I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
aha!
Atriostan?
watertigerstan?
Bush presidency: FIERY WRECK-O-STAN!
CartoonAllahstan?
iran with nukes is a threat, but the line we walk is getting branded with the "you're soft" iron by not having at least some focus on it.
the truth is, this is a classic intentionally-fucked-up scenario wherein the perpetrators (the Fraud's administration) intentionally screws things up by antagonizing and accelerating Iran's nuke program, and then bludgeons the rest of us with "see? we told you so!" chatter while they go about doing what they were going to do all along - which is to say, try to snag a few oil fields for their pallys.
so, yes, it's a problem, but it didn't have to be this way.
kinda like iraq.
Yeah, but do you really think the sabre rattling is for the Iranians {especially the moderates} mroe than it is for domestic consumption for the codpiece admiration society and the loony tunes Ledeen's of the American radical right?
Sullivan has definite Liebermanesque tendencies
Atrios, I agree with you about Iran but the threat to us is not what Fredo is thinking about, it's the threat to Israel. Now, Israel could also destroy Iran by itself so I also think that I(ran)AD would work.
It's a shell game.
-
YOU NO LONGER LIVE BITCHES!
yes, but Goldstein carries on... and on
My guess is they are going for a twofer this time. Iran and Syria.
Danger!
Danger!
Blogger just bloggered again!
I think Amy Sullivan is a complete idiot, myself. You should've smacked her upside the head.
Kuklastan and Ollie.
Of course Iran is a threat. It threatens our ability to do with the Palies as we please.
Oh, and Iran will threaten Peoria. Bet on it.
First time I could get here today.
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSssssssssss
Feastorfaminestan.
It's all about pacing, Atrios.
Kuklastan and Ollie
Oh, Bra-fucking-vo, sir.
it's you fuck with us a little bit and YOU NO LONGER LIVE BITCHES!
Wow. Atrios is so butch!
Not living any longer is icky.
Is this Eschastan?
cocksuckerstan.
that is all.
Not living any longer is icky.
Ickystan is right next to abortistan.
Hey Atrios, while you're busy, we could use some Wiley and Gizmo, y'know.
As long as the U.S. and other major powers have and claim a right to having weaponized nukes, any other country can make that same claim. For the smaller countries, yeah, it's a deathwish.
Afghanistan Banana stand.
-- The Hot Rock
I am Vickistan.
Spinoza--anywhere near Whackjobistan?
Liberals need to no longer live or they will never appreciate just how much danger we are in and how much we need Bush and his heroes to protect us.
Fuck with us a little bit and you'll Iranian Stained Glass Unlimited.
fucked up my joke.
Spinoza--anywhere near Whackjobistan?
Near ickystan.
Wankerstan? or maybe Wankeristan.
I forget
hello darkness my old friend
Iran is not doing anything wrong. Iran -- and every country -- actually has a right to do nukyuler things without written permission from their USraeli superiors.
The State Department and the neokes are pursuing the same deceit-fest they spewed in the lead-up to war with Iraq.
A nuclear Iran would mean stability and no chance of American invasion.
This one makes Avestus look like Bill Moyers...
I had an Uncle Stan.
No, seriously. Funniest sumbitch on the planet. He passed away, unfortunately.
Vicki--I am Poissonniereistan, and I'm open for business.
Brownistan
and when that's erased Inthewayistan
Pantslesstan
Hey, they just make shit up anyway. These evil fuckers are the bullies that grew up to step into power because their folks were there before them, or because they all met at Yale or Andover or AEI or Heritage. The worst, lowest kind of people, the ignorant powerful. Sociopathic and self-regenerating, because the money's real good. They have no souls, thus no self-worth, and can only get it up with the power game at full tilt. They've been trying to extiguish us all for hundreds of years. I wish they would disappear.
Ickystan is right next to abortistan.
spinoza
==
I thought it was Moististan.
Afghanistan Banana stand.
-- The Hot Rock
watertiger
==
Miasmo!
The reason for the warrant-less
wiretaps is because THEY WERE
SPYING ON THEIR DOMESTIC POLITICAL
OPPONENTS!!!!!!!!!!
When that comes out -- as I'm
convinced it will -- they're toast.
I dunno. I can easily believe that the supporters of the regime, including the fuckdolls in the media, would support the regime's spying on its political opponents. After all, anyone who isn't with the regime is with the terrorists.
Just ask Chris Matthews.
Iran is a bigger threat that might not have been if bushco could have stayed out of iraq.
There is the concern of attack on israel, as well as the fact that iran has ties with so much of the middle east and none of them will side with the us against iran, imo. I also don't doubt the little nut in n.korea wouldn't love to get in on all the depravity. China, perhaps?
Yes we have nukes, but can we take out the entire m.e. before they take out a large portion of us?
The bush-rice foreign policy in action.
Ickystan is right next to abortistan.
spinoza
Won't somebody please think about the blastocysts.
The whole Iran thing boils down to a racist, willfully ignorant lie about Iranians not being mature as a people, not being capable of handling nukes like big old us.
Kevin talked with Wes Clark. You only talked to Amy.
Icky!
Doktowitzistan - Land of Perpetual Fear and Mock Hero Worship.
Uh, I think that is "danger to the Republic", not "Republican". Iran is a double-edged sword for the Republicans to be sure, but...
Cranky
Somebody toss this Osher dude a blankie. Might help him get to sleep. (Or is it just another boring parody? I can't keep up.)
No more Blogger/Haloscan aftershocks?
I'm still pissed about my thoughtful response to RIL's thoughtful post was completely wiped out, although at the moment the memory of the actual exchange is also completely wiped out.
It doesn't do to dwell on such things, I suppose. It feels like having a ginormous bubble gum bubble pop in one's face and embed itself all over one's glasses and beard and stuff, though. 
I had a kidney stone named Stan who also recently passed,
Can you say that Bushco is "drunk with power"?
I knew ya could.
Having been to Iraq for the sake of Israel, we sincerely hope Iran develops nukes.
Liberals need to no longer live...
Osher Doktowitz | Homepage | 02.04.06 - 11:42 pm | #
*****************************
got that NSA
atrios, you pegged it a few weeks ago with your "this is how it happens" post - this is the whole pattern repeating itself - there is no credible threat - but we will see many "reasonable" dems(and god knows who else) in the weeks and months to come talking about how this threat "must be dealt with" - it's damn depressing, but this is how it goes. there may not be a war, but the rhetoric will make us all nuts
- hell, even Jon Stewart will soon be asking his guests, "what do we do about Iran" - then waiting for months and years later when it's safe...to blast the whole thing...
or, maybe I'm cynical 
/iran having nukes bad
//israel having nukes bad
///nukes bad
*
There's a bigger threat to the republic with it being 65 and sunny in DC on Friday. And also in blogger not working for the bulk of a day.
Iran = Losing the War on Turra, Part II
I am not sure why we fear a nuclear Iran anymore than a nuclear Pakistan. In fact I would think we should fear less about it.
But then again, I think our saber ratling is in many a proxy for another country's concerns.
But then, we can't talk about that in this country.
I live in superbowlistan. Jeebus help me, Condi will be here tomorrow. :P
Liberals need to no longer live...
Osher Doktowitz
Bring it on, bee-yotch!
Desi
You missed our get together in Ann Arboristan this afternoon!
I left a message for you on your blog and at JC General, in the hopes that you would e-mail me.
It was great. Chicago Dyke, pie, filkertom, Sister of Ye, Nim, Jen, and I were there.
Beautiful karma, lots of fun.
Miasmo!
YES! Mena gets it!!!
Loved Zero Mostel in that flick.
Iranian nukes are so obviosuly a threat to Maale Adhumin and Ariel and Maale Efraim and Kiryat Arba and Gi'iv Zeev and Elkana and and and
why are the US taxpayers sitting on their asses when our settlements are in such obvious danger?
don't forget syrianastan
The State Department has told the Syrian Ambassador that Syria must act decisively to protect all foreign embassies and citizens in Damascus from attack. We will hold Syria responsible for such violent demonstrations since they do not take place in that country without government knowledge and support.
WalterNeff--would you be envious to learn that I am eating a Scharfen-Bergen 80% cacao bar?
Whoa. Osher's folks went out, and he's in the likker cabinet. He's all fucked up. I'm a little jealous.
It isn't mutually
assured destruction, it's you fuck with us a little bit and YOU NO LONGER LIVE BITCHES!
Exactly why Saddam was never a
threat to us.
He knew --- because we told him --
that if he fucked with us he
and his country would be nuked back
to the stone age.
I hate these people so much I'm
almost choking on my own spit.
This one makes Avestus look like Bill Moyers...
nick carraway
Yeah, this one really sucks ass.
Just generally speaking, it's probably a bad idea for any kind of nukes to be going off anywhere in the region. One thing leads to another, as the song says, and pretty soon you've got Pakistan and India bringing it and that brings in China and next thing you know, Richard Perle can't get decent fettucini alfredo anyfuckinwhere.
I'm still pissed about my thoughtful response to RIL's thoughtful post was completely wiped out, although at the moment the memory of the actual exchange is also completely wiped out.
Little Brø...
I said that I found it odd and/or problematic that Muslims were protesting a cartoon that depicted Mohammed as a (violent) terrorist with violence.
And you said ...???
Condi will be here tomorrow. :P
Our thoughts and prayers are with ya, Desi.
This is why Condi doesn't want to run for preznit - she'd rather head up the NFL.
They've been trying to extiguish us all for hundreds of years. I wish they would disappear.
ronjazz, formerly free | Email | 02.04.06 - 11:44 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
The feeling is mutual.
Lynryd Byrnstan
who the hell could blame them for wanting nukes? we invaded iraq for less.
Heh--the Guardian got it right today, pointing out that Chirac has always gotten in more right than Bush...
Funny.
Lynryd Byrnstan
WalterNeff
Best. poster. ever.
Won't somebody please think about the blastocysts.
Marcia Brady ∞
==
Somebody can't seem to think of anything else.
Wakarimastan?
Having been to Iraq for the sake of Israel, we sincerely hope Iran develops
nukes.
kei & yuri | Homepage | 02.04.06 - 11:45 pm | #
You had me...now you lost me.
Monsieur has put on 'The Interpreter.'
I hate to say it, but Nicole Kidman grates on me.
Sallyh:
No, as I am quafing a Guinness.
Wakamolistan!
Iran isn't a threat to us but it could wipe Israel off the map despite the instant retaliation.
Lynryd Byrnstan
WalterNeff
Best. poster. ever.
