zed?

very disturbing…

This is a perfect example of why this Democrat is fed up with his party.

Thanks for covering this so quickly. Another war, just what we need (NOT).

And for me, if you would do a HUGE FAVOR, PLEASE.

Tell Senator Levin that Democratic voters in Michigan are losing faith in him because his long-time friendship with Joe Lieberman has gotten in the way of his job representing the constituents of Michigan. You can tell them that Michigan constituents sent you.

Other contact info for reaching Levin’s district offices:

Detroit
Phone: (313) 226-6020
Fax: (313) 226-6948
Address:
477 Michigan Ave., Ste. 1860
Detroit, MI 48226

Saginaw
Phone: (989) 754-2494
Fax: (989) 754-2920
Address:
515 North Washington St., Ste. 402
Saginaw, MI 48607

Lansing
Phone: (517) 377-1508
Fax: (517) 377-1506
Address:
124 West Allegan, Ste. 1810
Lansing, MI 48933

Grand Rapids
Phone: (616) 456-2531
Fax: (616) 456-5147
Address:
110 Michigan St., NW, Rm. 720
Grand Rapids, MI 49503

Warren
Phone: (586) 573-9145
Fax: (586) 573-8260
Address:
30500 Van Dyke, #206
Warren, MI 48093

Escanaba
Phone: (906) 789-0052
Fax: (906) 789-0015
Address:
524 Ludington St., Ste. LL-103
Escanaba, MI 49829

Traverse City
Phone: (231) 947-9569
Fax: (231) 947-9518
Address:
107 Cass St., Ste. E
Traverse City, MI 49684-2602

Thank you for your help, FirePups.

Pakistan has a nuclear arsenal and is becoming increasingly unstable, with a radicalized Islamic element within their country. North Korea has shown it’s one thing to make a nuclear bomb (if they indeed did), and quite another to make enough of them with a delivery means that can threaten anyone.

I dare any of these “wise old men” to explain clearly why Iran is such a major threat to the US. Their collective hard-on over Iran is as bizarre as our country being threatened by Cuba. Iran is not a credible threat. The only rational explanation has to be Israeli warmonger influence.

so now the senate has joined the house in the insanity (see h.con.r.21).

it was especially painful today to watch levin accept lieberman’s assurance that this bill was not an authorization for the use of force, and then – without reading the bill – ask to be a co-sponsor.

arrrrgh.

Can you imagine the laughter coming from Rove’s and Cheney’s offices. Bush is a very dangerous boy. Perhaps the ‘frontrunners’ can fall into line too.

on waging war with Iran … Holy Joe and what army ? well, at least Iran kicking them out of Iraq will bring the troops home.

Cr*p.

We’re going to have to lose the Democrats in Congress, all of them, because they’re too f*cking stupid something to figure out what’s going on without someone reading the bills to them very slowly, and explaining all the words to them as they go along.

We’ll need a new party name, too, because they’ve done to ‘Democratic’ what the GOoPers have done to ‘Republican’: turned it into a joke of an brand for a product that should be named ‘Acme’.

How can they claim to be representing us, when they can’t even read the bill and figure out where it’s going, before they vote on it, and they don’t listen to us, when we tell them what we’re seeing and hearing out here in the real world?

After the hearing earlier and now this, I give up. I’m going back to bed and taking a bottle of vodka with me.

And as soon as either the Stennis or the Nimitz are fired upon, both of which are sitting an Admiral’s piss stream from Iran’s territorial waters, Bush will be able to push those red buttons again. Boy, he must be excited!!!

It is hard to believe that these are the same idiots are scrambling to get away from their votes on the Iraq war, and here they are, ready to start a new one, with even less evidence than there was for Iraq. What a bunch of wankers!

Madness. Madness. Madness.

Words fail.

SeamusD @ 13

It is hard to believe that these are the same idiots are scrambling to get away from their votes on the Iraq war, and here they are, ready to start a new one, with even less evidence than there was for Iraq. What a bunch of wankers!

That does about sum it up.

When will Democrats in Congress get the message that sabre-rattling is not “patriotism.” We voted them in last fall to end a war, not start another one!

Remember the people who invoked the Iraq Liberation Act for ‘Clinton did it’ purposes, even though the text explicitly excluded military authorisation?

Damn.

And what are we going to attack Iran with? We are out of soldiers. Missiles and bombs are all we’ve got left. And if we do this, the Middle East will explode.

Where were Boxer, Feinstein, Feingold and Schumer for this lovefest? They seem to be Lieberman’s traveling ‘Alleluia Choir’ with anything he does. They NEVER speak out against him. Lieberman is batshit crazy and yet he has democratic followers.

Seamus – a very good point!

It was rather astonishing to hear them all saying Yea to this … they sure don’t learn from experience.

Spiritcatcher @ 9

on waging war with Iran … Holy Joe and what army ? well, at least Iran kicking them out of Iraq will bring the troops home.

That is what Joe is counting on, there is no more Army. If the Iran/Iraq war is gives any clue, the Iranians are willing to take large casualties. Joe and his handlers want tac nukes used on the Iranians.

Note the vote – 97 for the Lieberman Iran Amendment.

The assurance that the amendment wouldn’t be an explicit authorization to attack Iran should be read in conjunction with Glenn Greenwald’s post during TPM’s Book Club segment.

Glenn’s main point is that once it is generally accepted that Iran is conducting “acts of war” in killing US soldiers in Iraq, then Bush can use the existing AUMF in Iraq to attack Iran. He doesn’t need to get another authorization.

This is not saying that an attack is more or less likely than before; only that it arguably removes a barrier that might have existed.

siun, thank you so much for giving us this opportunity to hold our congress critters accountable…. i hope everyone will call first thing tomorrow morning (i will).

last week, when i spoke with my rep (jim mcgovern) about h.con.r.21 – he had no idea that there was any controversy about the translations (propaganda).

i swear – our congress critters must live a bubble that is almost as bad as the one president bush lives in. i guess that means it’s up to us to try to educate them.

Just a stupid question. What the %$^* just happened today? I am so confused. How did the Dems agree to let all the crap about ‘Clinton did it too’, get to be included in the House hearing? And why does every hearing Conyers has end up the same way, with the Repubs seeming to have the upper hand? I thought you had to be pretty smart to get elected to Congress. I’m just confused.

All they need is Chertoff’s gut to be right…and they will claim martial law, and it’s all over…or it’s revolution.

Another sad day in our country.

Is 97-0 correct? What! This has all the makings of another cluster-fuck. Where are they going to get more troops for these leeches to bleed out? The draft? Oh, hell no! I have 16 and 14 year old sons. FUCK THAT!

I had just called Teddy’s (Kennedy) office earlier congratulating him for his floor speechifying.

Just called AGAIN to register my disgust with voting for a thinly veiled war resolution. I said I expected a ‘Nay’ from him and am disappointed.

blah.

We have no military to send to Iran? Let’s send every representative and senator who has made another war possible–and their families.

The fact that it’s the Senate of the U.S. Congress should console everyone: it’s a throwaway vote from a body that’s been excised from any role in formulating or executing our foreign policy. Whether the vote was 1-96 or 97-0 makes no difference. We’re not going to war with Iran.

Since the ISG these things have happened:

–Fallon refused to deploy the third carrier to the Persian Gulf.
–There were threats of “mass resignations” in the military if we attacked Iran.
– The British refused to participate in an attack on Iran and then unseated Blair.

That said, it is beneath contempt. I thought last year’s 410-8 vote against a Lebanon cease-fire was the nadir. They sell their votes to you-know-who because no one else is bidding.

What this disgusting spectacle may be prefatory to, however, is an Israeli attack on Hezbollah: maybe they’re warning off Iran, or something. Maybe an expert can tell us.

the text of the bill is not posted yet… but here’s where i think it will be (hopefully in the next few minutes): Lieberman Amdt. No. 2073

and here’s the roll call vote.

Called Levin’s office. I think he only answers to Israel, based on his last anti-war statement suddenly softened after a big meeting with the Israel contigent.

Scarecrow @ 24

The assurance that the amendment wouldn’t be an explicit authorization to attack Iran should be read in conjunction with Glenn Greenwald’s post during TPM’s Book Club segment.

Glenn’s main point is that once it is generally accepted that Iran is conducting “acts of war” in killing US soldiers in Iraq, then Bush can use the existing AUMF in Iraq to attack Iran. He doesn’t need to get another authorization.

This is not saying that an attack is more or less likely than before; only that it arguably removes a barrier that might have existed.

exactly.

a responsible congress has NO business removing any barriers.

This is appalling on so many levels…

Never mind that this is pushing us one step closer to war with Iran – what the heck kind of horse-trader is Harry Reid supposed to be, anyway?

You hand the administration a great big wet kiss, and in exchange, get what? Screwed on every single other vote this week?

If Reid had armtwisted the Rethugs, told them “Okay, we’ll give you the Iran vote, but you have to stop with this nonsense of invoking cloture votes over everything”, then I could at least understand it.

But to hand the admin everything it wants WHILE getting screwed on everything else, with no quid pro quo, well.. I’m at a loss for words

Well, this sure takes the focus on the Libby deal away. And just about all the other Bush foibles with it. The Democrats are incredible.

dead last @ 12

And as soon as either the Stennis or the Nimitz are fired upon, both of which are sitting an Admiral’s piss stream from Iran’s territorial waters, Bush will be able to push those red buttons again. Boy, he must be excited!!!

They tried to make a casus belli out of those British hostages, and that didn’t work. They’ve been at it with Iranian-supplied “shaped charges” for months. Get used to it. A bellicose but impotent posture is going to be a feature of our posture towards Iran for a while. It took them a decade and three administrations to get their invasion of Iraq, it’s going to take just as long for them to have any chance to “go to Teheran”. With this difference: this time the rest of the world is fighting back.

Is anyone going to call BU!!SH!T on this ??

Where is the EVIDENCE Iran is killing our troops.. To hear retardo Joe talk on the Senate floor the Iranians were the ONLY ones attacking our troops..

Does anyone else smell a PNAC rat ?

Why would Levin jump on the PNAC war wagon ??

This is getting really ugly folks and I did not see any Dems up there stopping this march to yet another bogus corporate war..

There should be a maximum age limit for reps and senators–think Levin, Conyers, Spector, and several others.

We have an Executive Branch run amok enabled by the rightwing (and a few nuts from the middle and left).

The only answer will be a full out military coup to take our government back.

And how do we defend ouselves against the charge that ‘there’s not much light shining between the two parties’?

Not only did they not call BS, they lined up to vote Yes … and talked about their lovely nonpartisan agreement on this one.

Vitter R-LA didn’t respond.
He’s at his House in New Orleans Called the Rising Sun.

How the hell are we supposed to get Democrats elected in 08 when they refuse to differentiate themselves from Repubs?

More importantly, why should we?

Are they purposely trying to bankrupt this country?

NYT reporting Lady Bird Johnson has died.

selise @ 34

Scarecrow @ 24

The assurance that the amendment wouldn’t be an explicit authorization to attack Iran should be read in conjunction with Glenn Greenwald’s post during TPM’s Book Club segment.

Glenn’s main point is that once it is generally accepted that Iran is conducting “acts of war” in killing US soldiers in Iraq, then Bush can use the existing AUMF in Iraq to attack Iran. He doesn’t need to get another authorization.

This is not saying that an attack is more or less likely than before; only that it arguably removes a barrier that might have existed.

exactly.

a responsible congress has NO business removing any barriers.

My feeling, oddly enough, is that they just feel it’s risk-free pandering. They have no power, and therefore no responsibility.

OT..but interesting take on the order from Bush, for Meyers not to talk.

From TPM:

Invoking a privilege is one thing, but telling a person not to show up in response to a subpoena — if only to actually invoke the privilege — is quite another. It’s not just worse, it’s a felony under federal criminal law. See for yourself.

18 U.S.C. Sec. 1505 : … Whoever corruptly … influences, obstructs, or impedes … the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress … [s]hall be fined under this title, [or] imprisoned not more than 5 years … or both.

18 U.S.C. Sec. 1515(b): As used in section 1505, the term “corruptly” means acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including … withholding, [or] concealing … information.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/015273.php

war with china? na! give me war with iran for two hundred please…nice cynical strategy from dc dimwits toward our guys in the desert, perpetual war for imperial oil cynical cynical bastards in dc

The PNAC plan seems to still be on course.

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

Called both Boxer and Feinstein (my Senator’s) and asked them why they are supporting anything Joe Lieberman proposes.

Siun @ 51

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

Amongst all the other bad outcomes, the price of oil will skyrocket. Of course, that’s good for many of Cheney’s pals.

