You sure Bush won't be the one to bomb Iran???

[timvwcom]

Olmert Hints U.S. Action on Iran Nukes is Near.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert hinted after his meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush Wednesday that U.S. action against Iran is imminent. While he avoided saying anything clear and specific on the matter, Olmert did mention a “timetable” and said action would take place before Bush leaves the White House.

“We reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat,” Olmert said after the meeting. “I left with a lot less question marks [than I had entered with] regarding the means, the timetable restrictions and America’s resoluteness to deal with the problem.”

“George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on the matter before the end of his term in the White House,” Olmert reportedly said after his 90 minute long one-on-one meeting with the American Commander in Chief.

"With every day that goes by we get closer to stopping the Iranian nuclear plan," Olmert said. He said that meaningful steps were being taken to handle Iran "more effectively" and told reporters: "The Iranian problem requires urgent attention, and I see no reason to delay this just because there will be a new President in the White House seven and a half months from now."

"The U.S. is a leading element in dealing with Iran," Olmert said. "These are serious matters; I am not just saying this… It is not good to publicize everything."

Hell, even Cheney's daughter is getting in on the Iran threatening...

The Washington Post notes today that Liz Cheney, daughter of Vice President Cheney and a former State Department official, is “unhappy with key elements of U.S. Mideast policy.” “[W]e have been less effective and less successful…when we have been unfortunately not so bold,” she said of the Bush administration in remarks to AIPAC last week.

Liz Cheney encouraged the U.S. to draw more “red lines” in the Middle East, adopting an even harder-line than the Bush administration on key policies. When it came to Iran, however, Liz Cheney, seemed to be in full agreement with at least one administration official: her father. In her remarks, Cheney said the “time for diplomacy” with Iran is “rapidly coming to an end“:

Over the years, she said, there has been “no shortage of efforts to talk to them” — but to no avail: “We don’t have the luxury to have the debate we have been having about should we talk, should we not talk. The time for diplomacy here is rapidly coming to an end.“

Left unmentioned in the Post’s story is that Liz Cheney also said the U.S. also needs to threaten Iran with “military action.” The Asia Times reports:

(Liz Cheney) deplored…the Bush administration’s failure to enforce “red lines” against Iranian advances in the region. Washington, she declared, must clearly state that if Iranians “don’t give up diplomatically [to United Nations demands that it freeze its nuclear program], they will face military action“.

I'm thinking it's looking like the US will be the one that pulls the trigger on the "Bomb Iran" deal... Well, our buddies GWB and Cheney anyway.

[mr_gyptian]

People tried to skewer McCain for insinuating that the Iranians were supporting sunni Al Qaeda fighters. The more I think about it, the more I think it was a slip of the tongue.

attacking Iran is a question of when, not if.

[Thrill Hammer]

Olmert then asked for a turkey sandwich on rye, which he received promptly.

[Tuckerman]

attacking Iran is a question of when, not if.

No way. Not with all of the love from Nancy Pelosi.

And some of the success of the surge is that the goodwill of the Iranians-they decided in Basra when the fighting would end, they negotiated that cessation of hostilities-the Iranians.

Also it would ruin our economy.

[Cliff Huckable]

Wouldn't the US attacking Iran would be a dream for countries that hate the US, and for countries in close economic competition with it?

I'll bet China is rooting for it to happen.

[Cliff Huckable]

BTW, Who the fuck care what Cheney's daughter says? Is she some kind of poitician? Foriegn affairs expert? High-ranking military person?

Oh, she's a lawyer with bad taste:

WIKIPEDIA:
[Liz] Cheney signed on in June of 2007 to work for Fred Thompson and his 2008 presidential campaign. After Thompson dropped out of the race, Cheney announced on January 27, 2008 that she would work for Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, serving as a senior foreign policy advisor

[counterfeitfake]

BTW, Who the fuck care what Cheney's daughter says?:

Yeah I was just wondering why she's allowed to open her mouth about this or anything else.

[tshirt.slinger]

Hmm. Well, here's something interesting to think about--

Who would you rather have as president if we're at 'war' with Iran? Obama or McCain?

I think that's an entirely different question than who we want while we're occupying Iraq.




Also, where'd you get that quote from? or a date? I try and keep track of the CNN and BBC tickers on my computer, and I didn't see anything.