Vicki | Email | 02.04.06 - 11:48 pm | #
Hey -- that's mine!!!!
can we take out the entire m.e. before they take out a large portion of us?
There is no need to "take out" the ME, as you put it. Apocalyptic thinking is best suited to bad Sci-Fi flicks.
You missed our get together in Ann Arboristan this afternoon!
I left a message for you on your blog and at JC General, in the hopes that you would e-mail me.
It was great. Chicago Dyke, pie, filkertom, Sister of Ye, Nim, Jen, and I were there.
Beautiful karma, lots of fun.
ACK!!! I didn't see! Vicki, I gots email. *sob*
who the hell could blame them for wanting nukes? we invaded iraq for less.
Desi | Email | Homepage | 02.04.06 - 11:47 pm | #
right. After Iraq, if you are are Iran or North Korea, I would be concerned about their grip on reality if they did not seek nukes as quickly as possible
WalterNeff--would you be envious to learn that I am eating a Scharfen-Bergen 80% cacao bar?
I would. Best I can muster right now is Ghirardelli 60% squares, and ::rattles bag:: shit, only one left.
I hate to say it, but Nicole Kidman grates on me.
Sallyh, Madame Poissonniere
I am so right there with you.
Nuclear arms have become a purely defensive instrument, unusable for aggression. They impose a state of non-war in the area concerned. Their presence has permanently dissuaded Israel’s enemies from terminating its existence in the same way that nuclear weapons dissuaded the ex-Soviet Union from unleashing its tanks across Western Europe. An atomic deterrent has repeatedly demonstrated its role in regional stability.
Of course, this strategic equilibrium hasn’t resolved the Israeli-Palestine conflict nor has it stopped acts of terrorism or the stone-throwing Intifada. It simply imposes a maximum threshold of conflict intensity beyond which no belligerent may go.
In this manner, war between India and China has become impossible, as well as a major conflict between Pakistan and India, despite the battles in the mountains of Kashmir. All parties in that part of the world have understood the stabilizing role of the nuclear deterrent.
This is why Condi doesn't want to run for preznit - she'd rather head up the NFL.
please no! I like my NFL. I don't want Condi to bring the same level of competence and success to the NFL that she has displayed in her other positions.
Loved Zero Mostel in that flick.
watertiger
==
"I'm gonna tell Momma on you, Dad...."
I could probably recite the whole damn thing.
A somewhat related blogwhorestan.
I want to drink the blood of liberals.
Israeli nukes, on the other hand, are actually filled with sunshine and smiles!
She gyrates on me.
I hate to say it, but Nicole Kidman grates on me.
Sallyh, Madame Poissonniere
I am so right there with you.
Vicki
Like so many actresses, she used to look fine till she got addicted to plastic surgery and dieting.
It might be a safer world if Iran had a nuke or two. Iran didn't have any so our cowardly leader felt safe to attack, but look at what's happened since then.
Won't somebody please think about the blastocysts
Well if we would just invade Blastocystistan, destroy their infrastructure, force a new government on them and then bail, they'd be free...
Hey -- that's mine!!!!
steve simels
I know, sweetie, I know... Atrios even commented he thought that might be the most brilliant nom de blog evah.
I want to drink the blood of liberals.
Osher Doktowitz
You've had enough to drink already.
Blastocytistan
Someone here pointed out during thees SOTU that Amy Sullivan ees the female Kevin Drum, or how-joo-say, "the She-Drum".
Notheeng I have read of hers has lead me to theenk deeferently.
so.
Of course Iran is a threat.
And Iran. Iran so far away. Gotta get away.
Wakarimastan?
anon
==
SoooDesuNestan.
steve simels:
Half yours, half mine: a manipost.
.
Iranian nukes = no invasion of Iran.
I want to drink the blood of liberals.
I understand that Biden has some visciously bleeding hemorrhoids.
I hate to say it, but Nicole Kidman grates on me.
Sallyh, Madame Poissonniere
Really? I love her.
And Iran. Iran so far away. Gotta get away.
Thers, Insolent Partisan (F) | Email | Homepage | 02.04.06 - 11:52 pm | #
Didn't that guy have the best
haircut?
Looked like the helmet Hawkman
wore...
Sorry, little Osher, I wa talking about the sociopaths in government, not their ass-licking minions. Go finish your homework. You have less than no power, nobody gives half a shit about you. Especially Bushco. And even more especially if you have the courage of your convictions and the requisite ignorance or poverty to go fight in their war. Then they really hate you, and will not come to your defense with proper equipment or training, and will fill your unit with felons and malcontents. And you expect them to go into Iran and not lose? You're plenty stupid, as well as crazy.
ran is using precisely the same reasoning. A thousands year-old civilization with its own particular religion surrounded by four nuclear powers of which three obtained nuclear weapons in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, aggressed in a major fashion by one of its neighbors and seriously menaced by the desire of Bin Laden to spread the influence of Sunni fundamentalism, Iran aspires to become a pillar of stability and a beacon of regional influence.
India, Pakistan and Israel--acquired their nuclear deterrent in violation of the treaty. It is unwise to maintain a legality divorced form reality and to apply its principles with variable insistence depending on the nationality of the rule breakers.
An Iran selling oil for euros might be a threat.
If Terry C's still here:
Sorry, got called away.
The disturbing thing I meant was the gay bar attack. 18 years old, so much hate. The hatchet thing really freaked me out. And they recovered a machete. I think what's so chilling about that--and not that handguns don't scare the fuck out of me--is that both are tools one uses for utilitarian purposes: chopping branches, clearing foliage, etc. He really had the whole Nazi thing down pat. Fucking psychotic.
Oh ahit, I meant "Iraq didn't have any so . . ." Maybe I should just stop drinking and smoking and go to bed.
El Gato Negro--and believe me, she won't offer you any chicken curry.
Our thoughts and prayers are with ya, Desi.
This is why Condi doesn't want to run for preznit - she'd rather head up the NFL.
watertiger, I would rather she head up the nfl. I imagine she could fuck them up pretty good too though, eh? 
watertiger-That's a joke, right?
Manimalistan
Someone here pointed out during thees SOTU that Amy Sullivan ees the female Kevin Drum, or how-joo-say, "the She-Drum".
Why, she's like some sort of female madman!!!
Sullivan responded, with all seriousness, Iran.
excellent. (rubs hands in that unbuttoning judith miller way)
Iran isn't a threat to us but it could wipe Israel off the map despite the instant retaliation.
No it couldn't.
Trollistan has just tested a nucular deee-vice
Well if we would just invade Blastocystistan, destroy their infrastructure, force a new government on them and then bail, they'd be free...
FeralLiberal
==
On a side note, if we could just figure out how to treat blastocystitis, we could make a fortune.
Iranian nukes = no invasion of Iran.
Which of course is the whole reason for them wanting nuke capability in the first place.
Luckily for them Bush already has the military over extended in Iraq busily propping up a nascent pro-Iranian Shia theocracy.
Evening, all.
Got the day's work done, and now I'm free to enjoy your good company.
Life, for the moment, is good.
Israeli nukes, on the other hand, are actually filled with sunshine and smiles!
Sunshine, lollipops and rainbows,
Everything that's wonderful is what I feel when we're together,
Brighter than a lucky penny,
When you're near the rain cloud disappears, dear,
And I feel so fine just to know that you are mine.
My life is sunshine, lollipops and rainbows,
That's how this refrain goes, so come on, join in everybody!
Iran isn't a threat to us but it could wipe Israel off the map despite the instant retaliation.
With one or two bombs?
Not so much.
"chicken curry"
Wakes up...huh!
I think it's cute how Americans continue to think their country which is slowly bleeding to death still matters to the rest of the world because it can win a nuclear war that won't ever happen. I bet the Iranians are just quaking in their boots.
The fact of the matter is that Iran has us over a barrel. We simply do not have the troops (nor do our "allies") to invade, occupy and control Iran. They have lived under sanctions for decades and China, Russia and India might agree to sanctions but won't enforce them on their own people.
This is a no-brainer for Iran and everyone knows it, including the US.
I know, sweetie, I know... Atrios even commented he thought that might be
the most brilliant nom de blog evah.
Vicki | Email | 02.04.06 - 11:51 pm | #
Awww....
Shucks folks, I'm speechless.
Toons--even better when there's a paycheck attached to it.
how much we need Bush to protect us.
Like on 9-11?
Didn't that guy have the best
haircut?
Or the worst case of hathead.
EkCenTrik--I simmered it in the crockpot all day. Want some?
An Iran selling oil for euros might be a threat.
Smokes: check it out.
watertiger-That's a joke, right?
We should only be so lucky.
He's got a wife, you know...
(though she's not named Incontinentia Buttocks)
Cunny will never win jack shit in the republican party -
1. She's a she (slightly)
2. She's a negro.
Crackerville would never vote for her.
I bet China would love for the US to have sanctions on Iran. One less competitor for Iran's oil.
Then they really hate you, and will not come to your defense with proper equipment or training, and will fill your unit with felons and malcontents. And you expect them to go into Iran and not lose? You're plenty stupid, as well as crazy.
ronjazz, formerly free | Email | 02.04.06 - 11:53 pm | #
--
Wrong. Most Americans agree with me that liberals are scum.
ONly serious people reply. Who wants to meet up and suck my cock to give me the best bj i have ever got? we will meet up right away so email me if interested.
Then they really hate you, and will not come to your defense with proper equipment or training, and will fill your unit with felons and malcontents. And you expect them to go into Iran and not lose? You're plenty stupid, as well as crazy.
ronjazz, formerly free | Email | 02.04.06 - 11:53 pm | #
--
Wrong. Most Americans agree with me that liberals are scum.
"Iranian nukes = no invasion of Iran.
"Which of course is the whole reason for them wanting nuke capability in the first place."
Yes, yes, that's what I was trying to say. Thank you, thank you.
rorschach, they're only going to stop at one or two?
Most Americans agree with me
Er, they don't.
Not here in the REAL world.
Vicki, I hope at least the food was bad. heh [I'm kidding] How's the snow there? It's pretty ugly here, and the power keeps going out.
CSI:Poughkeepsie? So the next episode is Vassar starting an El Qaeda major, and two gay undergraduates are found floating in the Hudson?
CSI: Poughkeepsie
Okay. That shit's fucking funny.
Thers, Insolent Partisan
So last night you roughed out the screenplay, what about the casting? Do we all get to play ourselves?
There is a delicious but unsubstantiated rumor that the real unforgivable sin of Saddam Hussein was threatening to switch to the Euro.