This is beyond dumbfounding. Words cannot convey the contempt I now have for the US Senators who have acquiesced to this nonsense. Un. F*cking. Be. Lieve. Able. Idiocies stacked upon insanities stacked upon death and destruction.

Siun @ 51

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

Air War didn’t work with Germany, Japan, or North Vietnam..won’t work with Iran.

siun, who are the three who didn’t vote? Do we know? It’s not on the Senate site yet that I can find.

If Cspan replays any of the discussion of the Amendment … please watch. This was not a throwaway vote – they are all very eager to take on Iran.

war with Iran sounds like it would be in Israels best interests, anyone wanna say A*P*C? Levin, Lieberman?

http://www.truthdig.com/report…..om_israel/

~~ModNote: Content edited to clear filters.~~~

Hey Zennurse!

Not sure – the roll has not been up … Johnson would be one, not sure of the other two.

Must have something to do with the terra tak.

Siun @ 51

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

I hope I’m wrong. But if I am, here’s another bitter consolation: an attack on Iran, from our current position of weakness, will hasten the expulsion of our army from Iraq. We have to lose sooner or later; I’d prefer it be sooner.

brendan @ 47:

My feeling, oddly enough, is that they just feel it’s risk-free pandering. They have no power, and therefore no responsibility.

Unfortunately, your feeling is exactly right. They don’t see or even consider the greater implications of this vote.

zennurse @ 56

siun, who are the three who didn’t vote? Do we know? It’s not on the Senate site yet that I can find.

not voting:

Brownback (R-KS)
Johnson (D-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)

see my links above @32

Don’t these guys EVER learn????
I can understand a few Blue Dogs voting for this, but 97-0??? I am disgusted.

Bob in WI (temporarily)

I smell a draft…

unless we accept the premise that ALL the Democrats who voted for this really are clueless, spineless tools (which mind you I am not ruling out), what was their motivation in doing so? I believe Brendan’s theory is that they regarded it as an essentially meaningless act — are there any others?

Do you think we can depend on help from the Israeli military for our pending attack on Iran?

I can’t even follow the bullshit spin anymore. Who are the main bad guys? Is it al Queda or Iran?

Siun @ 57

If Cspan replays any of the discussion of the Amendment … please watch. This was not a throwaway vote – they are all very eager to take on Iran.

This is insane. I’m just an editor from the hinterlands, but even I can see this as a disaster writ very, very large. How do you think China and Russia will feel about us blowing up Russia’s pipeline and China’s major source of oil? Both those countries, as I recall, have troops, submarines, planes, and nukes.

Oil prices would go through the roof, economies would collapse…

Who was it above who said something about crawling into bed with a bottle of vodka? I’m so there…

Siun @ 57

If Cspan replays any of the discussion of the Amendment … please watch. This was not a throwaway vote – they are all very eager to take on Iran.

second that.

i watched the last part of it… eager is a good description.

Steve-AR @ 48

OT..but interesting take on the order from Bush, for Meyers not to talk.

From TPM:

Invoking a privilege is one thing, but telling a person not to show up in response to a subpoena — if only to actually invoke the privilege — is quite another. It’s not just worse, it’s a felony under federal criminal law. See for yourself.

18 U.S.C. Sec. 1505 : … Whoever corruptly … influences, obstructs, or impedes … the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress … [s]hall be fined under this title, [or] imprisoned not more than 5 years … or both.

18 U.S.C. Sec. 1515(b): As used in section 1505, the term “corruptly” means acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including … withholding, [or] concealing … information.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/015273.php

Yes.. I’ve seen this personally..
A judge threatened an attorney with contempt and JAIL for advising his client to ignore her court order..

It was the highlight of my day..

The plans against Iran are likely to include only special forces on the ground, but with the full might and firepower of the US Air Force and the US Navy, both of which are not suffering the same maladies as the overstretched Army and Reserves.

Shock and awe all around.

-GSD

kym @ 43

Vitter R-LA didn’t respond.
He’s at his House in New Orleans Called the Rising Sun.

He was asked to vote ‘no’, misheard it as ‘ho’, and no-one’s been able to reach him since.

brendan @ 60

Siun @ 51

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

I hope I’m wrong. But if I am, here’s another bitter consolation: an attack on Iran, from our current position of weakness, will hasten the expulsion of our army from Iraq. We have to lose sooner or later; I’d prefer it be sooner.

Any attack on Iran will prompt an attack immediately upon the troops in Iraq and on Israel. The US would then bomb the holy hell out of Iran, we would be without an army, and they would institute the draft. That is the only way I can see such a thing going down. I hope I’m wrong, and I probably am.

i just called kennedy’s office. it’s closed for the evening.. but i’ll call again the am.

also called kerry’s office. the person i spoke with sounded very surprised to hear that kerry had voted for the lieberman amendment (seemed to completely understand why that could be a bad idea – iraq replay).

I’m often one of those saying that there isn’t much difference between the two parties, but the cloture vote today showed a clear difference: it was almost entirely on party lines, Democrats for and Republicans against.

As far as Iran goes, as far as I can tell the Democrats are more supportive of war with Iran than the Republicans. Hillary makes a speech every couple of weeks about how Bush isn’t being “tough enough” on Iran. All three of the top three presidential contenders have hinted that they’d consider a nuclear attack on Iran if elected, although Edwards has pulled back from that a bit recently. If you want war with Iran, vote for the Democrat.

Frank Probst @ 67

I can’t even follow the bullshit spin anymore. Who are the main bad guys? Is it al Queda or Iran?

It’s the Neocons.

theWalrus @ 40

We have an Executive Branch run amok enabled by the rightwing (and a few nuts from the middle and left).

The only answer will be a full out military coup to take our government back.

I mentioned this possibility to a colleague a couple of years ago, and he said I was crazy. I think if I were to bring it up again, I might get a different response. I never have thought it to be a high-probability event, but the spinelessness of the Senate certainly makes it more plausible.

What were they thinking? What’s going on. It just doesn’t make sense that it would be unanimous. There’s got to be something else at work that we don’t yet understand.

Nothin’ like a new war to take the voters minds off of the old war.

The end is near.

I told Lieberman in an email to give the troops a break.
Here’s the autoresponse I got:

Dear Friend:
Thank you for visiting my Contact Center and sharing with me your comments on the important issues I am addressing in Congress. Your message has been received; you will be receiving a response to your concerns as soon as our review and research have been completed.

I value having the benefit of your thoughtful views and hope you will keep me apprised of any other matters of interest or concern to you in the future. Please continue to visit my web site at http://lieberman.senate.gov for current information about what is happening in Congress and updated news about my work on behalf of Connecticut. I am pleased to let you know that I have launched an email news update service through my web site. You can sign up for that service by visiting my web site and clicking on the “Subscribe Email News Updates” button at the bottom of the home page. I hope these are informative and useful.

Sincerely,
Joseph I. Lieberman

UNITED STATES SENATOR

I feel all fuzzy and warm inside.

Drudge has got the sirene up.

‘Al Qaeda at pre-9/11 strength’.

The bell is tolling, don’t ask.

There will be a massive regional conflagration in the Middle East this summer.

-GSD

Steve-AR @ 48

I just mailed that US Code quote to the LA Times, in reference to the AP wire story on Bush ordering Miers not to testify. Said that telling her that was, in itself, obstruction of justice and a felony. ‘Now can we impeach them?’

And I am, once more, p*ssed off at Feinstein and Boxer and Reid. Reid is a useless piece of sh*t Majority leader.

My reading on the actual text of this Amendment is that it’s pretty much meaningless. It doesn’t look like we’re actually accusing Iran of anything. We’re just saying: (a) killing Americans is bad, and (b) Iran should stop doing anything that would lead to the killing of Americans. If you go through the whole Amendment and replace the word “Iran” with, say, the words “Joe Lieberman”, I think that the Amendment will still be technically accurate–it won’t say that Joe Lieberman is actually killing US troops; it will just tell him to take immediate action to stop doing so.

The analogy eventually breaks down, though. Iran can’t really do much to stop the killing of US soldiers in Iraq. Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, could be a powerful voice to get the troops out of harm’s way and bring them home. But you get the point.

this is from an old comment of mine (from 6/26) about h.con.r.21 – that is relevant to today’s senate vote.

h.con.r.21 background here, here, and here.

lots of good stuff in the links.

bottom line – virtually the entire house of representatives (only 2 “no” votes – kucinich and paul) voted to ask the UN security council to charge ahmadinejad with “violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and United Nations Charter” based on basically his calling for the genocide of israelis and because “Iran has aggressively pursued a clandestine effort to arm itself with nuclear weapons”.

only problem is that the first is a lie (mistranslations) and there is not evidence for the second (see IAEA).

when kucinich tried to enter into the congressional record the correct translation, he was prevented from doing so.

so, now we have a document that bush can point to (after bombing iran) and say – “see, even the dems know that the iranian leader is a genocidal maniac pursuing nuclear weapons.”

how could my D congress critters be so dumb?

97-0 ???? OMG! Time to plan what planet I want to live on next.

I guess the silver lining in this will be our total and complete defeat after we attack Iran. Our status as a superpower will end, like the way Spain’s or the Soviet Union’s was ended. It’ll be bloody and many will die, but then our warmongering ways will be ended for generations.

I try to appreciate the pressure these Senators face from the middle who are saying we have to stay because we made the mess, or we will create civil war or whatever, I really do. For every one of us, there is probably one of them that they have to respond back to. And I have made myself read about the weapons and the improvised explosives and the incredible damage they are doing in Iraq, just so I would know and could say I had some small understanding of that horror. But I don’t really get what these Senators expect to accomplish with this kind of effort. They can say they know what Iran is doing and they can shake their finger in Ahmedinijad’s face and say “no, no, go to the naughty chair”, but beyond that this is just rhetoric that supports the neocon’s argument for war. I can’t imagine what Bush thinks will happen to his adventure in Iraq if he takes the military into Iran and I can’t begin to connect to the feelings of the military families as they see this stuff happening. It’s bad enough that platoons who went over for 6 months early on are doing their third deployment in 5 years, but for them to then have to imagine two conflicts…
I think about their kids and pray that they get mad enough to generate a revolution, somewhat like the Peace Movement but with Blackberries and cellphones.

selise @ 74

i just called kennedy’s office. it’s closed for the evening.. but i’ll call again the am.

also called kerry’s office. the person i spoke with sounded very surprised to hear that kerry had voted for the lieberman amendment (seemed to completely understand why that could be a bad idea – iraq replay).

yeah, guys like Kennedy are what I mean. And Webb — I mean didn’t he introduce a bill earlier this year to require king bozo to get Congressional authority for any move against Iran? Maybe I’m being naive again, but it seems to me there must be something more to this than just a massive cosmic wimpout.

selise @ 75

i just called kennedy’s office. it’s closed for the evening.. but i’ll call again the am.

also called kerry’s office. the person i spoke with sounded very surprised to hear that kerry had voted for the lieberman amendment (seemed to completely understand why that could be a bad idea – iraq replay).

Unbelievable. It certainly doesn’t help diplomatic relations. I can’t believe Kennedy and Kerry voted for that piece of crap. Or Dodd. What the F* is going on?

All this stuff makes my gut hurt. I am going out to eat some Vindaloo..maybe that will help.

I smell a rat. They’re pulling the same fear mongering tricks they’ve pulled for years.

It didn’t work so well a few months ago so now they bring out Act II

97-0!!! These people just piss me off to high heaven.

How can anyone be so f*cking obtuse?

Were the A*P*C folks in the aisles passing out dollars as the vote was taken?

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~

GSD @ 82

Drudge has got the sirene up.

‘Al Qaeda at pre-9/11 strength’.

The bell is tolling, don’t ask.

There will be a massive regional conflagration in the Middle East this summer.

-GSD

Oh, goody. That just proves what a failure this administration is. It doesn’t matter anymore I guess.

I think the coup is pretty much complete. Our only hope is that the military turn, but they won’t, because they are brainwashed. I have my beliefs about 9/11, and all of this stuff just reinforces it.

scav @ 46

NYT reporting Lady Bird Johnson has died.

:(

Frank Probst @ 83

My reading on the actual text of this Amendment is that it’s pretty much meaningless. It doesn’t look like we’re actually accusing Iran of anything. We’re just saying: (a) killing Americans is bad, and (b) Iran should stop doing anything that would lead to the killing of Americans. If you go through the whole Amendment and replace the word “Iran” with, say, the words “Joe Lieberman”, I think that the Amendment will still be technically accurate–it won’t say that Joe Lieberman is actually killing US troops; it will just tell him to take immediate action to stop doing so.