Where do you get your sources, good sir!?

[Stone-Free]

Wouldn't the US attacking Iran would be a dream for countries that hate the US, and for countries in close economic competition with it?

I'll bet China is rooting for it to happen.

Maybe the Chinese want the US in another war, but what other country will import all their shit?

[timvwcom]

Also, where'd you get that quote from? or a date? I try and keep track of the CNN and BBC tickers on my computer, and I didn't see anything.

Where do you get your sources, good sir!?

I know it can be tough to see underlined hyperlinks in Size 4 Bold Print on the First Line... So here you go again.

Olmert Hints U.S. Action on Iran Nukes is Near.

...

[Jer]

BTW, Who the fuck care what Cheney's daughter says?

Who the fuck cares what you say?

Bomb bomb bomb - bomb bomb Iran.

[MTT]

Hmm. Well, here's something interesting to think about--

Who would you rather have as president if we're at 'war' with Iran? Obama or McCain?

I think that's an entirely different question than who we want while we're occupying Iraq.




Also, where'd you get that quote from? or a date? I try and keep track of the CNN and BBC tickers on my computer, and I didn't see anything.



Where do you get your sources, good sir!?

It occured to me that, A shooting war with Iran of any significance is very unlikely while we are in Iraq.

Pull out of Iraq and I belive a big scuffle with Iran becomes much more lilleky.

[tshirt.slinger]

I know it can be tough to see underlined hyperlinks in Size 4 Bold Print on the First Line... So here you go again.

My apologies! I can't remember the last forum I was on that allowed clickable links.

my eyes have been trained to overlook them, I guess. =|

[RootSkier]

Who would you rather have as president if we're at 'war' with Iran?

Hmmm...a crazy old man who graduated 854 out of 859 in his class at the Naval Academy, loves war, loves the war in Iraq but doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites, and is well known for explosive temper tantrums?

Or a really, really smart guy who surrounds himself with intelligent, forward thinking people who know how to get things done and keeps his show cool and collected?

I'll take Obama, thanks.

[Rubicon]

Olmert Hints U.S. Action on Iran Nukes is Near.

If they are talking they are not bombing. It's when they stop talking that Iran should start to look to the sky.


...and I agree with Gyption, it's a matter of when, not if. Amadenanutjob(and those pulling his strings) has seen to that.

[mr_gyptian]

Hmmm...a crazy old man who graduated 854 out of 859 in his class at the Naval Academy, loves war, loves the war in Iraq but doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites, and is well known for explosive temper tantrums?

Or a really, really smart guy who surrounds himself with intelligent, forward thinking people who know how to get things done and keeps his show cool and collected?

I'll take Obama, thanks.

Yeah, inteligent forward thinking people like Jim Johnson, of Mondale fame? Or Jeremiah Wright? Or Eric Holder, of Mark Rich fame?

[timvwcom]

My apologies! I can't remember the last forum I was on that allowed clickable links.

my eyes have been trained to overlook them, I guess. =|

There's LOT OF THINGS allowed here that are not elsewhere!!!

Have fun exploring... and welcome JONG. (trolias)

[Jer]

Hmmm...a crazy old man who graduated 854 out of 859 in his class at the Naval Academy, loves war, loves the war in Iraq but doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites, and is well known for explosive temper tantrums?

Or a really, really smart guy who surrounds himself with intelligent, forward thinking people who know how to get things done and keeps his show cool and collected?

I'll take Obama, thanks.

I take it you think McCain is the first guy, but who's the second guy? Can't be Obama. He just appears smart as long as the teleprompter guy keeps up and he sure as hell doesn't surround himself with "forward thinking" people. As far as "knowing how to get things done" - what has he ever done? What flavor Kool Aid is that?

[tshirt.slinger]

There's LOT OF THINGS allowed here that are not elsewhere!!!

Have fun exploring... and welcome JONG. (trolias)

I've noticed that.


and thanks!

I think...

[L7]

BTW, Who the fuck care what Cheney's daughter says? Is she some kind of poitician? Foriegn affairs expert? High-ranking military person?

Oh, she's a lawyer with bad taste:

My Father was a Gynaecologist. My experience when meeting his former patients was that they always appreciated me advising them how to care for their twats. It's all hereditary you know.

