his father, but a contest for control of the government soon erupted between the shah and an older professional politician, the nationalistic Mohammad Mosaddeq.

Despite his vow to act as a constitutional monarch who would defer to the power of the parliamentary government, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi increasingly involved himself in governmental affairs and opposed or thwarted strong prime ministers. Prone to indecision, however, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi relied more on manipulation than on leadership. He concentrated on reviving the army and ensuring that it would remain under royal control as the monarchy's main power base. In 1949 an assassination attempt on the Shah, attributed to the pro-Soviet Tudeh Party, resulted in the banning of that party and the expansion of the Shah's constitutional powers.

In 1951, Premier Mohammed Mossadeq, a militant nationalist, forced the parliament to nationalize the British-owned oil industry. Mossadeq was opposed by the Shah and was removed, but he quickly returned to power. The Shah fled Iran but returned when supporters staged a coup against Mossadeq in August 1953. Mossadeq was then arrested by pro-Shah army forces. The participation of the American CIA and British SAS in orchestrating the coup against Mossadeq is still cited by Iranians of all political stripes as a major milestone energizing the movement which culminated in the 1979 revolution.
In the context of regional turmoil and the Cold War, the Shah established himself as an indispensable ally of the West. Domestically, to coopt the forces arrayed against him, he advocated reform policies, culminating in the 1963 program known as the White Revolution, which included land reform, extension of voting rights to women, and the elimination of illiteracy. Ironically, he was only able to afford these programs because of the wealth that the government had accumulated due to Mossadeq's oil nationalization program.

These measures and the increasing arbitrariness of the Shah's rule provoked religious leaders who feared losing their traditional authority, intellectuals seeking democratic reforms and national dignity, and workers seeking basic unionization rights, better wages and working conditions. These opponents criticized the Shah for violation of the constitution, which placed limits on royal power and provided for a representative government, and for subservience to the United States. The Shah saw himself as heir to the kings of ancient Iran, and in 1971 he held an extravagant celebration of 2,500 years of Persian monarchy. In 1976 he replaced the Islamic calendar with an "imperial" calendar, which began with the foundation of the Persian empire more than 25 centuries earlier. These actions were viewed as anti-Islamic and resulted in religious opposition.

Collapse of the dynasty

The Shah's government suppressed and marginalized its opponents with the help of Iran's security and intelligence organization, SAVAK. Relying on oil revenues, which sharply increased in late 1973, the Shah pursued his goal of developing Iran as a strong regional power dedicated to social reform and economic development. Yet he continually sidestepped democratic arrangements and refused to allow meaningful civic and political liberties, remaining unresponsive to public opinion.

By the mid-1970s the Shah reigned amidst widespread discontent caused by the continuing repressiveness of his government, socioeconomic changes that benefited some classes at the expense of others, and the increasing gap between the ruling elite and the disaffected populace. (cont'd at wikipedia.com)

[MadAzza]

When Iranian peoples drove United States' US corporatUSt$', militarUSt$



What did you say?

[waioli kai]

What did you say?
As, apparently, you have no cognizant connection to 1978, 1979, 1980 Iran, especially in the context of militarUSt$', corporatUSt$' subjugation of Iran via the delusions of grandeur of U.S. puppet Mohammed Reza Pahlavi and his (and US's) SAVAK, there is nothing that I can add to what I wrote that can fill you in.

If you are truly interested in learning more about Iran with regard to how and what US corporatUSt$, militarUStS did/do there that earned/earns U.S.'s US the name "The Great Satan" in Iran, and elsewhere, reading in All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471265179/qid=1120620783/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-9679651-2063214?v=glance&s=books) by Stephen Kinzer could be a sound beginning.

[Miulang]

Waaaaay back in June, I reported here that the White House had given the OK for Israel to attack Iran in 2005. Thank God clearer heads prevailed and no military action was declared, even though there was an escalation in rhetoric coming out of the US and Iran.

Now, with the serious (and possibly fatal) illness of Pres. Ariel Sharon (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060105/israel_sharon_update_060106/20060106?hub=CTVNewsAt11) of Israel, there will be huge political turmoil in Israel. Sharon's Kadima party, which he was in the process of forming, was destined to win in this coming March's Israeli national elections. Without Sharon in the lead, however, it might be difficult for Kadima (which is considered a centrist political group) to defeat Likud (a very nationalist, pro-Israeli group). If Likud wins the majority of seats in March, the hawks in that party (including former Pres. Benjamin Netanyahu) will certainly try to undo all that Sharon has accomplished to bring peace between Israel and the Palestineans.

Since the President and his cabinet have already given tacit permission for Israel to bomb Iran (under the pretense of Iran building up its nuclear---read WMD---capability), there is a good possibility that as we pull troops out of Iraq, their next stop might be Teheran. I'm sure the White House is looking for any excuse it can fabricate to repeat the debacle that is Iraq, but in this case we wouldn't be the direct aggressors; we'd just be "helping out" our Israeli friends. And since it appears that we won't be able to control the oil fields in Iraq, maybe we can try to control the oil fields in Iran instead. After all, the head of the Iranian oil ministry is trying to get all countries of the world to buy Iranian oil in euros instead of dollars, which is a direct slap at the United States and would weaken our position in the world currency market.

Miulang

[waioli kai]

US War on Iran is a thriving USraeli enterprise ever since Reza Shah Pahlavi was on the Kissinger fast-tract to asylum (albeit short-lived cancer treatment) in US's New England, together with US expropriation of Iranian assets following the overthrow/ouster of USrael's puppet Shah in Iran and his/US's Savik security forces which were oppressing Iranians much as then and later were Iraqis oppressed by US's puppet Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

U.S. Military personnel on the ground in Iraq inadvertantly act as hostages in the prevention of USraeli U.S. or Israel bombing of Iran. Such USraeli bombing(s) in Iran would likely ignite an assured destruction of the United States on which the vast majority of the world would agree was a destruction uniquely deserving to US, though unfortunately a burden mostly borne not by US (the likes of Carlyle Group, Morgan Stanley, Citibank corporatUSt, militarUSt elitUSt of the West) but a burden borne predominantly by the middle and lower classes of the United States.

[waioli kai]

.
13 killed in Iranian military plane crash (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10771828/)
Revolutionary Guards commander among those killed, state media says

AP Updated: 6:06 a.m. ET Jan. 9, 2006
TEHRAN, Iran - A small military jet crashed in northwestern Iran on Monday, killing the commander of the ground forces of Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards and at least 12 other people, state media said.

It was the second time in two months that a military plane crashed in Iran while attempting to make an emergency landing. ...

One may increasingly be led to believe that Secretary Rice's Star Wars (or whatever militarUSts now call or nickname their space weapons platforms and delivery systems) weaponry is bearing fruit for US warlords. A second known downing of an Iranian military plane in as many weeks.

Have militarUSt$ indeed succeeded in their dream of their being able to wreak destruction and death on Earth from weapon systems above Earth? If still not yet, it is surely not because they are not trying their damnedest, throwing untold U.S. treasure into their effort of establishing corporatUSt$' dominion over Earth.

[waioli kai]

.

'How do you feel about the terrorists attacks on civilians in Iraq and elsewhere?'
Not much different than about feelings toward terrorUSt$' Hellfire missiles being rained down to explode upon civilians (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10842035/) in Pakistan yesterday to try to kill a man whose (militant anti-terrorUSt?) wife and child were some time ago already killed by terrorUSt$.

===== === ==

"How do you feel about the bellicose statements made by the Iranian President, threatening war, death, and destruction?"
You got your presidential sources of such statements mixed up. It is your USraeli President Bush and the mindset for whom he speaks wherefrom such statements emanate.

==== === ==

'Do you think Iran's plans should be interdicted to spare us this additional concern?'
Alleged plans for what? Speeding up the rottening process of the decay of the United States under the grip of corporatUSt$' fascUSt militarUSism? Is it really possible to speed up that process faster than it is going? Would corporatUSt$' interdiction in militarUSt$' alleged "Iran's plans" slow the process or add to its corruptionUSt inertia?

=== === ==
'How would you suggest eliminating this threat to world peace?'
There is a state in the world that is more a threat to world peace than the United States' corporatUSt state? What are Iran's plans for Latin America compared to militarUSt$' actions and plans? Iran's plans for Space weapons systems compared to militarUSt$' actions and plans?

To be a more precise allegation than "threat to world peace" is "threat to US oil supply hegemon".

=== == ==

'Or do you support war and murder if the Iranians, for example, are the perpetrators?'