The analogy eventually breaks down, though. Iran can’t really do much to stop the killing of US soldiers in Iraq. Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, could be a powerful voice to get the troops out of harm’s way and bring them home. But you get the point.

How much do you want to bet that Bush takes this as being given authority to bomb Iran?

mui @ 89

selise @ 75

i just called kennedy’s office. it’s closed for the evening.. but i’ll call again the am.

also called kerry’s office. the person i spoke with sounded very surprised to hear that kerry had voted for the lieberman amendment (seemed to completely understand why that could be a bad idea – iraq replay).

Unbelievable. It certainly doesn’t help diplomatic relations. I can’t believe Kennedy and Kerry voted for that piece of crap. Or Dodd. What the F* is going on?

i suspect the D leadership told everyone to vote “yes”. what i don’t get is why.

LS @ 93

GSD @ 82

Drudge has got the sirene up.

‘Al Qaeda at pre-9/11 strength’.

The bell is tolling, don’t ask.

There will be a massive regional conflagration in the Middle East this summer.

-GSD

Oh, goody. That just proves what a failure this administration is. It doesn’t matter anymore I guess.

I think the coup is pretty much complete. Our only hope is that the military turn, but they won’t, because they are brainwashed. I have my beliefs about 9/11, and all of this stuff just reinforces it.

As individuals, not nearly as brainwashed as you might imagine.

What a F**KING OUTRAGE this is.

We are “represented” by people with NO PRINCIPLES, NO VALUES, NO INTEGRITY that they will not trample and abandon in the name of political expediency.

We are, in short, held hostage by crooks – like the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee who trampled all over John Conyers with sneering deceitful impunity today, using our powers under the Constitution against us.

Carl Levin looked like somebody who got free ice cream today, grinning like a cheshire cat as he singlehandedly operated the United States Senate in service and on behalf of foreign governments and their lobbies.

Oh, how the campaign contributors cashed in their chips today. Between this travesty of a vote in the Senate and Senate Oil Crook Ted Stevens of Alaska letting slip the truth about Iraq on the front page of the Washington Post (that huge oil wealth Stevens and Cheney are drooling over), this government, in all its forms, is an absolute abomination to the good name of the people of the United States.

[Small silver lining: Rep. Joe Sestak on C-SPAN’s talk show, admitting to the ulterior motive of the oil law (thanks to informed callers), AND to the inherent war powers of our Legislative Branch (what a concept…), as the program came to a close. Joe means well, and defended his positions extremely effectively to both sane and insane callers.]

We must make these people who pretend to represent us pay for their utter contempt for we, the American people, and our rights, our liberty, and our will, while they violently abuse our power in open, flagrant defiance of honor, duty, country and the American Constitution.

Frank Probst @ 82

My reading on the actual text of this Amendment is that it’s pretty much meaningless. It doesn’t look like we’re actually accusing Iran of anything. We’re just saying: (a) killing Americans is bad, and (b) Iran should stop doing anything that would lead to the killing of Americans. If you go through the whole Amendment and replace the word “Iran” with, say, the words “Joe Lieberman”, I think that the Amendment will still be technically accurate–it won’t say that Joe Lieberman is actually killing US troops; it will just tell him to take immediate action to stop doing so.

The analogy eventually breaks down, though. Iran can’t really do much to stop the killing of US soldiers in Iraq. Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, could be a powerful voice to get the troops out of harm’s way and bring them home. But you get the point.

what text are you reading? thomas doesn’t have it posted yet.

ifthethunderdontgetya @ 53

Siun @ 51

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

Amongst all the other bad outcomes, the price of oil will skyrocket. Of course, that’s good for many of Cheney’s pals.

Yes, exactly! That explains why the Iraqi infrastructure is incapable of producing pre-war levels of oil. The war was for this very purpose, according to Greg Palast. And the lie — that the war would be paid for with Iraqi oil — is just so much more cynical in that light.

Why are we letting a HANDFUL of warmongers lead us to the brink of destruction ??

I hear Tony Soprano’s lookin’ for work..

Let’s let him WORK !!

LS @ 27

All they need is Chertoff’s gut to be right…and they will claim martial law, and it’s all over…or it’s revolution.

Another sad day in our country.

the revolution will be Toobzed

“For many months, our military commanders and diplomats have warned us that the Iranian government has been training, equipping, arming, and funding proxies in Iraq who are murdering our troops.”

wtf?

Haven’t we been arming the police, the army, the militias, and any other group that attacks and plunders the police, army, or militias? (Or other poorly guarded edifice, or antiquity…)

Makes the head spin, b/c I recall that the US was instrumental in arming all kinds of groups, countries, dictators, death squads. The moral disconnect is appalling.

And, the tendency of the Dems to fall in line, vs. the Repub practice of lining up against the Dems… just makes me want to feel like a failure. I’ll stop ranting, I could go on forever. I am very disappointed.

TexB @ 96

LS @ 93

Oh, goody. That just proves what a failure this administration is. It doesn’t matter anymore I guess.

I think the coup is pretty much complete. Our only hope is that the military turn, but they won’t, because they are brainwashed. I have my beliefs about 9/11, and all of this stuff just reinforces it.

As individuals, not nearly as brainwashed as you might imagine.

You are right. I know some who are clued in. I’m really depressed about all of this.

Steve-AR @ 55

Siun @ 51

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

War, ultimately is about capturing territory. No airplane ever took a hill.
Air War didn’t work with Germany, Japan, or North Vietnam..won’t work with Iran.

TJ @ 94

Frank Probst @ 83

My reading on the actual text of this Amendment is that it’s pretty much meaningless. It doesn’t look like we’re actually accusing Iran of anything. We’re just saying: (a) killing Americans is bad, and (b) Iran should stop doing anything that would lead to the killing of Americans. If you go through the whole Amendment and replace the word “Iran” with, say, the words “Joe Lieberman”, I think that the Amendment will still be technically accurate–it won’t say that Joe Lieberman is actually killing US troops; it will just tell him to take immediate action to stop doing so.

The analogy eventually breaks down, though. Iran can’t really do much to stop the killing of US soldiers in Iraq. Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, could be a powerful voice to get the troops out of harm’s way and bring them home. But you get the point.

How much do you want to bet that Bush takes this as being given authority to bomb Iran?

No bet. I think it was stupid for the Dems to vote for this, but I can understand why they did so. I just wish they’d stop handing Karl Rove the big bats that he brains them with.

BTW, is anyone else just a wee bit concerned about those 140,000 Turkish troops on Iraq’s northern border?

Rayne @ 5 –

tried calling levin at DC and detroit numbers. office is closed for the evening, but i will call back in the am.

selise @ 63

zennurse @ 56

siun, who are the three who didn’t vote? Do we know? It’s not on the Senate site yet that I can find.

not voting:

Brownback (R-KS)
Johnson (D-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)

see my links above @32

ugh!!! even Feingold voted for this POS. :-(

ccmask @ 65

I smell a draft…

You might be right. But please read Fuck the Draft to see why I am ambivalent about this.

“… and tell ‘em Big Mitch sent ya!”

(Blogwhoring alert)

selise @ 99

Frank Probst @ 82

My reading on the actual text of this Amendment is that it’s pretty much meaningless. It doesn’t look like we’re actually accusing Iran of anything. We’re just saying: (a) killing Americans is bad, and (b) Iran should stop doing anything that would lead to the killing of Americans. If you go through the whole Amendment and replace the word “Iran” with, say, the words “Joe Lieberman”, I think that the Amendment will still be technically accurate–it won’t say that Joe Lieberman is actually killing US troops; it will just tell him to take immediate action to stop doing so.

The analogy eventually breaks down, though. Iran can’t really do much to stop the killing of US soldiers in Iraq. Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, could be a powerful voice to get the troops out of harm’s way and bring them home. But you get the point.

what text are you reading? thomas doesn’t have it posted yet.

My bad–I just meant the parts that Siun posted. I should have said “My impression” instead of “My reading”.

BigMitch @ 104

Steve-AR @ 55

Air War didn’t work with Germany, Japan, or North Vietnam..won’t work with Iran.

War, ultimately is about capturing territory. No airplane ever took a hill.

America is a colossus run amok. The people are sedated by bread and circus and the ruling elite are determined to try and stay at the top of the heap no matter what.

The US will be shocked at an Iranian response to a US attack.

-GSD

I see the word “co-sponsor” in relation to Lieberman’s Iran bill. I believe the correct spelling is c-o-c-o-n-s-p-i-r-a-t-o-r.

comments previously attributed to Steve-AR@55 were my own. Corrected at 110.

Sorry, bout that.

Frank Probst @ 105

BTW, is anyone else just a wee bit concerned about those 140,000 Turkish troops on Iraq’s northern border?

yes

Clinton @ 102

“For many months, our military commanders and diplomats have warned us that the Iranian government has been training, equipping, arming, and funding proxies in Iraq who are murdering our troops.”

wtf?

In fact, Pace said Iran was doing no such thing – shortly thereafter, he was replaced.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 67

Do you think we can depend on help from the Israeli military for our pending attack on Iran?

You can always depend on Israel. However, if we attack Iran, the U.S. will ask Israel to stay out of the fray. If the U.S. wants Israel to attack Iran, it will.

I am 100% certain of this.

selise @ 62

zennurse @ 56

siun, who are the three who didn’t vote? Do we know? It’s not on the Senate site yet that I can find.

not voting:

Brownback (R-KS)
Johnson (D-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)

see my links above @32

That means Bernie Sanders also voted for it. There’s more here than meets the eye (though probably not much more).

Zawahiri has called for a jihad against the Pakistani government in his latest brief video.

Oh it is getting really hot in here.

-GSD

ifthethunderdontgetya @ 53

Siun @ 51

There is a third carrier on its way now to the Gulf … and the plans talked about are not troops on the ground but carpet bombing 200 sites in Iran – Fox News has a lovely map of them.

Air war is great when you have completely destroyed your ground army.

Amongst all the other bad outcomes, the price of oil will skyrocket. Of course, that’s good for many of Cheney’s pals.

you don’t roll out a new product in august, but you do in september, so what will it be impeachment in september? na!! let’s invade iran increase our losses and raise-up the war preznut say the jolly cultish goopers with lieman at the helm…disgusting beyond…

This is beyond depressing.

The US will be shocked at an Iranian response to a US attack.

-GSD

I have to agree. Awesomely shocked.

Frank Probst @ 105

TJ @ 94

How much do you want to bet that Bush takes this as being given authority to bomb Iran?

No bet. I think it was stupid for the Dems to vote for this, but I can understand why they did so. I just wish they’d stop handing Karl Rove the big bats that he brains them with.

BTW, is anyone else just a wee bit concerned about those 140,000 Turkish troops on Iraq’s northern border?

I think the Kurds must be. Other than that probably nooen, except for maybe Juan Cole. It certainly doesn’t warm the cockles to know that this country has added fuel to that ancient feud.

Israel will go to war with Syria to cover the western flank.

-GSD

Frank Probst @ 109 – thanks.

selise @ 95

mui @ 89

Unbelievable. It certainly doesn’t help diplomatic relations. I can’t believe Kennedy and Kerry voted for that piece of crap. Or Dodd. What the F* is going on?

i suspect the D leadership told everyone to vote “yes”. what i don’t get is why.

I think we may need to find out why.

GSD @ 111

America is a colossus run amok. The people are sedated by bread and circus and the ruling elite are determined to try and stay at the top of the heap no matter what.

The US will be shocked at an Iranian response to a US attack.

-GSD

I agree, when Iran retaliates by launching 300 russian-supplied cruise missiles at our 3 carrier groups and all major oil production centers within the Persian Gulf, one would think we might sit up and notice!!! *g*

GSD @ 111

I won’t be. I’m expecting their response to be forceful and definite.

Israel will be annihilated if the US attacks Iran. Why would the Neocons want that?

Knut Wicksell @ 117

selise @ 62

not voting:

Brownback (R-KS)
Johnson (D-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)

see my links above @32

That means Bernie Sanders also voted for it. There’s more here than meets the eye (though probably not much more).

yes. and from listening to durbin (marjority whip) my guess is that the D leadership said vote “yes”, and no one had the time to read the bill or think about it for themselves or with their staff.

that’s my guess, anyway.

… and i think the same thing happened in the house. how else to explain the 411 – 2 vote (only paul and kucinich voting no)?

LS @ 128

Israel will be annihilated if the US attacks Iran. Why would the Neocons want that?

The final battle, Armegeddon. The fundies having been waiting for this glorious moment in history and Bush wants to give back to his base.

BigMitch @ 98

ifthethunderdontgetya @ 53

Amongst all the other bad outcomes, the price of oil will skyrocket. Of course, that’s good for many of Cheney’s pals.