EkCenTrik--I simmered it in the crockpot all day. Want some?
Chicken curry?
at the risk of pissing some one off: I'd love to have the recipe... There's no Indian restaurant where I live, and it's killing me. Well, not literally.
Who wants to meet up and suck my cock to give me the best bj i have ever got?
gee, yer mom's gonna be pretty hard to beat.
rorschach, they're only going to stop at one or two?
Ô¿Ô | 02.04.06 - 11:57 pm | #
No; within a matter of months, they will have arsenals to rival not only Israel's, but the world's!!
Bwahahahaha!
Cunny will never win jack shit in the republican party -
1. She's a she (slightly)
2. She's a negro.
Crackerville would never vote for her.
wtf
Word.
No matter what party KindaSleazy represents or how much education she has, to the crackers down in Jebusland, she's STILL that nigrah wench.
Someone here pointed out during thees SOTU that Amy Sullivan ees the female Kevin Drum, or how-joo-say, "the She-Drum".
Why, she's like some sort of female madman!!!
DemByDefault | 02.04.06 - 11:54 pm | #
where did someone get the idea that either of these people are bright enough to have any credibility on this issue?
In all seriousness, why does anyone take what any of these people say to heart?
which is one great thing about Atrios - he doesn't make these bold unqualified statements. There is a health dose of "I don't really know" with the things he writes, which is quite refreshing within the leftyblogosphere's pundit class.
There is no need to "take out" the ME, as you put it. Apocalyptic thinking is best suited to bad Sci-Fi flicks.
Steve J.
And driving up the monopoly rents the dictatorship of the petrol-tariat can extort without a backlash from the groundlings.
As NFL Commissioner, what will Condi do if she gets a memo that's titled, "Tom Brady Determined to Strike in the Red Zone"
I'm actually more worried about Poland getting the bomb.
Iran.
Syria.
Endless war as far as the eye
can see.
Nukes.
Lots of them.
We are in such desperate trouble
language is inadequate to describe
it.
Good evening batses.
What's happening?
It appears blogger is no longer bloggered.
We simply do not have the troops (nor do our "allies") to invade, occupy and control Iran.
And the U.S. has neither a legal nor moral reason to do so.
Desi ~
How's the snow there? It's pretty ugly here, and the power keeps going out.
We drove from Grand Rapids. Everyone made it except Barndog and his wife...they were concerned about the coming storm.
It started snowing in the latter part of the afternoon. We were probably in Ann Arbor for 3 hours at the restaurant. The food was pretty okay. The drinks were grand!
The lights kept flickering on and off, so we said it was the spirit of Barndog.
Good time, though.
We simply do not have the troops (nor do our "allies") to invade, occupy and control Iran.
And the U.S. has neither a legal nor moral reason to do so.
And when has that stopped Mr. Bush?
So last night you roughed out the screenplay, what about the casting? Do we all get to play ourselves?
In most cases. NTodd will be played by Bud Cort.
But is Iran any real threat to Israel? Doesn't Israel basically lease the US military as arms' suppliers and trainers? Who has attacked Israel lately? This is all more macho posturing and bullshit. Fitzgerald had better be ready to throw his monkey wrench into the works ASAP, because the media is doing its usual piss-poor job of informing the people of its government's lawlessness.
Most Americans agree with me that liberals are scum.
We keep having conversations with apolitical average joes that end up condemning Bush worse than happens here. Anyone else noticed the several different kinds of flash ads they have that offer an x-box or something if you land a direct face punch on dumbya? Between the unrepentant gleeful conversion to the Soyuz and the fantastic sadistic arrogance and carelessness of Katrina, you lost them.
even better when there's a paycheck attached to it.
You betcha, Sallyh.
And tomorrow, I get to start another outline while I'm waiting for the one I just turned in to go to script. And the story editor has already started talking to me about doing a third one. Not bad for pick up work while I'm STILL waiting for the major job I was talking about a couple of weeks ago to finish negotiations, which have been dragging on for-fucking-ever.
No matter what party KindaSleazy represents or how much education she has, to the crackers down in Jebusland, she's STILL that nigrah wench.
Not to mention that inconvenient "roommate" back in Palo Alto. there's one who needs to stay away from small planes and winding mountain roads
I wasn't on last night until very very late, but I heard about that screenplay.
Did I have a part?
Er, they don't.
Not here in the REAL world.
Terry C, Coldplayer | 02.04.06 - 11:57 pm | #
--
You do not live in the real world, you live in the fever swamp of liberalsim.
An Iran selling oil for euros might be a threat.
Smokes: check it out.
res ipsa loquitur
we
are
fucked
As NFL Commissioner, what will Condi do if she gets a memo that's titled, "Tom Brady Determined to Strike in the Red Zone"
WalterNeff |
wait for her period? and hope?
Fitzgerald had better be ready to throw his monkey wrench into the works ASAP
I think there's a deal with the administration to put everything on hold until early 2007.
Midnight 5 February and it's 47 degrees in upstate NY. I made the mistake of building a fire tonight, and now I am in a T shirt, and the cat is stretched out trying to cool off.
Nûr al-Cubicle ... 11:50 pm
Nûr al-Cubicle ... 11:53 pm
Yeah.
There is a health dose of "I don't really know" with the things he writes, which is quite refreshing within the leftyblogosphere's pundit class. ~ Syd Barrett
one could starve to death before finding eet among the bloviators of right blogistan.
so.
Matthews is SUCH an assclown.
New NBC Poll Shows Solid Majority Opposes Warrantless Wiretaps
According to Chris Matthews, warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens is “a winning issue politically” for resident Bush.
A new poll from NBC and the Wall Street Journal further undermines Matthews' argument:
That’s a pretty big margin in favor of the resident following the law. How long will the media keep repeating the “conventional wisdom” that warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens is a good issue for resident Bush when most polls show the opposite?
And the U.S. has neither a legal nor moral reason to do so.
masculine_monica_nyc
==
Well, we've proven to the world we have no particular problem with that.
We simply do not have the troops (nor do our "allies") to invade, occupy and control Iran.
And the U.S. has neither a legal nor moral reason to do so.
masculine_monica_nyc | 02.05.06 - 12:00 am | #
You are kidding right? Don't worry - we will reports that their troops crossed into Iraq, occupied a radio station and started running anti-German, er, anti-US propoganda.
I have it on good authority that Canada plans to bomb the Baldwins.
"EkCenTrik--I simmered it in the crockpot all day. Want some?"
Man that sounds good and that is after a huge steak and dessert for dinner this eve.
Was someone talking about my buddy Zero Mostel on another thread? What movie was that?
You do not live in the real world, you live in the fever swamp of liberalsim.
Osher Doktowitz
Wrong. Most Americans agree with me that liberals are scum.
Osher Doktowitz
Hey, everybody, "Dean" Flickinger is back! Welcome back, "Dean"!
Hey, did you get a new suit yet? 'Cause that brown number you were wearing in those pictures where you desecrated the Bible by using it as a political prop looked like a bunch of abortions.
You do not live in the real world, you live in the fever swamp of liberalsim.
Osher Doktowitz
Isn't "liberalSim" a video game or something?
Alright, I'm off to sleep.
Oh, and I don't think anyone's said this yet:
FUCK YOU, BLOGGER!!!
DemByDefault--this is a really easy recipe. The trick is really good Indian curry powder, which is easy to get in LA, but may not be by you.
3 large chicken breasts, skin removed. Brown in a small amount of oil. Set aside.
Combine in the crockpot:
small red pepper, cut into narrow strips
2 large potatoes, cut into 1" cubes, or 8 baby potatoes
1 medium onion, sliced thin
1/2 c. chicken broth
1 can coconut milk or cream (if this isn't available, use 1 can cream of chicken soup
1 1/2 tsp. curry powder (Spice Islands' is good if you can't find Thai or Indian curry powder)
1/4 tsp. ground ginger
Spray the crockpot with no stick cooking spray like Pam. Place chicken into liquid and vegetables and cook on low for 8-10 hours.
I have it on good authority that Canada plans to bomb the Baldwins.
Steven took himself out.
Did I have a part?
I think you were one of the hot scientist babes. You do have a lab coat, don't you?
Chris Matthews blows goats. Why does anyone watch his show?
we've only alighted on the first lily pad.
time to move on in little georges favorite game.
frogger.
i hope he ends up like george costanza, pinned against a curb, truck a barrell'n at him.
i actually don't want iran to have a nuke. i want responsible leaders to start dismantling those fuckers. one day someone is going to start setting them off, and i don't care how big they are, that shit is not good for the enviroment.
Scum?
Well, that's better than they'd rate someone who thinks "Osher Doktowitz" is a cute play on words.
Was someone talking about my buddy Zero Mostel on another thread? What
movie was that?
DemByDefault | 02.05.06 - 12:03 am | #
That robbery/caper flick with
Robert Redford (forget the title)?
Is it the Gawker at the accident syndrome?
4Legs--how is His Plushy Overlordness?
Vicki,
Well next time, I'll email you my phone # right away instead of waiting to hear from someone.
I'm thinking of making some signs right now, 'cause I know exactly where condi will land when she flys in. If the snow would just let up now. :D
You do not live in the real world, you live in the fever swamp of liberalsim.
Mmmmmm... a fever swamp. I like the sounda that.
Did I have a part?
I think so. And a mimosa.
But is Iran any real threat to Israel?
No. "Nuking Israel" makes no sense, since animosity towards Israel is not irrational European anti-Semitism but based on a desire to take and hold that same land, not render it uninhabitable with radiation. In fact Iran and Israel have this bizarre long-standing realpolitik relationship that goes way back. Iran and Israel are both non-Sunni Arab minorities at the periphery of a bloc of Sunni Arab states; they do not directly border eachother and share many mutual enemies. Israel was the major mover in the Iran-Contra scandal, and several contacts made then are still operational.
"We are in such desperate trouble
language is inadequate to describe
it."
It's hard to believe that all hell won't break out before fearless leader's reign comes to an end.
In wingnuttia "most Americans"="me and my buddy at the Fryolator".
"ou live in the fever swamp of liberalsim"
Oh no!!! Watch out for the hippie gators,
DemByDefault--I usually serve the curry with boiled peanuts, raisins and scallions.
I hope Bush and Delay both come back as cockroaches.
But is a nuclear Iran really a threat to us? Certainly an Iran-with-nukes could blow the hell out of a city or two, but an Iran that did such a thing would pretty much cease to exist. It isn't mutually assured destruction, it's you fuck with us a little bit and YOU NO LONGER LIVE BITCHES!