War and murder perpetrated by Iran, on the level of War and murder perpetrated by USraeli corporatUSt force$ and interest$? May as well equate an upset stomach to AIDS.

=== == =

'How would you neutralize these people who have declared their intent to wreak havoc on this planet and are just awaiting development of logistical means to do so?'
At this point in time, only a global hegemon can wreak havoc on a planetary scale, and it is US who is the global hegemon of the era whose very foundation is based first on wreaking havoc on peoples then absorbing their lands, resources and surviving inhabitants in the name of promoting freedom and democracy, the "free market" and justUS.

== == =

'Would you suggest the United States sit by passively rather than being proactive and protecting its interests.'
Protecting immorally gained, illegitimate, imperialist interUSt$ cannot lead to anything good for Humanity.

== = =

'You do know that the terrorists have not been reluctant to kill Americans. Remember all of the attacks culminating in 9/11.'
Your "terrorists" understand your "America" better than you do. They understand that the United States is run by elitUSt$, a minority whose power is derived from a sickly, corrupt, secretive corporatist government that is economically bankrupt and pushing the limits of that which popular ignorance can tolerate. Your "terrorists" understand that the average United States citizen is not as truly worshipful of elitUSt$ as are elitUSt$ worshipful of themselves.

= = =
'.... a realistic method for restraining a theocratically motivated madman?'

A theocratically motivated madman? That leaves out Richard Cheney, US's superhenchman who is motivated for personal reasons. So it remains to consider realistic methods for restraining gwBush. Chairman of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Arlen Specter today (http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/wireStory?id=1507809) acknowledged that impeachment is a possible remedy, though he suggested that electoral processes usually prevail in providing such restraints on US's theocratically motivated madmen and madwomen.

[waioli kai]

.
poll created: Friday, January 13, 2006, at 15:35:49 EDT from today's cnn late edition poll on

"What is the best way to handle Iran's nuclear program?'

Diplomacy 55%
Sanctions 18%
Military action 27% Were the United States a truly thriving democracy, one would not be wrong to be encouraged by such a poll, but, the United States is not such a democracy. The United States is a cleptocratic corporataucracy that extends from the first thefts (aka, "blessings") by some Puritan English exiles emptied from the bowels of the Mayflower to become an English investment consortium's "settlers" in what they initially deemed to be British "North Virginia", not fundamentally different from how Iraq is now deemed to be FOB East Fort Knox, Eastern Pennsylvannia Oil Patch, Eastern Israel, or whatever Iraq is in the minds of US corporatUSt$ militarists led by the Cheneybushites of the United States.

[Miulang]

Well, the drums are getting louder for our involvement (directly or via Israel) in Iran (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11602.htm). Another pseudo-WMD scare?

"...Is the United States about to launch a second preemptive war, against a nation that has not attacked us, to deprive it of weapons of mass destruction that it does not have?

With U.S. troops tied down in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Pakistanis inflamed over a U.S. airstrike that wiped out 13 villagers, including women and children, it would seem another war in the Islamic world is the last thing America needs.

Yet, the "military option" against Iran is the talk of the town.

"There is only one thing worse than ... exercising the military option," says Sen. John McCain. "That is a nuclear-armed Iran. The military option is the last option, but cannot be taken off the table."

Appearing on CBS's "Face the Nation," McCain said Iran's nuclear program presents "the most grave situation we have faced since the end of the Cold War, absent the whole war on terror."

Meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Bush employed the same grim terms he used before invading Iraq. If Iran goes forward with nuclear enrichment, said Bush, it could "pose a grave threat to the security of the world."

McCain and Bush both emphasized the threat to Israel. And all the usual suspects are beating the drums for war. Israel warns that March is the deadline after which she may strike. One reads of F-16s headed for the Gulf. The Weekly Standard is feathered and painted for the warpath. The Iranian Chalabis are playing their assigned roles, warning that Tehran is much closer to nukes than we all realize. ..."

Miulang

[Miulang]

Our government is being extremely hypocritical about Iran and its determination to harness nuclear energy (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011806C.shtml) to provide power to its people because some factions within our government advocate OUR use of nuclear energy to provide alternate power sources for us!

"...With energy demand spiraling and markets volatile, the US administration and the energy industry are looking to nuclear power to lessen dependency on traditional fuel sources.

"I think we have a tremendous need and responsibility to provide nuclear power," White House Chief of Staff Andy Card said in a speech at the US Chamber of Commerce last week.

Card also said that only part of the responsibility for reducing dependence on foreign sources of energy lay with the government.

"We also have an obligation to pay attention to the private sector," he said.

Last year's energy act provides a series of incentives and federal subventions for companies building nuclear power facilities in an effort to end what amounts to a 20-year moratorium on new plants.

Officials said the Card speech was part of drive by the administration to highlight the potential for nuclear power to reduce dependence on sources of energy - like Middle Eastern oil - that are both subject to potential supply disruption because of political instability, and produce greenhouse gases which may contribute to climate change.

"This administration has been clear on the need to expand the use of nuclear power," Craig Stevens, press secretary for the Department of Energy, told United Press International, adding that only 20 percent of the nation's energy supply currently comes from nuclear power. ..."

Why is it OK for the United States to build more nuclear power plants to reduce our need for imported oil and other countries cannot? Just because some countries (like Iran) have despotic leaders who might get trigger happy? What makes the American public think that our current leadership couldn't also get that trigger happy at some point? :mad:

Miulang

[Miulang]

Even the Jerusalem newspapers (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011906Q.shtml) are reporting that Israel is preparing for the possibility of attacking Iran by air:

"...IAF pilots have completed their mission training and fighter jets have been prepared for an Israeli attack on Iran, the British Sunday Times reported.

The article reported that "the elite 69 strategic F-15 I squadron" had been equipped with weapons that will be tested in combat for the first time, and that two missile submarines were on standby: one in the Persian Gulf and the second in Haifa Bay.

The Times also said that special IDF forces would be helicoptered into Iran to take out targets that could not be destroyed in an air strike.

Iran's nuclear facilities, according to the newspaper report, are widely dispersed at some 40 underground sites throughout Iran, which would make any attack by Israel - or any other nation - exponentially more difficult that Israel's successful attack on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981.

Col. [res] Ze'ev Raz, the former IAF pilot who led the Osirak mission, was quoted by the Times as saying, "What we now have is a lot of targets, which makes the operation much more difficult."

Raz believes an aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities is possible. There are many things that the IAF has done over the past few years that the public is not aware of, and it has made many important advances in mid-air refueling. Israel can strike the Iranian nuclear program, Raz said on Israel's Channel 1 TV's Politika program last week.

Former IDF Deputy Chief of Staff Uzi Dayan said last week that if Iran gets nuclear weapons, then so would terror organizations, like Hizbullah. "Israel needs to be ready to act on a military option," Dayan said. "Without getting into details, Israel is capable of doing these things." ...

Whoever pisses farther is going to determine whether or not we face another oil crisis with the loss of oil production in Iran. And if Iran loses, we'll be helping Israel by providing them with all the warheads they need.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Interesting theory (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11613.htm) of why the US wants to go to war with Iran and why it really decided to occupy Iraq. It was not for the oil per se, but for the control of the method of paying for the oil.

In March of this year, Iran will move from accepting payment for its oil from the US dollar to the Euro. The only countries that will suffer from this move will be the US (whose dollar will be worth squat in the world's economy) and our long-suffering friends, the Brits. And even they may move away from us for expediency, because they are more closely allied by geography to the Europeans across the channel who all trade now in Euros.

What will this do to our economy? It will ruin it, because our dollars will purchase less and less. Hence the government's move to thwart the oil-producing Middle East from moving to the Euro bourse. It wouldn't surprise me if Israel starts its aerial attacks of Iran around March, with our warheads.

Miulang

[waioli kai]

.
'Interesting theory (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11613.htm) of why the US wants to go to war with Iran and why it really decided to occupy Iraq. ... It wouldn't surprise me if Israel starts its aerial attacks of Iran around March, with our warheads.'

...if Israel starts its aerial attacks of Iran with our warheads, employing our presumption of our militarist right to attack first, pay later: that kleptomanic foundation which binds USrael --land possessions by US and by Israel being deemed to be Ghod's "blessings" on USrael, instead of being treasures stolen from indigenous peoples of the Americas, the Pacific and Palestine-- will be further exposed for all to see.

[Miulang]

OK, here we go! With Bush's popularity so low that there is virually no room left to sink any lower, the war drums are starting to beat ever more loudly for an invasion of Iran (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041206F.shtml).