Yes, exactly! That explains why the Iraqi infrastructure is incapable of producing pre-war levels of oil. The war was for this very purpose, according to Greg Palast. And the lie — that the war would be paid for with Iraqi oil — is just so much more cynical in that light.

Mitch, you need to modify the link you have for your Facebook connection. You need to go to your “Profile” page and at the bottom click on “Public Listing” and copy that URL into the box on the FDL registration.

I had to do the same thing after I screwed up at first.

puppethead @ 85

I guess the silver lining in this will be our total and complete defeat after we attack Iran. Our status as a superpower will end, like the way Spain’s or the Soviet Union’s was ended. It’ll be bloody and many will die, but then our warmongering ways will be ended for generations.

This has been pretty much my view of it since day 1 (actually day -1 of the Iraq invasion. One always hoped it wouldn’t come to that, but we have the example of Japan and Germany both becoming more civilized after their defeat. Problem with that hypothesis, though, is that the Germans didn’t accept it the first time, and really had to be throttled the second time round to get the point. For us, the worst case scenario is that it will take three beatings (Vietnam, Iraq/Iran and God knows who next).

On the present case, I don’t think the Russians will stand for our or Israel’s uncontested bombing of a neighbor state. My guess is that they’ve been shuttling in pretty sophistic AA and anti-missile stuff to the Iranians, who can certainly afford it. Christ! What a mess.

Siun@115

Yes, it’s us. It is almost always us.
And yet we blame others.

Have been meaning to see “Why We Fight” but too afraid about being even more depressed about the reality. I read part of “In Search of Enemies” 20 years ago, and I know the playbook hasn’t changed.

It is all sad and infuriating. (I *had* thought new Senators would help) I want to give them the idiot’s voting cheat card. “If Bush likes it, vote NO. If Lieberman likes it, vote NO. etc.”

Why can’t they get on the right side of the issue?

just to step back for a minute.

as depressing as this is….

1. it doesn’t mean there will be war with iran. it just means congress made it a bit more likely, if bush/cheney want to do it.

2. it’s better to know that congress is not on our side on this… facing reality helps us to know what to do next.

let’s make sure our congress critters know we are watching them… they can’t do this shit and expect to get away with it.

LS @ 127

Israel will be annihilated if the US attacks Iran. Why would the Neocons want that?

You underestimate Israel’s defense capability. IMHO

1 vote for the brendan theory here. Reprehensible, absolutely reprehensible. Even if you put a very dark interpretation on the meaning of some of the recent rose garden scaremongering, it’s past time to stop being so cowed.

CTuttle @ 126

GSD @ 111

[snip] The US will be shocked at an Iranian response to a US attack.

-GSD

I agree, when Iran retaliates by launching 300 russian-supplied cruise missiles at our 3 carrier groups and all major oil production centers within the Persian Gulf, one would think we might sit up and notice!!! *g*

The missles are predominantly Chinese, and are known within the armed forces as “ship killers.”

Everyone knows that if and when the U.S. launches another war of aggression that Iran will respond in some forceful way. The question is, what will the American people do? Continue to sit on their ever expanding butts watching the latest reality show, sit at their computers blogging their indignation, roll over and go back to sleep? Given the fact that Congress is once again caving into pressures for another war what is the fall back plan for the left? More waiting is just going to result in more death.

Bluetoe @ 129

LS @ 128

Israel will be annihilated if the US attacks Iran. Why would the Neocons want that?

The final battle, Armegeddon. The fundies having been waiting for this glorious moment in history and Bush wants to give back to his base.

No. The Neocons are not the fundies. They have been highly aligned with Israel. Ledeen, Feith, Wolfowitz, Kristol, Cheney, Lieberman, etc. It makes no sense.

The only thing I can think of is that they are thinking of taking a huge gamble; attacking Iran, Pakistan, Syria simultaneously by air – shock and awe – with back-up by Israel, Saudi Arabia, maybe Jordan. All bloody hell will break loose. The Neocons do not care about religion, they care about oil, money, and power. World domination by force – and they will lose. They can subdue and distract our country by a false flag terrorist event.

egregious @ 136

CTuttle @ 126

I agree, when Iran retaliates by launching 300 russian-supplied cruise missiles at our 3 carrier groups and all major oil production centers within the Persian Gulf, one would think we might sit up and notice!!! *g*

The missles are predominantly Chinese, and are known within the armed forces as “ship killers.”

I stand corrected! *g*

relevant quote from glenn greenwald when he was here for book salon:

I devoted the largest chapter in the book to Iran, because I think a war with Iran is the greatest danger we face, and I think it’s more likely than not.

P J Evans @ 127

GSD @ 111

I won’t be. I’m expecting their response to be forceful and definite.

I meant to say people will be shocked at the severity of the response. And the Iranians will respond.

The neo-cons are under the impression that the Iranian government will collapse after a US attack. Abandon their unpopular president.

You know, just like what happened to America after 9/11.

-GSD

The Iranians recently purchased about 40 of these from Russia.

dakine01 @ 130

BigMitch @ 98

Yes, exactly! That explains why the Iraqi infrastructure is incapable of producing pre-war levels of oil. The war was for this very purpose, according to Greg Palast. And the lie — that the war would be paid for with Iraqi oil — is just so much more cynical in that light.

Mitch, you need to modify the link you have for your Facebook connection. You need to go to your “Profile” page and at the bottom click on “Public Listing” and copy that URL into the box on the FDL registration.

I had to do the same thing after I screwed up at first.

Why can I not find the Public Listing link????

selise @ 134

just to step back for a minute.

as depressing as this is….

1. it doesn’t mean there will be war with iran. it just means congress made it a bit more likely, if bush/cheney want to do it.

2. it’s better to know that congress is not on our side on this… facing reality helps us to know what to do next.

let’s make sure our congress critters know we are watching them… they can’t do this shit and expect to get away with it.

Do you think Dems in Congress fear the people????? They know the American public has a very very short memory and certainly knows next to nothing about history. They will do what they want until such time the people make them pay a price they are not willing to pay.

egregious @ 135

CTuttle @ 126

I agree, when Iran retaliates by launching 300 russian-supplied cruise missiles at our 3 carrier groups and all major oil production centers within the Persian Gulf, one would think we might sit up and notice!!! *g*

The missles are predominantly Chinese, and are known within the armed forces as “ship killers.”

I believe that Putin told the Chimpenfuhrer that if we attack Iran, he attacks us.

Although this resulting war would be the Christianists ultimate wet dream – total global war centered in the ME.

If Bush did not invade Iraq, Iran would not be a question now.
So what are the new 16 words?

BigMitch @ 134

LS @ 127

Israel will be annihilated if the US attacks Iran. Why would the Neocons want that?

You underestimate Israel’s defense capability. IMHO

No, I don’t. They have nukes, and they will use them. They have an outstanding airforce capability, but they will be no match for the onslaught against them, should they do something like that. They will be forced to go nuclear.

CTuttle @ 125

GSD @ 111

America is a colossus run amok. The people are sedated by bread and circus and the ruling elite are determined to try and stay at the top of the heap no matter what.

The US will be shocked at an Iranian response to a US attack.

-GSD

I agree, when Iran retaliates by launching 300 russian-supplied cruise missiles at our 3 carrier groups and all major oil production centers within the Persian Gulf, one would think we might sit up and notice!!! *g*

The Sunburns

… Beyond mines, Iran’s most significant threat to Gulf shipping would probably come from its truck-mobile anti-ship missiles. Iran generally keeps eight SS-N-22 Sunburn anti-ship missile batteries stationed near Bandar-e Abbas, as well as at least 12 Silkworm anti-ship missile sites around Bandar-e Abbas and Kharg Island. Military ships’ defenses could easily shoot down the Silkworms, but not the hypersonic Sunburns, which have a 75-mile range. Any civilian shipping would be a sitting duck in a fight with either.

Iran also boasts three Tareq/Kilo-class diesel/electric submarines and several Ghadir-class midget subs (based on a North Korean design) that could be launched from Chabahar. Both ship types are capable of attacking shipping — or other energy assets in the Gulf — directly or indirectly by laying mines. Speedboats could also be used to harass tankers and terminals. Luckily, Iran’s air force would be of limited use since it has few anti-ship capabilities.

And about the torpedoes in those submarines that they also bought from Russia

Iran has tested what it says is the world’s fastest underwater missile, designed to elude radar and destroy enemy submarines.

National TV programmes were interrupted to show footage of the missile being fired into the Gulf and destroying a derelict ship.

The test came two days after it tested a conventional missile capable of being equipped with multiple warheads.

Both tests come amid rising tensions over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard troops are carrying out a series of military exercises and tests in the Gulf and in the Arabian Sea.

The new missile, called Hoot, or Whale, could be deployed on Iranian ships in the oil-rich area, which is home to the US 5th Fleet. …

Don’t get me wrong, the US could obliterate Iran, but we would sustain massive casualties … to say nothing about the cessation of all oil deliveries out of the gulf

So an amendment against Iran. And when will the Senate pass an amendment against Saudi funding of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq or Pakistan’s granting safehavens to the Taliban in border areas.

Oh, I forgot they’re our allies.

BigMitch @ 141

dakine01 @ 130

Mitch, you need to modify the link you have for your Facebook connection. You need to go to your “Profile” page and at the bottom click on “Public Listing” and copy that URL into the box on the FDL registration.

I had to do the same thing after I screwed up at first.

Why can I not find the Public Listing link????

It should be at the very bottom of your Profile page, next to a link for “Creating a Public Badge.” It is a number that seems to correspond to the your Facebook porfile page.

GSD @ 142

We’re on the same page. The ‘they’ I meant was Iran. Sorry it wasn’t clear.

We are so scr*wed.

This is sickening. Dodd? Obama? Kennedy? Kerry? Even Feingold?? It’s like Groundhog Day….

When will they ever learn?

Slightly OT:
What is stopping Putin (Dubya looked into his eyes and saw his good soul) from getting with Castro (Raul or Fidel) and replacing some missiles?

Like 1964 all over again.

Putin was none too happy about the US Missiles planned for Czech Republic, Poland, etc. (Missile Defense shield).

Every day, Bush makes the world more dangerous.

It is disgusting that Democrats cower in fear while they hold the majority. It seems they wish to ride everything out til election time (to win by default).

They now do nothing other than attempt to blunt Rove’s attacks on their patriotism (and manhood). Almost always getting sucker punched and playing defense.

Bluetoe @ 143

Do you think Dems in Congress fear the people????? They know the American public has a very very short memory and certainly knows next to nothing about history. They will do what they want until such time the people make them pay a price they are not willing to pay.

yes i do. and i think they fear the light. and i think many of them have no freaking clue what they are doing (i think this was true of my rep’s vote for h.con.r.21).

i think we can make a difference. not by acting alone. by acting together.

The Iranians also informed the Gulf States that US bases on their soil will be targeted.

Most of the Gulf States announced that they “wouldn’t allow” an attack on Iran from their soil.

-GSD

I don’t understand this vote. The fact that so many ‘good’ dems voted for it makes me think it’s not worth worrying about. I really do trust the judgement of some of our senators. Feingold, for example. So, I’m going to wait before getting too worried.

Let’s not forget the Bin Laden factor. If he or his followers were to pull off another USS Cole style attack, where do you think the finger of blame will be directed at?

It will only take one match to light this fuse.

-GSD

CityGirl @ 151

This is sickening. Dodd? Obama? Kennedy? Kerry? Even Feingold?? It’s like Groundhog Day….

When will they ever learn?

guess it’s up to us to teach them.

tomorrow morning, use the phone. let them know what we think.

they’ve got pressure on one side (mic and the lobby that shall not be named)… let’s at least try to give a bit of pressure from the other side.

Regardless of Iran, it’s now official.. Shrub has lost the War on Terror. AQ is stronger than it was right before 9/11. The last 6 years of war and fear has accomplished nothing. Shrub lost. He’s a loser.

Al-Qaida has rebuilt strength, US says By KATHERINE SHRADER and MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writers
16 minutes ago

WASHINGTON – U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded al-Qaida has rebuilt its operating capability to a level not seen since just before the 2001 terrorist attacks, The Associated Press has learned.

Tiem to tell our various congresscritters that if they really think attacking Iran, under any circumstances, is a good idea, they get to do it themselves. With motorboats, sport-type GPS units, and .22 rifles. And whatever map that the UK navy ship was using when it got into trouble.

I don’t want our military involved. Let JoeL lead it, since he wants it so much. Then we can get on with trying to clean the Augean Stables Capitol and the White House.

GSD @ 141

P J Evans @ 127

GSD @ 111

I won’t be. I’m expecting their response to be forceful and definite.

I meant to say people will be shocked at the severity of the response. And the Iranians will respond.

