I have a few quick thoughts about Iran.

1. Beware of the bait-and-switch trick the administration likes to play. They deliberately over-estimate the budget deficit. Then when they come in way under their bloated estimate, they point to how much they’ve cut the deficit. They may be floating the nuke option so they can demonstrate how “reasonable†they are by bombing the snot out of Iran with conventional weapons.

2. Bomb-making material is relatively small and easily dispersed. Iran could hide centrifuges just about anywhere, for example. Moreover, the technology is needed to make a fission bomb just isn’t that hard (and is getting easier all the time). It simply is not possible to prevent a country from developing nukes through bombing alone. Bombing may set Iran back a few years (or not, if they are moving equipment around even now), but it will certainly convince the Iranians they need nuclear weapons. Just look at North Korea. We don’t push them around.

3. The consequences of even a conventional attack will be bad. I don’t want to dwell on that part, because sane people understand that. It is worth pointing out, though, that the administration was very wrong in its intelligence assessment of Iraq. Before the 2nd Iraq war, we had been flying over the country for a decade. We knew a good bit more about Iraq than we know about Iran, and much of it was wrong. We are likely to be more wrong about Iran than about Iraq.

Hellllpppp!

If you follow wackos like Kevin Phillips, the Bush family and the Iranian hardliners seem to have benefitted from their association.

What was the October Suprise? Supposedly a deal worked out to delay the release of the hostages to nuke Carter’s chances in ‘80.

Then there was Iran Contra.

Now a great deal of what we do in Iraq seems to redound to the benefit of the Iranian hard liners.

Glad I’m not suspicious.

Yes to what you have written, Pach, and yes to shargash’s first point. It really needs to be stressed that nukes probably won’t be used against Iran, but ‘conventional’ mega-ton explosives will be – and people will supposed to be relieved and ‘thankful’ that it’s ONLY another premeditated, inexcusable, unwarranted attack by the US on a country that is not and will never be a threat to the US. ( Juan Cole is extremely good on this topic, see his latest posts.)

There should be a Senate resolution to the effect that any previous authorization to use force is NO LONGER OPERATIVE.

quick and painfull is the only bush option ???

After all we’ve seen, are you willing to bet your life and the lives on your children on the proposition that Bush is posturing as part of some well reasoned strategy?

Pach: thanks for using the Futurama image! One of my all-time fave shows, and it couldn’t be more apt.

And thanks for the message. It’s exactly what we need.

Pachacutec!

Great post on a very serious subject. Let’s make Congress hear us.

porco rosso,

not sure where you are going with that, but I see it more as a non-conspiratorial Vonnegut-esque Cat’s Cradle than anything purposeful. Each nation is necessary to the self-myth of the other.

As for shargash point one, I mentioned the same thing before today, and I have to tell you, I WOULD be relieved if it we just engage in a conventional bombing with cruise missiles. We will then collectively be just criminal, not beyond redemption.

nobody says #5–’There should be a Senate resolution to the effect that any previous authorization to use force is NO LONGER OPERATIVE’

and unconstitutional and illegal. Hamstring the bums. Let them come to the people, not the politicians.

I have just read an article by R J Eskow on the Huffington Post about Hillary Clinton being to the right of Bush on striking Iran. Have you anything on this?

There may be a handful of Republicans who will oppose El Incompetente on this, but only a handful. They’ll dummy up until the fait is accompli, and then reap the electoral advantage of an ignorant electorate who will fear gay marriage and Mexicans even more than they fear nuclear war.

don’t forget, the US is testing a mega-ton conventional weapon in Nevada in June. Is this part of the sabre-rattling? And how close is the date of the test to YKos 06?

Porco Rosso –

You’re right. There is (and has been for a long time) some fundamental hinkiness in the relationship between the Bushies (and before the 2 Bushes, Reaganites) and Iran. It’s always confused me deeply.

The recent example (which never got “resolved” in anyway) was Chalabi and the US gov’t official who was supposedly drunk and revealed that we broke Iran’s code. Yet none of the Bushies showed they were upset with this revelation in any way.

This was sort of EPU’d:

This whole pre-emption isn’t like taking out Hitler in 1935, before he bame a major threat. Don’t let them pull off some bogus Chamberlain-Churchill dichotomy. It’s not 1935, it’s 1940, and Bush isn’t deciding whether or not to be Churchill, he’s deciding to be Tojo. The model Bush and Newt are emulating is not brave Churchill, it’s cowardly Tojo and his Pearl harbor pre-emptive strike. They’re trying to replay WWII as the wrong goddamned side.

Pearl Harbor was a pre-emptive strike. For Bush to propose a Pearl Harbor (nuclear or otherwise)on Iran is shameful. It dishonors our WWII veterans. It’s un-American.

And, it’s bad policy. Ask yourself–why are there nukes in the first place? What was the impetus for developing nukes? It was Pearl Harbor. A doctrine of pre-emption was what unleashed the nuclear whirlwind. And the country that did Pearl harbor last time had it rebound on them. With nukes.

OT — Here’s an example of how the WaPo spins a 7% increase in just three weeks of Americans favoring impeachment of Bush: “Calls to impeach Bush are not resonating beyond Democratic partisans.”

“Calls to impeach Bush are not resonating beyond Democratic partisans. One-third of Americans, including a majority of Democrats (55 percent), favor impeaching Bush and removing him from office. But more than nine in 10 Republicans and two-thirds of independents oppose impeachment.”

But as Froomkin points out:
But it’s worth nothing that both the censure and impeachment numbers are up a bit from a Newsweek poll from just three weeks ago. In that poll, 42 percent supported censure, and 26 percent supported impeachment.

TGFF (Thank God For Froomkin).

Here’s the HuffPo article on Hillary:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..18984.html

divine strake is planned for June 2, i think and YKos starts the 8th?

GREAT job, Pach, and it was really neat talking w/folks today. What I like best about FDL is not merely the sense of community, but the fact that we as a community seem to get things done. Not only has the WaPoo budged twice (or is it three times, I forget), but a certain venerable Senator from the Bay State may well have heeded the suggestions of some Fire Pups. Now, faced with the potential end of the world as we know it, and not wanting to leave the future of this overheated orb to the occasional cockroach or two, we simply must all get going here and do our thing.

Your life may depend on it. Mine, too.

The concern in this family is that knot-head Bush has some sort of messiah complex in that he is fulfilling biblical prophecy and in the process is starting “the war to end wars”. Last nights supper conversation in this house revolved around megalomania and possession of nuclear ability. We think it’s really imperative to begin impeachment proccedings and send a message that America is still in control of its faculties. If it isn’t already too late, that is.

Pach, I agree with the major points of this post, but the framing of the article in terms of nuking Iran is the wrong frame. It is not simply a case of nuking Iran being catastrophic, but a case of any kind of pre-emptive attack being provocative in the extreme and likely to result in dire consequences throughout the Middle East and here in America. Even an attack of the refinement facilities of Iran with conventional weapons may well bring on World War III, but nuclear weapons will almost certainly accomplish that.

No, the proper frame of reference is that the United States, acting in concert with allies, needs to pursue a policy of containment and diplomacy. The time to do it is now, while the ramp-up of nuclear capability in Iran still gives us time.

Perversely, the longer Bush delays going to the table with diplomacy rather than the nuclear threat, the more time it gives Iran to covertly advance any nuclear aims they may have. Playing this game of chicken, there may arrive a point in time when Bush (or his succesor) may feel we have no choice but pre-emption. At that point it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

However, the proper frame to advance our cause is not to fight against the nuclear option as an isolate issue, but to fight any form of pre-emptive attack under the current circumstance.

To rush to the streets crying “NO NUKES” is the wrong frame. It should be “NO WAR IN IRAN.”

It makes me so sick and angry I can’t see straight. I heard Sy Hersh interviewed on NPR’s “Fresh Air” today and he said that in all of the administration’s contingency plans for attacking Iran, absolutely no effort has been made to predict or study the possible impact on the civilian population.

The neocons and all of their minions are dangerous to our nation and the world. I only hope that I live to see justice served and that our country can survive their reign of error.

hey cleter, I already gave you props for that — are you getting greedy? :~)

I think it’s important to note that this whole Iran attack thing is a major objective of the whole PNAC policy. The reason BushCo wants to do this is to force regime change. It’s not their potential nuke capability, anymore than Hussein had WMD ready to blow the mushroom cloud over the planet that was the impedus for ’shock & awe’. That’s the fear stimuli that worked the last time with Iraq. They’re delusional enough to believe that it might work again (I sure hope we’re past that) for their Iran adventure!

Bottom line, let’s not forget to recognize the focus they have and the basis for the rationale. So they will do anything it takes to follow through. It’s very serious and very scarey. I just believe they are hell bent and it’s going to take more than fighting off the fear mongering. The true motives have to be exposed and debunked or we’re all in a world of hurt!

orangejumpsuit
At the protest, there should also be signs that say WE DON”T DO PEARL HARBORS. And a bunch of American flags.

I’m not sure I can accept point #2. I wish everyone would step back and ask why we need to negotiate with and impose sanctions on Iran? They are not a threat. They do not appear to have territorial ambitions, aside from a completely understandable desire to keep first Iraq and now the United States from invading and occupying them.

Why is it “disasterous” if they somehow learn to make nuclear weapons? Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them to a target, and it has not been a disaster yet. Korea has nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them, and no disasters yet.

The fundamental “give” to the PNAC agenda of conquest in the Middle East, that there is some danger to us in allowing Iraq and Iran to exist as sovereign nations with nuclear power generating plants, is the thin edge of the wedge.

Cleter,

But let me add, that the added insight about nuclear weapons being originally developed as an antidote/response to pre-emptive war (either Pearl Harbour or the Sudetenland and etc.) is a brilliant addition to your original post.

Why the emphasis on nuclear? What about a regular war with regular strikes, is that good for you?

Thanks for your thoughts on this issue, Pach. Watching ABC News tonight, we saw that Bush and Chee-Knee at a 4-months span both spouted the same lie about the Iraqi sand toilets despite knowing they’d been debunked.

The BushCo web of corruption is desperately trying to distract from their total fuck-up in Iraq by saber-rattling with Iran at a time when that tactic is most guaranteed to provoke dire consequences on all sides.

A wise person once observed that you don’t make peace with your friends, you make it with your enemies.

But as long as Big Oil has a stranglehold on all of us, there’s scant hope of peace.

Kudos today to the GM exec who said on Imus that E85 is just fine…maybe the big car people are starting to realize Big Oil is their worst enemy as well.

Kudos today to Prince Harry (and the British Royals) who shows more stones at his young age than the feckless Preznit and Shooter combined.

And remembering with great regard Rev. William Sloan Coffin, a true warrior for peace.

Hillary Clinton is courting AIPAC (the American Israeli PAC), and AIPAC and the neocons believe that our striking Iran is in Israel’s best interest. Most Democrats are firmly in AIPAC’s pocket, Republicans slightly less so, though the wingnut Christian Zionists certainly like the idea of helping along Armageddon (I am serious here). So you will certainly see Schumer, Emmanuel, Obama, ….. all in favor of attacking Iran, just maybe not with nukes. I personally do not want to see us hit them with anything other than intelligent diplomacy but cannot imagine who in the present administration could possibly conduct it.

And yes, Bush’s grandfather helped finance Hitler and his father was up to his eyeballs in Iran Contra and best friends w/Osama’s papa, so the Iran connection doesn’t surprise me in the least.

” Iran is ten years away from the ability to develop weapons grade uranium. It possesses no nukes today.”

That’s not what Condi said today. She is reported to have said they could have nukes within 16 days of sufficient centrifuging.

Ignorant bitch.

Divine Strake at 700 tons of high-explosive will be the largest conventional explosion ever attempted. This is less than 1 kiloton – I’m not sure if the smallest tactical nuke can even be dialed-down that weak … The nuclear bunkerbusters in the US arsenal are case-hardened hydrogen bombs than can survive a drop and burrow a meter into the ground. Much of the blast is transferred to the earth but it kicks out a large crater and beaucoup fallout into the atmosphere.

Sy did a great and expansive explanation for his New Yorker article and includes recent developments on Democracy Now today.

‘What’s amazing, Amy, about this is this, and what always surprises me about my country is, here we have a president that doesn’t talk to people he disagrees with. And anybody who’s been around little boys, big boys, knows that when they get out of control, you grab them. If you’re a nursery school teacher, you grab the little four-year-olds by the scruff of the neck, and you pull them together, and you say, ‘You two guys, shake hands and make up, and go play in the sandbox.’

Bush doesn’t talk to people he’s mad at. He doesn’t talk to the North Koreans. He didn’t talk to the insurgency. When the history is done, there were incredible efforts by the insurgency leaders in the summer of 2003. I’m talking about the Iraqi insurgency, the former Sunni generals and Sunni and Baathist leaders who were happy to see Saddam go, but did not want America there. They wanted to talk to us. Bush wouldn’t. Whether it got to Bush, I don’t know, it got in to four stars. Nobody wanted to talk to them. He doesn’t talk to the president of Syria; in fact, specifically rejects overtures from al-Asad to us. And he doesn’t talk to the Iranians. There’s been no bilateral communication at all.