One thing that previous Presidencies have done when faced with bad economic times was to start a good "5 cent" war. Iraq was supposed to be one of those "nickel wars" (go in, shock and awe them and then get out) but it has since devolved into a quagmire that gets uglier and bloodier by the day.

A year ago I was predicting, based on what I was reading in the world press, that the White House would escalate its pissing match with Iran and because of our engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan, would have to rely on our buddies the Israelis to take care of the Iran situation for us. The reports I was reading indicated a likely date for this military action would be June, 2005.

Well, June, 2005 passed with no incident, but in the last several days, the likelihood of some sort of international incident (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/04/12/iran.nuclear/index.html) involving us, Israel and Iran has been growing exponentially. For the sake of all the children alive today and those yet to be born, pray that this does not happen, because prayer is about all most of us have right now.

Miulang

[Island2Island]

Howzit! jus' joined da boards, Aloha!

Yep, looks like there at it again.......I hope it's just some "Hans L'Orange park stuff"* again.


*"Hans L'Orange park stuff"= two guys acking big, walking big, saying "Whaaat?, Whaaat? Whaat bra, like t'ro???Whaaat? You big???? Whaat? doing that for 2 hours, then going home.

[Miulang]

Here's an interesting scenario (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12952.htm) that makes so much sense it's scary. If we and Israel decide to attack Iran, that $70/barrel crude oil will cost way way more if Iran and Iraq, Venezuela, Nigeria and the Sudan all form a new cartel and starve us to death. Is it really worth having the oil producers of the world band against us when we don't even have any real alternatives to replace the crude that would be lost by a siege of sabotage to American oil company facilities overseas? $3+ per gallon of gas? It'll seem like chump change.

And ethanol (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/03/050329132436.htm) is not a solution either. As farmland is being plowed under and turned into suburbia, there are fewer areas where corn can be raised. If most of the farmland is devoted to raising corn to fuel our cars, what happens to all the other agricultural products that are currently being raised? Will all the fresh fruits and vegetables we consume come from areas outside the US? Raising corn is also very water-intensive. What if there comes a time when there isn't enough water to sustain both corn crops and human beings? My guess is water is more important to human beings than their cars, although there are probably people out there who would dispute that. :p It's also too bad that most sugar production has moved from Hawai'i to other countries. Brazil (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0417-23.htm) is the first country that has declared itself not dependent on oil to fuel its cars. The new fuel source is sugar cane. Ironic, isn't it?

Miulang

[Palolo Joe]

Ironic, isn't it?
Not really. More like coincidental.

[Pedro]

As farmland is being plowed under and turned into suburbia, there are fewer areas where corn can be raised. If most of the farmland is devoted to raising corn to fuel our cars, what happens to all the other agricultural products that are currently being raised? Will all the fresh fruits and vegetables we consume come from areas outside the US?
Miulang[/QUOTE]

I sure hope suburbia isn't a cancer that will kill america of all it's farmland, that wouldn't be to cool :eek:

[Miulang]

And this is the "real" reason why the US is playing chicken with Iran. Next month, Iran is scheduled to require payment for its crude oil in Euros (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12960.htm), rather than in dollars. If all of Europe, which is Iran's largest customer, converts more of its dollars to euros, it will further destablize the value of the US dollar which already is in toruble because of the White House's insistence on "free trade", which has caused, in part, our $8 billion trade deficit. :mad: And with the way Dick Cheney blasted Putin's government last week, Russia could decide not to sell any of its oil to us, too. Can you say "US recession?" :(

"...Presently, oil is sold exclusively on the London Petroleum Exchange and the New York Mercantile Exchange both owned by American investors. If the [Iranian] bourse opens, central banks around the world will reduce their stockpiles of dollars to maintain a portion of their currency in euros. This is the logical step for Europe which buys 70% of Iran’s oil. It is also the reasonable choice for Russia which sells two-thirds of its oil to Europe but (amazingly) continues to denominate those transactions in dollars.

Washington has succeeded in maintaining its monopoly by propping up the many corrupt and repressive regimes in the Gulf States. The prudent choice for Saudi Arabia would be to move away from the debt-ridden dollar and enhance its earnings with the stronger euro. Regrettably, Uncle Sam has a gun to their head. They understand that such a transition would invite the same response that Saddam got 6 months after he converted to euros and was removed through “shock and awe”...

Miulang

[Pedro]

So basically in a nut shell, Iran is going to be converting their money by asking for payment for their crude oil in Euros not U.S. Dollars and after that many other countries will do the same, which will lower the value of the U.S. Dollar. Am I hearing you right? Is their not a way to get out of this, is it too late? :eek:

[Miulang]

There may be some hope that we can forestall a physical confrontation with Iran (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060508/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_us_8;_ylt=AnD9mW2isq3Oru5SU8yy4ntSw60A;_ylu=X 3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl) IF the US pursues the diplomatic route. The new President of Iran sent a letter to the White House outlining some suggested ways that tensions over Iran's nuclear buildup might be eased.

The White House in the meantime says it isn't aware of the letter :eek: and will continue to pursue UN sanctions against Iran.

The problem with our government is it lacks the diplomatic finesse to talk about mutual benefit for both sides. In this country, it's always been "it's our way or no way". Now that most of the oil producing world would like to turn their backs to us, I don't think we as a country have much choice but to come to the table to at least listen to what the other side has to say.

Miulang

P.S. In an interview later today, Condoleeeeeza (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/08/iran.letter/index.html) said that the Iranian letter didn't really contribute anything significant to ease the ongoing tension but was rather a historical review of the Iran-US relationship over the years. Maybe if we look at how the US has tried to engineer regime change (first by installing the puppet Shah Reza Pahlevi in the 1950s), we might get a clue as to why the Iranians are mad at us.

[Miulang]

More evidence (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050806Z.shtml) that the White House has absolutely no intention of using diplomacy to calm the situation with Iran. Invading Iran at this point, with so many US troops still embedded in Iraq, would put our troops there in even graver danger. :mad:

Miulang

[Miulang]

Here is the "purported" English translation (http://www.cnn.com/interactive/world/0605/transcript.lemonde.letter/) of the letter that the Iranian President sent to Pres. Bush which was denounced by Condoleeeeeeeza as not being a basis for meaningful discussion about Iran's nuclear intentions.

Since 1953, when the US government backed the overthrow (http://www.iranchamber.com/history/coup53/coup53p1.php) of Iranian Prime Minister Mossaddeq and installed the puppet Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi on the Peacock Throne, the people of Iran have had every reason not to like the US. If we do not learn lessons from past history, then we are doomed to repeat the same lessons. :mad:

Miulang

[glossyp]

All I can say is that anyone who believes Ahmadinejad is anything other than barking mad (ever heard of the Madhi, the messiah who will usher in an era of Islamic world domination, and Ahmadinejad's devotion to this messianic vision?) and a puppet of the mullahs has a very poor grasp of what is going on in Iran. I am inclined to believe him when he repeatedly says he/they want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. He can dress up the rhetoric in all the anti-American sentiment that can possibly be mustered but it does not change the fact that the ultimate wish of the mullahs is to obliterate Israel, the Jews and establish a radical Islamic caliphate that will spread throughout the Middle East and on to Africa and Europe.

When I hear that there is a possible diplomatic solution to this mess and we can all just get along if we negotiate, I hear echoes from the last century when the world thought Hitler could be managed. Treaties were signed, promises made and they all came to naught because the person the world was dealing with someone who had his own agenda. If there is any lesson to be learned from history here, it is that you can't make deals with mad men.

Do I want to see any one go to war with Iran? Absolutely not, but I'm not hopeful that there may be any other choice in the long run.

[Miulang]

... If there is any lesson to be learned from history here, it is that you can't make deals with mad men.
.
Unfortunately, I think the same could be said for our (American) side of the story, too. :(

Miulang

[timkona]

A brief review of the Koran (Quran?) is essential reading in order that one is properly briefed to partake in any discussion about Islamic War.

"Convert or Kill" is DIRECTLY referenced at least 20 times. And phrases to that effect are sprinkled throughout the text. This is the basis of justification for most suicidal maniacs. Islam will continue to pound the infidels until they win (exterminate) all of us.

You can soft peddle this issue all you want, but the truth is the truth.

[Miulang]

A brief review of the Koran (Quran?) is essential reading in order that one is properly briefed to partake in any discussion about Islamic War.

"Convert or Kill" is DIRECTLY referenced at least 20 times. And phrases to that effect are sprinkled throughout the text. This is the basis of justification for most suicidal maniacs. Islam will continue to pound the infidels until they win (exterminate) all of us.