The neo-cons are under the impression that the Iranian government will collapse after a US attack. Abandon their unpopular president.

You know, just like what happened to America after 9/11.

-GSD

The Iranians recently purchased about 40 of these from Russia.

Damn, that’s 320 readily available AA missiles to counter the three carrier groups’ aircraft! Hmmm, sounds like they’re prepared, that doesn’t include all the SA-7’s they can also field in a moment’s notice!

Think about it. Something else must be up. Gates canceled his trip that had been planned for 6 months, to sit in meetings with W, etal., right after Putie was here. Putie is a Neocon I believe also.

With Chertoff’s statement..I’d look for some backpack type of terrorist event as a diversion and justification, and then a sudden attack on the rest of the axis of evil, with Putie having been guaranteed a cut of the bounty. JMHO.

new thread upstairs with flowers

Can you picture Joe Lieberman siting atop a tactical nuclear weapon as it drops toward an Iranian facility waving his cowboy hat and yelling YAAHOOOOOO!!!!

I guess those blackwater ops are stateside in extortion mode.

97-0. incredible.

Bluetoe @ 164

Can you picture Joe Lieberman siting atop a tactical nuclear weapon as it drops toward an Iranian facility waving his cowboy hat and yelling YAAHOOOOOO!!!!

Definitely, Dr. StrangeLove!!!

CTuttle @ 165

Bluetoe @ 164

Can you picture Joe Lieberman siting atop a tactical nuclear weapon as it drops toward an Iranian facility waving his cowboy hat and yelling YAAHOOOOOO!!!!

Definitely, Dr. StrangeLove!!!

Nah.. that’ll be McCain’s job. Joe’ll be back home, egging him on.

solai @ 156

I don’t understand this vote. The fact that so many ‘good’ dems voted for it makes me think it’s not worth worrying about. I really do trust the judgement of some of our senators. Feingold, for example. So, I’m going to wait before getting too worried.

with all due respect…. i think the last few years has taught us that there are no politicians that should be trusted to act on their own.

and in many cases, i don’t think it’s really their fault. we have a very broken system… no group is living up to their responsibilities (the politicians, the press, the citizens).

look at what happened in the house – they all voted for an insane bill because they believed the propaganda. they just didn’t know any better. don’t believe me, believe juan cole (see my links above on h.con.r.21).

Dubya looked into his eyes and saw his good soul

He never said it was good. Of course, there are other ways to misread a soul.

They are, of course, bought and paid for A*P*C whores. The lot.

James Petras:

The US is the only country in the world where the peace movement is unwilling to recognize, publically condemn or oppose the major influential political and social institutions consistently supporting and promoting the US wars in the Middle East. The political power of the pro-Israel power configuration, led by the American Israel Political Affairs Committee (A*P*C), supported within the government by highly placed pro-Israel Congressional leaders and White House and Pentagon officials has been well documented in books and articles by leading journalists, scholars and former President Jimmy Carter. The Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC) has over two thousand full-time functionaries, more than 250,000 activists, over a thousand billionaire and multi-millionaire political donors who contribute funds both political parties. The ZPC secures 20% of the US foreign military aid budget for Israel, over 95% congressional support for Israel’s boycott and armed incursions in Gaza, invasion of Lebanon and preemptive military option against Iran.

http://tinyurl.com/2n97c5

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters.~~~

prostratedragon @ 168

Dubya looked into his eyes and saw his good soul

He never said it was good. Of course, there are other ways to misread a soul.

Can a man without a soul read another’s soul?

The IDF have lost every single war they’ve fought in South Lebanon what makes you think this one will be different?

LS @ 162

Think about it. Something else must be up. Gates canceled his trip that had been planned for 6 months, to sit in meetings with W, etal., right after Putie was here. Putie is a Neocon I believe also.

With Chertoff’s statement..I’d look for some backpack type of terrorist event as a diversion and justification, and then a sudden attack on the rest of the axis of evil, with Putie having been guaranteed a cut of the bounty. JMHO.

Yes, something like this must be involved. 97–0 is like nothing we’ve seen, including the original Iraq AUMF. Come to think of it, maybe it’s not such a bad signal, though I’m still not liking it one bit …

Bluetoe @ 144

selise @ 134

just to step back for a minute.

as depressing as this is….

1. it doesn’t mean there will be war with iran. it just means congress made it a bit more likely, if bush/cheney want to do it.

2. it’s better to know that congress is not on our side on this… facing reality helps us to know what to do next.

let’s make sure our congress critters know we are watching them… they can’t do this shit and expect to get away with it.

Do you think Dems in Congress fear the people????? They know the American public has a very very short memory and certainly knows next to nothing about history. They will do what they want until such time the people make them pay a price they are not willing to pay.

Don’t tell us — tell them:

U.S. Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Bluetoe @ 164

Can you picture Joe Lieberman siting atop a tactical nuclear weapon as it drops toward an Iranian facility waving his cowboy hat and yelling YAAHOOOOOO!!!!

…paging Darkblack….

Hi Du – thanks for coming by! And your point on the IDF is important. I suspect we see a very quick move to nuclear in this debacle.

And Selise is quite right – they did not read the text or offer any resistance, they negotiated minor changes during a quorum call … and Joe announced his intention to bring this amendment on CNN last night. They had warning and they voted yes quite happily … let’s understand what we are facing here … a Senate which has no problem encouraging the warmonger in chief.

prostratedragon @ 171

LS @ 162

Think about it. Something else must be up. Gates canceled his trip that had been planned for 6 months, to sit in meetings with W, etal., right after Putie was here. Putie is a Neocon I believe also.

With Chertoff’s statement..I’d look for some backpack type of terrorist event as a diversion and justification, and then a sudden attack on the rest of the axis of evil, with Putie having been guaranteed a cut of the bounty. JMHO.

Yes, something like this must be involved. 97–0 is like nothing we’ve seen, including the original Iraq AUMF. Come to think of it, maybe it’s not such a bad signal, though I’m still not liking it one bit …

Look at the four magic words:

“Sense of the Senate”

In other words, no legal force.

It’s not like the AUMF. It’s just bogus boilerplate made because nobody wants to look weak against Iran, but nobody actually wants to do anything that gives Bush the legal and financial ability to invade Iran.

Phoenix Woman @ 175

prostratedragon @ 171

Yes, something like this must be involved. 97–0 is like nothing we’ve seen, including the original Iraq AUMF. Come to think of it, maybe it’s not such a bad signal, though I’m still not liking it one bit …

Look at the four magic words:

“Sense of the Senate”

In other words, no legal force.

It’s not like the AUMF. It’s just bogus boilerplate made because nobody wants to look weak against Iran, but nobody actually wants to do anything that gives Bush the legal and financial ability to invade Iran.

I see. I didn’t realize it was a sense of the Senate deal. Now, it makes sense.

PW – it is just “sense of the Senate” but as Atrios noted in an email, it will now become a matter of “Iran is murdering our soldiers, how could you vote against authorization?”

This is not something you just toss off … look at how McCain today used the BS story about Hezbollah to push for approval of this … we have seen this game played before and we better understand what we are seeing now.

Siun @ 174

Hi Du – thanks for coming by! And your point on the IDF is important. I suspect we see a very quick move to nuclear in this debacle.

And Selise is quite right – they did not read the text or offer any resistance, they negotiated minor changes during a quorum call … and Joe announced his intention to bring this amendment on CNN last night. They had warning and they voted yes quite happily … let’s understand what we are facing here … a Senate which has no problem encouraging the warmonger in chief.

It’s a “sense of the Senate” resolution. Which means it’s not only toothless, it’s meaningless. As Jon Aravosis said about S. 1545 (the Salazar Distraction), it’s right up there with declaring National Ice Cream Day in terms of effectiveness.

That being said, we have to let them know that we don’t like seeing even token gestures that give even lip service to insanity:

U.S. Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Nuclear against whom or what Siun?

PW – it is *NOT* meaningless.

You are forgetting everything we have learned over the past few years. Look at how they build the case, the record …

sorry, but this is way too serious to be giving them a pass on

Has prewar intelligence, or Iran Amendment intel., improved any since the first congressional vote to authorize war? Mentioned in another post- how many in congress actually read the information reports (rather than rely on aides to give them a synopsis?)

Du … if pressed, I am certain Israel will move to nuclear quite happily… and I think George would as well. From there, I’m lost … it starts to look like one big horror with no one escaping.

it ties the hands of the democrats in congress when bush/cheney can say:

“even the democrats have said that iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and has a president who’s a genocidal maniac” (h.con.r.21)

or

“even the democrats have said that iran is actively supporting the terrorist who are killing our troops” (s.amdt.2073)

i think this is VERY serious. we know where it got us on iraq. i don’t want to go there on iran.

mui @ 125

selise @ 95

i suspect the D leadership told everyone to vote “yes”. what i don’t get is why.

I think we may need to find out why.

They might plan on stripping it in the conference committee. Might be the best of both worlds.

atrios’ post:

Iran

I’m probably not the only person who has played a game of Risk with someone who, when losing, decided the best course of action was to just give the board a good whack and scatter the pieces.

mui @ 125

selise @ 95

i suspect the D leadership told everyone to vote “yes”. what i don’t get is why.

I think we may need to find out why.

any suggestions on how we find out?

Joe’s Press Release:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senators Lieberman, McCain, Kyl, Graham, and Coleman today introduced a bipartisan amendment to the Defense Authorization Act, confronting the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran over its proxy attacks on American soldiers in Iraq.

Well, he’s technically correct. Four Republicans and a CFLer.

In which you can write that little settler state off.

Alright let’s consider a tactical nuclear strike either by Israel or the U.S. on Iran.

From where would it be launched? The airbases in Irak are already surrounded and the majority of the AFs in Balad are helicopters which is why naval aviation are flying close support missions.

IOW all of the US airbases not only in Irak but throughout the reigion are within easy range for Iranian retaliation. Iran does actually have the means to retaliate.

Particularly as the ones in Irak are all in the riparian zones which means that they’re technically surrounded already.

Wouldn’t take much to wipe them out.

Moreover both Badr and Jaish Al Mahdi as well the 1920s brigades have made it perfectly clear that they will attack if the Americans attack Iran.

No scenario for securing the entire Gulf coast oil, transportation and shipping infrastructures works without the use of enhanced radiation nuclear devices, known as “Neutron bombs” The Israelis always contemplated their efficacy, as they would possibly be forced to use nukes in close proximity to their own cities, or in areas – such as the West Bank, Damascus and Amman, upon which the llong-term planning of some Israelis has designs.

The device exploded above the Antarctic Ocean in the 70s, by the South Africans and Israelis, was a first generation neutron bomb. The USA developed modified first generation neutron bombs in the early 80s, but they were built so long ago that they have been deconstructed – their useful life is far shorter than “conventional” nuclear or thermonuclear devices. But Bush ordered research into a new generation of enhanced radiation devices early on. The Stennis air wings received additional training in use of a “new weapon” before their deployment. The links are out there, time for me to find them now isn’t – sorry…

brendan @ 31

The fact that it’s the Senate of the U.S. Congress should console everyone: it’s a throwaway vote from a body that’s been excised from any role in formulating or executing our foreign policy. Whether the vote was 1-96 or 97-0 makes no difference. We’re not going to war with Iran.

Since the ISG these things have happened:

–Fallon refused to deploy the third carrier to the Persian Gulf.
–There were threats of “mass resignations” in the military if we attacked Iran.
– The British refused to participate in an attack on Iran and then unseated Blair.

That said, it is beneath contempt. I thought last year’s 410-8 vote against a Lebanon cease-fire was the nadir. They sell their votes to you-know-who because no one else is bidding.

What this disgusting spectacle may be prefatory to, however, is an Israeli attack on Hezbollah: maybe they’re warning off Iran, or something. Maybe an expert can tell us.

Hate to rain on your parade, Brendan, but the Enterprise group was sent and is just outside the Straights as of Monday…speeding on its way. Sinse it is the oldest warship, mayhap it will be the “target” of “terrorism from Iran”. Maybe this is why Mr. Chertoff has “a feeling in the pit of his stomach” that terrorism will happen this summer.

97-0 I am outraged!!
The senators are all telling Bush and Cheney…go ahead…bomb, bomb, bomb.

Where are all the questions they did not ask before Iraq…where is the PROOF behind the rhetoric we have been hearing for months???

Dubhaltach – very important points and valuable information.

I don’t understand why George and Olmert and all would think this is a good idea … but that does not seem to stop them. I honestly think that any sensible analyst knows that this is insane on so many levels yet they seem to have such a strong delusional capacity that they probably believe they would win. That there will be nothing to win does not seem to bother them – neither apparently does the loss of the US troops who instantly become even bigger walking targets.