Iran has come hat-in-hand to us. A former National Security Council adviser who worked in the White House, Flynt Leverett, an ex-C.I.A. analyst who’s now working at Brookings, wrote a piece a month or so ago, maybe six weeks ago, in the New York Times, describing specific offers by the Iranians to come and ‘let’s deal.’ Let’s deal on all issues. I’m even told they were willing to talk about recognizing Israel. And the White House doesn’t talk. And it’s not that he doesn’t talk, it’s that nobody pressures him to talk. There’s no pressure from the media, no pressure from Congress. Here’s a president who won’t talk to people he’s walking us into a confrontation with.’

full article here and imho, worth the time and effort to read:
http://www.democracynow.org/ar…..12/1359254

Re: conventional threat

I don’t support it as policy, but can imagine it as posturing in the context of negotiating international peace.

This post was crafted to enlist wide support while propelling a dynamic of oversight.

WP has a followup to the trailer story. Doesn’t look like they are backing off. The fact that Snottie McClueless won’t tell when the WH knew about the report is … telling. There is smoke there. You cannot tell me that all those anxious phone calls and faxes and pressure that team was under … that none of that came from the WH. Dig a little deeper, MSM. You will find it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01789.html

Prairie Sunshine,

Big fan of Rev. Coffin here. One of my favorite stories about him, {according to my friend} upon hearing that Lieberman was a reform Democrat and an Orthodox Jew, Coffin quipped, “He would be much better off as a Reform Jew and Orthodox Democrat.”

seaside –

Yes! It was an important thing for you to point out, and we mustn’t lose sight of it. Iran being next was part and parcel of the large-scale PNAC “plan” from the very beginning.

It is a bloody horror to me, but not a surprise. This was always going to be the next “step” — taking down Iran. And after Iran it will be Syria, and after Syria what was it, Libya? I forget now, have to go back and re-read the PNAC “manifesto.”

We need to scream loudly about the PNAC game plan, how this was all plotted back in the nineties. STILL, not enough Americans know about the neocon “agenda” and it’s for damned sure that not enough journalists write about it. When will the networks cover the history of PNAC?!?

when Iran gets up to what the US thinks it will, then Iran will take 16 days to churn out enough sufficiently purified U235 to build one weapon – in other words: 20 bombs per year.
How many, dear Condi, does Israel churn out per year?

I am going to take a page from Bill Maher and declare a NEW RULE:

New Rule: Presidents may not deploy nuclear weapons if they cannot properly pronounce them.

Amen.

BTW, give Joby (the guy who broke the trailer story) some love here …

http://projects.washingtonpost…..y+warrick/

That’s not what Condi said today. She is reported to have said they could have nukes within 16 days of sufficient centrifuging.

Ignorant bitch.

Or a lying bitch. She did get a PhD in Soviet (remember them?) Studies in the late 70’s. One would assume she knows better than that tripe. At least she should.

If there is any attack on Iran, the US will be so hated none of us will ever be able to travel ever again. It could well be the final act of hubris which comes before the inevitable fall.

The Dems can’t be allowed to make this about protecting Israel. The US has enough nuclear weapons to obliterate Iran within minutes of a strike on Israel – and Iran knows it. That is what Bush and/or the Dems should be saying.

Remember MADD? I never thought I would see the day when it would sound so sane, which just goes to show how insane the world has become.

And thank you Pach for a great post!

pach -
thank you so much for this post. i have a slightly different take that comes from 1) wanting to learn from our iraq experience – no more wars of aggression; and 2) recognize the importance of international laws – and bring ourselves back from lawlessness to to being leader in supporting laws and agreements such as the NPT.

here’s my version:

1. Starting a war with Iran is seriously nuts.

2. Strength comes from leadership. We must recommit ourselves to the NPT – including living up to our own responsibilities under the NPT. We must join our allies in direct negotiations with Iran. We must advocate publicly for a nuclear free middle east.

Americans must unite to demand bipartisan opposition to a first use nuclear strike.

beth meacham says:
I wish everyone would step back and ask why we need to negotiate with and impose sanctions on Iran? They are not a threat. They do not appear to have territorial ambitions, aside from a completely understandable desire to keep first Iraq and now the United States from invading and occupying them.

I think you’ve nailed it…We should not allow Bush, PNAC, or any of the other crazies frame this debate. They should be forced to explain from first principles
1) Why is a nuclear Iran a threat to the US?
2) Why is Israel allowed to have nukes?

Great post, Pach. People who have never taken political action before should think really seriously about doing so now. We could wind up in the middle of WWIII, our leadership is so very clueless and detached.

Pay your Senator a visit. It’s never been more important.

thank you thank you thank you

excellent. there is absolutely NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW. check out 3 new iran posts

Not Nuclear. Not conventional. Not air strikes. Not special forces. No attacking Iran, period. Stop. Yes, write your congressmen, senators, and friends. However, I am afraid that this will not be enough. I live just outside DC. Feel free to come to my house and we will descend on the Capitol and the Mall to stop the madness. Go look up “Bonus March” to see what a real protest can do.

Before you even think about trusting Bush for one minute, ask yourself this question: If Iraq had gone as well as the administration thought it would, do you think we ALREADY would have invaded Iran?

We are the people, and we will stop the next war!
peace,
jim

Not only ask why is Iran a nuclear threat to the US of A but also discuss that the US of A is the biggest nuclear threat going…pot and kettle and all converging….

Pach, thanks for a great post. After reading it, imo FDL may be best positioned to take a role with respect to the 180 centrifuges and the fact the WH is cherrypicking the intellligence as per usual. Iran is no where close to becoming a nuclear threat.

FDL can hit the WaPoo’s blog about Juan Cole’s and other’s informed opinions. John Harris has a chat tomorrow as does Dana Priest. When we say, this is “Iraq” all over again, I don’t know if we understand how correct we are. FDL’ers have learned together about National Intelligence Estimates (NIE’s). The Leaker-in-Chief stated that he “declassified” those, because he “wanted people to see the truth” about Iraq. Great Georgie, since you want us “to see the truth,” declassify these NIE’s.
IMO where you, Christy, and Jane have great skills is in sharpening a message that FDL’ers will bring to the corporate media and to our elected officials.
IMO it’s possible that a synergy will exist between our message on the 180 centrifuges and the non-threat that Iran poses, and our long standing attempts to expose the complete incompetence of the Leaker-in-Chief’s administration.
I am constantly amazed by the political dexterity of Christy and Jane, so I am just putting this out there as a brainstorming idea. You tell me what to do, to the best of my ability, I, and a lot of other FDL’ers will follow through.
From Juan Cole, commented earlier today by many:
“Iran Can Now Make glowing Mickey Mouse Watches”*
Despite all the sloppy and inaccurate headlines about Iran “going nuclear,” the fact is that all President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday was that it had enriched uranium to a measely 3.5 percent, using a bank of 180 centrifuges hooked up so that they “cascade.”
The ability to slightly enrich uranium is not the same as the ability to build a bomb. For the latter, you need at least 80% enrichment, which in turn would require about 16,000 small centrifuges hooked up to cascade. Iran does not have 16,000 centrifuges. It seems to have 180. Iran is a good ten years away from having a bomb, and since its leaders, including Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei, say they do not want an atomic bomb because it is Islamically immoral, you have to wonder if they will ever have a bomb.
The crisis is not one of nuclear enrichment, a low-level attainment that does not necessarily lead to having a bomb. Even if Iran had a bomb, it is hard to see how they could be more dangerous than Communist China, which has lots of such bombs, and whose Walmart stores are a clever ruse to wipe out the middle class American family through funneling in cheaply made Chinese goods.
What is really going on here is a ratcheting war of rhetoric. The Iranian hard liners are down to a popularity rating in Iran of about 15%. They are using their challenge to the Bush administration over their perfectly legal civilian nuclear energy research program as a way of enhancing their nationalist credentials in Iran.
Likewise, Bush is trying to shore up his base, which is desperately unhappy with the Iraq situation, by rattling sabres at Iran. Bush’s poll numbers are so low, often in the mid-30s, that he must have lost part of his base to produce this result. Iran is a great deus ex machina for Bush. Rally around the flag yet again….”http://www.juancole.com/
Immanentize and Prof ???? had some great comments about this on a Christy thread earlier this am.
Also, I thought shargash was right on target wrt “bait and switch.” I also want to vouch for immanentize, however, he made the same comment this am.
*Christy put up a pic of a florescent Mickey Mouse watch this am in honor of Cole’s comments.

whoops those 3 new posts are on billmon’s they are not printing for some reason

I have sent e-mails to my two senators and house member making the points Pach has outlined. I encourage all to do the same. We must stop the insanity.

Whoa. From a new Wapo article on the trailer lies:

The White House sought to further rebut the Post article with a series of “Setting the Record Straight†statements e-mailed to reporters. In the statements, the White House does not deny the existence of the technical team’s report but portrays it as a preliminary finding, contrasting that report with a public white paper put out by the CIA on May 28, 2003. The CIA paper described the trailers as the “strongest evidence to date that Iraq was hiding a biological warfare program.â€

The White House provided a “link†to a CIA Web site where the white paper is still posted, nearly 18 months after its conclusions were refuted by the Iraq Survey Group.

The White House statement also cites the 2005 Robb-Silberman commission report on intelligence failures related to Iraqi weapons. That report criticizes the intelligence agencies for “bureaucratic resistance to admitting error†as evidence showed Iraqi weapons claims to be unfounded. (My bold)

What’s happening on American Idol?

pach, maybe you should add an update link to your ‘lets talk senator’ thread for people who didn’t sign up last time.

We have enough countries in this world without the US actually being one.
I’m very worried the rest of the world will look at our words and our behavior and simply decide to back away from us, as we might when approached by a crazy person on the street talking to radio transmissions only he can hear.

IRAN: CONSEQUENCES OF A WAR (online)

IRAN: CONSEQUENCES OF A WAR (pdf)

Earth Penetrating Nuclear Warheads against Deep Targets:
Concepts, Countermeasures, and Consequences.(pdf)

Bunker Busters: Sources of Confusion in the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator Debate [PDF]

Thank you Pach

Btw it might have already been asked – I haven’t caught up with the comments – Why shouldn’t Iran have nukes? Why is Iran so uniquely unsuitable to have nukes, as opposed to, say, George Bush or Kim Jong Il?

Given that I’m from Georgia and my Senators are Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, it seemed a bit of an exercise in futility, but I did e-mail Isakson (Chambliss is pretty much a lost cause). I may e-mail my Congressman, too, but he is Nathan Deal, and he once lied to my face (while he still called himself a Democrat, no less) about his support of the Line Item Veto (I said I was against it and he agreed, then voted for it). Hopefully they will get more messages like mine.

American Idol? are we going to be Moses or Aaron?

Sheeesh what’s the link limit? I posted 4 all of them vital info. now in moderation and as I don’t spam I’d like to know the limit so as not to do that again.

Wilson (I am reclaiming the right to speak “W” in your name)

I wish we could be Job.

I am very glad that we are going to take action on the threatened attack on Iran. We must speak up loud and clear and do it now.

I would suggest that we demand a resolution by the Democrats in Congress to block funding for any attack on Iran, nothing less. And we need to make it clear that we will not vote for any politician who does not make this a bottom line of their foreign policy position.

We must remember a few things:
1- we already have troops in Iran according to Sy Hersh so we have already violated Iranian territory
2- the carpet bombing of Dresden did as much damage as the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima acc to several sources
3- the issue is not simply nukes but pre-emptive war

I say this as someone who spent a long time on anti-nuclear efforts, esp the anti-Trident campaigns. I am particularly concerned about a potential nuclear strike but only slightly less concerned about a conventional strike. While the long term effects are lessened, the immediate death and destruction of either choice is a horror. Our cold war strategy was not pre-emption but MAD – mutually assured destruction. Bush’s choice of pre-emptive war as his prefered strategy is a significant break with all past policy and is also a violation of international law.

William Sloane Coffin was a giant of a man and his book Uncomfortable Pews remains a very good and inspirational read. I had the honor of meeting him several times and attending the ordination of a dear friend by Rev Coffin – would that we still had his voice today!

There’s a big difference between being opposed to a conventional strike, and wanting it publicly taken off the table. Many people wouldn’t sign up for the latter. I think Pach has put together a nice set of points that can garner wide support, and which Senators can take seriously.

“To rush to the streets crying “NO NUKES†is the wrong frame. It should be “NO WAR IN IRAN.”
ojs, I like the direction you are headed in. IMO using the WH’s own tactics of deceit against him: “Mr. President, please release the NIE’s” might be preferable.
If we can get the corporate media (and the Congressional Intelligence Committees to nail/ask Snottie McMuffin technical questions about the number of centrifuges, and the wind patterns of dust (either nuclear or not, that dust is going to so some damage)…., that Snottie cannot answer, I think we will be “killing two birds with one stone,” just like the WH did when they outed Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings.
I do agree completely with you, however, that “no nukes” is too diffuse an attack for FDL to marshall.

BC–Bucky finally off!

seaside, 25 said:

“The reason BushCo wants to do this is to force regime change. It’s not their (Iran’s) potential nuke capability..”

I agree, its the WMD ploy all over, or as Yogi said, “It’s deja vu all over again.” At least he is consistent in his MO.

The thing about the 16-days-to-nukehood is so comical I wonder why they are even trying it. Now comes nuclear-weapons expert Condi endorsing the idea. Granted that 10 years is an awfully conservative estimate, some expert observers think 5, under the right conditions.