You can soft peddle this issue all you want, but the truth is the truth.
And what would you consider the American habit of "encouraging" regime change in countries where we don't like their politics? "Killing them gently with kindness?" :rolleyes: And I don't think the Koran is to blame for the Islamic fundamentalism any more than the Bible is to blame for the Bible Thumpers in this country. They are very very similar (as is the Dharmapada for Buddhists) in their teachings. It's HOW people interpret what is written that can sometimes create the problems.

The so-called "holy warriors" are only trying to seek retribution for the wrongs they believe are being committed against their believers by Israel and the United States. Yes, Iran is helping Hezbollah but until and if the issue of sovereignty for the Palestinian people is resolved, there will be no peace there or in Lebanon or Syria.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Speaking of the US sponsoring regime change all over the world (and sometimes failing miserably), here's a little story about how we're sneaking in about $75 million (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050906F.shtml) to non governmental groups in Iran to "encourage" them, probably with some help from some covert Christians in Action "consultants" to overthrow the government. We've done this in Chile, Peru, Cuba, the Baltic States, even in Iran once before...

"... The money is to be spent on empowering civil society, providing supplemental requests, broadcasting into Iran, promoting democracy, offering scholarships and fellowships, and enhancing communication.

But Iranian civil society activists who asked to remain unidentified told IPS they believe this policy will just intensify the Islamic republic's repressive approach toward non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and will be used as an excuse to crack down on their activities...."

Our motto must be, "if we fail at diplomacy, we'll outsource our regime change to the locals so no one can accuse us of butting in where we don't belong..." :rolleyes: As everyone knows, "there is no such thing as a free lunch". :eek:

[Miulang]

I don't agree completely with everything this writer (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12983.htm) says, but here's an interesting point to consider: our reasons for considering attacking Iran are way different than the motivation for getting rid of Hitler:

"...And now we are about to liberate the Iranians. We are about to make war against their houses. The difference between our "liberation" of Iraq/Iran and our "liberation" of Germany lies in the vast difference between the types of people involved. The meaning of "collateral damage" has far different connotations then and now. Our hypocrisy in dealing with "collateral damage" is monumental. "Collateral damage" was one of the OBJECTIVES in the war against Germany in order to cause the German worker to slow his efforts towards the defense of the Fatherland as a result of losing his home and his family.

But the objectives of our wars have changed. "Collateral damage" against the Iraqi/Iranian drives him immediately to thoughts and actions of revenge on the perpetrators. While the German was no less devoted to his home and family, his motivating reaction was not revenge. The Muslim (fanatic or not) has been reared in an atmosphere of tribal retribution for real or imagined harm. His religion is his comforter in a normally harsh life and he is more than willing to sacrifice his life for his religion's guarantee of eternal bliss. Regret for "collateral damage" is all right for newspaper PR, but as a weapon of the war being waged by our neo-cons, collateral damage creates a truly dedicated enemy. But of course, that is the "plan"..."

Miulang

[MadAzza]

Here's an interesting scenario (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12952.htm) that makes so much sense it's scary. If we and Israel decide to attack Iran, that $70/barrel crude oil will cost way way more if Iran and Iraq, Venezuela, Nigeria and the Sudan all form a new cartel and starve us to death.

ROTFL. This is one of the funniest theories floating around about this whole situation. Yeah, all the oil producers are going to stop selling to their top customer. Right.

Does anyone ever think these things through?

Nobody is going to stop selling oil to the United States. They need the money. In fact, they're desperate for it. Without our money, their economies would collapse. They're not that stupid.

I swore I wouldn't get involved in these "controversial" topics, but this one just had to be addressed.

Carry on with the campaign of hysteria and misinformation.

[LikaNui]

Carry on with the campaign of hysteria and misinformation. Ooooh, there you go being "tough" again, Maddie. Your new fan Middleman is gonna get even more excited. :p

[Miulang]

ROTFL. This is one of the funniest theories floating around about this whole situation. Yeah, all the oil producers are going to stop selling to their top customer. Right.

Does anyone ever think these things through?

Nobody is going to stop selling oil to the United States. They need the money. In fact, they're desperate for it. Without our money, their economies would collapse. They're not that stupid.
.
Um Maddie? If the Middle Eastern oil producers (with the exception of our buddies the Saudis) all decide to only accept payments in Euros (Iran is expected to start requiring this beginning next month), and if the oil producing countries in South America and Africa do the same, that would be tantamount to our dollar being worth about as much as a postage stamp. The rest of the world doesn't need our money anymore; our $800 billion trade deficit means we owe more to the rest of the world than the rest of the world owes us. So how do you figure they need our money that badly if all China has to do is call in its IOUs and it would sink our economy?

70% of the oil in the Middle East is being sold to Europe. China is fast becoming the buddy of Iran and Iraq and India and Pakistan and making deals to build oil pipelines to get the fuel they need. Venezuela and Bolivia could very easily sell their oil to China rather than to us, partly because of our political posturing against their freely elected governments.

Pax Americana is being sold up the creek by a bunch of greedy men who run multinational corporations.

Miulang

[waioli kai]

.
Miulang= 'If the Middle Eastern oil producers (with the exception of our buddies the Saudis) all decide to only accept payments in Euros (Iran is expected to start requiring this beginning next month) , and if the oil producing countries in South America and Africa do the same, that would be tantamount to our dollar being worth about as much as a postage stamp.'
A postage stamp?

Too kind of a comparison. Am sure you are just tryng to cushion the blow. Plenty of us, domestic and foreign. know that the dollar is not now, will even less likely to be later, truly worth as much as the U.S. postage required to send by USPostalService an ounce worth of $100 bills (including the envelope containing those paper notes) across the street. Employing your earlier That $0.39 for that envelope paper contents of promise-sorry U.S. treasury certificates would come out to almost 40cents on the dollar, when, in truth, only as the immorally amazing success of the grandest international scam in the history of the mankind, the U.S. dollar, sustains the illusion that a U.S. dollar is not even worth as much as the cost of one envelope from a package of a hundred envelopes.

M= 'The rest of the world doesn't need our money anymore'
Right at the moment 'our money' originates from us taxpayer' and 'our money, is owed to some average individual U.S. citizen taxpayers; yet, most is owed to the Social Security Trust Fund account, and via U.S. Treasury scam, to JapanUS, Inc/KuwaitUS, Inc/ SaudiUS, Inc/IsraelUS, Inc/BritainUS, Inc/NigeriaUS, Inc/US corporatUSt$, Inc., and owed of course to The Peoples' Republic of China so far as they are extended into the US $cam.
....... .... ...

M= 'our $800 billion trade deficit means we owe more to the rest of the world than the rest of the world owes us. So how do you figure they need our money that badly if all China has to do is call in its IOUs and it would sink our economy?'
That's $800bln per year that the U.S. Treasury adds onto its nearly 10,000 billion dollar debt., and added to its 10's of thousands billion dollar unfunded liabilties/commitments/contracts.
.... ... ..

M=' Pax Americana is being sold up the creek by a bunch of greedy men who run multinational corporations.'
Pax Americana has, like lands in Hawaii, been sold/stolen for decades. Today's corporatUSts forebearers served the United States up to our moment's 'bunch of greedy men who run multinational corporations'. US War Iraq is one of their ongoing exercises.

[Miulang]

If/when we do it, this is how our "sturm und drang (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13066.htm)" operation in Iran will work. Of course, then again, we might just let the Israelis do it for us instead.

Miulang

[waioli kai]

Listening (pbs newshour31mayO6) to perhaps "the main architect (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june06/rice_05-31.html)" of the U.S.s' USWarIraq"OperationIraqiLiberation", USrael's Madame U.S. Secretary of State Rice speaks of the evils of anyone but United States' USrael bearing weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East and Afghanistan.... the day will come, else USrael will have totally succeeded in rendering Earth more secure and livable in its Stone Age than it is to be in its post-USrael Age, the day will come when today's video/audio of Madame Rice (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june06/rice_05-31.html) will be seen to be of the greatest fascist tradition of the recently past centuryCE.

[waioli kai]

Bunkum From Benador (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060703/cohleresses)**

' The neoconservative campaign to equate Iran with Nazi Germany received a setback in May. Bloggers and a few journalists quickly exposed as wholly concocted a story about a new law that would require Iranian Jews to wear yellow insignia. ... The debunking of a PR agency that circulated a bogus story about persecution of Jews in Iran exposed the moving parts of a media machine bent on preparing the American public for another war...a media machine intent on priming the public for war with Iran--as it did earlier with stories about Iraq's nonexistent WMD.

