Another question....

[-mmm-]

Is it really a good idea that the best thing to do when the military that you have is nearing the breaking point is to expand the GREAT AND GLORIOUS WAR ON TERROR to more countries?

[StockTrader]

Originally Posted by -mmm-

Is it really a good idea that the best thing to do when the military that you have is nearing the breaking point is to expand the GREAT AND GLORIOUS WAR ON TERROR to more countries?

No, but what are you proposing? A Isolationist theory?

Nick

[-mmm-]

Originally Posted by StockTrader

No, but what are you proposing? A Isolationist theory?

Nick

I didnt propose anything. I just asked.

Word is abounding that Bush/Chaney are dead set on doing air strikes on Iran in the week following Labor Day.

[StockTrader]

Originally Posted by -mmm-

I didnt propose anything. I just asked.

Word is abounding that Bush/Chaney are dead set on doing air strikes on Iran in the week following Labor Day.

Anything credible? I've had my TV off since yesterday.

Nick

[-mmm-]

Depends on the definition of credible. In your case it might be something like Fox News. In my case, its something like Mr Rubin at Informed Comment.

They [the source's institution] have "instructions" (yes, that was the word used) from the Office of the Vice-President to roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day; it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects. It will be heavy sustained assault on the airwaves, designed to knock public sentiment into a position from which a war can be maintained. Evidently they don't think they'll ever get majority support for this--they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is "plenty."

[StockTrader]

Originally Posted by -mmm-

Depends on the definition of credible. In your case it might be something like Fox News. In my case, its something like Mr Rubin at Informed Comment.

So, nothing non-biased?

Nick

[hork]

the signs have been more than abudnant the past couple of months. let's just hope this time the american public (and even more so the US Congress) has learned that these criminals are not to be trusted and their words continue to be lies, fabrications, and incendiary. but don't take my word for it, let the statements barethe truth.

http://tinyurl.com/3x2qno

http://tinyurl.com/ys8mr4

http://tinyurl.com/3cttfm

http://tinyurl.com/37chfo

http://tinyurl.com/2r3s99

http://tinyurl.com/2xk3mv

http://tinyurl.com/3c8xad

http://tinyurl.com/2o9zyw (obviously biased but citations are noteworthy)

http://tinyurl.com/256ohg

http://tinyurl.com/2nh6x6

http://tinyurl.com/ynu5n4

http://tinyurl.com/2j8tnt

and before we have to listen to the whining about an imaginary liberal bias....

http://tinyurl.com/7cta8

[-mmm-]

Thanks hork. The 7th link to the Guardian was the one Im looking for before and came back to find you with all of those.

[-mmm-]

Originally Posted by StockTrader

So, nothing non-biased?

Nick

No more non-biased than asking a what could be construed as an inflammatory question about religion and politics, and than answering "if its true".

[hork]

Originally Posted by -mmm-

Thanks hork. The 7th link to the Guardian was the one Im looking for before and came back to find you with all of those.

not a problem given it's been a huge story for the past couple of months, one couldn't help but have been exposed to the story, i had those and many more in my history so since they were literally at my fingertips figured i'd offer them up.

[spoc22]

I reject your premise that the military is near the breaking point

[hork]

Originally Posted by spoc22

I reject your premise that the military is near the breaking point

it's not his premise (well not his own original premise anyways), it's the words of several retired military officers and persons under contract with the DOD.

http://tinyurl.com/2whf57

http://tinyurl.com/2pxemf (to avoid the liberal media bias arguement)

http://tinyurl.com/8zmsf

http://tinyurl.com/38w9us (see i do read right-winged rags too)

[-mmm-]

Article

THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.

Another brilliant move to create more radical Islamic terrorists.

Israel, which has warned it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, has made its own preparations for airstrikes and is said to be ready to attack if the Americans back down.

America, the puppet state for Isreal to fight its proxy wars for.

But Debat believes the Pentagon’s plans for military action involve the use of so much force that they are unlikely to be used and would seriously stretch resources in Afghanistan and Iraq.

At least someone doesnt have their head up their arse. I really hope hes right. But given how reckless Chaney has become since falling into the neocon philosophy you just never know, and hes the one whos really pushing for this.

[spoc22]

This may come as a surprise to you -mmm-, but the military is constantly drawing up plans for all kinds of military actions. Just because the plans are drawn up does not mean they will be used. As a matter of fact,VERY FEW of the plans ever do get used. But you go right ahead with this Israel/Neocon fantasy you've come to believe.

[-mmm-]

Originally Posted by spoc22

This may come as a surprise to you -mmm-, but the military is constantly drawing up plans for all kinds of military actions. Just because the plans are drawn up does not mean they will be used. As a matter of fact,VERY FEW of the plans ever do get used. But you go right ahead with this Israel/Neocon fantasy you've come to believe.

Ok I delayed this because I didnt want to reply with an overly snarky remark.

I hope what Im posting is just a fantasy. Otherwise I truly BELIEVE it'll make the situation worse than whats happened in Iraq (and if we do strike Iraq, it'll cascade itself through neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan...and perhaps even into Turkey and the former Soviet republics in the Caucuses which arent the models of stability in their own right since they are major trading partners with Iran..and lets not start on Pakistan since thats a subject in its own right, or the Russians who have backed the current regime since the revolution that overthrew the corrupt American-backed government back in the late 70s).

The spin machine right now advocating as such is the same kind of thing we saw before Iraq. And we (well most of us) saw how much that turned out in truth. Ive yet to see flowers laid in front of our troops on the streets of Iraq (and Im sure that would be something Fox would show incessantly if it had happened).

As you pointed out, its probably just the usual run of the mill stuff. But one also must be diligent to make sure that our leaders dont make another mistake.

Of course it sure doesnt help that Ahmadinejad eggs on the US in a similar fashion as a teenager trying to pick a fight at a party. Maybe its just me, but when he boasts of his nuclear programs, it sounds like a guy telling another guy his girl was great in the sack.

Ahh the tangled web thats been woven with our current Mid East policy. Damned if you do, damned if you dont.