So what are the “right conditions?” Look Eastward for help. Bush would be awfully stupid to ignore Russia and oil-hungry China as players at this table, and don’t forget Pakistan which just happens to be the first Muslim nation in the nuclear club. But Bush is doing everything he can to drive Iran into the embrace of the East.

I’m utterly opposed to either a nuclear or conventional strike against Iran as I’ve made clear in blog commentary back to 2003.

However, I think we should be as careful about tossing around lines like “Iran is ten years away from the ability to develop weapons grade uranium.”

That ingredient is highly enriched uranium, and the National Intelligence Estimate, pieces of which were leaked in August, makes the 10-year assessment. But this is a guess. And given the notorious inability of our intelligence agencies to predict the arrival of the Indian Bomb or Pakistan Bomb, I recommend caution when putting forward this claim. There is a great deal of ambiguity in the NIE, and nobody knows for certain how long it might take Iran to start producing HEU or stockpile enough of it for a Bomb.

It’s bedtime for me. Can’t stay up to check for the latest filing.

I’m including a link to the brainless abnormals at JOM who keep refreshing Pacer with fervent frenziness.
This is a Team Libby filing, after all.
Since TM is away I don’t expect that the anticipated brief will get a host unless someone directs Jeralyn to it.

Anyhoo, good night and good luck to all the lil’ doggies.

http://justoneminute.typepad.c…..ing_o.html

To Join FDLers in the Roots Project

1. Put your home state (nothing else!) in the subject line of an email to pachacutec01 at gmail dot com

2. include your commenting name or dkos user name in the body of your email

3. be patient while I append you to an existing group or wait for enough people to form a new state group.

By doing this, you can connect with FDLers in your state for local action, lobbying, and perhaps for visits to your congresscritters’ offices.

Professor Foland, sorry I mentioned you above, but forgot the Foland part. Thanks for those great comments this am about plutonium vs uranium and other technical issues.
Also, I see markfromireland on the thread, IIRC, mark was the early voice in calling our attention to this issue.

When did containment magically quit working? That seemed to work fine against the USSR, and they had a gajillion nukes. And crazy leaders like Stalin.
Can someone please explain to me why Iran is a bigger deal than the goddamned globe-straddling, several-thousand-nuke-owning, ICBM-wielding Soviet Union? And what makes Amini-whatsisname worse than STALIN? We didn’t nuke freakin’ Stalin! Why should we nuke Whatshisname?

orangejumpsuit – Iran and Pakistan are most emphatically not friends.

an informative page of nuclear warhead counts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L…..ar_weapons

Russia still has 7200 nukes
the USA has just 5735
one 10 megaton bomb can annihilate Indianapolis

And I completely agree with John Casper’s take. “No Nukes” is the wrong approach.

John Casper — great summary and thanks. I agree that there is a chance that Bush’s bluster gambit will backfire on him and just re-iterate his dangerous incompetence. I am speaking with a WH insider tomorrow and will report what dirt I get dished. Prof. Foland is the most knowledgable fellow around on the technical nuke stuff. Maybe we could get up a weapons/ Nuclear non-proliferation treaty primer sometime (soon?).

You speak from my heart, Mister. My comment is pre-written, composed in a small European country in the middle of the night because these developments leave me speechless. For all of you there radiation contamination is sort of an abstract concept. What is below is my personal experience:

What worries me, out in a small European country, is the current seemingly decided decision to nuke Iran.

Emphasis on ‘nuke’.

Ever hear of what WIND can do? Well, it is pretty amazing. Like you wake up one morning and everything outside is full of red sand. Got sucked up into the stratosphere and dumped on us in northern Europe–all the way from the Sahara desert. Cool, huh?

Or one day twenty years ago now, when you wake up and the radio is telling you not to go outside, keep your windows closed, and downtown all the first produce of the season is being taken off to be destroyed by health department officials. And a few days later you get to see dandelions that are KNEE-HIGH and the stalks measure about six inches at the base? And where even now, well, you don’t eat mushrooms from certain areas unless you NEED your daily dose of Cäsium 327?

THAT is what wind can do, and it was from Tschernobyl. And we weren’t even that close.

We have had a noticeable increase here in cancer since. And no one gives us statistics. Have read that the UK has measured an increase in enriched uranium levels in their soil thanks to the Iraq war. Where I live, no data.

So my humble suggestion is–

Yeah, you got issues, you were lied to, deceived, and dumped on. But if what Hersch says is even close to what is planned, you better get yourselves organized and fight that option NOW.

Because I do NOT want to see anyone on this planet have to be in that situation and feel that sort of helplessness in any way shape or form.

And no, corporate people won’t care–because they’ve probably GOT their bunkers.

It is really time to put an end to this craziness.

Just sayin’

MB:

I’m aware of the ambiguities, though the consensus, from what I can tell, is closer to ten years than ten months.

But the crux of the message here is to propel a dynamic of oversight, and the argument would still hold without an insistence on “ten years.”

Perhaps I should post an update.

Yah – me, meteor blades (kudos to you on that mb) cole, a few people. Believe me I think I speak for everyone when I say this is one party where we’ll embrace every latecomer with fervour. Effing blogger blogger is down or at least the server that hosts my gorillas guides is down or I’d post a heap of other links. There are times recently when I actually feel physically sick.

They told us we would be greeted as liberators in Iraq…That we’d be welcomed with roses.
Not.

Now they’re saying we would be greeted as liberators in Iran. Allowing the populace to rise up against their oppressors.

Same song, second verse.

Sharkbabe, indeed, we are the only superpower who has launched a pre-emptive war and a couple of nukes in modern times. Why trust us? I would personally beg my leaders to protect me however they deem necessary from our might, if I was sitting in my living room or what was left of it in Iraq or Afghanistan or wherever else. If we continue to defy the world’s treaties, including the nuclear nonproliferation treaty– why should anyone respect us as a moral compass? We already have violated all the other treaties we were signatories to and refuse the others that a majority of the rest of the world adheres to — Kyoto protocols and the International Court of Justice.

“In the April 17 issue of New Yorker Magazine Seymour Hersh has an eye-opening piece that quotes Administration insiders who suggest nuclear war with Iran is a serious option. You had written back in October of 2005 that “The strategic decision by the United States to nuke Iran was probably made long ago.” What led you to that conclusion at that time? What do you think of the Hersh piece?

“Jorge Hirsch: Of course the Hersh piece is extremely useful in bringing this issue to the forefront of public attention. However already several months ago an analysis of the facts led me to the conviction that a deliberate decision had been made to use nuclear weapons against Iran. First, the US pursuit over several years to get an IAEA resolution against Iran, no matter how weak, which it finally achieved in September 2005. It didn’t make any sense as a diplomatic move if the goal was to exert pressure on Iran, in view of the clear dissent by Russia and China. It had two purposes: one was to bring the issue eventually to the UN Security Council, even knowing that Russia and China would veto any action against Iran, so that, just as in the case of Iraq, the US could argue that other countries share its concern but not the resolve to act. But more importantly, the US issued a commitment to the UN in 1995 that it wouldn’t use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear countries signatories of the NPT, which however explicitly excluded countries that are in “non-compliance” with the NPT. So by securing the IAEA resolution of September 2005 of Iran’s “non-compliance” the US achieved that it can now use nuclear weapons against Iran “legally”, i.e. without violating its 1995 commitment. This explains why it was pushing for it so adamantly.

Furthermore the US has radically changed its nuclear weapons policies since 2001 to erase the sharp line that traditionally existed between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons. It now “integrates” both types of weapons in its military strategy, and envisions the use of nuclear weapons against underground facilities, preemptively against countries “intending” to use WMD’s against US forces, and “for rapid and favorable war termination on US terms”. Several scenarios like that, that apply specifically to the Iran scenario, were made public in 2005 in the Pentagon draft document “Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations”, to prepare the country for what was being planned.

Furthermore, the administration has been pushing Congress every year to fund new nuclear weapons, “more usable” nuclear weapons, and bunker busting nuclear weapons, to prepare the public mind for the attack. Many are under the mistaken impression that Congress has resisted these efforts, however they forget or don’t know that the B61-11, a bunker-buster that can be used against Iranian underground facilities, is in the US arsenal since 2001. Its yield (power) is classified but is likely to include very low yield, to cause “reduced collateral damage” and thus be more “acceptable”.

Furthermore, as I pointed out several months ago and is also mentioned by Hersh, the administration is stacked with nuclear weapons experts that are hawks and participated in the formulation of the new nuclear weapons policies: National Security advisor (Hadley), deputy national security advisor (Crouch II), undersecretary of defense for intelligence (Cambone), chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board (Schneider), undersecretary of state for arms control and international security (Joseph) and ambassador to the UN (Bolton). Bolton was appointed in the face of very strong bipartisan opposition. None of these positions require specific nuclear weapons expertise, however these “nuclear warriors” are in high positions for a reason: to advise President Bush to use nuclear weapons. And let’s not forget Cheney, who was the architect of new nuclear weapons policies back in 1992 to target non-nuclear-weapon countries, and Rumsfeld who advocates a smaller high tech military where nuclear weapons play an essential role.

It also became clear to me that there is a long-term advantage in the view of advocates of America’s “preeminent role in the world” (PNAC) to use nuclear weapons against Iran: to establish the credibility of the US nuclear “deterrent” against non-nuclear countries that pursue courses of action contrary to US interests. The Iran situation lends itself to a scenario where the US use of nuclear weapons will appear to be “inevitable”, under the conditions that have been created by the US carefully and methodically over the course of several years for that purpose. Finally, I believe President Bush has embraced the breaking of the 60-year old taboo against the use of nuclear weapons as his personal goal, to be his lasting “legacy” that will overshadow other “accomplishments” of his administration.

Reat the rest @ http://www.zmag.org/content/pr…..3;>Read the rest.

BTW I agree with meteorblades and john Casper – everything I’m getting from the US is that the no nukes won’t float. That’s to your shame but that’s where you people are at right now. RenB amen brother and hello from copenhagen.

Professor Foland @ 63 -

after thinking further about it, i’ve changed my mind to agree with your point about the importance and feasibility of publicly taking the nuclear option off the table.

but, i don’t think we have to ignore our objection to starting a conventional war – we can do both – demand that a nuclear first strike is taken off the table AND voice our opposition to starting a war with iran…. that is what i was trying to do with my modified list above (43).

International Court of Justice.

Just a clarifier — we are still signatories to the UN convention and therefore member states before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) — it is the International Criminal Court (ICC)that we spurn and work against.

could the Bush administration be getting advice about nuclear capability from the same folks who are informing them about global warming? not only is the policy/diplomacy shot to pieces but I’d bet they don’t understand/believe the science re: radiation, fission, etc., etc.

Let’s look at the Bright Side. Attacking Iran is politically attractive in a number of ways. First, it would precipitate conditions which require the declaration of domestic martial law (energy and food rationing), and it would allow elections to be postponed until there’s a better time.

Most importantly, attacking the AntiChrist in Iran would follow the script of the apocalypse as laid out in the Left Behind series, and would further solidify support amongst Bush’s “Base.”

Have YOU earned a spot in BushWorld?

why doesn’t the Preznit just wait until victory in Iraq before he starts a fresh war against Iran ?

Extra! July/August 2003
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1150
The Great WMD Hunt
The media knew they were there–but where are they?

By Seth Ackerman

[THIS IS JUST THE END SECTION OF ACKERMAN’S 2003 ARTICLE, PERTAINING TO THE “TRAILERS OFMASS DESTRUCTION”. FOLLOW THE URL TO READ THE WHOLE SORRY STORY]

“Given that no serious evidence of ongoing Iraqi production capability ever turned up–especially after inspectors returned last year [2002] and were given unfettered, no-notice access to suspected sites–there were few grounds for assuming that Iraqi retained a significant WMD capability.

“Another clue reporters missed: Weeks before the war began, the transcript of Hussein Kamel’s 1995 private briefing to U.N. inspectors was leaked and posted to the Internet (Newsweek, 3/3/03). The interview revealed a crucial fact that the Clinton and Bush administrations, which both promoted the defector’s story as evidence of an ongoing Iraqi WMD threat, had long neglected to mention: Kamel told the inspectors that all the weapons had been destroyed. Coming from the head of Iraq’s secret weapons industries, a source the Pentagon, CIA and U.N. had all praised for his intelligence value, the revelation should have been front-page news. Instead, it was barely covered (Extra!, 5-6/03).

Centerpiece or hot air?

“Having suffered a series of public humiliations from the conspicuous absence of unconventional weapons, the administration made it known that it was pinning its hopes on two trailers found in northern Iraq, which they termed mobile biological weapons labs. On May 12, NBC News correspondent Jim Avila, reporting from Baghdad, declared that the labs “may be the most significant WMD findings of the war.” Joining him was hawkish former U.N. nuclear inspector David Kay (now an “NBC News analyst”), who was flown to Iraq to perform an impromptu inspection for the cameras. Armed with a pointer, he rattled off the trailer ’s parts: “This is a compressor. You want to keep the fermentation process under pressure so it goes faster. This vessel is the fermenter….” In his report, Avila didn’t explain how and why Kay and the NBC crew obtained access to the trailers while the legally mandated U.N. inspection team, UNMOVIC, had been barred from looking at them.