**The Nation July 3, 2006 issue: Larry Cohler-Esses, editor-at-large for the Jewish Week of New York.

' Ubiquitous in this campaign, as it was with Iraq, is the PR firm Benador Associates. ... Its stable of writers and activists, a Who's Who of the neocon movement, includes Richard Perle, Michael Ledeen, Frank Gaffney, Charles Krauthammer, Victor Davis Hanson and Iranian exile journalist Amir Taheri--the author of the bogus piece. Even among a crowd notable for wrongheaded analyses, Taheri stands out, with a rap sheet that leaves one amazed that he continues to be published. It is here that the role of Benador is key; the firm gives Taheri a political stamp of approval that provides entree to hawkish media venues, where journalistic criteria are secondary.

In a New York Post column last year, Taheri identified Iran's UN ambassador, Javad Zarif, as one of the students involved in the illegal 1979 seizure of hostages at the US Embassy in Tehran. San Francisco State University professor Dwight Simpson wrote the Post politely to request a correction. "This allegation is false," he explained. "On November 4, 1979 [the day of the seizure], Javad Zarif was in San Francisco. He was then a graduate student in the Department of International Relations of San Francisco State University. He was my student, and he served also as my teaching assistant." ...

On May 30--just days after the National Post's apology for running his false story on Iranian Jews--Taheri was one of a group of "Iraq experts" brought to the White House to consult with George W. Bush on the disastrous situation there. '

Floundering at the helm of the debacle it gleefully began in Iraq in early 2003, the civilian CheneyBush regime (http://www.newyorker.com/online/content/?060703on_onlineonly01) does not even consider extracting itself from one quagmire as it designs to push the U.S. Military into an even more disastrous US civilian, sworn-to-Israel, neo-con militarist adventure scripted by interlocking cabals of wars-for-Israel enthusiasts: Tie and suit intellectuals and fianancial interests, mostly of the East Coast, who have hijacked the United States government via a fatally stagnant and corrupt democracy; who have turned by deception, flattery, unlimited monies and insurances of unaccountability a significant faction of former and present officers of the U.S. Military.

Which makes the condition of what remains of democracy in the United States U.S. all the more powerless to extract itself from the rapids of dishonesty, dishonor and dis-ease on which the CheneyBush regime has launched the United States, if not indeed launched the West as a whole. A nation that was founded mostly by civilains is being run into the ground, or otherwise driven to Hell, by civilians. It is ironic that now the only thing that can save the United States from a final plunge into foreign policy madness is a full awakening of the United States Military to the criminal folly of their civilian superiors. On the way to "Strike Three! You're Out!!", was US War:Vietnam the first or second strike called by the U.S. Military on the U.S. Congress and Executive Branch?

Will US War:Iraq be the second or third strike? And, if US war criminals are called Out by the U.S. military should they be prosecuted in civilian courts or special military courts?

[chriscollado]

According to Scott Ritter (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article8130.htm), a former Marine and a former member of the UNSCOM weapons inspection team, a plan to bomb Iran was submitted and approved by the President. The date of the aerial attack was scheduled for June, 2005.

"...On Iran, Ritter said that President George W. Bush has received and signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran planned for June 2005. Its purported goal is the destruction of Iran’s alleged program to develop nuclear weapons, but Ritter said neoconservatives in the administration also expected that the attack would set in motion a chain of events leading to regime change in the oil-rich nation of 70 million -- a possibility Ritter regards with the greatest skepticism. ..."

In light of the report by Seymour Hersh last month and the admission by the White House that we have been flying drone spy planes over Iran for over a year, something like this would not surprise me in the least.

Miulang



uuummmmmmmm..... it is now July of 2006..... I haven't heard of any bombs being dropped in Iran. Have you? You know for sure they would have complained......nice conspiracy theory website....

[chriscollado]

The consistant regurgitation of ignorant bliss is making me laugh so hard my stomach hurts.... lack of sensible research, knee jerk statements, huge amount of ignorance....LMFAO :D

[Miulang]

The consistant regurgitation of ignorant bliss is making me laugh so hard my stomach hurts.... lack of sensible research, knee jerk statements, huge amount of ignorance....LMFAO :D
It's just a matter of time, my friend...just like our involvement in Iraq, the decision has already been made that we will get involved in Iran (either directly or indirectly, through Israel). The only question now is WHEN, not if. We might not actually put boots to the ground in Iran, but we will have bombs dropped on that country, because Dick Cheney/Donald Rumsfeld believe that bombs are the answer for everything.

Miulang

[War_Resisters_Canada]

You cannot deny that all empires in the history of mankind have crumbled in due time. The United States is next. Just like Rome, they will stretch their troops so thin and spend so much money on war that the empire that was created by those wars will be unable to stay afloat.

[chriscollado]

You cannot deny that all empires in the history of mankind have crumbled in due time. The United States is next. Just like Rome, they will stretch their troops so thin and spend so much money on war that the empire that was created by those wars will be unable to stay afloat.

Then Canada ... the 51st state will follow...

If we keep electing morons like Bush and crew... Then Yes I agree with you.. The US will out live its worth to the world... We need to worry about ourselves... A little of mind our own business would be nice for a change.

I still support our troops. ;)

[waioli kai]

"...Canada ... the 51st state..."

Try Israel for that state, although Israel is more like the 49th state, with Alaska and Hawaii following. The U.S. gives to Israel billion$ in grants and loan guarantees every year. The U.S. insulates Israel from all United Nations actions, arms Israel to the max, provides Israel with nuclear weapons technology and components, allows Israel free reign to oppress Palestinians, and on and on....all the while getting nothing in return from Israel but the international ill-will resulting from the rogue nation activities of Israel. Of course, Israel is not a state of the United States like any other state of the United States. Israeli citizens contribute zero to the U.S. Treasury but they are the U.S. Treasury's greatest beneficiaries, the U.S. Military's greatest beneficiaries since before the first U.S. invasion of Iraq.

[Miulang]

The consistant regurgitation of ignorant bliss is making me laugh so hard my stomach hurts.... lack of sensible research, knee jerk statements, huge amount of ignorance....LMFAO :D
One more thing, Chris, you don't have to believe me when I say that we've already made up our minds to meddle in Iran. You can decide for yourself by reading what I found out about "Divine Strake (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?p=80778#post80778)" and then ask why the White House and Pentagon are trying to do this testing, even though Congress took away funding for nuclear testing. Once again, when the White House doesn't get its own way, it will use any method to get around the rules that our elected representatives impose on them. :mad:

Miulang

[Miulang]

Hmmm...given what's happening recently with Israel and the Palestine and Lebanon, reading this story (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/13/world/middleeast/13assess.html?hp&ex=1152763200&en=496532c053847064&ei=5094&partner=homepage) kinda puts things into a little better perspective for me as to how Israel may in fact get into the act with air strikes against Iran (thus making it appear as though we have nothing to do with it).

"...For Israel the issue is not simply the Palestinians and their actions, including the rocket fire into Israel. It is the broader problem of radical Islam — of Hamas, as a part of the regional Muslim Brotherhood, and of Iran, a serious regional power with considerable influence on Syria, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and the military wing of Hamas.

"...Iran’s president has famously denied the Holocaust and made countless provocative statements about Israel. But even before his election, Iran committed itself to undermining any prospect of real peace between Israel and the Palestinians through proxy forces like Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and the Palestinian group Islamic Jihad.

Iran is also considered to be the main sponsor of Khaled Meshal, the exiled Palestinian leader of Hamas’s political bureau and the man widely considered to be in charge of Hamas’s secretive military wing — which was instrumental in carrying out the seizure of Cpl. Gilad Shalit, touching off the latest explosion....

"...So there is considerable speculation among Israelis and Palestinians about whether Hezbollah and Mr. Meshal, and through him the Hamas military wing, coordinated the manner and timing of the raid to capture the corporal or whether, ultimately, the decision was Iran’s.

An Arab intelligence officer working in a country neighboring Israel said it appeared that Iran — through Hezbollah — had given support to Mr. Meshal to stage the seizure of Corporal Shalit. The officer said the Shalit case, even before the capture of two more Israeli soldiers, amounted to Hezbollah and Iran sending a message: “If you want to hurt us, there are tools that we have and that we can use against you.”

Israeli intelligence officers and analysts say they believe that the message is primarily Iran’s, acting through Hezbollah and Mr. Meshal.