What do you do when they all go mad?

I do not see how an attack on Iran benefits anyone – anyone!!! – in either the short or long term. Or how anyone even imagines they would benefit.

ET – I always forget (wishful thinking perhaps) about the neutron capability.

Ed*ard Teller @ 189 – and i was worried before.

seriously, siun, dubhaltach, et al… i have trouble thinking nukes. just freaks me out so much…

but ET’s comment means i better do some googling….

Fern @ 192

I do not see how an attack on Iran benefits anyone – anyone!!! – in either the short or long term. Or how anyone even imagines they would benefit.

i thought the same thing about iraq (bad for us, bad israelis and a disaster for iraqis)… and they still started that war.

iran? – thousands of times worse. for everyone.

Well if you’re a Muslim you say this is my chance to get their boot off my neck permanently and you turn Irak into one gigantic hunting ground with every single American soldier and “diplomat” and mercenary there as prey. As we documented on guides recently the US is already having to fly in water to places like Kut and all those tanks need fuel.

That’s just Irak. Afghanistan is even worse.

Dubhaltach @ 198

Well if you’re a Muslim you say this is my chance to get their boot off my neck permanently and you turn Irak into one gigantic hunting ground with every single American soldier and “diplomat” and mercenary there as prey. As we documented on guides recently the US is already having to fly in water to places like Kut and all those tanks need fuel.

That’s just Irak. Afghanistan is even worse.

I’m really scared for our Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan – am I right to be?

Does anyone else feel like they swallowed a large triangle?

Yes. And as I don’t know you and you presumably don’t know me my two most recent tours of duty were in Helmand and then in Al Basrah and Maysan.

Definition of the Neutron Bomb

“Also called ENHANCED RADIATION WARHEAD, specialized type of small thermonuclear weapon that produces minimal blast and heat but which releases large amounts of lethal radiation. The neutron bomb delivers blast and heat effects that are confined to an area of only a few hundred yards in radius. But within a somewhat larger area it throws off a massive wave of neutron and gamma radiation, which can penetrate armor or several feet of earth. This radiation is extremely destructive to living tissue. Because of its short-range destructiveness and the absence of long-range effect, the neutron bomb would be highly effective against tank and infantry formations on the battlefield but would not endanger cities or other population centers only a few miles away. It can be carried in a Lance missile or delivered by an 8-inch (200-millimetre) howitzer, or possibly by attack aircraft. In strategic terms, the neutron bomb has a theoretical deterrent effect: discouraging an armored ground assault by arousing the fear of neutron bomb counterattack. The bomb would disable enemy tank crews in minutes, and those exposed would die within days. U.S. production of the bomb was postponed in 1978 and resumed in 1981.”

Dubaltach’s point is serious … votes like this are the Senate version of “Bring ‘em on” and if they lead to an actual attack on Iran, we are looking at unbelievable horror for the US troops in Iraq.

There are a lot of people in Iraq who know how to fight and who have a lot to revenge in what we have done to their country and their families.

Bush; Support the Generals?

My question is which Generals?

President Bush did not listen to the military and CIA when they warned him that invading Iraq would lead to out of control sectarian violence. Also if Sedum had WMD they did not think he would use them or sell them to terrorist.

Then President Bush wanted to invade anyways. General Zinni, military experts and the CIA warned Bush that we needed 300,000 to 500,000 troops to have any chance. Also we must separate the Country and give local control. So what did Bush do? Bush gets rid of General Zinni and did the complete opposite.

Next after Rumsfeld failed plan of doing Iraq on the cheap and blowing off military and CIA advice. Bush than waits to fire Rumsfeld to after the mid term election for what Bush admitted was for political purposes.

Putting aside we have not met one time line for anything in Iraq the leaders of the Country plan on going on vacation for August rather than deal with the sectarian violence in their Country.

And now President wants us to believe he will listen to the military. Does that mean Bush will listen until they do not do what he says?

Read More

http://www.controlcongress.com

Neutron bomb:
wikipedia
global security

i really want to think that even if given the order – the order to use nukes would be refused.

Siun @ 203

Dubaltach’s point is serious … votes like this are the Senate version of “Bring ‘em on” and if they lead to an actual attack on Iran, we are looking at unbelievable horror for the US troops in Iraq.

There are a lot of people in Iraq who know how to fight and who have a lot to revenge in what we have done to their country and their families.

You are so on the money Siun!

Ed*ard Teller @201

IOW wont work against hardened targets but will destroy the people in the city beside the target. Because it wouldnt be enough to hit the target as you and I both know perfectly well. They would also have to kill all the technicians, research staff, etc.

I posted this a few days back. Someone please tell me why this won’t work.

What about the introduction of a bill that requires, during times of war, military conflict, or action exceeding sixty days, that all defense/military contractors and/or suppliers, be paid on a cost reimbursement basis only until such conflict is over?
This bill would:
1. Save tax payers billions of dollars
2. Be an easy sell to the public
3. If someone is not in favor of it, what would their reason be?
4. End this war and all future unjust/preemptive wars (stop what is going to happen in Iran.)

Siun,
Exactly – Bring Them On is what the vote was about. This is so terrifying.

One thing I do know. I am not afraid. I am so pissed, I could chew glass.

If I remember my old anti-nuke days, the neutron bomb was developed precisely because it would leave the infrastructure and just get rid of the people – at least in theory. So you keep the “assets” and get rid of the opposing force.

One of those truly evil inventions.

The stock market is mortally wounded ~~ dollar, oil, housing, hedge funds, financials, Wal-Mart, all in crisis.

The Recession is upon us. Bush must feel desperate for time.

Sally @ 30

We have no military to send to Iran? Let’s send every representative and senator who has made another war possible–and their families.

You got it! It’s called putting your body where your mouth is!

dannyM @ 2

very disturbing…

Exactly right. I was just thinking about Lady Bird Johnson and Vietnam and how soon the US forgot its last stupid war. Now the entire Senate is playing games around the next one while the world is still in the midst of what may be the most incredibly stupid war in all of human history.

Could not one person, not one, manage to vote no? Shades of the advance rejection of Kyoto. I think perhaps I’ll just give my money to House candidates for now.

Are these people not paying attention? Do they think that their little clause will slow Cheney from using this to move toward war posture?

Piece in the Guardian on Iran Steven Kinser on Iran but sadly his conclusion that no one will buy it feels wrong this afternoon.

selise @ 204

Neutron bomb:
wikipedia
global security

i really want to think that even if given the order – the order to use nukes would be refused.

I am not big on this nuclear option talk. I think it misses the point. It is unlikely any attack on Iran could remain restricted to a few isolated targets. Once you realize this the target lists rise exponentially. Command and control, radars, air defense, air fields, naval bases, ships and small speed boats carrying missiles or explosives, roads and bridges, military bases, missile sites. You are talking about thousands of targets. Most would have to be struck multiple times. Then you throw in Natanz and the nuclear program and you are talking hundreds more targets.

Then you consider out country fallout. What happens in Iraq, in Lebanon, in Dhahran in Saudi Arabia, in the wider Moslem world?

Finally, you consider the effect on the flow of oil and the world economy. You think about $100 plus oil.

Is all this really worth giving a puffed up pipsqueak like Lieberman a hard on?

Dubhaltach @ 207

Ed*ard Teller @201

IOW wont work against hardened targets but will destroy the people in the city beside the target. Because it wouldnt be enough to hit the target as you and I both know perfectly well. They would also have to kill all the technicians, research staff, etc.

We’re less concerned with taking out hardened targets than securing the Iranian coastal production areas. We (Cheney’s allies) want the coastal wells, pipelines, terminals and piers taken intact, otherwise oil goes to $7.00 to $10.00 per gallon and our economy goes into a tailspin.

The inland oil production areas are unattainable under any means. What neutron bombs could do, theoretically, would be to de-populate strategic areas, which we could occupy almost immediately if clothed in anti-radiation suits, and occupy intensively within four days of the detonations. No local population to feed, let alone subdue. Just toxic waste to clean up with Halliburton crews brought in from the Philippines.

They didn’t forget Vietnam. They remember the sweet smell of blood and burning flesh mingled with the screams of children and the wailing of their mothers. Oh the sound of that delicious music! Bring it on again and again and again!

Hugh, you and I don’t completely see eye to eye, but our objectives are the same. How about giving me some help with 208. Tell me why this couldn’t be done.

Ed*ard Teller @ 215

We (Cheney’s allies) want the coastal wells, pipelines, terminals and piers taken intact, otherwise oil goes to $7.00 to $10.00 per gallon and our economy goes into a tailspin.

Oil would go through the roof anyway. Last year during Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, oil and with it gasoline spiked although the flow was never disrupted. Iran would be much worse because there likely would be a significant disruption of oil flow through the Straits of Hormuz. Tankers are not going to move through the Straits if there is a significant physical threat to them (and there will be) because insurance companies will not underwrite them. The oil will not flow.

Considering not one Senator voted against this, some awfully powerful people must have placed full court pressure.

It also points to the fact we are not really leaving Iraq with this congress in charge.

What was Russ Feingold thinking? Self preservation?

NO ET I dont agree. I think what they’re interested in is the SLOCs

Hugh @ 213 –

yes. this doesn’t require nukes to be a complete disaster… much worse than anything we’ve done so far.

Making my job easier – mocking viral videos claiming the (D) party is indistinguishable from the other half of the Republicratic Party – coming right up!

Mocking progrssive defenders of the bifurcated one party status quo also got a lot easier.

How can anyone seriously support someone like Clinton or Obama who would vote for such a thing? The consequences of another hideous act of agression against another country that poses no threat to the USA would be unspeakably dire… and they are rushing this country along this terrible course.

who are they really working for?

boxer @ 206

I posted this a few days back. Someone please tell me why this won’t work.

What about the introduction of a bill that requires, during times of war, military conflict, or action exceeding sixty days, that all defense/military contractors and/or suppliers, be paid on a cost reimbursement basis only until such conflict is over?
This bill would:
1. Save tax payers billions of dollars
2. Be an easy sell to the public
3. If someone is not in favor of it, what would their reason be?
4. End this war and all future unjust/preemptive wars (stop what is going to happen in Iran.)

This sounds like price controls which in time of war would not be a bad thing. The problem is that the military industrial complex, their lobbyists, and the politicians they own would fight it to the end. It would overturn decades of military procurement practice. I favor it. I just don’t think it will happen.

Dubhaltach @ 222

NO ET I dont agree. I think what they’re interested in is the SLOCs

I only know that term to mean “Source Lines of Code”…

Siun @ 212

Piece in the Guardian on Iran Steven Kinser on Iran but sadly his conclusion that no one will buy it feels wrong this afternoon.

By Stephen Kinzer

07/11/07 “The Guardian” — – Why attack Iran? War hawks in Washington are having trouble answering that question. Even their dire warnings about Iran’s nuclear program have not been enough to alarm Americans already weary of Middle East conflicts.

Now the war drums have taken on a different tone. The Bush administration is testing a new rationale for attacking Iran: We must strike because Iranians are killing our soldiers in Iraq.

This is not simply a charge made by one state against another in the hope that a misguided policy will be changed. It is also part of a calculated effort to find an argument for bombing Iran that Americans will accept.

Accusing Iran of deep involvement in the Iraq war is more than a way to lay the groundwork for a US attack. It also provides a scapegoat for America’s looming defeat. By this rationale, the American occupation would have succeeded, and Iraq would now be blooming and tranquil, if only Iran had not interfered and ruined everything.

Not even Americans are likely to swallow that one. Most reject the various rationales the Bush administration has so far offered to justify a possible attack on Iran. If they remain hostile to the idea, President Bush will eventually have to ask himself a fateful question: Should I attack anyway?

Attacking Iran would accomplish at least one thing Bush must be seeking. It will assure that future historians will not remember the invasion of Iraq as his biggest blunder.

looks like our senate just swallowed that one. i heard durbin today saying something like “we all know the iranians are supplying weapons to the insurgency in iraq.”

will have to look for the transcript late to capture the insanity.

Siun @ 210

If I remember my old anti-nuke days, the neutron bomb was developed precisely because it would leave the infrastructure and just get rid of the people – at least in theory. So you keep the “assets” and get rid of the opposing force.

One of those truly evil inventions.

That is precisely how I remember it. I also remember an LA punk band made a record called “We got the Neutron Bomb”.