“The trailers quickly became the “centerpiece” (New York Times, 5/21/03) of the administration’s argument that Iraq was indeed hiding a biowarfare program, and Bush himself used them to proclaim (5/31/03) that “for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong. We found them.” No actual biological agents were found on the trucks, though; nor were any ingredients for biological weapons. In fact, no direct evidence linked the trailers to biological production at all.

“U.S. officials said the trailers’ equipment was capable of making such agents. Even then, the unconcentrated slurry that resulted could not have been put into a weapon: “Other units that we have not yet found would be needed to prepare and sterilize the media and to concentrate and possibly dry the agent, before the agent is ready for introduction into a delivery system,” the CIA’s report admitted (5/28/03).

“Iraqi scientists who worked at the institute where one of the trailers was found offered a different explanation: They told interrogators that the labs were used to produce hydrogen for military weather balloons. “Even while conceding that the equipment could, in fact, have been used occasionally to make hydrogen” (New York Times, 5/21/03), the CIA report dismissed that explanation, reasoning that such a production technique “would be inefficient.” (Yet the weapon-making technique imputed to the trailers was also “inefficient,” an intelligence official admitted–New York Times, 5/29/03.) In fact, a technical analysis alone, they said, “would not lead you intuitively and logically to biological warfare” (New York Times, 5/29/03).

“On the other hand, the trailer’s equipment “appeared to contain traces of aluminum, a metal that can be used to create hydrogen.” Yet that was discounted by U.S. officials, who said the aluminum “might have been planted by Iraqis to create the illusion that the units had made gas for weather balloons” (New York Times, 5/21/03).

“A few weeks later, a front-page New York Times article by Judith Miller and William Broad (6/7/03) quoted senior intelligence analysts who doubted the trailers were used for biological weapons. “I have no great confidence that it’s a fermenter,” one WMD specialist said of a key piece of equipment on the trailer. (In his TV performance on NBC, David Kay had evinced total confidence that it was.) The CIA report, he said, “was a rushed job and looks political.”

“Analysts noted that the trailers “lacked gear for steam sterilization, normally a prerequisite for any kind of biological production.” “That’s a huge minus,” said a U.S. government biological expert who had been quoted in an earlier Judith Miller article endorsing the administration’s theory. “I don’t see how you can clean those tanks chemically.” A senior administration official was quoted admitting that “some analysts give the hydrogen claim more credence.”

“It’s worth noting that in the 1980s, the British defense contractor Marconi received a government-backed loan to sell the Iraqi army an Artillery Meteorological System, an artillery radar system that uses weather balloons to track wind patterns (London Guardian, 2/28/03).”

I need to clarify my previous post– the Soviet Union launched a war of aggression and greed against the Afghan people and at that time they were a superpower… it was aggression, not pre-emption, though.

Regime change. In his dreams.

What is more likely to happen is that secular people will rally around the mullahs. Remember the outpouring of sympathy from Iranians after 9-11? The tacit support for the invasion of Afganistan (even the mullahs were none too fond of the Taliban)? And how quickly this potential to build bridges evaporated after “axis of evil” speech and the subsequent invasion of Iraq?

These people do not know or care to know history. And like true psychopaths, are unable to learn from (or acknowlege) their mistakes, to alter their course in any way. They were wrong, wrong, wrong about Iraq and they are doubly wrong about Iran.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I never bought the WMD scare-tactics before the lead up to the war. WMDs don’t grow on trees, and if there was credible evidence that they were there, they would’ve bombed without asking anyone’s permission (and a long drawn out drumbeat to war lead up) as Clinton did in ‘98. No need to take over the entire country.

It really is all about Oil. And meglomania.

Speaking of Iran, everyone should learn where the Straits of Hormuz are. A 20 mile wide passage which connects the Indian Ocean to the Persian Gulf, with the UAE (ie US army bases) on one side and Iran on the other. Every super oil tanker that departs carrying middle eastern oil passes through it.

siun, imo you can add the bombing of Hamburg to Dresden.
With that said, imo those comments allow us to easily to be labeled as “anti-war.”
IMO, a much stronger position is to pressure the corporate media to ask Bush to release the NIE’s to explain how Iran is closer than ten years away ? Let’s play on his turf. He just got done saying, he “declassified” so we could know the truth about Iraq. We want to know the truth about Iran, and the wind patterns and the collateral damage estimates, and the effect this is going to have on the price of oil. One of my favorites is, how is he going to do bda (bomb damage assessment?) of underground facilities?
I agree with you that Dresden was a horrible, senseless act of revenge, with no military benefit, I just don’t think it’s as effective a talking point right now as the points Cole and others are making. By attacking the “pre-Iran-war-intelligence” we automatically remind everyone of the Leaker-in-Chief’s “pre-war-intelligence” failures/lies in Iraq.

Now they’re saying we would be greeted as liberators in Iran. Allowing the populace to rise up against their oppressors.

Any war with Iran will set in stone the current regime for att least 20 years. You have no idea how intensely nationalistic Iranians are.

I think we should demand Bush take a drug test and be evaluated physically and mentally…

somehow I doubt he’d pass…

markfromireland–rise up against their oppressors, that would be us, or US would it not?

cleter @ 71

MFI 92 – You are absolutely right. I have lived in Iran and have many Iranian friends who have fled either the Shah’s regime or the Mullahs and they are ALL horrified at the stupidity of this. Iranians do not need us to interfer, they are perfectly capable of dealing with their own country, in their own way and in their own time.

oops, sorry!
was trying to tell cleter @71 that i agree? whatever happened to discredit policy of containment?

Update posted, responding to comments.

Mark’s reply—nationalistic. Exactly.

What was that saying…the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting the results to change.

In GWB’s playbook he’s taking on the anti-Christ and triggering Armageddon.

In the eyes of the world, GWB’s become the anti-Christ.

Meet the tor-m1 update 1

MSNBC Question of the Day
Iran nuclear threat: How should it be handled?
Diplomatically
83%
Militarily
17%
* 13504 responses
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080261/#survey

immanentize @ 84

thank you, I stand corrected; my fingers and brain are furious and frightened today.

me too angie.

gonna try and sleep sweetly — at least there is that escape? Perhaps I too will dream of rain….

Digby: “Their perception of national security is a simplistic belief that the rest of the world thinks we are too chickenshit to fight, so we must prove to them that they are wrong. Every threat or “threat” must be met with a hard, aggressive show of power or we will never be taken seriously.”

Good thing Mafia dons, muggers, and Mike Tyson don’t think like that.

Oh, wait…

*ilson46201 @ 7:26 pm (#87) – Good question. It’s one I’ve been asking myself, at least rhetorically. Iran must be at least two years away from being able to make an atomic bomb, even if one believes the most optimistic analyses and projects out.

We already have more trouble than we can handle in that part of the world. They’ve been blaming Iran for their troubles, but I really don’t think that if Iran disappeared tomorrow from the face of the earth that it would make our efforts in Iraq any more successful.

The only thing I can figure is either they know something we don’t, or they think they know something we don’t know and they’re wrong. My money’s on the second explanation, given the Bush Administration’s history.

Related to this question is a video I saw on Crooks and Liars. It’s of Scott Ritter, the guy who was the lead weapons inspector in Iraq until 1998.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/…..html#a7843

Among other things, he says that before the Iranians can do much serious weapons production, they need to figure out how to filter the molybdenum out of the local uranium.

Analysts Say a Nuclear Iran Is Years Away

Western nuclear analysts said yesterday that Tehran lacked the skills, materials and equipment to make good on its immediate nuclear ambitions, even as a senior Iranian official said Iran would defy international pressure and rapidly expand its ability to enrich uranium for fuel.

The official, Muhammad Saeedi, the deputy head of Iran’s atomic energy organization, said Iran would push quickly to put 54,000 centrifuges on line — a vast increase from the 164 they said Tuesday that they had used to enrich uranium to levels that could fuel a nuclear reactor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04…..r=homepage

washingtonpost.com’s Daily Politics Discussion
John F. Harris
Washington Post National Political Editor
Thursday, April 13, 2006; 11:00 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01636.html

Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 13, 2006; 12:30 P
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01637.html

Yes to all above and yes I’ve lived there they’re very gracious and generous but if you think the most bigotted IRA man is nationalistic you ain’t seen nothing until you’ve met an Iranian.

Meet SS-N-22 Sunburn incidentally the Straits of Hormuz are very narrow, incidentally the Straits of Hormuz are very shallow. All it takes is one sunk tanker. By the way I do keep mentioning that US navy doctrine (SOP) is to get behind the tankers that they’re meant to protect when shooting starts don’t I? Did I also mention that the basichii (these were the kids who rode motorbikes over mine fields to clear the way. Bought an awful lot of speedboats three years ago and have been rehearsing like mad over the last three years? They remember the Cole too.

Your out of options people and that ain’t good.

I have read today’s WaPo article on the trailers of mass destruction:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01789.html

Can someone interpret it for me? Is the “news” that it contains simply Scotty’s foaming at the mouth, and Howard Dean’s statement, and the White Houes e-mails to reporters? Is it WaPo’s position now, that it does not know whether Bush saw the negative report on the trailers of May 27 before making his May 29 remarks, and is that the same position WaPo took in its earlier story? In other words, is WaPo either backing off its earlier story about Bush’s knowledge, or reinforcing it, or just holding to the same position? I don’t have a link to the earlier story.

Even gazed-in-his-eyes-and-found-my-soulmate Putin knows Bush is nuts in thinking he can provoke a regime change. The Russians would know, since Iran is a neighbor. And not always such a friendly one either.

From The NY Times:

The Russian stance against penalties highlighted the obstacles Washington faces in its effort to force a halt to Iran’s nuclear program. A senior aide to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said yesterday that any effort to employ broad penalties against Tehran would backfire because “Iran’s current president will use them for his benefit, and he will use them to consolidate public opinion around him.”

Good update pach

There is no military solution available in Iran. And if you call me a pacifist I’ll punch you in the fucking nose.

mfi @ 100… ;(.

how can we justify this? We are covered in their blood and our lies.

erm
Last time I looked, Iran was a democracy
sure they have their problems (don’t we all – I mean look at the US leadership)

I think there are a few very dangerous ‘truths’ which need to be disputed
The first is the most significant, because all the silliness this Administration has been permitted proceeds from one faulty assumption:

“9-11 changed everything”
This is only true because weak and incompetant leadership allowed core american values and strengths to be devalued out of fear and opportunistic greed.
We overrreacted to a horendous event with an ill-considered and even more poorly planned war.
A previous poster pointed out that the Soviet/Russian threat was (and is) considerably more substantial.
Let’s stress that point.

The other ‘truth’ is that
Christians favor war and the abomitable social policies of the past 5 years
George Bush’s Chrstianity is no more representitive of core American values than Rev Moon’s. In fact they have a lot in common.
Seperation of Church and State is, however a core American value. You can say ‘one nation, under God’ without in any way implying attributing divinity to our political leaders.

neurophius,

“Is it WaPo’s position now, that it does not know whether Bush saw the negative report on the trailers of May 27 before making his May 29 remarks, and is that the same position WaPo took in its earlier story?”

Yes, per the guy that wrote the article. He was on Countdown tonight. Either way, Bush loses. It goes to CREDIBILITY (lying) if he knew or INCOMPETENCE if he didn’t know ; )

Oilfieldguy in 112, thanks, LMAO.

Mrs. KB #38-

“We need to scream loudly about the PNAC game plan, how this was all plotted back in the nineties. STILL, not enough Americans know about the neocon “agenda†and it’s for damned sure that not enough journalists write about it. When will the networks cover the history of PNAC?!?”

Exactly! Our representatives need to constantly be reminded of that. Let them know that we’re not in the dark and neither should they be.

John Casper #101 re: MSNBC Question of the Day
Iran nuclear threat: How should it be handled?

I’m sure you realize this, but can I point out that the wording of this question is dubious and possibly inflammatory? It presupposes that there is a viable threat from Iran. Or, at least, it seems to be designed to get people even more attuned to “Iran nuclear threat”. I think that this either/or wording is irresponsible on the part of MSNBC. They have completely “dumbed down” the issue. This, in itself, deserves attention, imo.

Thanks, Coz. And following up on that, I heard from Scotty McClueless’s lying mouth that ABC said this morning that Bush DID know the contents of the report. Does anyone know whether ABC is still standing by that, or has Rove gotten to them?

Speaking wearing my military hat oilfield guy can get in line :-)

If your senator or rep is a right-wing whack job, appeal to their patriotism and invoke the sacred name of Reagan. We need to give members of the Republican congress a face-saving way to back off the ledge.
1) Pre-emptive attack is un-American and cowardly. It’s Pearl Harbor. It shames our WWII veterans. Invoke your relatives that fought in WWII. Feel free to use verbiage from post #17.
2) Containment is a tried-and-true strategy against states. From Truman to Reagan, containment and deterrence kept the Soviets in check–and they were much more threatening than Iran. Lots more nukes, too. Containment and deterrence. That’s how Ronald Reagan won the Cold War*. For Bush to abandon the proven strategy of Ronald Reagan is a repudiation of Reagan’s legacy. Bush is trading Reagan’s legacy of strength for Tojo’s strategy of cowardly pre-emption.

*Contains exxagerations for rhetorical effect. Simplistic but something many Republicans believe.

Cozumel @ 115

Don’t forget that incompetence can mean comfort in the bubble.