"...Even without nuclear weapons, Iran is acquiring considerable influence in Lebanon, in Syria and with the Palestinians, not to speak of Iraq.

“It can directly operate Hezbollah in southern Lebanon through Syria, and with Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the territories it can detonate the situation whenever it wants,” Mr. Rabinovich said...."

Miulang

[waioli kai]

The terms "radical Islam", "radical Islamists" have no corresponding English terms when it comes to Judaism, even though it was radical Judaizm which created the conditions giving rise to today's radical Islamism.

We never hear of "radical Zionizm", "radical Judaism", "militant Judaism", "militant Zionizm" in Western, U.S. news analyses but those of such persuasions were/are the modern day terrorism of terrorist, militant, radical Zionizts which forced the manifestation of "Israel" upon Palestine that in turn created "radical Islam". It was European Naziism that created terrorist, radical Zionizts. Neither Arabs nor Moslems nor Palestinians created terrorist Zionizm. It is militant Zionizm which has created militant Islam.

[waioli kai]

U.S. exists for super state Israel?

"...Israel... the 49th state (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=80846&postcount=60)..." ?

Although Israel is more like the 49th state, with Alaska and Hawaii following. The U.S. gives to Israel billion$ in grants and loan guarantees every year. The U.S. insulates Israel from all United Nations' actions, arms Israel to the max, provides Israel with nuclear weapons
> SSecretary General Haig in Tel Aviv at the announcement of The First "Operation Bright Star" in the deserts of Egypt adjacent to/overlapping Khadaffi's Libya when in a Tel Aviv briefing Mr. Haig poorly restrained his indignant humor while using phrases such as "self-fulfilling prophecy" and "demonstration nuclear blasts"/Bright Star ? When apartheid South Africa and apartheid Israel were jointly engaged in weapons proliferation, weapons testing and evaluation?<
technology and components, when not the built-to-use strategic as well as tactical nuclear/bio/chem agents/weapons. Weapons
> Made in USA, near exclusively
free weapons plus a maybe negotiable to very tenuous-strings-attached conditional use permit which amounts to virtually U.S. Zionists permission, as if Israel needs anything except weapons and money from the U.S.!! ... Israel needs U.S. permission?,,,what a joke!! <
to allow Israel free reign to oppress Palestinians, weapons literally given away to Israeli Occupation Forces, with U.S. Zionists' effectively unconditional permission to use the agents/weapons solely at Israeli discretion, weapons/agents that go far beyond any Zionist need to oppress Palestinians or even Lebanese....all the while the non-Zionists of the United States get nothing in return from Israel but international ill-will resulting from the rogue nation militarism/terrorism of Israel...and earth-mover loads of pretension of divinity.

Of course, Israel is not at all a state of the United States like any other state of the United States. Israeli citizens contribute zero to the U.S. Treasury but their Zionauseous government is the U.S. Treasury's singlely greatest beneficiary, the U.S. Military's most endowed beneficiary since before the first U.S. invasion of Iraq, and even moreso following the successive bombings and invasions by U.S. Zionist of Iraq.

[waioli kai]

'Nixon White House Considered Nuclear Options Against North Vietnam, Declassified Documents Reveal

New Evidence Adds Historical Context (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB195/index.htm) to Current Debate about Nuclear Attack on Iran Nuke Sites www.nsarchive.org

Washington, DC, 31 July 2006 - The Bush White House's reported interest in using nuclear weapons against Iran's nuclear energy complex is but the most recent example of how American officials since the administration of Harry S. Truman have given serious thought to employing such weapons in crisis situations. Details about one of these episodes were revealed today in a set of formerly top secret documents published by the National Security Archive that appear to confirm rumors and secondhand reports that President Richard M. Nixon and his national security adviser, Henry A. Kissinger, discussed the option of using tactical nuclear weapons against North Vietnam as part of preparations for operation "Duck Hook," which was scheduled to be launched against North Vietnam in early November 1969. ....

Released late last year by the U.S. National Archives, these documents raise significant questions about White House military planning against North Vietnam. Why did Lake and Morris bring up the question of using tactical nuclear weapons? To what extent were they responding to instructions by Kissinger to raise the matter? Did Kissinger and Nixon believe that nuclear weapons were potentially efficacious for use against North Vietnam in the circumstances of 1969? To what extent did Nixon or Kissinger push for military plans to use nuclear weapons against North Vietnam? What considerations led Nixon and Kissinger to abandon the concept of nuclear weapons use from their Vietnam planning?'
..............

wk: What a great illusion it was while it lasted, to have imagined that the dangers of the "Mutual Assured Destruction" era were past. Surely, now as it was years ago the U.S. Government has an "all conceivable events defense"/survival plan for itself, but, for its citizens it gives the leftovers of the Department of Homeland Security (after DHS has taken care of US) to direct a U.S.-wide defense/survival plans, which plans, if they existed U.S. citizens are totally unprepared for; such as, relocations of large populations by the 100,000's for "temporary accomodation" in pre-selected U.S. regions/states/counties/cities/towns locations no one but those with "the plan" know a thing about: U.S. intra-national emergency refugee distribution. One could wonder if current DHS plans for the general U.S. populace have political, racial, religious, class, and/or partisan aspects determining (1) who would go where and when, (2) which, if any, U.S. citizens on the receiving end of such refugee distribution would have anything to know about it, muchless say about it.

[kamuelakea]

I guess Bush and company were right all along. Iran tells the UN, the world to go shove it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR?SITE=HIHAD&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Smat buggahz dem Bushs. Lucky for us people like Waioli and Miulani aren't in charge.

[kamuelakea]

"ministers" from the "religion of peace" call for more weapons to be delivered to terrorists so that they can be used to indiscriminately murder innocent Israelis in first strikes.

My my, what a poor oppressed lot, eh?

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-08-01T121056Z_01_L01894728_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-IRAN-ARMS.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

Gotta love those muslims.

[Miulang]

"ministers" from the "religion of peace" call for more weapons to be delivered to terrorists so that they can be used to indiscriminately murder innocent Israelis in first strikes.

My my, what a poor oppressed lot, eh?

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-08-01T121056Z_01_L01894728_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-IRAN-ARMS.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

Gotta love those muslims.
And we rush a batch of bunker busting bombs to Israel last week at their request. England refuses to let the US cargo planes carrying those bombs land there to refuel because we didn't submit the proper papers, so the planes instead land in Scotland (and the White House says "oopsie" to Blair). I guess the Zionists must be looking for peace too as they massacre innocent Lebanese? Gotta love those Zionists! With the high tech weaponry that the US is providing to Israel, you'd think they'd be able to be a little more discriminating about where they use those weapons. The Katyushas that Hezbollah is using aren't laser guided and are way older techonology than the IDF is using. If there has to be a war, let's level the playing field and give BOTH sides the same type of weapons to use. And if Israel wants to exercise the "Solomon" option, they can do that too, and cause the end of the world as we know it.

Miulang

[kamuelakea]

The Katyushas that Hezbollah is using aren't laser guided and are way older techonology than the IDF is using. If there has to be a war, let's level the playing field and give BOTH sides the same type of weapons to use.
Miulang

Wow, you're getting even better. Now you're actually supporting giving the terrorists more and better weaponry because you fell sorry for them. If you acted upon that thought, you would be arrested by the FBI. Serious thoughts you might want to reconsider.

You appear to be morphing into a clear terrorist supporter right before our eyes.

[waioli kai]

"This message is hidden because kamuelakea is on your ignore list."

[Miulang]

You appear to be morphing into a clear terrorist supporter right before our eyes.
No, I'm just saying if there has to be war, let's try to make it a fair one. The kind of war you want is when you got one wimpy guy with a bat cornered by 2 big Samoan bruddahs coming after him with numchuks and AK 47s. What kind of fight is that? I regret the killing of innocent Israelis as much as I do the Lebanese; unfortunately, there are more tears to be shed for the Lebanese because there are more of them being killed. I think the magnitude was something like 1 Israeli to 15 Lebanese.
If Israel truly wanted to end this thing for all time, they could exercise the Solomon option. But then that would put them in a very unfavorable light with everybody (everybody who survived the explosion, that is). I always thought we'd have more to worry about from the whackos in North Korea or Pakistan. Sadly, I think I'm mistaken.