Exactly right. The only major "threat" it really poses to the USA is to an American invasion of Iran.
In the future when terrorists can just take their phasers off "stun" we'll look back at nuclear weapons and laugh.
Anyhoo, Iran getting nukes is about them not wanted to be invaded.
I think so. And a mimosa.
Thers, Insolent Partisan
Mmmm. Mimosa. You'd probably get more comic relief if you gave me a banana, but I digress.
As NFL Commissioner, what will Condi do if she gets a memo that's titled, "Tom Brady Determined to Strike in the Red Zone"
WalterNeff
I think she'd draw up a plan to pre-emptively strike against Damon Allen and the Toronto Argonauts.
Place chicken into liquid and vegetables and cook on low for 8-10 hours.
Sallyh ... 8-10 hours? Seriously? Isn't that chicken going to just fall off the bones after all that time? Or is that the idea?
I hope Bush and Delay both come back as cockroaches.
I hope they don't come back at all.
Chris Matthews blows goats. Why does anyone watch his show?
wtf | 02.05.06 - 12:04 am | #
Because he also sucks hippo root.
And it's worth waiting to see it...
DemByDefault--this is a really easy recipe.
Sallyh- Why do you assume I need an easy recipe, belle dame poissoniere? You're right, I just wonder why you assume it.
It looks great. Many thanks for posting it!!!
In wingnuttia "most Americans"="me and my buddy at the Fryolator".
ronjazz, formerly free
The 36%
(or is it lower than that now?)
I hope Bush and Delay both come back as cockroaches
they already have
Fuck you liberals. You are like the Nazis, like Hitler. Your bias is like those who hated the Jews and capitalism and Israel. Not this time, we will not fall for it no way. Most Americans know that the real fascists are leftists. You prove it every time you open your diseased mouths.
I AM LOOKING FOR ANOTHER GUY WHO IS HOT, LAID BACK, DISCREET AND LOOKING TO GET NAKED AND CLOSE THE DOOR AND CHECK IT OUT.
I AM 5'9 165 HAIRY AND BIG PRICK
NOT LOOKING FOR FEM GUYS OR STUFF LIKE THAT
Res--that's what you want it to do
fantastic sadistic arrogance and carelessness of Katrina, you lost them
Yeah, my mom's husband was a big wingnut who thought I was some sort of far-left hippie. Now he thinks I was right all along but what does it matter anymore. The damage is done and getting worse with 3 more years to go.
Was someone talking about my buddy Zero Mostel on another thread?
==
Earlier this thread - the Hot Rock. Rob't. Redford, George Segal, Ron Liebman (sp?), and Paul Sand. 1972. Fucking classic.
Dem--I never assume, but I know that many people have time pressures, so most of the things I make are simple.
Chris Matthews blows goats. Why does anyone watch his show?
wtf | 02.05.06 - 12:04 am | #
Because he face is a constatnt on the left - like they say, images are everything, no one reads words. Seriously, who designed that ad? It is terrible and probably does more to get people to watch his show than not.
4Legs--how is His Plushy Overlordness?
Funny you should ask.
http://plush-life.blogspot.com/
wait for her period? and hope?
Fuck.that.
You are kidding right?
Nah. The truth of the situation is worth repeating, despite the prevalence of truthiness.
Israel was the major mover in the Iran-Contra scandal, and several contacts made then are still operational.
kei & yuri
Ledeen and Ghorbanifar???? And those forgeries about Saddam trying to obtain Yellow Cake?
Alright, I'm off to sleep.
Oh, and I don't think anyone's said this yet:
FUCK YOU, BLOGGER!!!
Thank you, sweetie. Nite! Don't be too hard on Blogger, they finally kicked out the porno spammers that took my old site. Of course it did take what, 3 months?
Dem--I never assume
Oh, I could screw up a cup of tea. But I'm going to try this one.
Prince is looking old
Res, Dem--I usually make it the night before, then take it out of the fridge and start the crockpot up when I leave for work, so when we get home, many hours later, it's ready.
Osher Doktowitz
Assuming you're a parody --
You're not funny.
Please stop posting here.
He'll be doing the Super Bowl in a year or two.
Those who are not with our leaders are far in the minority, no matter what you libs believe and your bullshit polls say. Bush is Large and In Charge, OK? You are nothing. We can do what we want. And we want FREEDOM for the world.
No doubt that BushCo is the biggest threat to the world in the world.
Chris Matthews blows goats. Why does anyone watch his show?
I think people are hoping to see him slip up and go for a goat on the air.
I am happy he's gone over the deep end. It keeps me from ever turning into his show at all.
Res, Dem--I usually make it the night before, then take it out of the fridge and start the crockpot up when I leave for work, so when we get home, many hours later, it's ready.
That's sort of what I used to do with Strom!
-Liddy Dole
4Legs--he actually looks a little tired from his day of Ruling the Universe.
America rules. Liberal haters are fools.
Prince is looking old
wtf | 02.05.06 - 12:09 am | #
Who isn't?
And we want FREEDOM for the world.
So do we.
That's why we hate Bush!
kei & yuri | Homepage | 02.05.06 - 12:06 am | #
That was a nice reminder. Something I think many of us, including me, forget the connections between Israel and Iran.
It's homepage is Horowitz's rag. Did anybody see his love letter to GWB? these people are immune to embarrassment.
There aren't any straight trools anymore, are there?
Was Toby really the last "intelligent" one out there?
That doesn't say much for the "base" does it.
Prince is looking old
wtf
ya want him to pull a Michael Jackson and pretend to live in Neverland?
start the crockpot up when I leave for work, so when we get home, many hours later, it's ready
And when you get home, the house smells wonderful...
Maybe Osher is that Deutcsh from NASA.
No doubt that BushCo is the biggest threat to the world in the world.
Ding ding ding! We have a winner!
k&y, that's what I had in mind. Besides which, Israel is pretty much ass-kicking in desert warfare, and their chops are up, since they keep using the Palestinians for target practice. Iran would have to be run by Bush to do something that stupid.
Chris Matthews blows goats. Why does anyone watch his show?
I think people are hoping to see him slip up and go for a goat on the air.
"Osher" wants Chris to blow HIM!
You do not live in the real world, you live in the fever swamp of liberalsim.
Osher Doktowitz
And you're just a little punk-ass bitch. So?
And we want FREEDOM for the world.
So do we.
That's why we hate Bush!
Terry C, Coldplayer | 02.05.06 - 12:11 am | #
Freedom begins at home, baby!
Feral--that too!
Damn. I had the strangest dreams while I was snoozing on the couch.
I support the USA 100%. What the FUCK is the problem with you traitors? Do you not understand why the heartland HATES you? Please, step back or kill y ourselves or something. We, the grown-ups, have important work to do.
Is he calling himself Prince again? I thought he was just the symbol...
This just in ... text of Condi's half-time statement at Superbowl: "Nobody could have anticipated that Jerome Bettis would run the football."
Bebe--didn't you have to thaw him out first?
Most Americans know that the real fascists are leftists
ummm..... fascists are right wing. Communists are left wing......
Most Americans know that the real fascists are leftists. You prove it every time you open your diseased mouths.
Osher Doktowitz
I believe the correct term is froth hole. Ain't that right, DeanInTheHouse?
Ha, 'freedom for the world' . . . one dead body at a time. Where have all the good trolls gone?
Prince is looking old
wtf | 02.05.06 - 12:09 am | #
Who isn't?
steve simels
Bonnie Raitt is still looking mighty fine! Thanks to Prince.
The trolls' idea of freedom and liberty are a bit skewed.
The only major "threat" it really poses to the USA is to an American invasion of Iran.
Iran is three times larger than Iraq.
Iran is a totally unforgiving mountainous place, whereas Iraq actually has nice forests and arable land up north.
Iran is relatively very linguistically, religiously and ethnically uniform, especially compared to Iraq.
Iran, unlike Iraq and like the People's Democratic Republic of Korea, was permanently scarred by a US coup and dedicated its military, which despite third-world status is strong, to fucking up American invaders.
Iraq was a cakewalk until we noticed, like Custer, all these pesky insurgent keeping on coming. Iran has insurgents, plus a real army, plus more and rougher land.
When they fought the invasions in the 40s, they fought room by room, building by building. Iranians, like the Turks, have a proud martial tradition that goes back to conquering the region.
Invading Iran can only be much worse than the current diaster in Iraq.
And a nuclear Iran will prevent that.
Who isn't?
Ummm, I can't think of anyone right now.
Bebe--didn't you have to thaw him out first?
Not if I wanted part of him stiff.
Bush is Large and In Charge, OK?
OK, it's a parody
prince might be looking old, but his sound sure hasn't changed mmuch in 20 years.
"We are in such desperate trouble
language is inadequate to describe
it."
It's hard to believe that all hell won't break out before fearless leader's reign comes to an end.
mike in pr
===
That's the real threat behind everything they do.
the real fascists are leftists
Beyond stupid, this one!
How to make Bush Bolognese:
Combine in a crock o' shit . . .
Osher
Do you believe everything Bush said prior to the Iraq invasion?
Bonnie Raitt is still looking mighty fine! Thanks to Prince.
Huh? Is Bonnie on SNL?
Bush is Large and In Charge, OK?
OK, it's a parody
Buzz Bomb
Or too stupid to live.
By the way, earlier today I was seized again with "diatribe frenzy," this time over at AMERICAblog, concerning Rumsfeld's Iran comments.
If you're so inclined, here I'm trying to understand what's going on.
Here I'm responding to another post with more thoughts about the nature of power and our possible place in preserving our country from doom.
I believe the appropriate phrase is, "Don't get me started."
Was Toby really the last "intelligent" one out there?
Where has Toby been? Did he get permanently banned?
ya want him to pull a Michael Jackson and pretend to live in Neverland?
no, not at all. it was just an observation.
Bush is Large and In Charge, OK?
Despite four hours of working out each day, he does look fat and sloppy.
We, the grown-ups, have important work to do.
Osher Doktowitz
Someone's gotta man the White House glory holes, I guess.
4Legs--he actually looks a little tired from his day of Ruling the Universe.
That's actually from yesterday.
No shots from today.
I wish the papers would quit calling what the administration is having the NSA do "eavesdropping." Sounds so cute, so harmless, so like your dippy but lovable Aunt Louise craning her neck to hear what the people at the next table are talking about.
It's not "eavesdropping." It's WIRETAPPING.