OfT: Coz, if you have the time or the inclination, I am interested in any thoughts you have @ Duke. I think the Durham D.A. may be trying to pull an OJ in reverse. Screw the DNA evidence, he’s got African-Americans on a jury listening to an African-American woman testify that she was raped by three European-American men. It sounds like the inverse remake of “To Kill a Mockingbird.”

Haven’t read through the entire thread, but wanted to chime in briefly before hitting the sack to fall asleep to the Stewart/Colbert hour.

I agree that the time is now, but it’s got to be more than writing letters and visiting Senators. It’s time for the entire leftwing blogosphere to mobilize a MASSIVE demonstration in D.C. (we’ll all crash at Pach’s :) with the dual themes of “No War on Iran” and “Impeach the Lying WAr Criminals”. Eventually, it’s going to have to happen if we are to stop this march toward WWIII.

Jane, Christy, you have forged relationships with all the heavy hitters in the blogosphere and collectively you reach millions of Americans. Let’s light this candle, before it’s too late. I’m no longer asking….I’m pleading.

Shorten the message. Hitting Iran requires a Congressional declaration of war and no prior action from Congress has given Bush the authority to take military action. Period.

Then sit back, and wait for a reprise of the “USS Maine” moment, somewhere, off in the Gulf.

Explain the threat. Why is Iran with a bomb (ten years down the line)more of a threat than Pakistan (now)? When is the last time Iran invaded a country? Those who think nukiong Iran eliminates a threat to anyone besides Isreal (to whom we owe nothing by legal treaty) are obligated to explain exactly what the threat is that warrants a war crime.

neurophius,

I just remembered, they showed a clip where Bush said the same thing on June 5th also! lol

I sent notices to my congresscritters but can’t avoid the feeling of swimming against the current. Anybody remember anything about the rubber stamp slavishly mewling lickspittle doormats? Asking them to defy and halt a President who writes his own laws and ignores congress as irrelevant? Action, on this matter, is mandatory, but just who is listening?

mark, 72 said:

“orangejumpsuit – Iran and Pakistan are most emphatically not friends.”

Perhaps not, but they don’t have to be friends to find common cause against someone who has attacked a second Muslim country. Why stop at Iran? How long would it take any Muslim country to sense an American jihad? Remember how the US and Russia became allies in the WWII, only to revert to enemy status immediately after?

Not to mention that Pakistan has not been above finding a market for nuclear export. Here is an extract from a Congressional report on WMD trade between N.K. and Pak.

In October 2002, North Korea reportedly admitted it had a clandestine uranium enrichment program, and the press reported that Pakistan had exchanged centrifuge enrichment technology for North Korean help in developing longer range missiles.

Although they may appear to be unlikely proliferation bedfellows, North Korea
and Pakistan have been engaged in conventional arms trade for over thirty years. In the 1980s, as North Korea began successfully exporting ballistic missiles and ballistic missile technology, Pakistan began producing highly enriched uranium at the Khan
Research Laboratory. Serious missile cooperation seems to have begun in 1993 with
a visit from Benazir Bhutto to Pyongyang; it is harder to pinpoint the genesis of Pakistan’s nuclear cooperation with North Korea, although there are some reports of equipment exports from the mid-1980s.

I mean an unsympathetic observer might even go so far as to call Pakistan a nuclear ho’.

My e-mail to Senators Schumer and Clinton (rather late and after a Seder):
Iran – Express strongest possible opposition to this administration’s aggressive, non-diplopmatic plans for Iran. Iraq was a collosal mistake. Iran would be the end of this Republic. Nuclear warheads – including bunker-busting bombs are immoral and should never be used. They would start a world war and we would be like the Nazi’s marching on Poland.

Adam Law, MD

108 lisa says: April 12th, 2006 at 2:21 pm: I love it when people type their demands on what people should be FOCUSING ON in all caps. Oh wait. No, I don’t [/quote]

Ok honey, try this, see if you can h e a r :

“Focus people, focus: we’re about to nuke Iran.

This should scare the sh*t out of everyone.

It’s so cracked, so weird.

Sy Hersh was on Democracy Now this a.m. and he said some in the military see it as crazy. Messianic.â€

[end quote] Ok? even without the caps, it still looks like WWIII.
Take Action Now

Valley, absolutely. FDL’s Professor Foland and immanentize pointed that out this am. Please see my link to Juan Cole in 49, who also made this point very well.

Look to the “threat” from North Korea…Remember how excited the press got over the “softball of death!!!!” (the max payload the 2-3 stage intercontinental NK missile)

EEK! Is this the country that created John Wayne? Where are our guts, for chrissake?

Mark from Ireland,

I would very much like to hear your views, now, or at some other point, as to what the US should do re: the ME, and to become a better citizen of the world. I’ve wanted to ask you this question many times, and it is a serious question. I have my own ideas, but I’d like to hear your perspective. xxoo VG

Wearing my military hat oilfield guy can get in line and I’ll stomp any kitten who tries to get in ahead of me too ;-)

Isn’t Iran in the US’ crosshairs with or with out nukes? If so, it seems like a rational move for Iran to want nuclear capabilities. Is all of this talk about invading Iraq making other countries think about speeding up their own aquisition of nuclear weapons? And this is supposed to make the world safer?

Is this another case where the Bush Admin. is pushing a war in Iran against the advice of the military? How far can this go before there is a real risk of a military coup in this country?

Scary that I am starting to think that a military coup would produce a government more in line with the people of this country than the current admin is.

Iran is a democracy. Albeit flawed, but then again we should understand what it is to live in an imperfect union.

It is also, ironically, the one country in the ME (with the exception of Turkey & Lebanon) where women have any meaningful rights. Iranian women have never been subjugated to the extent that Arab women have been, and even the mullahs know better than to try.

Iran was not a democracy under our old friend Reza Pahlavi (otherwise known as the Shah). It was a totalitarian, authoritarian state with one of the most horrific secret police forces of the 20th century. The average Iranian has more political rights under the Mullahs then they did under the Shah, except for things like the public consumption of alchohol and women in mini-skirts and a few other draconian “morality” laws. While I am, by no stretch of the imagination, no apologist for the Islamic Republic, there is actually a democratic structure in place (more then anywhere else in the ME except Turkey and perhaps Lebanon) and if enough people in that country want a more liberal society, they will get it. Threatening to attack Iran plays right into the hands of the Mullahs, because like a lot of Americans we all know, a fair number of them will be willing to give up political rights to rally around their Persian nationalism and to keep their borders secure from foreign invadors. Just as they did in 82 when they were attacked (with US encouragement, I might add) by Saddam.

A war with Iran will make the Iraqi war look like a walk in the park.

Sorry for all the ranting, but these things have to be known. There has not been accurate, unbiased news coverage of Iran in over 25 years.

I agree with Jay–it’s going to take more than letters to do this. Contacting our congresscritters is a good plan for tomorrow. But let’s have a plan for the next day and the day after. There has to be a very loud noise to wake up those who have not yet recognized the danger of any type of attack.

Jane,

It sounds like you just made the case for USING nuclear weapons, at least the case that is embraced by the messianic right! With GWB being the #2 or #3 cheerleader. We are talking “Onward Christian Soldiers” here, “lemmings off to war”.

These people forgot what Jesus taught. BLESSED ARE THE FUCKING PEACEMAKERS!!! Some bibles still print that in red so the dipshits don’t forget the stuff that should be Page 1 in the sermon book.

Global starvation doesn’t mean shit to a martyr. Anyone who does not repudiate this war-mongering is a jihadist — even if they have blond hair, blue eyes, and “walk and talk with Jesus.”

America, we — the social expirement called democracy — are about to fail! This is what we get for making nice all the time and letting nitwits lie and cheat their way into power. I plead guilty to sitting idly by, while school district after school district gutted science education, mixed god with civics, and promoted sports above academics.

As ye sow, so shall ye reap…

Well, we are about to reap, baby!! Cover your genitals because you may need them.

orangejumpsuit 66-

“So what are the “right conditions?†Look Eastward for help. Bush would be awfully stupid to ignore Russia and oil-hungry China as players at this table, and don’t forget Pakistan which just happens to be the first Muslim nation in the nuclear club. But Bush is doing everything he can to drive Iran into the embrace of the East.”

TEHRAN (Reuters) – The world’s leading powers, including Russia and China, joined to condemn Iran on Wednesday for advancing its atomic program in defiance of the United Nations, but Moscow said force could not resolve the dispute.

Sorry Pach, I blew the dedication…

John Casper,

On Duke. I was flabbergasted when the DA took his non case immediately to the media. He’s up for reelection in three weeks by the way!? A few other reports don’t pase the smell test (with me) either. 46 players at the house and 43 of the “non rapers” are keeping their mouth shut? I don’t buy it. There’s an old Mafia saying…”Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead” LOL

Valley Girl – one word.

LEAVE

You’re hated and despised as a country (not as people as a country) and rightly so. You’re so hated as a country now that nothing you can do will rescue the situation and everything you do will make it worse. Just go for God’s sake and take Anthony Poodle Neville Chamberlain Blair with you please.

John Casper- thanks for the reply #132. I have to confess that I am swamped at work, and don’t get to read all of the comments on every thread. I am glad that this was pointed out previously by two of our regulars.

Amen to timewarp @ 137

RE 137 – I don’t think I made one point as clearly as I meant to. The Iran-Iraq war did in fact set Iran back 20 years. Before that war, the Mullahs had not consolidated their power as they were able to in the face of an invasion by Saddam. Supporting Saddam in that war was one of the stupidest (remember Rummy’s famous Saddam-handshake?) we ever did. It also allowed Saddam to consolidate power.

One wonders how much of a role Bush 41 played in all that, if he wasn’t in fact (at least when it came to middle eastern – oil matters) Reagan’s Cheney.

Jeralyn, has the Libby filings. 29 page response. The wingnuts at JOM probably have already labeled them “brilliant” and “definative”. (Snort)

TalkLeft just got a copy of Libby’s latest filing. Will we see our typical in depth Plamegate analysis of the filings here tomorrow morning? I’d get up early to read that.

Bush clearly sees his legacy as saving the ‘White West’ from the ‘Unborn Again’ foreign hordes and securing for America the ‘Last Days of Ancient Sunlight’ (Oil).

That or he really, really wants Apocalypse Now.

Hey, time for a little T S Eliot, my older sister alway told me as a kid that the ‘T S’ stood for tough shit.

The Hollow Men

T. S. Eliot (1925)

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats’ feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar …..

just driving by, but: from your posts 1&2 points, can we include the idea: “let’s not sell weapons. to anyone.”

can you make a nuke? a tank? a conventional bomb? even if you can, can you buy all the parts? my guess is “no.” unless you’re a (western government approved) arms dealer, you’re not selling more than kal’kov ripoffs and tutsi-ready machetes. which is good for humanity, but not halliburton.

want to stop wars of aggression? everywhere? seriously regulate arms sales and the application of armed “forces” everywhere upon the globe. let’s let tribes and groups and religions work it out for themselves, without outside arms sales. take away the US based arms dealers, and all of the sudden, lots of our “problem” areas dry up and go away. as i’m fond of saying: do you think gang bangers own boats and planes? no? then how does all that south american coke get in chicago? ditto: do you think an af’stanian warlord has an arsenal at his feet, native built? no? do you think the nsa doesn’t know where he buys his arsenal from? do you think that the US couldn’t shut down the sales of arms to groups and gov’ts around the world, if they wanted to?

it’s all about the great profit that arms sales and the death and destruction they create. that’s the real force of behind the war, more than bush’s ignorance or israel or oil or even racism.

Valley, it’s always nice to have you on a thread. I hope the work is progressing.

Double amen to timewarp @ 146 God its nice to have a few people around who actually know something about the place and thats not meant offensively just there’ve been many nights here when I’ve felt like I was smashing my head against a wall.

My .02:

We don’t have the infrastructure in the blogosphere to organize an effective march or demonstrations, but if major players like labor or MoveOn were to pursue it, we could help generate buzz and interest.

Major media have tended to ignore peace marches because they are old hat, and so they don’t have an effect, and we can’t generate the kind of simultaneous, national turnout the immigrant community put together. Those events got coverage because they were huge, different and not DC based.

However, I really think you understimate the impact a group of people can have just by organizing within your states to sit down with staffers of your representatives.

Our MA contingent went to Kennedy’s office and to Kerry’s office. Shortly thereafter, Kerry came out swinging with a meaty op-ed on redeplyment with deadlines and has not quit hitting hard. Coincidence?

You never know what will push these people over the edge. The word we get on the Hill is the pols don’t believe we in the blogopshere can turn out real people, we’re just a noice machine. Whenh you show up at their doorsteps, you surprise them.

I know people will flame me for saying all this, but I’m giving you my best strategic advice. I mean, look at it this way: if we can’t get masses of the readers of this blog to go to their senator’s offices in their own states, how can we turn out millions for marches across the country?

Answer: we can’t.

When my inbox is flooded with Roots Project volunteers who show up by the hundred to senators’ offices, then maybe we can talk about some marches, in my opinion.

Well, I answered my own question from No. 119 above by going to the ABC News Web site:

“The Post did not say that Bush knew what he was saying was false. But ABC News did during a report on “Good Morning America,” and McClellan demanded an apology and an on-air retraction. ABC News said later in a clarification on its Web site that Charles Gibson had erred. McClellan said he had received an apology.”

So I guess Rove did get to them.