Sea lines of communication – they’re frightened iran will close the straits

selise #225,

I posted my letter to Durbin and Obama one thread up. It basically told them to get a clue and not do in Iran what Bush did in Iraq.

selise @ 25

siun, thank you so much for giving us this opportunity to hold our congress critters accountable…. i hope everyone will call first thing tomorrow morning (i will).

last week, when i spoke with my rep (jim mcgovern) about h.con.r.21 – he had no idea that there was any controversy about the translations (propaganda).

i swear – our congress critters must live a bubble that is almost as bad as the one president bush lives in. i guess that means it’s up to us to try to educate them.

Stop calling the sleep-walkers in Washington ‘congress critters’ for Crissakes. That cutesy moniker really reeks.
Same inanity when people used to refer to the sociopath Bush as the folksy “Shrub”.

Dubhaltach @ 227

Sea lines of communication – they’re frightened iran will close the straits

The Iranians probably can. More importantly they can make a credible threat to. The effect would be the same on oil markets, stock markets, and to insurance companies.

Nah there is no Israeli lobby. Levin liberal on almost everything except when it comes to Israel he takes a hard right turn wrong just like Senator Schumer.

There is no hard proof to anything that they are saying about Iran…but who cares it worked with Iraq.

Dubhaltach @ 229

Sea lines of communication – they’re frightened iran will close the straits

All the more reason to use neutron bombs and other unconventional weapons. Believe me, I DO hope I’m wrong, but I believe they believe that a violent, unconventional attack all along the Iranian coast, with other attacks on vital command and control centers in the interior has to happen before Bush leaves the White House and that this summer is the end of the optimum time for it to happen.

Hugh @ 227

selise #225,

I posted my letter to Durbin and Obama one thread up. It basically told them to get a clue and not do in Iran what Bush did in Iraq.

found it, thanks. durbin was surprisingly bad today.

no hugh and et – you’re not getting the point. The iranians dont need to close the straits. All they need to do is to arrange for the loading facilities in Kuwait and Saudi to go up in smoke. You’d need a hell of a lot of neutron bombs to eliminate that capacity.

redwoodtreehugger @ 229

Stop calling the sleep-walkers in Washington ‘congress critters’ for Crissakes. That cutesy moniker really reeks.
Same inanity when people used to refer to the sociopath Bush as the folksy “Shrub”.

No one told me there was a book of approved terminology or sent me mine. Isn’t the substance of the comment more important?

I agree with you on timing btw particularly as the Syrians have just ordered all their citizens to evacuate lebanon now

Spiritcatcher @ 9

on waging war with Iran … Holy Joe and what army ? well, at least Iran kicking them out of Iraq will bring the troops home.

Israel cleared the way for a pre-emptive strike on Iran by invading Lebanon taking out part of the Hezbollah arsenal that would be used on Israel if the U.S. or Israel pre-emptively attack Iran.

Iran kicking them out of Iraq will bring the troops home.

No it won’t because they’ll be dead.

Hugh @ 224

boxer @ 206

I posted this a few days back. Someone please tell me why this won’t work.

What about the introduction of a bill that requires, during times of war, military conflict, or action exceeding sixty days, that all defense/military contractors and/or suppliers, be paid on a cost reimbursement basis only until such conflict is over?
This bill would:
1. Save tax payers billions of dollars
2. Be an easy sell to the public
3. If someone is not in favor of it, what would their reason be?
4. End this war and all future unjust/preemptive wars (stop what is going to happen in Iran.)

This sounds like price controls which in time of war would not be a bad thing. The problem is that the military industrial complex, their lobbyists, and the politicians they own would fight it to the end. It would overturn decades of military procurement practice. I favor it. I just don’t think it will happen.

Close to price controls, but I’m thinking more along the lines of a contract clause that would be attached to all procurement contracts that would express this idea. Very similar to forcing the implementation of ADA, Veteran’s Preference for hiring, etc…
I know the defense contractors would fight it like crazy, but if we force this argument into public debate, I don’t see how an elected official could stand against it. I have some extremely red, Bush sycophant, friends. I tried it out on them and they said “it’s very patriotic”. I think this would be something even the nutty right could support.

Eureka Springs @ 221

Considering not one Senator voted against this, some awfully powerful people must have placed full court pressure.

It also points to the fact we are not really leaving Iraq with this congress in charge.

What was Russ Feingold thinking? Self preservation?

When the majority of your contributions come from the Israeli lobby what are you going to do.

When many people think of the cold war, they think that it was not a true “war” because the Americans and Soviets never fought. While the two countries forces my have not traded shots with each other, this war was extremely violent and deadly, and it was a “hot” war. It’s just that it was fought vicariously for the most part and fought in the 3rd world. What we are seeing, and will continue to see, as long as we are dependent on non-renewable energy, is a similar conflict played out against China and/or possibly Russia. Western Civilization’s hegemony depends on the availability of reasonably priced fuel. It is our jugular.

Dubhaltach @ 234

no hugh and et – you’re not getting the point. The iranians dont need to close the straits. All they need to do is to arrange for the loading facilities in Kuwait and Saudi to go up in smoke. You’d need a hell of a lot of neutron bombs to eliminate that capacity.

A threat to close the Straits is a lot easier to pull off than a military or sabotage campaign against Saudi Arabia or Kuwait although such might be taken in conjunction with a closing of the Straits.

Fern @ 194

I do not see how an attack on Iran benefits anyone – anyone!!! – in either the short or long term. Or how anyone even imagines they would benefit.

Israel benefits plain and simple

Hugh @ 241

Dubhaltach @ 234

no hugh and et – you’re not getting the point. The iranians dont need to close the straits. All they need to do is to arrange for the loading facilities in Kuwait and Saudi to go up in smoke. You’d need a hell of a lot of neutron bombs to eliminate that capacity.

A threat to close the Straits is a lot easier to pull off than a military or sabotage campaign against Saudi Arabia or Kuwait although such might be taken in conjunction with a closing of the Straits.

surface to surface missles?

Oklahoma kiddo @ 36

Well, this sure takes the focus on the Libby deal away. And just about all the other Bush foibles with it. The Democrats are incredible.

$$$$$$

Yes selise and for Kuwait all they need is conventional artillery which they good at.

Also all they have to do is announce that they plan on closing bot the straits and the shatt for Lloyds to declare war risks and you can kiss goodbye to a huge chunk of shipping.

To prevent that you would need a large number of ships and IIRC a MEF of about 30k. America doesnt have them.

Kathleen @ 237

Israel cleared the way for a pre-emptive strike on Iran by invading Lebanon taking out part of the Hezbollah arsenal that would be used on Israel if the U.S. or Israel pre-emptively attack Iran.

I’m not sure if Hezbollah has replaced the longer range missiles it had but everything else has already been resupplied.

Also I just got an insta-response from Obama to my letter. The Bush Administration acting like it is above the law. No explanation of his vote.

Hugh -
Don’t leave me hanging at 240.

Lieberman does this the day after El Baradei announces this

Iran slowing down uranium enrichment work: ElBaradei By Mark Heinrich and Karin Strohecker
Mon Jul 9, 1:44 PM ET

VIENNA (Reuters) – Iran has slowed the expansion of its disputed uranium enrichment program, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said on Monday, after Western powers threatened to hit Tehran with harsher sanctions.

The Iranian shift was detected by IAEA inspectors last week after months in which Iran accelerated the installation of centrifuge machines that refine uranium, an effort Western leaders suspect is covertly meant to yield atomic bombs

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200…..baradei_dc

Here is what A*P*C is telling our reps to do

Will this insanity ever end?

Dubhaltach @ 245

Yes selise and for Kuwait all they need is conventional artillery which they good at.

Also all they have to do is announce that they plan on closing bot the straits and the shatt for Lloyds to declare war risks and you can kiss goodbye to a huge chunk of shipping.

To prevent that you would need a large number of ships and IIRC a MEF of about 30k. America doesnt have them.

so, what could they be thinking? dubhaltach, if any action is going to be taken, what do you think it would be?

everything just seems so insane.

Sorry Hugh, meant 241

I think the American government and I include in that the Democratic party are a pack of b*tsh*t crazy racist imperialist w*nk*rs and that in conjunction with an Israeli drive across the golan (massive “training” exercise their at the moment) that they are going to bomb Iranian installations because they honestly beleive they can win.

It was insane for the Germans to open a second front but they did … people in world conquering mode especially when they people to be kicked around are ragheads are entirely logical just not especially sane.

boxer @ 241

Western Civilization’s hegemony depends on the availability of reasonably priced fuel. It is our jugular.

I wasn’t sure which you wanted me to respond to. Re cost reimbursement, corporations will hate it and use “free” market lingo to oppose it. Large trans nationals who are also big defense contractors like GE, Boeing, Halliburton are not exactly patriotic. They are out for themselves.

As for your other comment, I would say that the world economy depends on the availability of reasonably priced energy, i.e. oil. The competition for it has been going on for decades and it will only get worse. Daily consumption is what like about 80 million bbl/day and increasing about 2% a year or between 1.5-2 million bbl/day. Throw in Peak Oil being hit around 2012 and the current energy supply is unsustainable. This means fiercer competition for what’s left. The situation is complicated by the fact that at the same time, we have 10 years to do something meaningful about global warming.

Dubhaltach @ 250 – that was the answer i was fearing.

can’t say i disagree about the “b*tsh*t crazy racist imperialist”. we do seem to have problem with supremist thinking.. and our politicians have it 100x.

Kathleen @ 249

VIENNA (Reuters) – Iran has slowed the expansion of its disputed uranium enrichment program, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said on Monday, after Western powers threatened to hit Tehran with harsher sanctions.

Well, it could be because of sanctions although I’ve heard running a big cascade of centrifuges is technically challenging. Iran is proceeding at something like a moderate mosey. When they encounter a technical problem they back off even further.

Hugh @ 255

boxer @ 241

Western Civilization’s hegemony depends on the availability of reasonably priced fuel. It is our jugular.

I wasn’t sure which you wanted me to respond to. Re cost reimbursement, corporations will hate it and use “free” market lingo to oppose it. Large trans nationals who are also big defense contractors like GE, Boeing, Halliburton are not exactly patriotic. They are out for themselves.

As for your other comment, I would say that the world economy depends on the availability of reasonably priced energy, i.e. oil. The competition for it has been going on for decades and it will only get worse. Daily consumption is what like about 80 million bbl/day and increasing about 2% a year or between 1.5-2 million bbl/day. Throw in Peak Oil being hit around 2012 and the current energy supply is unsustainable. This means fiercer competition for what’s left. The situation is complicated by the fact that at the same time, we have 10 years to do something meaningful about global warming.

I agree wtih every thing you said, but with regard to cost reimbursment, I think we could shove it down their throats. If the issue were forced, you don’t sign this, you don’t get any contracts, eventually someone would blink.
Regarding energy, I work in this field (staff attorney, in house). I’ve been in on a lot of meetings that were very scary.

Hugh @ 251

The situation is complicated by the fact that at the same time, we have 10 years to do something meaningful about global warming.

i don’t think they care. but if i did, i’d say that attacking iran and the resulting skyrocketing cost of oil… could induce some severe oil demand destruction.

pow wow @ 98

What a F**KING OUTRAGE this is.

We are “represented” by people with NO PRINCIPLES, NO VALUES, NO INTEGRITY that they will not trample and abandon in the name of political expediency.

We are, in short, held hostage by crooks – like the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee who trampled all over John Conyers with sneering deceitful impunity today, using our powers under the Constitution against us.

Carl Levin looked like somebody who got free ice cream today, grinning like a cheshire cat as he singlehandedly operated the United States Senate in service and on behalf of foreign governments and their lobbies.

Oh, how the campaign contributors cashed in their chips today. Between this travesty of a vote in the Senate and Senate Oil Crook Ted Stevens of Alaska letting slip the truth about Iraq on the front page of the Washington Post (that huge oil wealth Stevens and Cheney are drooling over), this government, in all its forms, is an absolute abomination to the good name of the people of the United States.

[Small silver lining: Rep. Joe Sestak on C-SPAN’s talk show, admitting to the ulterior motive of the oil law (thanks to informed callers), AND to the inherent war powers of our Legislative Branch (what a concept…), as the program came to a close. Joe means well, and defended his positions extremely effectively to both sane and insane callers.]

We must make these people who pretend to represent us pay for their utter contempt for we, the American people, and our rights, our liberty, and our will, while they violently abuse our power in open, flagrant defiance of honor, duty, country and the American Constitution.

In regard to your last paragraph…..the one about paying. How about NOT paying this year when April 15 comes around. That would knock them on their asses.

Every single person who files, just put in for an extension, or something. Just don’t give any of them another cent.

I’d like to hear some thoughts on this, but I know I’m way late on this thread.

Thanks, and keep the faith.

selise @ 257

i don’t think they care. but if i did, i’d say that attacking iran and the resulting skyrocketing cost of oil… could induce some severe oil demand destruction.