I wish the papers would quit calling what the administration is having the NSA do "eavesdropping." Sounds so cute, so harmless, so like your dippy but lovable Aunt Louise craning her neck to hear what the people at the next table are talking about.
It's not "eavesdropping." It's WIRETAPPING.
Is he calling himself Prince again? I thought he was just the symbol...
Vicki
Ran through his Contractual Obligation albums, so he was able to stop screwing around with the PR people at his old label.
How to make Bush Bolognese:
Combine in a crock o' shit . . .
WalterNeff
Toss in some chopped Xian babies.
And some julienned troll parts.
Better to live in a fever swamp than a fever dream.
Bebe--how much gravy was involved?
"eavesdropping." Sounds so cute, so harmless, so like your dippy but lovable Aunt Louise craning her neck to hear what the people at the next table are talking about.
Hee hee: Bush is Gladys Kravitz.
Invading Iran can only be much worse than the current diaster in Iraq.
And a nuclear Iran will prevent that.
true that, which is why an Iranian Nuke is the best possible scenario for the safety of the american soldiers.
but as andrew cockburn points out, do you really want to nuke Iran with 130,000 hostages available?
Do you not understand why the heartland HATES you?
Because they resent having to live off of our Ag subsidy hand-outs?
Is he calling himself Prince again? I thought he was just the symbol...
Vicki
Or, as my daughter used to call him, "Squiggle."
The liberals want us to surrender to the terrorists. That is the reason behind their opposition to the wiretapping. They also muist be terrorists themselves of have something to hide, why else?
Do you not understand why the heartland HATES you?
Do YOU not understand that YOU do not speak for the "heartland"????
but an Iran that did such a thing would pretty much cease to exist. It isn't mutually assured destruction, it's you fuck with us a little bit and YOU NO LONGER LIVE BITCHES!
I hope you are kidding with this. You know what religious fundamentalists are capable of on both sides of the Atlantic.. are you really comfortable with the idea of a few million dead Americans leading to 68,000,000 dead Iranians? If you believe the U.S. rhetoric that they are after weapons, and not just enriching uranium for power plants as the government claims, then this desire for nuclear weapons certainly stems directly from the invasion of Iraq, which, as it has been recently exposed on the BBC, would have happened regardless if Iraq had any weapons. For Iran's government, it's truly their only credible deterrent to protect themselves from being invaded. It's only a dangerous situation because of the example we have set in invading a sovereign nation without legal justification.
Who isn't?
Ummm, I can't think of anyone right now.
fourlegsgood
==
Same here. *sigh*
Huh? Is Bonnie on SNL?
DemByDefault
Actually was just on Letterman here... through the miracle of temporal distortion that is international TV syndication.
Do you not understand why the heartland HATES you?
California will be happy to quit subsidizing them.
Sci-Fi says this is Jason and the Argonauts, but we know this isn't Jason and the Argonauts . . .
The liberals want us to surrender to the terrorists
No, we don't.
I SAID we hate Bush.
Where has Toby been? Did he get permanently banned?
res ipsa loquitur | 02.05.06 - 12:14 am | #
Trolls are reptiles. They have no sense of decency to shame them on. Responding to them makes as much sense as responding to an iguana.
We, the grown-ups, have important work to do.
Blowin shit up?
The liberals want us to surrender to the terrorists
No, we don't.
I SAID we hate Bush.
Terry C, Coldplayer | 02.05.06 - 12:17 am | #
--
You are the terrorists.
Bush is standing up to you, and most Americans support him Your game is up.
Huh? Is Bonnie on SNL?
DemByDefault
Actually was just on Letterman here... through the miracle of temporal distortion that is international TV syndication.
I meant what does Prince have to do with Bonnie looking good?
Is taht the Letterman with Oprah? That was hard to watch, wasn't it? Mcuh more fun to see him smack Bully O'Liely around./
You know what religious fundamentalists are capable of on both sides of the Atlantic.. are you really comfortable with the idea of a few million dead Americans leading to 68,000,000 dead Iranians?
I hate fundies.
No matter what kind of fundies they are.
Shorter Amy Sullivan: Mmmmmm.....Kool-Aid......
Prince is indeed Prince again.
Do you not understand why the heartland HATES you?
I've never, to my knowledge, been hated by a piece of land.
Except for this one really obnoxious hillock. But that hillock sucked.
Trolls be getting skeert. 62% of Americans catching on to Bushco's evil, next week 63%, pretty soon 70% will know that the regime is anti-American, and that their followers are the lunatic fringe. I makes me smile with delight when they froth at the mouth with their foolish claims of godliness for their own Little Adolph. Bad enough Bush emulates Hitler, his incompetence keeps him from "living the dream". Thank Wicca for small favors.
Bush is standing up to you, and most Americans support him Your game is up.
Osher Doktowitz
Under 40% is MOST?????
No wonder you like Bush.
You're as stupid as he is.
Despite four hours of working out each day, he does look fat and sloppy.
Sallyh, Madame Poissonniere
==
The sauce'll do that to you.
And thanks for the daily Maxx, 4LG.
"we have met the enemy and he is us"-- now *that* came out of a fever swamp.
Invading Iran can only be much worse than the current diaster in Iraq.
And a nuclear Iran will prevent that.
kei & yuri | Homepage | 02.05.06 - 12:13 am | #
The things you already mentioned will prevent it.
Actually, the only thing that can realistically stop Iran from continuing with its nuclear program is convincing them that they do not need them because they have nothing to fear, but the US has already blown it.
Actually, the American people really have no idea how bad this administration is at diplomacy. The hot-cold-hot-cold manner with the way they have handled the North Korea is a perfect example. It is so pathetic now that the US has made an issue of DPRK's counterfeiting efforts!!!! We have fucking known about that for a decade and we bring it up now?!?!?!
Fucking amateur hour. And then wants these things actually get moving in the right direction, like with Chris Hill as head negotiator, the neocons come in and undermine him and the efforts. It is ridiculous and a running joke in Korea.
Large and In Charge... is usually apended to Mistress Ilsa's BSDM ads in the paper.
You are the terrorists.
Bush is standing up to you, and most Americans support him Your game is up.
Osher Doktowitz | Homepage | 02.05.06 - 12:18 am | #
You're not funny. This is lame
satire.
Please go away.
Prince is looking old
wtf
prince is old. but man he can kick the shit out of that fender.
he may be old but he still has it.
Where has Toby been? Did he get permanently banned?
res ipsa loquitur
I know its wrong, but I kind of miss him.
Sheets
Osher Doktowitz
Anyone that responds to this person is a moron.
He is an idiot jerking chains and pushing buttons.
Dance, chilluns, dance.
the reason behind their opposition to the wiretapping.
Didn't we bitch about the old Soviet Union doing shit like spying on their own people????
Except for this one really obnoxious hillock. But that hillock sucked.
rorschach
==
Commie bastard hillock!
And thanks for the daily Maxx, 4LG.
You're welcome.
Does anyone know what it means when you dream about UFOs?
Trolls are reptiles. They have no sense of decency to shame them on. Responding to them makes as much sense as responding to an iguana.
Ô¿Ô
Hey!
Trolls are reptiles. They have no sense of decency to shame them on. Responding to them makes as much sense as responding to an iguana.
Ô¿Ô
Hey!
The liberals want us to surrender to the terrorists. That is the reason behind their opposition to the wiretapping. They also muist be terrorists themselves
Yes, we must surrender to ourselves.
Gonna answer my question Francis?
I meant what does Prince have to do with Bonnie looking good?
Is taht the Letterman with Oprah? That was hard to watch, wasn't it? Mcuh more fun to see him smack Bully O'Liely around./
DemByDefault
Yeah, it was the Letterman with Oprah.
And do you remember the Bonnie Raitt album about the same time that Oprah was previously on Letterman, where Bonnie made the big "comeback"? Part of that was her living life right to end her Jimmy Page bloat, so she wouldn't look like a beached whale next to Prince in a music video.
Good night, all. My froth hole is tired and I've got class again in the morning. Not that I don't always exude elitist sophistication at all times...
Bush is standing up
Very wobbly on his feet these days, though.
That cheap liquor will do that to ya!
Because they resent having to live off of our Ag subsidy hand-outs?
trsust em, the landless working class in the Midwest resent very much how the landed working class subside on welfare.
Where has Toby been? Did he get permanently banned?
res ipsa loquitur | 02.05.06 - 12:14 am | #
steve simels | Email | 02.05.06 - 12:17 am | #
He enlisted in the Marine Corp.
BWAHAHAHAHAH!
Nur, I think you've about got it right. All this is pretty trumped up, as anyone with half a brain can tell. The Iranians wouldn't be making people so nervous right now if Bush hadn't called them part of the "Axis of Evil" back when; the realpolitik lesson is that if you have a couple three nukes, you don't get invaded. On the other hand, if you can't come up with that much, you get rolled over, and your government and infrastructure destroyed, at which point the US declares victory and goes home, leaving ruin, poverty, and anarchy in their wake. (See Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan the first time, Iraq the first time, etc.) If I were Mohammed Iranian On The Street, I'd be a little nervous about that possibility myself. (As a Canadian, I figure the US will only invade after they're done with the Middle East, so I've still got some time, ha ha.)
I also don't really think Israel's terribly likely to sign up to fight the US' proxy war, either. And I don't think this is something Israel's been agitating for; Iran isn't the likely culprit. Rumour has that the Israeli drive for this, if it happened, would be led by Netanyahu, but I think even he, having to phone in his daily report to reality at large, isn't willing enough to commit political suicide. He has to have seen the polls there; I don't think the average Israeli voter is too keen on possibly getting caught in the crossfire if they're lobbing tilim gariniim back and forth... As one of my friends put it, "Politically, I am in favour of policies favouring my continued survival." Damn right.
Except for this one really obnoxious hillock. But that hillock sucked.
rorschach
I hate hillocks so much. They think they're so much better than hills.
China, India and Russia understand that if Iran is sanctioned by the Security Council, Bush will use this as a pretext to launch attacks on Iran's nuclear installations. Iran won't get more than a slap on the wrist when the matter is brought before the Council on March 6. Bush cannot get what he wants --to fool the EU and the UN into giving him the pretext.
Didn't we bitch about the old Soviet Union doing shit like spying on their own people????
Terry C, Coldplayer
Watch out for those Congressional Hearings on Merkin internet businesses doing deals in China.
And if the caffeine kicks in I've got a patriotboy-esque letter to write to Pat Roberts.
Bonnie Raitt used to say she had to quit drinking and get into shape because she was going to make a record (& the video of course) with Prince & wanted to look better...