Pacifica–I’ve been thinking a similar thing. With two and a half years left of this administration, how do sane people get out from under a clincally insane delusional psychopath of a president? Would the military refuse to do his bidding? There has got to be some way to practice containment on Bush.

markfromireland

I found that terris kitty artwork for my blog.

John Casper – I do enjoy our exchanges! and I really like your suggestion of using our WaPo skills (and they are considerable now) to push in a way they can understand. Count me in.

My comments on Dresden were meant as background – whether we attack with nuclear bombs or massive “conventional” bombs, we will slaughter innocents. While I understand that we are identifying a common rallying point – I believe that rallying point should be no attack on Iran. We are in a very strong position in terms of public opinion – Iraq is a disaster, W is discredited, the american people are pissed. The only audience we need to swing is the congress – and I do not think we should give the Hillary’s and Joe’s (L, B, etc) the out of being for attacking and simply taking nukes off the table. (This is not s dig at the proposal – just discussion of the level of demand)

The other night I had a sudden, and distressing, thought – W reminds me of my ex who would push harder and harder to see when/if I would walk out (not physically) until I understood the game and said “no thanks, not playing” – which took 20 years btw) and I see W as a very similar illness/temperament – he will do more and more outrageous things and will only stop when someone stops him. Before the attack on Iran, in addition to organizing here, many of us wrote to international leaders asking them to step in, stand up for the UN process and tell George no. I think we should consider also sending a series of SOSs to international leaders now – I doubt our ability to stop this madness and pray the wider world community will put pressure on at the same time we do all we can here. It is our responsibility but the damage will be global.

We have already totally screwed up Iraq. We have a very small window to prevent ANOTHER pre-emptive war, with Iran. Likely outcome: retaliation, other countries joining in, WWIII. Look, world wars have a beginning. It tends to look exactly like this. TAKE ACTION.

I have repeatedly contacted my representatives and worn out my welcome with anyone who will listen. We have precious little time. WAKE UP EVERYONE, THIS IS IT.

So did I oildfield guy you have an email coming your way this weekend with a heap of graphics :-)

Mark from Ireland-

LEAVE- yes, I agree with you that totally. I never supported attacking Iraq, never. I knew it was bound to be a disaster from the get go. I hope you recall that I’ve said this before. I am assuming that when you say “LEAVE” it is Iraq that you are referring to specifically. And, the longer we stay there, the more problems we will create. When I first thought of asking you “what should we do?” it was long before the current Iran talk. So, the question was more specific (and maybe outdated given recent events): after we leave Iraq, what should we do, what should we as a nation push for, to have some hope of undoing that damage, to look forward to being a more credible world citizen. Not to say that the damage can be undone, mind you.

MFI – I lived in Teheran in the mid-70’s. Traveled around quite a lot. Used to know some passable farsi (though sadly, w/out any practice for so many years it is basically all gone ‘cept a few good ones like padar seg!). I also had the privledge of actually going to Afghanistan for a few weeks before the Soviet invasion – when it was really stunning.

I would really really love to go back to Iran someday as it is a beautiful country and the people are great, but sadly it doesn’t seem like it will possible in my lifetime, not with the way things are going.

And I find that most of what people in this country think they know about Iran is not even close to being accurate. Not surprisingly.

Another “selective” leak to the NY Times.

http://www.rollingstone.com/po…..6.0.12.872

Pachacutec at 153:

I know people will flame me for saying all this, but I’m giving you my best strategic advice.

No flaming here. I think you’re absolutely right. My senators are Chambliss and Isakson. Clueless cogs in the GOP machine. But, you know, I can always keep their staffers busy arguing with me on the phone. That’s a few minutes at least when that particular republican won’t be pulling the legs off a kitten or poisoning poor minority children with tainted candy or whatever it is they do for fun.

Pach– just wondering; why can’t we take our lead from the immigration protestors? I remember asking not long ago, how come we anti war and anti bushco protestors weren’t taking to the streets and the vast majority of people who responded said that our lives and the well being of their families was not being threatened.

Our lives are threatened and so are the lives of millions around the globe.

Why not excuse ourselves from work, give the kids a holiday and refuse to buy anything for a weekday or a weekend? Stand in the streets and hold anti-war and anti-bushco signs. March on every state capitol? Why couldn’t that happen quite easily?

siun, thanks a lot.
It only took you twenty years? You are a fast learner.
I couldn’t agree more. Bush/Rove IMO is classic dry drunk couple who needs to “scapegoat” the world in order to maintain their own “purity.” The only way for them to appear to have any semblance of order in their own lives is to create chaos around them. IMO Bush/Rove is trying to “hook” us (the public) into behaving in ways that will make Bush appear as the “noble victim,” “just try’in to protect the American people.”
As long we don’t let him “hook us,” we’ll be ok.

COuldn’t agree with you more timewarp. I served with the (unarmed) peacekeeper contingent on the Iran Iraq after the war it got a little stressful sometimes and ocassionally downright exciting. I also made some of the best friends both Iranian and Iraqi that you could ever hope to make in many lifetimes. God grant we manage to put an end to this wicked foolnishess.

Pach you are absolutely right. Read what Kos has to say about demonstrations — their efficacy depends on the media’s willingness to cover them, something they aren’t willing to do when it isn’t in support of their favorite President. MUCH more effective to work locally, try to influence your representatives in your own back yard.

I’ll repeat — the strategy of going to your Senator’s office was given to me by a Senate staff member who said it was the most effective way to influence them. He said 10 people showing up in someone’s office is incredibly powerful and gives faces to the thousands of emails, faxes and phone calls they get from the netroots. Proves we’re real people and not just SPAMMERS.

VG the sad fact is that there’s nothing nothing you as a country can do for good in that region you’re simply too hated and too despised. Again I emphasise that this is as a country not as people.

I’ll contact Boxer and Feinstein and Pelosi and tell them that I think a tactical nuclear attack on Iran under the current circumstances would constitute a war crime. I’ll also tell that that, would such an attack occur under current circimstances, I will support eventual legal action to bring anyone (including Congresspeople) who approved it to justice. That is my honest opinion on the matter. As for a conventional attack under current circumstances, I could never vote for them again.

In Nixon’s last days, I vaguely remember stories about him calling up the Pentagon, obviously drunk, and ordering military action on his perceived foreign enemies. The Pentagon apparently ignored him, knowing he was on the way out.

I hope the present day military leadership perceives Bushit is on the way out and ignores any ‘orders’ they get from him.

He doesn’t follow any laws, why should the Pentagon?

If Bushit orders the insane and they refuse, they could ask him how he’s gonna make them obey, “Mr. President, you and who’s Army?”

Flowers from me to VG as well. Deconstructed a three word MSNBC poll and labeled it correctly for what it was. I see a future Digby.

Wow MFI – now THAT must’ve been an adventure! I’d love to hear more about it sometime, but the pillow is calling. Night everyone.

I am hoping that something really juicy comes out of the latest Fitz filing, something that really will not only make Scottie blow a gasket, but will cause Rover such an extreme case of heartburn that it burn a hole right through his soft and fluffy gut.

BTW, VG– domino yet?

Pach,

I think you’re right about showing up at their doorsteps, it can certainly have an impact, whether the MA contingent’s visit to Kerry’s office contributed to his newfound willingness to chin up or not.

When those fine folks marched up Beacon Hill to talk to Kerry, they received no media attention beyond the thread here the follwing day (as far as I know) and you suspect it made a difference. If millions of Americans did the same thing in D.C., whether it was on the evening news or not, the politicans could not ignore it.

Why to you think we don’t have the infrastructure? If FDL and Kos, MyDD, Digby, HuffPO et al. reach millions of Americans (and if the Site Meters are accurate…they do), what more do you need? Send out a trial balloon, get people thinking about it, pick a date and do it. I think we’re at the tipping point now and action a large-scale show of democracy is in order. Not some half-hearted, disorganized, Woddstock redux, but a serious call to patriotic Americans to hit the pavement and prove that we are willing to take to the streets to end this insanity. What infrastructure is required for that?

“BTW, VG– domino yet?”

LOL!

And Jane, my inbox is still not flooded.

I have to echo Jane and Pach and to repeat something. Don’t get downhearted they’ve been at this since Goldwater’s time. You’re just starting and you’ve managed to do an impressive amount in just that tiny amount of time.

It will be interesting to see how Libby’s lawyer’s play this. Do they figure “f**k it” and go after Fitz as hard as they can and wait for the blow back. Or do they tred carefully, not knowing what bombs Fitz has in his briefcase?

RenB says “For all of you there radiation contamination is sort of an abstract concept”. Worth noting that some of you may have an idea what it’s like anyway, but bopping around the usual-suspect blogs etc, I’m suprised how little mention I’ve seen of this. And it’s got me moving to add my bit.

I’m a Brit, living in Britain. [hello, good people. I’ve been reading for a while, I don’t think I’ve de-lurked before.]

And, yeah. This thing goes off, hell of a long way away in a place you thought wasn’t much to do with you, and a day later it’s “don’t drink the rainwater. Heck, don’t go out in the rain. Rain’s fallen on the grass, the sheep have eaten the grass, really don’t eat the sheep”. Friend of mine was worried, because she was breast-feeding, so she took some offer of radiological testing. “You haven’t drunk any milk the last few days, have you ?”.

Chernobyl was 1 power station. Anybody got any idea how that compares with what’s on offer here ? I haven’t. Bore a couple of metres down into the ground and then fling how-many-tons of radioactive dust up in a big bang ? Do it how many times ? Anyone really think it’s all going to drop back out over the next quarter-planet or so ?

Billmon’s “what if they did and nobody noticed ?” – having watched the loss of New Orleans, I can believe you might not get any announcements. But, I reckon you’d notice. We all would. Everybody. It’s a big wide world, and everybody in it would be noticing, year after year after year after … It’s a hard rain, eh.

jay:

They. Don’t. Show. Up.

My inbox is still not flooded.

Pach & Jane,

Personal visit, that might be doable. I am not interested in lobbying the media, in search of political action. It seems circuitous. Is it necessary to actually catch your congresscritter, or would a staffer suffice in a pinch?

Mark from Ireland- I understand completely what you are saying. And, I understand the distinction you are making between the country and its people. I had two students who were from Lebanon in one of my classes during the spring semester that we invaded Iraq. Short of a long story, but I had had several conversations before with one of them, and felt compelled to apologize as an American for the invasion. I think they gave me credit for that. (more to the story, but I’ll keep it short.) One of my dearest friends (American), housemate during the Beirut disaster in 70s went to AUB as an undergrad, and for master’s degree. I watched the destruction of Beirut on TV with her. So distressing. Heartbreaking. I guess in my shaudenfraude kind of way I was hoping that something like Bushco. being tried and convicted for crimes against humanity might help repair the damage.

As I am “represented” by Rethuglicans, my email will undoubtedly be relegated to the “NSA Express” pile, but I wrote it nonetheless:

I am very concerned about the Bush administration’s plans to start a nuclear war against Iran. This is crazy and suicidal! The United States’ reputation is already suffering under this administration; we would become an international pariah if we were to undertake such a foolish course of action. Not to mention the harm we would be inviting from infuriated Arab countries, some of which (e.g. Pakistan) actually DO HAVE nuclear weapons!

Strength comes from leadership—not brute force. We must join our allies in tough, direct negotiations with Iran, if we hope to change their current course of action.

No sane American wants preemptive nuclear strikes against ANY country, including Iran. Representatives of both parties can see how reckless this would be. I DEMAND that you speak up in opposition to these policies.

Thanks for the inspiration, Pach!

If you folks get the sense I’m goading you, you’re right.

Good for you, Sandia!

Here is half the Libby brief for you lawyer types.

http://amerivic.blogspot.com/2…..t-for.html

markfromireland 177

Do you think that history is speeding up? By that I mean the Romans took centuries to fall, the Soviet Union took 70 years. The velocity of events coupled with technology seem to be sending historic time frames into hyperdrive.

Maybe events can be changed quicker than in ‘Goldwater Days’?

angie @ 164
our lives and the well being of their families was not being threatened.

were not was. grrr.

Oilfeildguy: Getting a staffer is actually probably better, since they set more policy.

Going with a group of fellow citizens gets you time with a more senior staffer and gives you a lot more juice.

Talking to the politician is not generally helpful. They just posture and are not generally bright. Senior staffers are better. The politicians listen to them.

seaside, 140:

“TEHRAN (Reuters) – The world’s leading powers, including Russia and China, joined to condemn Iran on Wednesday for advancing its atomic program in defiance of the United Nations, but Moscow said force could not resolve the dispute.”

Good to hear Russia and China taking this sensible position, though in the current climate they could hardly be expected to endorse Iran’s nuclear initiative. But this is an interesting dynamic that can tilt the other way should Bush play his own nuclear hand too boldly. Playing the nuclear card has implications for the whole world, not just Iran. So Russia and China are going to be very leery of Bush’s moves. At some point it may tilt their position towards more support for Iran.

Oilfield guy #171. Thanks for the awesome complement. Oilfield guy #173 and Coz #175- domino? Sorry, you’ll have to explain that to me. Guess I’m not keeping up. xxoo

Pach, ye who worships ink, or something like that. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t bundle my congresscritter comments in a bulk thing like it sounds like your asking for. Yes, it’s prolly a lot easier and all, but I’m not convinced it doesn’t have “cooked” fingerprints on it. So I go to their sites, one by one, and send letters taht way. All those who are not hard headed like me take Pach up on his bundle offer. We must act.

