Monday, October 01, 2007


The latest Seymour Hersh gospel is in print. In the New Yorker story, Hersh cites his solid sources to show the Bush Administration is preparing us for war. Again. And, no surprise, Vice President Dick Cheney is playing a huge role in readying more meat for the grinder, this time in Iran.

From the story, this disquieting graf:
At a White House meeting with Cheney this summer, according to a former senior intelligence official, it was agreed that, if limited strikes on Iran were carried out, the Administration could fend off criticism by arguing that they were a defensive action to save soldiers in Iraq. If Democrats objected, the Administration could say, “Bill Clinton did the same thing; he conducted limited strikes in Afghanistan, the Sudan, and in Baghdad to protect American lives.” The former intelligence official added, “There is a desperate effort by Cheney et al. to bring military action to Iran as soon as possible. Meanwhile, the politicians are saying, ‘You can’t do it, because every Republican is going to be defeated, and we’re only one fact from going over the cliff in Iraq.’ But Cheney doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the Republican worries, and neither does the President.”
They meant it when they called it the Long War.


Anonymous said...

Seymour Hersh is a left-wing colostomy bag that needs emptying.

You know, there comes a time when real Americans know when its time to fight the fight.

You and Hersh obviously don't.

FDR did.

The CDM said...

We couldn't fight Luxembourg at this point let alone Iran. What FDR did back in the day, he was able to get away with due to it being simple times. However,(annonymous) if you want to take on Iran so bad, then have at it. It cracks me up to hear people wanting us to pick a fight so bad, yet they do so without intentions of making themselves part of the equation.

The Lorax said...


we need to hire a troll removal service. Looks like the same fella is hitting you, then me.

Or maybe just fairy spray would work.

They bite.

Anonymous said...

Let me remind you Conplaint Department Manager, just like during FDR's "simple times," America was attacked on 9/11. Were we attacked by Iraq? No. Were we attacked by Iran? No. We weren't even attacked by Afghanistan.
We were attacked by Muslim fanatics who embrace a religion that demands America either converts to Islam or we die. It's that simple.
So what do you think we should do? Wait for another hit? If Osama's boys are in 50 countries around the world, then we should track them down and kill them. It's that simple.
You can sell your country up the river if you want, but I don't have to stand for, or risk my life from the idiotic thinking that comes from the left. If it were up to your sid, we'd be dead already. Right Sniderman?

Anonymous said...

Hey, Anon, you've already sold the country up the river with that idiot false prophet you elected president. He and his cardiac-arrested puppetmaster are going to be the agents of the end of times. If you weren't such an inbred, you could start thinking for yourself. Instead, you read the copy points of the Grand Old Party verbatim, thumping the same lies that will be the undoing of life as we know it. You and your ilk are those needing to be cleansed from this earth.

I'm publishing anon, because I don't want to waste my time deleting your religious tracts from my inbox. Die, you little troll, die.

Anonymous said...

I agree, we've already been sold up the river...and nobody in charge has a paddle. I find it hard to believe the head up the President's butt crowd wants to go into Iran. We have to get smart about this thing. We can't keep going to war with the whole middle east. We have to take the blinders off and get real.

Anonymous said...

Well, I guess the idea of rational discussion about Ron's post is already out the window. Still, I'll try.

Iran is a danger to the middle east in the same manner that Iraq was a danger under Saddam. I know that the anti-Bush faction wants you to believe that Iraq was a big pussycat and no possible threat to anyone but Saddam was capable of genocide on a mass scale and proved it. Should we have gone in? No. That doesn't mean he wasn't a threat to stability in the region.

Iran is in the same boat. They are a threat and they make no secret their desire to commit a second Holocaust. However, the US has no compelling reason to go into Iran even if they are to get nuclear weaponry. The rest of the world won't support it and likely large parts of the world are making money financially from Iran like Russia and China.

Bush and Cheney don't care at all because they're done in January 2009. They don't care if there are Republicans after them because I honestly think they believe they'll just dump a mess on whoever comes into office that will handicap them to the point they'll look like Jimmy Carter II and be giving speeches about malaise.

Either way, the average American is screwed.

Anonymous said...

"I know that the anti-Bush faction wants you to believe that Iraq was a big pussycat and no possible threat to anyone..."

That's an inaccurate statement.

"Either way, the average American is screwed..."

Unfortunately, that's the attitude of too many Americans. We should be bombarding our representatives to Congress now with the message that we will NOT tolerate the bombing of Iran.

Scott Ritter speaks to the sense of our complacency when one speaks of the potential for a war with Iran:

A war with Iran would make the current conflict in Iraq pale by comparison, and would detrimentally impact the whole of America, not just certain demographics. As such, it is critical that we all put aside our ideological and political differences and focus on the one issue which, if left unheeded, will have devastating consequences for the immediate future of us all: Prevent a future war with Iran.

Anonymous said...

When Bush sends his daughters to the front lines, and Cheney and like-minded warmongers are willing to visit a war zone without being protected by a throng of Blackwater mercenaries, then maybe I'll respect them just a little bit.

Anonymous said...

Anon @4:00pm Thanks for reaffirming my belief that Liberals debate the issues with simple pure emotion.

As for me dying, in the words of Clint Eastwood, "we all got it comin', kid."

Anonymous said...

Seymour Hersh, Scott Ritter?

That the best you got? ROFL.

and Sniderman - If the guy did cross post what is your point?

Anonymous said...

"When Bush sends his daughters to the front lines"

Hell, I'd settle for every Congresscreature sending their kids to public schools, like us normal folk.