Miulang

[kamuelakea]

No, I'm just saying if there has to be war, let's try to make it a fair one. The kind of war you want is when you got one wimpy guy with a bat cornered by 2 big Samoan bruddahs coming after him with numchuks and AK 47s.
Miulang


My faddah alwayz told me, don't stat someting you kanna finish. The fools of Hezbollah should have thought about that before they kidnapped and murdered the Israeli soldiers, don't you think???? The fools of Lebanon should have thought about that as they allowed the terrorists to move and function behind the shield of their women and children, don't you think??? Israel's military abilities are not a surprise to anyone involved here. They wanted a war and they got one.

Keep pounding them until they're almost gone. Just like with any household pest, cakaroaches, rats etc, you can wipe um out for 6 months or so. Just godda do it to keep the house clean.

[kamuelakea]

"This message is hidden because kamuelakea is on your ignore list."


kanahandole ah? I understand.

[MadAzza]

I'm assuming you felt it necessary to announce to the world that you had Kamuelakea on ignore so that someone would repost his comments for you. Otherwise, why bother? So here, Waioli Kai, let me help:

My faddah alwayz told me, don't stat someting you kanna finish. The fools of Hezbollah should have thought about that before they kidnapped and murdered the Israeli soldiers, don't you think???? The fools of Lebanon should have thought about that as they allowed the terrorists to move and function behind the shield of their women and children, don't you think??? Israel's military abilities are not a surprise to anyone involved here. They wanted a war and they got one.

Keep pounding them until they're almost gone. Just like with any household pest, cakaroaches, rats etc, you can wipe um out for 6 months or so. Just godda do it to keep the house clean.

Yer welcome.

[Miulang]

When I started this thread waaaaay back in Feb. 2005, I surmised that either Israel or the US would be in a war with Iran soon. Unfortunately, my timing was a little off. I predicted Israel would be bombing Iran (with our permission) in June 2005 (see post #5 (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=20516&postcount=5)). So shoot me for my timing being a little off...it took a whole year longer to get the pot stirred up enough.

Under the guise of "fighting terrorism", we will get to Iran one way or another (either us directly because we will think that the UN sanctions are too whimpy, or by proxy using Israel since they also have newklar warheads that we provided), with the object being to keep them from selling their oil using the Euro bourse, which was supposed to happen beginning this past June. By preventing Iran from converting oil sales to Euros, it will help shore up our sinking dollar.

Anybody ever play the game Risk? Fascinating. "Today Lebanon, tomorrow Syria, the day after that, Iran."

Miulang

[kamuelakea]

Awwww those poor Lebanese, just hiding a few Hezbollah terrorists in a bomb shelter? Nope A hardened Silo? Nope A military base? Nope. Instead of those silly locales, they chose a hospital. Thats a great place for terrorists isn't it? Great place to hide weapons too.

Makes a lot of sense to me. I'm sure Miulang will fully support hospital/war machine combos. Kind of a shared overhead business arrangement huh?

[Miulang]

Awwww those poor Lebanese, just hiding a few Hezbollah terrorists in a bomb shelter? Nope A hardened Silo? Nope A military base? Nope. Instead of those silly locales, they chose a hospital. Thats a great place for terrorists isn't it? Great place to hide weapons too.

Makes a lot of sense to me. I'm sure Miulang will fully support hospital/war machine combos. Kind of a shared overhead business arrangement huh?

Why the hell do you think I would support something like that!? When you're in the health care business, you put politics aside when dealing with sick people. A sick person is a sick person, regardless of political inclinations. I am a health care professional. So what is Israel going to do with the prisoners they captured? Torture them, like we do? Besides, Kam, you put this in the wrong thread. You meant to put it in the Middle East thread, yes?

Miulang

[kamuelakea]

Why the hell do you think I would support something like that!? When you're in the health care business, you put politics aside when dealing with sick people. Miulang


Nice to read the early morning news and find that your poor oppressed kids from the religion of peace have indiscriminately fired 100s of rockets into cities and towns today.

Even hit one of your favorite "health care centers".

A Hezbollah rocket smashed into the eye department on the fourth floor of the surgical wing of the Western Galilee Hospital, near Nahariya in northern Israel on Friday, destroying the entire floor and causing more than $200,000 worth of damage.


Where's the outrage? Oh yeah, I forgot, outrage is only for the Israelis and Americans.

No problem gang, everybody keep moving, the middle east is fine. Go back to your jobs.

Allah Akbar!

[Miulang]

Nice to read the early morning news and find that your poor oppressed kids from the religion of peace have indiscriminately fired 100s of rockets into cities and towns today.

Even hit one of your favorite "health care centers".

Allah Akbar!
Atah Lo Tzedek. Elokim Yerachem.
Excellent Hebrew proverbs: "Who is the bravest hero? He who turns his enemy into a friend."

“These three are the marks of a Jew - a tender heart, self-respect, and charity”

“Opinions founded on prejudice are always sustained with the greatest violence”

[Miulang]

Spooky assessment of an impending war with Iran in next week's New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact) Magazine by Seymour Hersh. Was the Israel-Lebanon conflict just a practice for the "big one" the White House is planning for Iran????

The United States and Israel have shared intelligence and enjoyed close military coöperation for decades, but early this spring, according to a former senior intelligence official, high-level planners from the U.S. Air Force—under pressure from the White House to develop a war plan for a decisive strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities—began consulting with their counterparts in the Israeli Air Force.

...“The big question for our Air Force was how to hit a series of hard targets in Iran successfully,” the former senior intelligence official said. “Who is the closest ally of the U.S. Air Force in its planning? It’s not Congo—it’s Israel. Everybody knows that Iranian engineers have been advising Hezbollah on tunnels and underground gun emplacements. And so the Air Force went to the Israelis with some new tactics and said to them, ‘Let’s concentrate on the bombing and share what we have on Iran and what you have on Lebanon.’ ” The discussions reached the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, he said.

...“The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits,” a U.S. government consultant with close ties to Israel said. “Why oppose it? We’ll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels, and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran.”

...A Pentagon consultant said that the Bush White House “has been agitating for some time to find a reason for a preëmptive blow against Hezbollah.” He added, “It was our intent to have Hezbollah diminished, and now we have someone else doing it.” (As this article went to press, the United Nations Security Council passed a ceasefire resolution, although it was unclear if it would change the situation on the ground.)

...Earlier this summer, before the Hezbollah kidnappings, the U.S. government consultant said, several Israeli officials visited Washington, separately, “to get a green light for the bombing operation and to find out how much the United States would bear.” The consultant added, “Israel began with Cheney. It wanted to be sure that it had his support and the support of his office and the Middle East desk of the National Security Council.” After that, “persuading Bush was never a problem, and Condi Rice was on board,” the consultant said.

...The Israeli plan, according to the former senior intelligence official, was “the mirror image of what the United States has been planning for Iran.” (The initial U.S. Air Force proposals for an air attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear capacity, which included the option of intense bombing of civilian infrastructure targets inside Iran, have been resisted by the top leadership of the Army, the Navy, and the Marine Corps, according to current and former officials. They argue that the Air Force plan will not work and will inevitably lead, as in the Israeli war with Hezbollah, to the insertion of troops on the ground.)

This is a very long article, but a very fascinating read. Seymour Hersh was one of the reporters who uncovered the MyLai massacre during the Vietnam War. His credentials are impeccable. And what he is reporting is scary. Why? Because Hezbollah was not wiped off the face of the earth by Israel using conventional weapons...so what is the only weapon not used by Israel?...KABOOM. :(

Miulang

[kamuelakea]

Lots in the news today;

Gotta luv those Muslims!

Miulangs poor and oppressed are reportedly deciding to blow up themselves and their babies. Pregnant Muslims and Muslim women with babies now being hunted in war on terror.

The Holocaust cartoon comedy opened today in Tehran. (Not a joke) Where's the outrage by CNN, ABC, NBC, world leaders? Oh that's right, its only offensive if they are Muslims.

Muslims are outraged that President Bush actually used the words Islamic and Facists in the same sentance as he described the mass murderers caught the other day. Noooooo, Islam? Facist? Terrorism? Linked? How racist of you Mr. Bush.

Hezbollah, an terrorist organization embedded within the civilian population of Lebanon continues to be described by major media as a legitimate member of the UN charter, equal to Israel or anyother country for that matter.

May you live in interesting times my friends.

[Miulang]

Interesting comments from the Iranian "man on the street (http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2006/august2006/iran_hezbollah_1806.shtml)" about the Israeli-Lebanese conflict. Some of these accursed Muslims actually dislike Hezbollah and Hamas because their (the Iranians) tax money is being diverted by their government to support Hezbollah and Hamas.