Wow, Paca, nice piece.

I’ve been bleating about this for days so all I can say is Amen.

VG, remember the “slipped one past the goalie” comment? Domino is the endgame. You’ll be all cultured up in no time.

I read the first 80 comments and gave up looking for words like OIL or FASCISM.

GAWD folks, WAKE UP!!! You keep asking why Iran and not Pakistan or N Korea. ITS THE OIL! It is about world economic control…the house of cards is getting a bit fragile…time to crank the military industrial complex handle some more to show all who is really in control.

We lost it in the 50s when we decided it was ok to become a theocracy to fight godless communism and gave corporation the rights to be persons so they could control the government as WE THE PEOPLE with the money and power to subjugate the masses.

This will be EPUed but it felt good to get it out….

I had no idea staffers had more whiskers than the politicians. Excellent.

Thanks Coz for the 142. Pure speculation on my part, I think some of the 43 are talking to the cops, that’s how they got the Duke kid’s email. Cops also have a lot of detail, using the names of baseball player’s and track athlete’s; that would not have come from the women. My guess, again pure speculation, is that the three watched too much CSI and thought they could get away with it via the absence of DNA. They never, however, factored in a trial by a Durham jury.
What remains underreported is Duke’s administrative failures. IMO they waited until after their Men’s basketball team lost in the NCAA’s, to even report the incidences of underage drinking and allegations to the community. In my book, that’s real serious negligence. No one is denying some beat up and raped this woman. The latest story is that they have time stamped pictures of her non-genital injuries and that this means (according to the Defense attorneys, that she came to “perform” after the injuries. None of the Dukies thought to offer her medical attention. If the pics/video? are so exculpatory, and you have already admitted they exist, why not release them? OT, the families of the Dukies hired Bob Bennett to protect “Duke’s image,” year right. Sorry I am just speculating wildly here, thanks again for the response.

Yes Gentleman Jim I do. Empires are getting shorter and shorter lived. All empires are based on racism – the imperialist must decivilise themselves first so that they can do what is needed to build an empire.

What hasn’t been noticed is the slow shift of power away from whites to browns. You can embargo it, you can bomb it, you can invade it, you can do every evil monstrosity known to man to it. But until you can stand a 19 year old kid with a rifle on it and know he’ll live through the day you don’t control it. It’s just that most whites don’t know that yet.

Tacitean victory ain’t an option either.

Dislosure I’m a republican in the Irish sense of the world I detest empires.

Jane and Pach- I agree about the futility of demonstrations (unless they are totally novel and out of the blue- like the imm. protests). There was an anti-war demo in DC (Sept 2005 maybe? can’t remember the date) and for the sake of impact on the national consciousness, it just as well might not have happened- NO NO coverage in print or on TV.

Re: They. Don’t. Show. Up.

OK, I’ll have to take your word for it.

My last comment on the matter. This thread conveyed a sense of urgency and it seems clear to me that the possibility of attacking Iran (maybe with nukes) has triggered an entirely new level of urgency in the collective blogosphere. People in the RBC (reality-based community) are starting to hyperventilate. Something dramatic needs to happen, is all I’m saying. Time is short.

Peace!

This would be a good time for people to go back and re-read the Atlantic Monthly’s two-part series from about six months ago on A.Q. Kahn…the Pakistani nuke guru who was selling off technology. It has good detail on the difficulty involved in centifuging uranium into sufficient concentration for nuke weaponry.

To put it mildy, the difference between concentrating it to power-plant use levels and to weapon levels are like night and day. Cascade centrifuges are extremely sensitive, precision machinery. There is a pic in the first part of that series that shows a set-up. All this bluster about them being closet to nuke capability is complete horseshit.

Oilfield guy, yes, I do remember the “slipped one past the goalie” comment, and all of the hilarious misunderstanding around that. But, I am still clueless about the domino thing. All I can think of is some kind of newer version of “the milkman did it”, as in, “no really, it wasn’t the milkman, it was the Domino’s pizza delivery guy”.

I want to second Pach’s recommendation of speaking to staffers – call the office, ask for the name of the staffer who handeles foreign affairs, and then speak to them – get a meeting, take your FDL group with you. Ahead of time, identify precisely what points you want to make – keep to 2 or three and have you info to back you up – you don’t need to give a graduate seminar but be ready to discuss the issue intelligently and give the staffer facts that they can use – best idea: read the docs that MFI has linked and print out a copies to leave behind The staffer tells the pol what to do – you want the staffer to think of you as an ally who helps them do their job. Give them the info that lets them look smart when they brief their pol.

Also, and tis is silly but true – dress up a bit – business attire, look professional to the degreee you can pull it off – this helps shift their idea of who we are (I hate this part but put on my heels and makeup for these occasions) – the goal is not to express your inner being, the goal is to sell them on a position that they will not look stupid advocating. (And notice that political staffers are often frighteningly young and polished – you don’t want them to categorize you as their ex-hippy parent but as their potential employer iykwim).

Man, where did that thread go? It was funniest damn thing I’ve read in awhile. And I didn’t even get below the fold…

Don’t know the geneology ;D of the word domino. But I do know the colloquial meaning is “give birth”.

psychohistorian – we know but we’re working on what to do now – join in.

Tom Chicago – have you signed up for our IL group yet? – I can’t be sure who is in and who isn’t yet since email names don’t necesarily match screen names – if not, please sign up so you can join us as soon as I can get a confirmed meeting with Obama, Durbin and maybe Rahm.

Thanks for the advice siun. Is there an FDL group in the raving liberal Coburn area?

well. i have visited my senator’s office and still don’t even get a form letter. i have written via snail mail, email, fax and visited in person and phoned local and federal offices of my senators and reps. i have dressed up and dressed down. what next? i have stood with others protesting the war with candles and prayers. i am frustrated. i have signed petition after petition. time to take to the streets, all together now and scream to take back our country.
end of my personal rant and i am not giving up.

Oilfieldguy- ahhh.. thank you for the explanation. Now I understand the comments from you and Coz. I really do lead a sheltered life, at least on some accounts!!! Being as I love language and its nuances, I’m shamefaced that this one escaped me. I really did think you were talking about the pizza delivery guy. *g*

VG,

“Domino” is slang for giving birth. lol ; )

That’s Tom Coburn, In OK

I tried posting this on the new thread. Jeralyn has some preliminary analysis up on the Libby briefing. He will call Joe Wilson as a hostile witness (isn’t that interesting – can’t wait to see that) and he is hinting he will call Darth Cheney and the President to verify that he was okayed on the NIE. Practically begging for a post-election pardon, isn’t he? He is also signaling that he wants every document Fitz possesses (again).

talkleft

Oilfieldguy – send Pach an email – his addy is in the comments here – with your state in the subject line and he’ll hook you up.

Senator Gordon Smith
404 Russell Building
Washington, DC 20510 Salem, OR April 12, 2006

Dear Senator Smith,

I am writing to tell you that I fear for America and for our future. I have lost confidence in our leadership and I am losing confidence in you. We are living in a country with an incompetent and lawless leader. His mistakes and failures are many, and they will cost us an unbearable toll and will burden our children for decades to come. His high crimes threaten our liberty, our freedom, and our way of life. His lies have misled many of our countrymen to support his bad policies and have deeply divided our nation. There have been no checks and balances on his power. There has been no effective oversight.
We now learn that he is contemplating a preemtive nuclear strike against Iran. That is an unthinkable act. It would be immoral, inhuman, and unspeakably cruel. The result would be the immediate deaths of a million or more people from the detonation. Downwind from the strike zone there will be massive casualties. Over time, countless others will die of radiation sickness and cancer. For what? America will not be safer or more secure. The Middle Eastern oil fields will be ruined or forever lost to us. America will be damned.
I have written to you in the past, asking you to take action to stop this president and his reckless administration from doing more harm to America and the world. I have gotten polite letters from you without any concrete ideas about what you are doing to protect us, your constituents, from the growing danger posed by Bush and his government. Now I am demanding that you step forward and take action to stop him. Join with Rep. Murtha. Stand up with Sen. Feingold. Start your own movement. Find a way to stand up and to stand out. Make a statement. For the sake of our country and our people PLEASE DO SOMETHING, AND DO IT NOW!
I do not want another form letter from you telling me how concerned you are about these important issues and how you value my opinions. I want action and I want results. I am speaking for my family. I am speaking for many of my friends and colleagues. I am speaking for those who have been misled and who will not know how to speak until it is too late. Please tell me what you intend to do and when you intend to do it. History will judge you kindly, and you will change the world. Thank you and good luck.

Respectfully yours,

Ah, from the Libby brief:

But, of course, the opposite is true: the defense has the right to challenge at trial
all of the allegations in the indictment.

Interesting tact. More as I read…

Mark from Ireland #198 You say: All empires are based on racism. I don’t necessarily disagree, since I haven’t heard your complete take on this. This is not a view that I have considered. Having lived in the UK for 10 years (1976-1986) and having seen the wake-up call that they got vis a vis colonial exploits, my view has been that all empires are based on exploitation of natural resources.

siun,

I have been engaged for many years and while I am encouraged by some of what I see, I am way past jaded about what can realistically be done to make fundemental changes. I do appreciate that Pach has said what he has but feel the because there is no big picture consensus on the problems and potential direction/stategies that we are rearranging deck chairs more than anything else.

I have called and spoke to all them politicos and they smile and ignore me. Change the US motto back to E Pluribus Unum…what a crazy man. Take away corporations classification as persons…he is deluded…..

I’ll go back to making my bike saddles now and try and figure out how to make my house payment…

Below is some stuff I read earlier this evening afer some internet searches. Might give people some arguments for their Congresscritters to ponder over.

think progress
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..nrichment/

Union of concerned scientists
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/com…..clear.html

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/
(special front page section on possible US strike against Iran on April 12)

Brookings Institution Iran page
http://www.brook.edu/comm/infocus/iran.htm

Council on Foreign Relations Iran Nuclear Program Symposium
http://www.cfr.org/project/1237/

Rand Corporation
http://www.rand.org/commentary/041106CSM.html

If the press stories surrounding the government’s NIE disclosure illustrate anything, it is that this case is factually complex and that the government’s notion that it involves only Mr. Libby and the OVP is a fairy tale.

Christy needs to get up early.

zendoman

good letter and good luck to all of us! I hope he takes your advice, my reps are lost.

PS– I live in NH. arrrgh.

correction to my previous post– i have visited my senators’ offices. i also know i only have 1 rep, but i contacted both for good measure. none of it seems to matter. ;(

Coz- got it, finally!!! You and OFG have impressed me by your tenacious ability to remember FDL “events” (or not). This really is quite an amazing place!

http://tinyurl.com/a6erq

And today, we learned what “wild speculation” is all about.

Me3- good to see you here. But, for those newer folks, I hope you explain yourself a bit more. Whaddya think of the Fitz stuff of late? I still remember your comments about Fitz and his methods whenever I read the latest. Gave me a great perspective.

angie,

I’m in NH too and Sununu and Gregg are hopeless, rubber stamp Republicans.

I’m very frustrated and concerned for the future of my two sons. We’re in unchartered waters with this Cheney crew. As Hunter Thompson wrote not long before his death: Big Darkness, soon come. Of course, Hunter may have been referring to something altogether different….

Time for me to go 6:30 am here shower, shave, cofeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, and today more bicycling. Keep at it folks and organise. Reading FDL is fun signing up to something like pacha’s efforts is more important and may actually achieve something.

VG I also did not know about “domino” but slang is often either purely local or doesn’t cross the Atlantic. It does lead me to speculate that if a visit from a domino caused a domino would that be a domino effect or would it just mean that some dominos are more effective than others?

Sorry what with me being a papist and all I’ve got a dirty mind. Keep well :-)

*poof*

Empires are built by the consolidation of wealth and power into the hands of a few. Leaving a powerless and frightened everybody else. Racism is just sorta handy that way.

siun. Gottit. Pach now has one more in his in box.

Near the end of this thread, it is time for some poetry. This one by that great Irish bard, W.B. Yeats. (mikefromireland, hope you are here to read it.)

The Second Coming — W. B. Yeats

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all convictions, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Ooops! Sorry, Mark, I meant markfromireland.

Thanks, orangejumpsuit, I love that poem and it’s been too long since I read it. Just now it somehow makes me think of Dick Cheney…

orangejumpsuit #228 thank you for that. It is truly apt. Read it before, many times, but never seemed more apropos than now.

Pre-emptive impeachment?

p.s. Orange- markfromireland usually does disappear when he says *poof*. I hope you will keep a bookmark to your post, and repost it when he is online again.

I think we are all on notice now about any attack on Iran. It is now up to us to ensure that our Government listens to the will of the people. If we fail, we will all have blood on our hands.

Here is my analysis from earlier in the day about the limited options for the Bush Administration.

Pach, don’t know who I sent that email to that you sent me but this is what I sent them:

Got this email address from someone @ FDL. Looking to hook up with someone in OKC to visit congresscritter staffers into opposing Bush’s newest wild adventure, Iran. Probably should move fairly quick because you can’t put shit back into an elephant. Need four or five people sometime this week. If I go by myself I wont have as much juice. Help.