I get a kick out of people saying "you have nothing to fear if you're doing nothing wrong"-- when the President can tack 'signing statements' onto things like the Patriot Act, WHO THE HELL KNOWS WHAT'S ILLEGAL ANYMORE?
so she wouldn't look like a beached whale next to Prince in a music video
Ah. I never saw that video. But sobriety definitely works for Bonnie. She's aging extremely well. Her voice too.
You know what "surrendering to the terrorists" would entail? They're not Nazis who want to conquer is or even their region. It would mean abiding by international law.
Does anyone know what it means when you dream about UFOs?
fourlegsgood
==
Stop the world, I want to get off?
I said that I found it odd and/or problematic that Muslims were protesting a cartoon that depicted Mohammed as a (violent) terrorist with violence.
And you said ...???
res ipsa loquitur - 11:47 pm
Oh, yeah-- and then I said:
The irony and apparent doublethink is there, but I think it's an artifact of our non-Muslim perspective.
Based on only my bald speculation, I reckon that the proximate cause of the wrath of devout Muslims is the non-Muslim's knowing and intentional dissemination of images of Mohammed, a heinous violation of a religious taboo. Mass media depictions of He Who Must Never Be Depicted is blasphemous, a grave and provocative insult to Muslim sensibilities.
I would think that the exact nature of the travesties is icing on the cake-- or more properly, salt in the wound. Thus, I would expect that the suggestion of irony at best, or rank hypocrisy at worst, would be lost on offended Muslims. Or it would be inconsequential and trivial.
I don't think they're focused on the details of the material as such, except to the extent that it appears that the Prophet is being mocked, ridiculed, or degraded, cf. the fatwa on Rushdie.
Thus, I wouldn't expect furious Muslims to consider whether they were lapsing into cognitive dissonance or ignoring the unfortunate parallel you note. It's more problematic for us than them.
It doesn't seem so thoughtful the second time around, but if Blogger/Haloscan eats this post-- or even if this thread is dead... no more Mister Nice Guy.
China, India and Russia understand that if Iran is sanctioned by the Security Council, Bush will use this as a pretext to launch attacks on Iran's nuclear installations. Iran won't get more than a slap on the wrist when the matter is brought before the Council on March 6. Bush cannot get what he wants --to fool the EU and the UN into giving him the pretext.
Nûr al-Cubicle
Morning papers here have a couple of stories on the Busheviks getting their panties in a knot over the Iranians possibly moving their currency to Hong Kong to avoid sanctions. And the US going after HSBC {the HS is Hong Kong and Shanghai} and Standard Chartered Banks for their operations in Tehran.
Actually, the American people really have no idea how bad this administration is at diplomacy.
which is why they are getting bombed. probably with nukes.
has defense gotten anywhere with that mini nuke program?
I've got class again in the morning.
Sunday school?
I get a kick out of people saying "you have nothing to fear if you're doing nothing wrong"--
WHO decides what "wrong" IS?
I don't know. I only dream about one thing...
Where has Toby been? Did he get permanently banned?
He enlisted in the Marine Corp.
BWAHAHAHAHAH!
Syd Barrett
He take Gordo, hat, Cog, and the rest of the assholes with him????//
While they make this noise about Iran -- watch Syria. The diaphanous Xymphora makes a good argument that Syria is the real possible "Iraq II."
Atrios, the sentiment in your statement "it's you fuck with us a little bit and you no longer live bitches" is a different failed arms control policy than the failed one we have now.
I suspect your statement is born out of exasperation with the fact that our nukes are currently under the control of Gen. Jack D. Ripper, his subservant chiefs of staff and their corporate sponsors. But that does not mean that Carter-era diplomacy has been rendered "quaint" in our future.
Please do not give up on the possibility that we can find a way, post Bush, to undo nuclear escalation and preemptive war. My children need people of courage and integrity to chart a future without a nuclear holocaust.
Nuclear weapons kill innocent people, wherever they are targeted. How is retaliation not a crime?
I don't know. I only dream about one thing...
Ô¿Ô
Yeah, me too. And I bet we dream about the same thing...
the Iranians possibly moving their currency to Hong Kong to avoid sanctions.
Rrright. Just like we had to truncate the Florida vote counts to prevent national unrest.
The liberals want us to surrender to the terrorists.
You surrendered to the terrorists when you voted for Bush twice, asshole!
You know the empty phrases really astound me.
Consider "surrender to the terrorists."
What does that mean?
Leave aside the impossiblity of the legalistic sense of handing over control to an amorphous, loosely defined group.
If we were to say that terror will not affect us, that we will not fall for the bait and act out violently in the way terrorists claim will we will, "terror" loses its effect.
As long as we piss our pants in fear and attack everything in sight, that is surrendering to terror.
Quietly slipping out of Saudi Arabia, isolating ourselves from the international community, and allowing ourselves to be cast as crusaders against Islam--how long do we continue to do Osama bin Laden's bidding?
Bush has already surrendered to terrorists.
Well, I think it's time for Miss Vicki to take her lily white ass to Queen Bedistan.
I need to dream about some of what Incog is referring to, and I also need a peaceful sleep.
Later, moonbats!
I love you guys. Today was a fun and wonderful experience in Ann Arbor!
ou know the empty phrases really astound me.
Consider "surrender to the terrorists."
What does that mean?
Leave aside the impossiblity of the legalistic sense of handing over control to an amorphous, loosely defined group.
If we were to say that terror will not affect us, that we will not fall for the bait and act out violently in the way terrorists claim will we will, "terror" loses its effect.
As long as we piss our pants in fear and attack everything in sight, that is surrendering to terror.
Quietly slipping out of Saudi Arabia, isolating ourselves from the international community, and allowing ourselves to be cast as crusaders against Islam--how long do we continue to do Osama bin Laden's bidding?
Bush has already surrendered to terrorists.
Uncle Smokes
Word 
mmmmm, lets see how the rest of the world understands the Bush Doctrine:
Iraq with no nukes - invade, invade, invade!!!
North Korea with known nukes and extreme whackery - no invasion.
while it may be true that the bushcriminal is dumb as a stump and can't put 2+2 together, but not so for the rest of the world.
.
Nick, Terry--and the definitions of 'wrong' will shift infinitely, to suit the regime's purposes.
As long as we piss our pants in fear and attack everything in sight, that is surrendering to terror.
==
In the Big Dysfunctional Family, it's all about those attractive surfaces....
Goodnight Vicki - remember those dreams!
Monsieur has put on 'The Interpreter.'
Wow, we just finished watching that. Catherine Keener gives some good lines.
And, I confess I'm enjoying the replays of Over There.
-
Oh, and as for Bush "protecting" us.
Prince Fuckwit couldn't protect anyone.
He's a gutless coward!
Iran is as addicted to petrodollars as the rest of the Middle East. Dropping a nuke on the US and scortching the earth - not likely that they're that crazy. But, crazy enough to drop a nuke on Israel...now that's a different story.
.
Rrright. Just like we had to truncate the Florida vote counts to prevent national unrest.
kei & yuri
As a backstory on this ya might want to do some research on Macau's Banco Delta Asia and the US Dept of Treasury blacklisting them for rumours of money laundering on behalf of North Korea a few months back. Did serious financial damage to the bank solely upon rumours floated by US Treasury.
Israel is armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, and we would retaliate massively, too.
Just wondering. What will the US do with Sistani if we go to war with Iran? Sistani is an Irani citizen. Is he declared an enemy combatant? Do they lock him up in Abu Ghraib or Gitmo? What about the rest of the Shia in Iraq ... and Lebanon and Jordan and Syria ...
I certainly don't think Iran is the biggest threat to us, but if Atrios' incredulity is based only on his confidence in deterrence, then it seems a little misplaced to me. First, deterrence is not universally applicable. India and Pakistan are a perfect example of how the model of U.S.-Soviet deterrence won't necessarily apply to all dyadic relationships today. Second, nuclear deterence does not necessarily mean nuclear safety. What about accidental missile launch? Third, if Iran goes forward with the program, preventive war might have disastrous consequences in and of itself. Anyone want to place bets on what might happen if we or Israel launched strikes against Iran? How would other countries respond? How would it affect Friedman's beloved Arab Street? Fourth, what about passing fissile material to terrorists? The so-called undeterrables. Yes, I know what the CIA said about those prospects vis-a-vis Saddam, but the theocracy in Iran is hardly comparable with the secular Baathists. Selling material to other nations isn't out of the question either. I doubt Iran having the bomb would represent a serious risk to the U.S. directly (I can't imagine them having intercontinental range anytime in the next decade), but surely there are a host of strategic reasons why this would be a serious challenge for U.S. national security. Personally I am more worried about al Qaeda, the environment, and China, but I agree with Kevin Drum, liberals better start articulating a position on Iran NOW, and I hope it's a little more inspiring then "oh come on, you neocon crazies, it ain't THAT big of a deal." Calling the neocons out as stupid is too easy; we need a pro-active short-term and long-term solution. I thought electing Wes Clark would have been a good first step, but that's mostly just cause I think he's cute as a button...
What about accidental missile launch?
But Dmitri! Don't say I can't call you just to say hello!
I suspect I'm like most Americans in that I don't really worry that much about what the "teerorists" are going to do next. I do worry about what BushCo will do next to make the situation even worse than they've already made it.
welcome to Fuckedupistan!
welcome to Fuckedupistan!
You may not worry about what the "teerorists" (I don't know why this is in quotes or spelled incorrectly) are going to do next, but I live in NYC and it does worry me. And I don't know why I got mocked on 'accidental missile launch." Ask Robert Gallucci, Dean at the School of Foreign Service and one of the most distinguished experts on proliferation: one of his biggest concerns, if not his number one concern, is an accidental missile launch from Russia. And trust me, it is a big concern for people watching the situation in Pakistan and India.
Once again, late to the thread, but I think that Bushco has been seting up Israel to nuke Iran for two years.
And It hink the biggest threat are the six elections that will take place in South and Central America this year.
Now that Hamas and Venzeuela are working to become allies, along with Cuba, bring Syria on board, well, I think we can all see where Bushco screwed the pooch on thier office version of the board game Risk.
George Bush. Never has one man done so little to accomplish so much in uniting our enemies and dividing our friends. Singlehandly responsible for any number of countries abandoning diplomacy, and moving toward totalitarian regimes.
All because the guy they voted for said, "I hate George Bush". It may well become the most successful campaign slogan in history.
oy.
The naivete among liberals on military issues is absolutely stunning.
Iran's total military expenditures in 2003 are estimated at 4.3B by the ciafactbook. US expenditures were approximately 90 times larger ($370B).