The notable exception was the Iranian people which, in its great majority, was critical of the excessive verbal support provided by the Government to Hezbollah in the one hand and the Palestinian Hamas on the other, making it “the nanny more affectionate than the mother”.

“Of course I am angry’’, said one worker. “All our income is going to Palestine and Hezbollah”. “We Iranians have a proverb that says a lamp needed at home must not be given to the mosque”, commented another, adding: “The government should help its people first, and then help the people in Lebanon”.

“Let them fight with each other until they get tired”, said a young man giving his name as Mohammad. “Arab countries are not supporting Hezbollah, but why we who are not Arabs?

According to some sources, one percent of Iran’s budget has been approved by the Majles (Iran’s Parliament) to the Palestinian radicals. Hezbollah for its part is reported to receive 50 to 100 million US Dollars par year. “Why should I not get angry about this?”, Mohammadi asked.

The relentless pro Palestinian, pro Hezbollah programmes in the State-owned, conservatives-controlled public media and pro-Government press has caused a kind of indifference and even repulsion towards the Hezbollah and the Palestinians in particular and the Arabs in general. In a recent edition of the daily newspaper “Aftab-e Yazd” (The Sun of Yazd), one reader wrote in saying: “Radio and television broadcast so many programs about Arab countries that I sometimes wonder if it is the Iranian TV or an Arab TV”.

“Pray tell us, how on earth are we related to this Seyed Hassan Nasrallah whose photos have been plastered all over the country?!”, another reader told the same paper, owned by the younger brother of Iran’s all powerful Ayatollah Ali Khameneh’i, who actually had appointed Mr. Nasrallah as the leader of Hezbollah.

A taxi driver suggested Nasrallah be captured and brought to an international tribunal to tell the truth about the 12 July attack on the Israeli soldiers. “If he refuses, he must be given truth syringe. He must explain why he ruined a nation, killed hundreds of innocent people. He must say who ordered him to attack the Israelis? He must say where he gets his armaments, his money?”.

Guess it just goes to show that you can't indict a whole nation for the actions of a few demented government officials can you? :rolleyes:

Miulang

[kamuelakea]

Leader of Iran: Suicide Bombing "is the epitomy of exellence".
Holocaust "needs more research" to determine if it really happened.

[kamuelakea]

08/15/2006

Syria and Iran celebrate "victory" against Israel.

Hmmm, I thought they had nothing to do with this. I thought it was just poor simple Lebanese defending themselves against the big bad Israelis?



http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525878536&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3291469,00.html

[Miulang]

Here is the 60 Minutes (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14547.htm) interview that Mike Wallace did this week with the President of Iran. For leading a country that is deemed by most people as being "backward" the guy has an intensity, patience and charisma that would put any of our own country's leaders to shame. I think his training as a teacher is really being put to good use.

Sad to say, he ran circles around Mike Wallace, and he didn't have to scream or shout to do it, either. Time for Mike Wallace to retire for good, I think. Let Anderson Cooper have the next interview with Ahmadimejad.

Miulang

[glossyp]

Here is the 60 Minutes (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14547.htm) interview that Mike Wallace did this week with the President of Iran. For leading a country that is deemed by most people as being "backward" the guy has an intensity, patience and charisma that would put any of our own country's leaders to shame. I think his training as a teacher is really being put to good use.

Miulang
This sickens me - I have read my grandmother's journal from the 1939 Olympics in Berlin. She wrote almost an identical assessment of Hitler - we all know how that turned out. One difference, she was not admiring of him; she had the good sense to know that the world should be very worried.

[Miulang]

This sickens me - I have read my grandmother's journal from the 1939 Olympics in Berlin. She wrote almost an identical assessment of Hitler - we all know how that turned out. One difference, she was not admiring of him; she had the good sense to know that the world should be very worried.
Glossyp, have you actually WATCHED the interview? I was embarrassed for Mike Wallace! I'm not saying I admire the President of Iran, only that in performance values, the President had Wallace whupped big time. Please watch the video and you'll understand why I said what I did. I think if there had been someone with more journalistic integrity, the interview would have made us look a whole lot better. And because Ahmadimejad is charismatic, I know why the people of Iran look up to him. And yes, that's why he's so dangerous.

Miulang

[glossyp]

Glossyp, have you actually WATCHED the interview? I was embarrassed for Mike Wallace! I'm not saying I admire the President of Iran, only that in performance values, the President had Wallace whupped big time. Please watch the video and you'll understand why I said what I did. I think if there had been someone with more journalistic integrity, the interview would have made us look a whole lot better. And because Ahmadimejad is charismatic, I know why the people of Iran look up to him. And yes, that's why he's so dangerous.

Miulang
That is not how you wrote it. You said "...the guy has an intensity, patience and charisma that would put any of our own country's leaders to shame. I think his training as a teacher is really being put to good use." You only bother to note that you think he's dangerous now. And, yes, I did watch and it made me sick because I knew people would react the same way you did (or didn't?).

[Miulang]

Why would I not think he was dangerous? Why do I think our own government is dangerous, but for different reasons? When people with functioning brains give up the right to think for themselves, that's when I start to worry. My guess is if someone like Anderson Cooper had been given the chance to interview Ahmadimejad, it would have come out much more fair for us. I also know that many citizens in Iran don't like their President too, because they think he's spending too much time meddling in other peoples' business (like funnelling money to Hezbollah) rather than helping his own people. Why did Mike Wallace get an interview with him, when our own government refuses to have direct contact?

Miulang

P.S. Since you said you squirmed through the program (exactly as I did), what did you think of Mike Wallace's performance? Don't you think CBS could've found someone better than Wallace for that assignment?

[glossyp]

Why did Mike Wallace get an interview with him, when our own government refuses to have direct contact?

Miulang
Gee, I don't know how he got the interview. Maybe because they knew they could run circles around a 'useful idiot' who would serve the purpose of spreading their propaganda? Do you really think our government talking to him is some how going make everything better? He's not even the one running the country, it's the mullahs. Rapprochement with the West is NOT the goal of the mullahs. Ushering in an era of fundamentalist Islamic rule is.

[Miulang]

Gee, I don't know how he got the interview. Maybe because they knew they could run circles around a 'useful idiot' who would serve the purpose of spreading their propaganda? Do you really think our government talking to him is some how going make everything better? He's not even the one running the country, it's the mullahs. Rapprochement with the West is NOT the goal of the mullahs. Ushering in an era of fundamentalist Islamic rule is.
For one of the very few times in recent history, I am agreeing with one person in the White House (heaven forfend). The Secretary of State believes that the way to get things to quiet down in the Middle East is to be in open dialogue with both Syria and Iran. Her bosses both say no. So I guess she can't do her job, and we, the citizens of this country and all citizens of the world, are in greater peril because of them. :( Our experience in Iraq and the Israeli experience in Lebanon should teach us that force alone will not stop our enemies, unless we intend to use the ultimate end game, which might mean the end of life itself.

Miulang

P.S. You do agree that Wallace was a pretty poor excuse for an interviewer, though, right?

[Miulang]

One of the ways people like Nasrallah and Ahmadimejad become popular with their own people is because they come across as caring about the needs of their constituents.

A CNN reporter yesterday said amidst the rubble that is now South Lebanon, he saw Hezbollah operatives with clipboards in hand, talking to residents about what their needs were and asking how Hezbollah could help rebuild their homes. Nasrallah gave a speech in which he said Hezbollah would help rebuild apartments and rebuild schools and hospitals for the people. Everyone thinks that the billions it will cost to repair South Lebanon is coming exclusively from Tehran, but it's not. Every Shia family is tithed, and a portion of that money will be channeled to Hezbollah to help in the rebuilding efforts.

Then BBC reported that Ahmadimejad had set up a website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4790005.stm) and encouraged his people to send in questions they had. Because of the strict censorship rules that exist in Iran, it'll be interesting to see how many Iranian civilians actually do post questions.

To me, though, that's just basic customer service. If you treat your customers well, and make them feel like you care about them, they will remain your loyal customers. Nothing really revolutionary about that, except that more American companies could practice more of it.

Miulang

[kamuelakea]

One of the ways people like Nasrallah and Ahmadimejad become popular with their own people is because they come across as caring about the needs of their constituents. Miulang


Ahhh, isn't that nice. A friendly terrorist. As opposed to a rude one. I like my terrorists a little glib and sarcastic when they aren't indiscriminately murdering innocent men, women and children.

How about the rest of you. How do you like your terrorist? Cute, smart, confident. Do you like when your terrorist can play a musical instrument? Or do you go for the soccer guyz terrorist?


Everybody share now.