And so once again
My dear Johnny my dear friend
And so once again you are fightin’ us all
And when I ask you why
You raise your sticks and cry, and I fall
Oh, my friend
How did you come
To trade the fiddle for the drum

You say I have turned
Like the enemies you’ve earned
But I can remember
All the good things you are
And so I ask you please
Can I help you find the peace and the star
Oh, my friend
What time is this
To trade the handshake for the fist

And so once again
Oh, America my friend
And so once again
You are fighting us all
And when we ask you why
You raise your sticks and cry and we fall
Oh, my friend
How did you come
To trade the fiddle for the drum

You say we have turned
Like the enemies you’ve earned
But we can remember
All the good things you are
And so we ask you please
Can we help you find the peace and the star
Oh my friend
We have all come
To fear the beating of your drum

– words by Joni Mitchell

Actually, it won’t be Bush that will drop the first bombs on Iran…it’ll be the Israelis. Afterward, Bush will pledge U.S. support for Israel, our ally, while defending the Israeli pre-emptive action…and begin the U.S. bombing campaign in earnest. And as Bush bombs Iran like it was the Last Days, any dissenters will be branded as being anti-Semitic.

And this will all probably transpire during the first week of May, after the latest U.N. deadline passes at the end of April.

After Israel launches it’s pre-emptive strikes against Iran (remember the leaked Israeli war plans that had a late March 2006 starting date for taking out the Iranian nuclear sites), then the Iranians will retaliate, with one target being the oil shipping routes in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz. The Iranians will attack shipping with those supersonic anti-ship missiles they flaunted for everyone to see a week ago.

This will be the trigger for Bush joining in, because he can then claim that attacking Iran is in our national security (oil) interests.

U.S. forces have been secretly built up over the past year in the Persian Gulf countries across the Gulf from Iran…just as U.S. forces were secretly built up close to Iraq in the year preceding Bush starting war with Iraq in March 2003.

Anyway, as you are trying to parse what the Bush administration is really saying, remember that they are masters of misdirection.

So, when they say they are firmly behind giving diplomacy a chance, while also keeping all options on the table, they are really just biding their time for when inevitably Israel goes after the Iranian nuclear sites, at which time the Bush administration can claim that they did all they could to avert war (just like their false claims after starting the Iraq War), but in this looming global catastrophe, it was those Israelis who precipitated the Bush administration finally having to take action, especially after our “oil interests” in the Persian Gulf came under Iranian attack, they’ll say.

And as part of this Bush administration “strategery,” accusations will be levelled against Democratic Party dissenters (and maybe even some Republicans) of being anti-Semitic. In fact, Sen. Joe Lieberman will be one of those levelling this accusation against members of his former party.

Anyway, I might be wrong about the early May start of this “mother of all wars,” but if not early May, it will begin not long afterward…unless between now and then some sane people take over the leadership of the U.S. government, the Israeli government and the Iranian government. But I don’t foresee this happening…unfortunately. Do you???

Wrote to my congressfolk about Iran last week, a few quick paragraphs basically along the lines you suggest here.

Boxer was the only one who replied… and, alarmingly, her form reply was quite in the “confront the rogues/preserve our nation” vein. Not that Boxer is some paragon of virtue, but if someone who signed on with Feingold a few weeks ago is writing of Iran’s “agressive, anti-Western regime”… we’ve got a long way to move the ball.

Don’t let that discourage anyone from making their opinions known to their representatives in the strongest of terms… if anything, this just shows that we need MORE people sounding off. An avalanche of people sounding off.

Eddy

The threat that Iran poses to Israel is a red herring. Israel has many nukes and can retaliate massively if its territory or people are seriously threatened. They dont need the US for that.

There are many countries with nuclear weapons and we have not yet had any nuclear confrontation. Iran with nuclear weapons would be emboldened but they know that could not use those weapons as it would mean instant annhilation of their country. So even as crazy as their ayatollahs may seem they realize there is a line in the sand.

In fact the most dangerous country right now is Pakistan. They have nuclear weapons and is the primary base of the jihadis. There are many Islamist jihadi sympathisers in the Pakistani military and intelligence agencies who created and supported the Taliban. So if there is another coup and the Islamists in the military take over there is a likelihood that the jihadis would have a sympathetic state.

I have yet to hear cogent arguments about what the real threats would be from a nuclear Iran. The only one that makes sense is that it could fuel a nuclear arms race in the Middle East with the Saudis and Egypt who will also go all out to acquire a nuclear weapons capability.

The nuclear genie is out of the bottle and they only way would be to promote nuclear free zones and security pacts that remove threat perceptions.

Any attack on Iran – nuclear or conventional – would unleash a highly unpredictable set of events that could inflame the Middle East and impact us and others in the world in a very negative way. All for very dubious reasons.

I remember some twenty years ago on national news reports U.S. patents of carburetors that would allow automobles sixty to eighty miles per gallon. Big oil bought them up. Is this not a national/global emergency ? Can Congress pull the ( existing yet unused technology ) rabbit out of the collective hat? Reducing our auto fuel addiction sixty plus percent overnight, with no cramp in our lifestyle!
Clearly Iran, Saddam, Osama, Islamocons want to fight and we just keep taking the bait.

I hear Osama laughing everyday.

Anyway, I might be wrong about the early May start of this “mother of all wars,†but if not early May, it will begin not long afterward…unless between now and then some sane people take over the leadership of the U.S. government, the Israeli government and the Iranian government

The Oracle @237 – i know this will get EPUed, but reading your comment was an “oh sh*t” moment… because not long after may is june 6th.

6/6/6

If millions of Hispanics can go into the streets to demand fair treatment of immigrants, why can’t millions go into the streets to demand that use of nuclear weapons not be threatened/used in Iran?

This is the last time I will mention it then I will go away. Your use of copyrighted material, IE: the one above from Fox has me bothered. You have advertising and the image is not used as a parody. If you know what guidelines for placement you are using could you please tell me. I was wondering if I just sent some of your articles to a third party and posted them on a website to go with my photos, without credit, would you mind? Thanks. I love your work and I would hate to see you all Bitch slapped with an infringement suit, especially because of the number of hits you get. Please tell me I’m wrong. Sincerely, the Fly-Man.

Fitz!

zanzibar; bingo!

So why is the Bush administration planning preemptive nuclear war?
This is a nightmare, I wish I could wake up from. My impression of Iran: beautiful culture & landscape & antiquities, sucky fundie gov. No “preemptive strikes” *please*! i’m willing to beg and grovel on hands and knees.

I wrote my senator on Monday. The pushback from everyone on this issue needs to be immediate and sustained until each and everyone of our elected officials responds. My husband thinks Bush will listen to the military people who are against this. I tell him that Bush has the mentality of a bully and has only ever backed down when pushed against the wall. Dealing with this administration is truly a Sisyphean task, but I disagree with Josh Marshall. I will not sit idly by watching us swirl down history’s drain.

Read David Ignatius in this morning’s Wapo. His quotes from Brezinski are what we should be thinking.

Anybody want toast?

shargash, I was going to make precisely the same point you made in (1).

All this Iran talk has sucessfully diverted the american publics attention from the overt treason of the Liar and Leaker in Chief.

Another Mission Accomplished…

I think my second point (post #1) hasn’t been getting as much attention as it deserves. The US developed the first atomic bombs in about 4 years using 1940s technology, and we developed two different kinds of bombs on two different technologies. Since then, technology has advanced immensely, and all the underlying science is in the public domain and understood by every freshman physics major. If Iran really wants nukes, they can build primitive fission bombs in a decade, easily.

It probably won’t take them that long. Some of the parts can be bought from black market dealers such as A.Q. Khan. Some might be provided clandestinely by countries that are trying to block US imperialism, much as we provided stinger missiles to the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan in the 80s. Russia, China, and Pakistan are all candidates for that. Even India might do it, if they felt that Iran would provide a balance against Pakistani power (unlikely, though).

Furthermore, none of the technology requires huge above-ground facilities. Iran has very tall mountains filled with caves (basically similar to Afghanistan). If Iran wants to hide their production facilities, we will no more be able to take them out with bombs than we could take out bin Laden with bombs. We can only consider bombing them now because they haven’t bothered to hide their stuff very well. Guess what? Unless they are dumber than Dumbya, they’re hiding them even as I type this.

The only way we will stop Iran from getting nukes is if we convince Iran they do not need nukes. Bombing them is absolutely the wrong way to go about it, because it will make them more determined than ever to get them. In short, bombing will have the opposite effect than is intended.

I think the root of this misunderstanding is “yellow elephant” projection. The right has been wetting their beds nightly from fear that 9/11 would happen again. They project this cowardice on the Iranians, which leads them to believe that bitch-slapping the Iranians is how you get them to toe the line.

This is what we get for being ruled (not governed) by people with deep-seated psychological problems.

All this Iran talk has sucessfully diverted the american publics attention from the overt treason of the Liar and Leaker in Chief.

Not if it creates another imperative working for preemptive impeachmeant.

And consider this: THE BUNKER BUSTERS HAVE NO GUARANTEE OF DESTROYING THEIR TARGETS, WHILE PRODUCING MASSIVE FALLOUT NEAR THE THIRD LARGEST CITY IN IRAN!!!! THEY ARE PERVERSE NEUTRON BOMBS, LEAVING THE TARGET INTACT WHILE KILLING ALL MANNER OF PEOPLE NEARBY

The conundrum is this, as enunciated by physicist Robert W. Nelson: you have to go really deep to destroy underground reinforced bunkers, like the Natanz centrifuge facility. On the other hand, you have to go even deeper to avoid producing massive fallout in an underground explosion–the fallout from even a “low yield” tactical nuke exploded underground but not deep enough to avoid a crater will dwarf that of the air blast of a much larger bomb over Hiroshima.

So you would be left with this: we cross the nuclear line to go against a saber rattling country that is 5-10 years from being a real threat, a line not crossed since World War II, we kill tens of thousands or more of innocent civilians, and we don’t significantly damage the intended targets.

That’s the Bush administration–delivering global scale incompetence and inhumanity since 2001.

Even with a bomb, Iran knows that any overt attack on the US, or ally, would lead to a reprisal that wipes their country off the map. It’s sad that we haven’t gotten beyond MAD, but it *did* keep the world from going to hell for fifty years. In this case, it’ll powerfully restrain them from using their bomb for anything other than bragging rights, or last-ditch defense against an invasion.

My question for the experts is this: can we credibly link a *covert* nuclear blast to its source? Are there isotope fingerprints or other unquestionable evidence? If a major city somewhere goes up in a mushroom cloud, will we know — within hours or a few days — who the terrorists got their bomb from? It seems to me that if we know this, we can credibly caution the world that the *country of origin* will pay the price for any nuclear attack on us.

This wouldn’t stop fanatics, of any stripe, from destroying a cityful of people… but it would provide a powerful incentive for the members of the nuclear club to keep track of their evil devices. It also injects a little sanity into the Chicken-Little “Iran’s Got A Bomb!” yammering that’s going on.

Eddy

“but [MAD] *did* keep the world from going to hell for fifty years“

As perverse as this sounds, the best chance for world peace may be to do everything possible to help Iran get their bomb ASAP.

When nukes are outlawed, only outlaws will have nukes (or something like that).

Shargash, I think you have something there.A lot of countries with crazy leadership have nukes. Haven’t heard BushCo threatening N. Korea in quite the same way it did Iraq.

I think my second point (post #1) hasn’t been getting as much attention as it deserveI think my second point (post #1) hasn’t been getting as much attention as it deserves . . .
Ears are up. I have an outdated state of the world atlas from twenty years ago (ya know library book sales). It reported Iran’s nuke capabilities in 10 years. That is 10 years ago. If they were serious, Iran should’ve had it by now. That is my reading.

The mendacious obsolete academic Condemint Rice said:

Iran could have nukes within 16 days of sufficient centrifuging.

Ignorant bitch.

Yeah. What she said might be technically true, but it’s specious to the argument at hand. In other words, it’s what Al Franken calls a weasel: technically true but irrelevant and intended to mislead.

The key to it is the phrase, “sufficient centrifuging.” Iraq hasn’t got nearly enough centrifuges to reach “sufficient centrifuging” in my children’s lifetime. Now, once they have enough centrifuges added to the cascade they’ll be able to. But even having enough centrifuges for an effective cascade is several years off, and then they have run the goddam cascade.

BC

shargash says in 255:
As perverse as this sounds, the best chance for world peace may be to do everything possible to help Iran get their bomb ASAP. /end quote

Yup, nothing to those charges of treason. Those dastardly conservatives with their judgments and ability to read!

That’s ok though, swift condemnation from Liberals and Progressives alike for shargash’s statement is sure to follow. …any post now.

That’s ok though, swift condemnation from Liberals and Progressives alike for shargash’s statement is sure to follow. …any post now.
Swift condemnation for what? For batting around some ideas? For exercising intellectual faculties? Brainstorming? Ideas are not treason.

Yup, nothing to those charges of treason. Those dastardly conservatives with their judgments and ability to read!

Well, let’s consider the argument a bit more.

For several decades, the US justified its stocks of nukes by “deterrance” – it needed those bombs in order to stop attacks by either Soviet nukes or by the massed hordes of the Red Army.

Now, in 2006, which country in all the world is the most threatened currently by nuclear and/or conventional attack? Starts with an “I”, ends with a “N”.

So why exactly shouldn’t Iran have nukes again?