To pose a serious threat, a country would have to have:
1. Reliable nuclear warheads
2. Intercontinental missiles capable of reasonable accuracy
3. The capacity to launch a first strike
4. The ability to absorb a counterstrike
Iran is probably 10 years away from having a nuclear warhead, much less a reliable one.
Even if it acquired one from, say, our staunch ally Pakistan, it doesn't have a missile capable of hitting farther away than Israel.
Even if somehow it acquired a missile with sufficient accuracy to hit a target of military value in the US, it would have to acquire a few thousand to be capable of launching a first strike.
Even if somehow it built several thousand, it would have to be able to absorb a counterstrike from the submarine and bomber elements of the triad.
Iran is about as large as Alaska. It has a lot less room in which to absorb a strike.
Wake up, folks. Iran is not a threat.
Unless we convince them that they have no choice but to turn to terrorism.
I think the problem would be Iran-with-nukes-and-giving-them-to-terrorists to destroy Israel and the West. If terrorists use a nuclear weapon, Iran can wash their hands of it and claim they had nothing to do with it. Would they do something like that? I don't know, I don't specialize in Iranian-terrorist-collusion politics. I think it is possible, especially since Iranian leaders call for the destruction of the U.S. and "Death to America."
Charles,
It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that a nation requires the ability to absorb a counterstrike to threaten the U.S. Why is no one considering the other natural part of Iran getting a bomb: it's not just our ability to deter Iran that is the issue, it's Iran's ability to deter us. Have you ever heard of minimal deterrence, Charles? I think it may be you who is naive about military issues. What if Saddam had a bomb when he invaded Kuwait? What happens to U.S. foreign policy when it starts to become constricted by rogue nations getting nuclear capablity? These are serious issues, and arguments that a state doesn't pose a threat without thousands of nukes are not helping us.
The problem is that it would take only a few to remove Israel entirely, possibly before they could set in motion a retaliatory strike, and the Iranian crazies might be tempted to go for it. That's why I think Israel should take care of things.
If you think a nuclear armed Iran is scary, just think how the world views a nuclear armed America with Religionistas el presidente Bush in power.
I am curious, Jesse, as to what you definition of a "rogue" nation is.
I consider it a country that is attacking other countries. Aside from ourselves and our wonderful "coalition of the willing," which other country fits the description? I know of one right off the top of my head, but it ain't Iran by a long shot.
What makes you call Iran a "rogue" state, and why shouldn't it use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, and, really, why shouldn't it be able to defend itself like other countries? It hasn't been threatening us in any shape, size or form, nor any other country that I have read about.
See, what happened, is they volunteered to sign the NPT. Lots of other countries have out and out refused to sign and Bush has not even made a peep about them. Then, they voluntarily allowed teams in to look over what they are doing, unlike some countries who refuse review, again not a peep from Bush. Then, the teams reported that they found no evidence that Iran was doing anything other than what it said it was doing, pursuing the peaceful use of nuclear power like most countries in the world and unlike other nations who did turn up with nuclear bombs but still won't allow inspections or sign on to treaties or watchdog organizations. I find it so interesting that Bush is not screaming about those who have refused, but rather about those who have complied.
So once again here we are. With Iraq, UN teams searched and searched and never found any evidence of WMDs, just as Saddam had said. We attacked anyhow, an innocent country, and killed at least 100,000 people. Then the bright boys in Washington started to claim that Saddam "wanted" to make nuclear weapons and that was enough to have invaded. I will remind you that lots of countries "want" to make nuclear weapons, and some do so they don't get attacked by America -- N. Korea is the perfect example.
Back to the original question. Why is Iran the "rogue" state? Which country crosses borders to attack its neighbors? Which country has amassed illegal nuclear weapons and warheads? Which country has refused inspection? Which country has refused to sign the NPT? It's not Iran.
Why don't we do away with the double standard and demand that all countries comply in the same ways. Then we can better determine who needs to be attacked: the one who doesn't comply.
Isn't is all really about the Euro instead of the dollar?
burp
Or Iran can do the crafty thing and give a nuke or two to one of the many extra-national entities that loathe the US, and let someone else do their dirty work.
While it may be true that Pakistan poses the same threat, that fact still doesn't rule our concerted effort to limit the number of countries that aspire to the "new-kewlar" eBay for terrorists and crackpots.
Keep trying "kei & yuri"
Someone will anwser your trolling sooner or later.
This "Iran might do this" and "Iran could do this" game of guessing is grossly stupid and unfair. What do you base that on, jimmm? What information/evidence are you holding that Iran is actually contemplating giving nukes to terrorists? Why is this a given? Why would they? I can think of lots of reasons why they would not.
Any country could do anything. Your neighbor could cut your trees down. Your kid's teacher might smack him. "Saddam had a terrorist program." A comet can hit the earth. A cheeseburger may turn into a Volkswagon. George Bush might attack Canada -- well, the last is not so farfetched, and Bush does have a history of attacking innocent countries.
You can't run foreign policy on guesses of what "may" happen "someday in the future" when you don't have tangible data to even suggest you are correct. It's all just mindreading and wishful thinking that happens to fit into your agenda. Somehow, I think this fits into Bush's Crusade against Islamic countries agenda. Now, there IS evidence for that.
Note that N. Korea, one of the original Axis of Evil terrorist bunch, does have a nuke to give away to terrorists. Originally, Bush was yapping that N. Korea could get nuclear weapons and give them to terrorists. But once they produced a nuke, the threats stopped and no one is accusing them of getting ready to give their nukes to terrorists anymore. Why? That doesn't make sense, unless you mean by joining the nuclear countries you are no longer a threat to anyone; in which case we should encourge Iran to hurry up. But back to N. Korea, why hasn't N. Korea been brought up to the UN Security Council? Oh, I know why: they are not Muslim and they don't have oil.
I would say that "nuclear proliferation" in general, rather than specifically related to Iran, is probably the biggest existential threat to the U.S. - because really, what else is going to bring us down?
Iran with nukes is a scarier thought than India with nukes, but it's really the idea of more countries (and less politically stable countries) with nuclear weapons that frightens me.
You can't run foreign policy on guesses of what "may" happen "someday in the future" when you don't have tangible data to even suggest you are correct. It's all just mindreading and wishful thinking that happens to fit into your agenda.
But the question is what poses the biggest threat. It wasn't "who should we attack next". When trying to evaluate threats, you're obviously talking about the future and you have to make reasonable guesses. I agree with you that it is not bloody likely that Iran will give nuclear weapons to terrorists. But I don't think it's likely that any country will attack us with nukes, or that any country really poses an existential threat to us. So when trying to evaluate who poses the biggest threat, you are necessarily dealing with events that are unlikely to happen.
You stupid bastards would have been right at home in 1935. Neville Chamberlain would be your hero. You have a psycopath head of state in Iran in control of a sociopathic society. He threatens to nuke a neighboring state or anyone else that catches his fancy, and you don't take him seriously. Of cours, we and/or the Israelis could bomb Iran back to prehuman levels. Of course, Tel
Aviv is a radioactive pit, but what the hell, it's only Jews. Get it through your heads people, George Bush is not the problem. Militant Islam is. And you wonder why the voters do not trust the left to protect this country. These people mean exactly what they. To paraphrase Richard Pryor: They are ready to go to Allah and would like to take ten or twelve motherfuckers with them.
You have a point but the idea is to keep them from getting the Nukes so we don't have to make them cease to exist.
And exactly how are we going to keep them from getting nukes? You seem to be working under the assumption that we are dealing with rational beings.
No, Ensley
North Korea already has nukes. I hope you understand the distinction. Once the genie is out of the bottle, what can one do. Of course, everyone seems to forget or gloss over that due to the efforts of Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, the US got rolled by the North Koreans. The UN is a waste of time, money, and effort. For years they have twiddled their thumbs while Iran and North Korea continued full speed ahead with ther nukes program. The UN and the Europeans did squat to prevent genocide in Europe. It took America to actually do something to end the slaughter Muslims. Of cours, we and everyone else did nothing in Rwanda. The left is opposed to America being the world's policeman, except when they aren't, particularly in cases where our national interests are not at stake. i.e. Bosnia.
If Iran lit off a nuke aimed at, say, Kuwait City - would the United States retaliate with an overwhelming nuclear response?
I say no. Because people start adding up the civilian dead. If you believe that Iran is run by a oligarchic band of theocrats at the expense of the people, then what does wholesale slaughter of those under their reign do?
That said, a realpolitik analysis argues for obliteration of Iran. But then who pays to de-toxify Afghanistan, India, Russia, and wherever else the nuclear winds are blown?
The finger starts to waver when you realize what you are arguing to do.
MEC2
P.S. I giggle at the laughable arguments that somehow Iran represents a real threat where Iraq did not. What PRECISELY is the difference? A middle-eastern oil-rich terror-supporting state that's an avowed enemy of the United States is pursuing WMD? Iran is no more an imminent threat than Iraq was, we are worried about their POTENTIAL to have WMD, much less what we thought Saddam was hiding. Both used WMD on each other. And neither can be trusted in a terror-exporting post-9/11 world.
That said... the Iran pot is already boiling, it's just a matter of which side is going to remove the lid.
3 years ago Rafsanjani did a seminar with representitives of the Republican Guard where he laid out his incredibly sophisticated plan.
Once Iran has a couple of dozen nukes, they smuggle them into various capitols around the world. Then they can nuke Tel Aviv and announce that if there is any response they will also nuke Washington, Paris, London, Jerusalem etc.
Of course, he's the *moderate* that lost to Ahmadinejad.
If Iran has one nuke, it's not a problem. If they get 5 or 6, several million people will die. Most of those will be Iranian.
I hope Iran takes th whole middle east out along with itself. They are playing with nuclear fire and will get burned along with others
by the way most of these clowns just do not get the real danger. It ain't Iran having a nuke...it's Iran having a nuke to give to Islamic extremists who will definitely use it.
I disagree a little. Iran is fueling a lot of anti-American sentiment and terrorism, almost as fast as we are in Iraq. They are also starting to take over part of the training of Iraqi troops because bush is too ignorant/arrogant to go about it correctly. I realize of course that Iran poses a greater threat to Israel in terms of actual nuclear attack, but does anyone seriously believe that the use of nuclear weapons in one part of the globe will not affect the rest of us? IT IS mutualy assured destruction! If Iran attacks Israel, Israel will retaliate-- they have nukes, too. And if Israel retaliates, that will surely be a catalyst for what much of the Islamic dictatorships have wanted to do for a long time: attack Israel themselves. (If, as you said, Israel launches a preemptive attack then it will be even more of a catalyst for war with other Islamic dictatorships in the region.) Then, of course (and I'm not sure this is the RIGHT choice, but I'm pretty sure that this is what WILL happen) our government become militarily involved. It's like The Guns of August, by Barbara Tuchman, only nearly a century later.