That’s an interesting thought: induce a worldwide recession to conserve energy supplies. But these are guys whose idea of smart is to use a bigger hammer.

Unofrtunately Selise I agree with you. I wish it were otherwise but I grew up as a Christain European kid whose dad was stationed in two middle east countries – Lebanon and the Iran Irak border. You have no idea how hated your troops are. When push comes to shove they’re not going to take prisoners oh a few might get out. But it’ll be very very few. Rumsfeld threw away the one thing that an army must have and that’s logistical capacity. Take a look here scroll down to the second photo: 4th Anniversary believe me that’s mild.

Yeah, let’s hand Cheney/Bush MORE power to mass murder millions of civilians. GOOD IDEA!

If this is the example of the Dem opposition, damn it, I’m moving to a safer saner place, like Iran.

Vote? Me? Not if this crap keeps up.

Never forget: It was Levin, Reid, Schumer, Salazar, Clinton, Boxer and Pryor who schemed, lied and discredited a fellow (D) Democratic candidate, Ned Lamont, all to get Joe Lieberman back in, knowing what a war monger he is and how he votes.

Were they as concerned about the troops welfare as they pretend to be, Lamont would be in the Senate today.

This isn’t about protecting Iraq, or democratizing Iraq and this sure as hell isn’t about saving American troops lives.
This is all about twisting and using American votes and American lives to fight all the monsters hiding in Israeli closets.

This Bush led Congress is and will turn Iraq into another Palestine.

And that’s the awful documented truth.

Oh, and no God condones cluster bombs or depleted uranium tipped missiles. So leave all religious accusations at the nearest burn center door.

I wouldn’t mind seeing Lieberman on the Repub ticket as the VP. He does seem to have a pair, unlike Dingy Harry & some of his Dhimmi-pals. Joe & a strong Repub would beat Clinton Inc.

Interesting that Lieberamann chose today to introduce this legislation. A day where two hearings were going on nailing the Bush administration and its evil doers.

Liebermann did not do this today as a mistake. He wanted to let folks know who is still in charge.

Okay, somebody, ANYBODY…

please tell me again: in the rhetorical syllogism ‘we are better than that’

Who’s the “we”???

I am going to be unusually optomistic (something I am not usually). In fact, most of the people in the Military who are at a competent to fight a real war have retired or resigned. The rest of them have underestimated the enemy. Or should I say, the opposing side, because we are provoking Iran. Being a “trading partner” of Russia, I don’t think you have to be a lawyer or a security analyst to realize that Russia will become involved VERY quietly, and VERY carefully, Bush is crazy, Putin is not…..and you might find that the aircraft carriers in the gulf suddenly sink, and Tel Aviv is reduced to atomic rubble, and so on and so forth (you won’t be able to read the CIA report, but anyone who can read will figure out what it says…..the rest is details.

I do think King George is that stupid. I do think Shooter is that stupid. Having been in “the fog of war” I, and anyone else who fought in South East Asia will tell you that things do not always go the way of the side with the greatest arms.

As much as I hate Condi Rice, she is supposed to be an authority on the old Soviet Union, which has changed it’s coat, but not it’s methods, and hopefully, she’s not so stupid as to believe that we have any sort of a strategic advantage in the Middle East if Russia is involved.

As to a draft, That gives a lot of young people a vote on the war without a poll, if you know what I mean. It is the 21st century. The youth of this country might just surprise us. You cannot train people who are unwilling to fight, or who think your whole cause is BS. King George might get a few very nasty surprises. His volunteer army may just refuse to fight, his cannon fodder (the young people of America may just tell him where to stick it…..in spite of anything he plans to stage this summer), and the other side might just hand us the kind of a defeat that we have had comeing for years. How are we going to react to losing an Aircraft Carrier (or two)? How are we going to react to having our missiles shot down, or using nuclear weapons, and having the rest of the world turn on us. King George and his party have weakened us to the point where we cannot stand on our own. They don’t want to talk about that. Other countries (two I can think of) can bring us to our knees without firing a shot. Things do not always go the way the elite wish them to go. Save the Vodka for a celebration, not for a pain killer. King George and his crime family are not America. Dictators ride to and fro on the backs of tigers. And the tigers are getting hungry.

Cynic … thank you for a very interesting comment!

Let me see if I have this right each state gets two senators, right?

How many senators does Israel get?

Impeachment should not be off the table and Shooter and his pet monkey should both be nailed to the table while the details are worked out, so they don’t slip away to Uruguay or somewhere!

How do you make the little f (facebook) appear?

Democrats are just as culpable for these criminal wars.

In 2003, craven, spineless, ambitious (D)’s like Kerry and Clinton voted to authorize Bush’s illegal, immoral invasion.

They felt he was invincible, with (r) control of congress and his high approval ratings.

what could their excuse possibly be now????

they have demonstrated their willingness to support the next criminal war – this invalidates all their b*llshit poll-driven rhetoric against the current failed occupation of Iraq.

was there some backroom deal like, “well, you said WMD for the pretext last time, we’ll go along, but you have to come up with a better excuse this time” and so now they say Iran is behind attacks on US forces in Iraq and we get this 97-0 vote. wtf?

check out

http://powerofnarrative.blogsp…..llion.html

some bitter medicine over there, fire-pups.

but really, think about whether the (D) party is worth saving, ok?

and if you still have initiative and idealism after that, think about how to energize a third, or rather, second party movement in this country while we still have the last glimmers of a democratic republic.

CTuttle @ 126

GSD @ 111

America is a colossus run amok. …

The US will be shocked at an Iranian response to a US attack.

I agree, when Iran retaliates by launching 300 Russian-supplied cruise missiles at our 3 carrier groups and all major oil production centers within the Persian Gulf, …

One might think Dubya is TRYING to destroy all our military or that something is forcing his hand to make that happen OR one might think he wants to prove that our military can win such a fight, to show the world something not heretofore known.

Some of us just think he’s trying to show the world how truly crazy he is.

CityGirl @ 152

This is sickening. Dodd? Obama? Kennedy? Kerry? Even Feingold?? It’s like Groundhog Day….

When will they ever learn?

Kinda makes you think it’s another Rovian vote which is designed to scr*w any Dem running for president, eh?

I wonder what the stinger at the end of this trick is and how it will affect Clinton, Obama, Biden and Dodd.

Carl Levin is a neocon — a late convert, just as the rest of the world is waking up to how bankrupt the neocons are. Michigan voters need to bounce that stupid fuck out of the Senate.

I think it’s time we realize that the Democrats are full of shit when they say they are against the Iraq war, and that they are no different from the Repukes on Iran.

I’m voting 3rd Party, voting Indie, or staying home in 2008. Fuck the Democrats — they’re not getting my votes anymore. They’re just as guilty as the Repukes for the Iraq war, and it looks like they’re actually leading the way into Iran.

…yes 97…no…0…so Iran…get ready.

The DC DEMS are showing what flag they fly with this incredible vote taken after more than four years of Iraq death dealing,mayhem and chaos sponsored primarily by the Imperial United States of America.

So where were Hillary and Barack on this? Did they even vote?

The Americans…no…the Imperial Americans.

Surely not the good guys anymore.

It is time for another American Revolution.

Take the money away from these warmongers,liars and craven frauds.

That is the only action they will yield to.

brokenarrow @ 260

pow wow @ 98

What a F**KING OUTRAGE this is.

We are “represented” by people with NO PRINCIPLES, NO VALUES, NO INTEGRITY that they will not trample and abandon in the name of political expediency.

We are, in short, held hostage by crooks – like the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee who trampled all over John Conyers with sneering deceitful impunity today, using our powers under the Constitution against us.

Carl Levin looked like somebody who got free ice cream today, grinning like a cheshire cat as he singlehandedly operated the United States Senate in service and on behalf of foreign governments and their lobbies.

Oh, how the campaign contributors cashed in their chips today. Between this travesty of a vote in the Senate and Senate Oil Crook Ted Stevens of Alaska letting slip the truth about Iraq on the front page of the Washington Post (that huge oil wealth Stevens and Cheney are drooling over), this government, in all its forms, is an absolute abomination to the good name of the people of the United States.

[Small silver lining: Rep. Joe Sestak on C-SPAN’s talk show, admitting to the ulterior motive of the oil law (thanks to informed callers), AND to the inherent war powers of our Legislative Branch (what a concept…), as the program came to a close. Joe means well, and defended his positions extremely effectively to both sane and insane callers.]

We must make these people who pretend to represent us pay for their utter contempt for we, the American people, and our rights, our liberty, and our will, while they violently abuse our power in open, flagrant defiance of honor, duty, country and the American Constitution.

In regard to your last paragraph…..the one about paying. How about NOT paying this year when April 15 comes around. That would knock them on their asses.

Every single person who files, just put in for an extension, or something. Just don’t give any of them another cent.

I’d like to hear some thoughts on this, but I know I’m way late on this thread.

Thanks, and keep the faith.

To brokenbrrow::
Trouble is, most of the money will already have been withheld and will be in IRS hands. Only way it would work is if everyone filed EARLY and demanded REFUNDS…

theExile @ 270

Let me see if I have this right each state gets two senators, right?

How many senators does Israel get?
…..

It appears that they have ‘enough’. How many do they actually need? I suspect $100,000,000 or less would buy all of them and as the Republicans have shown you can do a whole lot with less than half…

What is the old aphorism about ‘honest’ politicians: That once bought, he _stays_ bought!

siun – called senator kennedy’s office this morning…. spent about 20 minutes on the phone with a nice aide (or intern?) named ben (who was quite knowledgable). hope it helps… and hope that everyone else will consider making the phone calls.

Not voting democrat next year? Bullshit. No, really, what an utter load of bullshit.

Everyone knows that pwogwessives do not have that much fucking spine. The DNC knows it. Reid knows it. Pelosi knows it. Hillary knows it. The janitors know it.

Why do you think they constantly vote for war, vote to fund war, vote for giant corporate giveaways and ruinous environmental policy?

BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY WILL NOT BE CHALLANGED.

Hell, pwoggies voted en masse for prowar John “Send More Troops” Kerry. Everyone know that pwoggies will vote for a ham fucking sandwich so long as it has a ‘D’ next to it’s name.

So don’t even pretend you’re not voting for Hillary next year. No one is buying it. So as much caterwalling as you like, so long as you send your check into Moveon or the PDA or whatever flavor of DNC front organization you like. Hillary needs the dough.

Alan @ 280

Hell, pwoggies voted en masse for prowar John “Send More Troops” Kerry. Everyone know that pwoggies will vote for a ham fucking sandwich so long as it has a ‘D’ next to it’s name.

true, laughably true – the cognitive dissonance of wanting peace, then voting for Lurch was still manageable for most garden variety progressives then.

but I think things are changing, the stench is getting so strong, with betrayal heaped on betrayal, they can’t be like “mmmm, tastes like chicken!” anymore.

there is even, I think, growing awareness that if it talks like a neo-con, and is lavishly bought by neo-cons, it just might be a neo-con, and therefore automatic support for a neo-con like Clinton or Obama might be a trifle problematic.

Maybe this is not as bad as it seems. Maybe the Dems in the Senate are just trying to help their good friend Ralph Nader with his next third party run.

Jesus, what a fucking joke.

brendan @ 31

We’re not going to war with Iran.

Since the ISG these things have happened:

–Fallon refused to deploy the third carrier to the Persian Gulf.
–There were threats of “mass resignations” in the military if we attacked Iran.
– The British refused to participate in an attack on Iran and then unseated Blair.

Oh ye of little faith. The ISG didn’t do a damn thing in the real world – Bush sent 30,000 more troops troops in reply to those cranky old white men telling him how to run his war.

On Fallon: they can always find a replacement. Plenty of yes-men left in the Pentagon. Ditto for the rest of the generals who are supposedly threatening resignation. And who needs the Brits? They barely have a navy anyway.

Bush has until Jan 20 2009 to attack. If I were him, I’d start Jan 19 and hand that mess to Hill/Obama after withdrawing half the troops from Iraq to cut down on the retaliatory casualties.

via tpm:

Yep, Bush Will Veto Any Antiwar Measures By Congressional Dems On Iraq — And Iran
By Spencer Ackerman

It’s official: President Bush will veto any and all measures put forth by Congressional Dems to halt the Iraq War, according to a little-noticed letter from the White House to Carl Levin (D-MI), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The letter also says that the White House will veto any measure that would tie its hands on Iran — including on military action inside that country.

That Bush will veto any such measures was expected, and isn’t surprising. Nonetheless, the letter makes it official that Congressional Dems face the daunting prospect of having to muster a veto-proof majority on any Iraq or Iran measures.