All I have to say is the Bush family has always had success by starting wars and even though it's clearly a stupid move I could see them thinking it's just the thing to get their man McCain into the whitehouse.

Yes I suspect it will completely tank your economy even more so than the current mess AND I'm sure other countries will jump on the chance to transgress various border, trade principals and human rights issues while the even more extended US army has it's back turned. That's obvious when you think it through but since Bush doesn't think things through it's equally obvious it will be bombs away on the way out the door.

[timvwcom]

If Bush/Cheney DO bomb Iran in any manner... Anyone think there is any chance the Congress/Senate or populace would get serious about the impeachment thing?

Conyers Tells Bush Iran Attack = Impeachment

May 8, 2008

The Honorable George W. Bush

President of the United States

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing to register our strong opposition to possible unilateral, preemptive military action against other nations by the Executive Branch without Congressional authorization. As you know, Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power “to declare war,” to lay and collect taxes to “provide for the common defense” and general welfare of the United States, to “raise and support armies,” to “provide and maintain a navy,” to “make rules for the regulation for the land and naval forces,” to “provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions,” to “provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia,” and to “make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution ... all ... powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States.” Congress is also given exclusive power over the purse. The Constitution says, “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law.”

By contrast, the sole war powers granted to the Executive Branch through the President can be found in Article II, Section 2, which states, “The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into actual Service of the United States.” Nothing in the history of the “Commander-in-Chief” clause suggests that the authors of the provision intended it to grant the Executive Branch the authority to engage U.S. forces in military action whenever and wherever it sees fit without any prior authorization from Congress. In our view, the founders of our country intended this power to allow the President to repel sudden attacks and immediate threats, not to unilaterally launch, without congressional approval, preemptive military actions against foreign countries. As former Republican Representative Mickey Edwards recently wrote, “[t]he decision to go to war ... is the single most difficult choice any public official can be called upon to make. That is precisely why the nation’s Founders, aware of the deadly wars of Europe, deliberately withheld from the executive branch the power to engage in war unless such action was expressly approved by the people themselves, through their representatives in Congress.”

...

We agree with Senator Biden, and it is our view that if you do not obtain the constitutionally required congressional authorization before launching preemptive military strikes against Iran or any other nation, impeachment proceedings should be pursued. Because of these concerns, we request the opportunity to meet with you as soon as possible to discuss these matters. As we have recently marked the fifth year since the invasion of Iraq, and the grim milestone of 4,000 U.S. deaths in Iraq, your Administration should not unilaterally involve this country in yet another military conflict that promises high costs to American blood and treasure.

[Jer]

If Bush/Cheney DO bomb Iran in any manner... Anyone think there is any chance the Congress/Senate or populace would get serious about the impeachment thing?

I could see Congress/Senate going for it, but he's only got months left in office - I don't think the average citizen would think that's very productive. I think everybodys just holding on tight 'til he's gone.

[Rubicon]

Yes I suspect it will completely tank your economy even more so than the current mess AND I'm sure other countries will jump on the chance to transgress various border, trade principals and human rights issues while the even more extended US army has it's back turned. That's obvious when you think it through but since Bush doesn't think things through it's equally obvious it will be bombs away on the way out the door.

The talk is about bombing certain facilities. I haven't heard anyone talking about invading Iran.

[AstroPax]

This is nothing new.

For years, the US has been creating and gaming CONPLANS, OPLAN's, WARPLANS's and all sorts of other PLANS for the sole purpose of eliminating the Iranian nuclear infrastructure.

Not too soon. Not too late. But when the time is just right.

-Astro

[AstroPax]

All I have to say is the Bush family has always had success by starting wars and even though it's clearly a stupid move I could see them thinking it's just the thing to get their man McCain into the whitehouse.

It would not be the start of ANOTHER war, just as Iraq and Afghanistan are not separate wars, but rather different campaigns/fronts within a single, larger war. Better characterized as an "expansion" of the current war.

while the even more extended US army has it's back turned.

The Army doesn't drop bombs, the Air Forces do. And believe me, the Air Forces are not THAT over-extended.

12-18 hours max, and Iran would be de-nuked for years, just like chopping their fucking balls off. That's what someone needs to do, castrate their ass!

-Astro