While I am in no way a neocon hawk advocating war on Iran (that would only have the opposite effect of securing the region) I have to agree-- Iran is one of the greatest threats to the United States. It is unconscionable that bush allowed them to get closer to obtaining nuclear weapons and then went and attacked Iraq for no reason.
Just my two cents. But of course I think the GREATEST threat to the security of the Republic is the war in Iraq...
All the comments like "I hope Iran takes the whole middle east out along with itself" etc... dont make sense. Did we learn anything from the cold war?! Heck, I wasn't even alive during the cold war and I realize the lessons! Even during the Second World War we knew that stuff like that in other parts of the world affects us, too! http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/speccoll.../pm/
10522cs.jpg
I am NOT advocating military intervention by the US in the middle east. I am against the war in Iraq. But we have got to realize that we are no longer isolated from anything in the nuclear age!
Well, sure, Iran nukes Tel Aviv. Fair enough, because Israel nukes them back harder? Is that really what you're saying? Oh, and by the way, about 300-500 million people throughout the region die of cancer over the next 20 years. But fine, let a country whose president has publicly expressed the wish to wipe Israel off the map have nukes. No biggie.
What is a rogue nation? I would say it is more than one which directly attacks its neighbors. Iran is in the business of destabilizing the region, through its sponsorshop of terrorism and, most recently, its manipulation of Shiites in Iraq. Iran was always more dangerous than Iraq. Always. It's why we supported Iraq in the 80s. Iran's conventional forces dwarf Iraq's. It's new President, incidentally, has called for wiping Israel off the map. I would, with respect, argue that qualifies as threatening a country, despite Ensley's assertion otherwise. As for someone else's comment that we shouldn't base foreign policy on what may or may not happen in the future, that certainly fails the logic test. That is grand strategy is all about. Being forward-looking. Maybe if we had done a little more of that during the Cold War, Islamic militism wouldn't be such a problem today. I have never said that Iran is an imminent threat. It isn't. But just as the neocons create straw men (isolationism? appeasement?), it would be bad for liberals to say that worriers about Iran are all saying it is an imminent threat. There is a threat assessment a little less alarmist than that which deserves some consideration. Personally, I think Iran getting nuclear strike capability is really, really bad. Ensley asks questions like "why should Iran be able to defend itself like other countries?" Uh, international security isn't about being fair. Sorry, it isn't. It's an anarchic system, and that means it's about self-preservation. Someday maybe international norms may progress to a point where that is no longer the scenario, but we're nowhere near that. As American citizens, do we really want to be in the position of saying, "well, we have them, so shouldn't violent, oppressive, terrorist-sponsoring, anti-Western nations have them too? I mean, they're countries too!"
Sorry, I had so many missing words and spelling mistakes in that last post. Hope everyone got the meaning of what i was trying to say...
You don't really mean it. What if the delivery of the atomic weapon could not be immediately identified to the Iran? You and your political cronies would be the first to call on us *not* to assume it was Iran. Even if we did find out it was Iran, I still bet that if push came to shove, Atrios, you wouldn't respond even if the mullahs blew a city or two. Not if you were the President. Not if your party were in power. You would issue demands. You would blame Bush, or neo-cons, or paleo conservatives. But you would do ... nothing. That's why I dont trust the Iranians. Or you.
Better they don't get the nuke in the first instance. But then we cannot even agree on that.
That's so retarded. Honestly, if you think a democratic president would fight al Qaeda less intensely than the republicans, you're missing some brain cells. It just doesn't make any sense. It's not based on anything in reality. Even if you think they're weak, surely you think they have the desire to keep their job. What presidency or party for that matter would survive NOT doing anything after a nuclear attack? Sheer Stupidity.
Talking about nukes in Iran is just like WMDs in Irag. Their real power still lies in stopping the flow of oil. And unlike the Iraqis, they have a real army with people who will fight to defend the country.
We have nothing left cause Bushie used it all up in Iraq. If we use nukes on Iraq, there wont be any oil coming this way for along time.
My, isn't this is a feeble attempt to backtrack from the "everyone knows terrorists are bad" Duncan mantra of yore.
You have pretty much outed yourself as a disingenuous tool. Stick to making up smears, distorting and mischaracterizing facts, and a shill for the Soros funded Media Matters smear merchant campaign.
You have done the unthinkable in this political atmosphere. You have united moderate and centrist Democrats and Republicans against the horseshit that eminates from both sides of the spectrum. But I have to admit, it flows in much greater quantities from Atrios and his ilk that his counterparts on the other side.
Congratulations.
Gee, Jesse,
I would feel oh so much more secure in my belief that a Democratic president would defend this country as well as a Republican, if President, Bill "I feel your pain" Clinton had done a damn thing about attacks on the WTC, the American consulate in Kenya, our Navy ships, or any other place. Oh, I forgot: He did destroy an aspirin factory and a few tents in the "wag the dog" scenario when the Monicagate affair heated up. Much of the American public views the Democrats as the party of appeasement and surrender, and rightly so.
But fine, let a country whose president has publicly expressed the wish to wipe Israel off the map have nukes. No biggie.
That isn't what he said, and you know it.
zzzz. How much of the country think Dems are appeasers, snowball? About 48 percent voted for John Kerry. Yeah, we're such pariahs. You're a joke. I agree that Bill Clinton didn't do enough about al Qaeda. What exactly was Bush doing about al Qaeda before 9/11? He can come back from vacation to sign the Terri Schiavo bill into law, but not for "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Within the United States"? Oops.
Jesse says, "It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest that a nation requires the ability to absorb a counterstrike to threaten the U.S."
Right, Jesse. Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, and JFK are just ridiculous little people. The doctrine of mutually assured destruction was based on the completely idiotic idea that nations might actually contemplate the *consequences* of their actions.
"Why is no one considering the other natural part of Iran getting a bomb: it's not just our ability to deter Iran that is the issue, it's Iran's ability to deter us."
And some observers, looking at the behavior of the United States under its current probably-unelected government wonder whether it might not be such a bad thing if Richard Perle had to contemplate the possible consequences to himself and his family of unjustified war instead of engaging in hallucinatory policy.
"What if Saddam had a bomb when he invaded Kuwait?"
Probably not a lot, if he had calculated the consequences of using it. Lacking an ICBM< it's not like he could target DC. He might have been able to knock out Incirlik. Or ships in the Gulf. Or even an Israeli town, though given the targeting ability of the SCUD, he might as easily have hit Lebanon.
Jesse asks, "What happens to U.S. foreign policy when it starts to become constricted by rogue nations getting nuclear capablity? These are serious issues, and arguments that a state doesn't pose a threat without thousands of nukes are not helping us."
If the US was able to handle facing down the USSR which *did* have thousands of nukes, I somehow don't think that it should have any problem dealing with one nuke.
Ironically, I wrote about the issue of terrorists with nukes five years ago. I wrote very obliquely, because I did understand the risk. The United States is extremely lucky that bin Laden didn't pre-position a nuclear weapon, waiting for the US army to get committed in the field. As we have seen with the Administration's response to Katrina, the home guard is a hollow force. That's the real problem. Any catastrophe, natural or man-made, and we don't have the military response to provide security.
So, Jesse, you don't know nuts from donuts, but you can write a grammatical sentence, for which I congratulate you.
You're welcome to come to MercRising and debate this in detail. Unlike you, my e-mail is publicly available. Feel free to drop a line. I'd be happy to set up a thread for this and, intellectually speaking, gut you like a trout.
After watching the Muslims going berserk the last few days over a few cartoons, I don't trust any of their immature societies with nuclear weapons. Deterrence doesn't work when the other guy doesn't care about living or dying because he's ready to go to the next world. MAD worked with the Russkies, but it won't work with the Iranians or any other Islamist fundamentalists. They'd just be screaming "Allahu akbar!" as millions of them were incinerated in the counterstrike.
Clyde, 24 years before the US acquired nuclear weapons, aircraft were used to bomb African Americans in Tulsa. Apparently thousands were killed.
It was another 30 years after the development of the A-bomb that African Americans were by law allowed to vote.
"Immature societies..."
Eh. This could be more societies than you imagine.
Hmm.
Iran has an insane, Jew-hating, Islamofascist president who's threatening to obtain and USE nukes. Guess who they'd be tested on?
There's been insane, Jew-hating, Islamofascist presidents in Iraq ever since the French gave us Khomeini. This one's just a bit worse than the others.
But according to some deep thinkers here, it's all BUSH'S FAULT.
The Iranians bear no responsibility, in other words, they're just poor simps who allow themselves to be provoked into doing whatever Rummy and Rove decide is opportune.
The "racism of low expectations," anyone?
My thoughts here. While there is some validity to the "rationality of irrationality" notion I think it would fail to confer an advantage to either Iran or the US. Reynolds and others don't seem to get the logic of deterrence or anything remotely approaching a rational discussion of these issues. If you want to make the case that Iran is a danger (and I think you can) then you can't simply suspend logic to make your case. They simply choose to ignore this cornerstone of debate.
If the Iranian Army crosses into Iraq from Kuzistan, I'm fleeing to Canuckistan.
"Certainly an Iran-with-nukes could blow the hell out of a city or two, but an Iran that did such a thing would pretty much cease to exist. It isn't mutually assured destruction, it's you fuck with us a little bit and YOU NO LONGER LIVE BITCHES!"
So if I understand Atrios correctly here, then nuking "a city or two" constitutes "a little bit" of fucking with us?
Wow. And still, that probably counts as really taking a stand around these parts. If you only realized how the majority of Amerians and the radical islamists see right through you!
He wasn't suggesting that we really trade a few million American's for all of Iran--but rather pointing out that the balance of incentives is so largely in our favor so as to deter Iran from contemplating using nuclear (when they finally acquire them) against us in the future.
Charles: I am going to shoot you in the head unless you give me a million dollars. Sure, the cops will shoot me after I shoot you, but if I don't get my million then life isn't worth living. How do you respond?
The reason MAD worked was that we were willing to lose millions. If the Soviets had ever started anything and we only lost a dozen cities, we'd be thanking God that we got away from it so lightly. But modern times are different--losing any city is an unacceptable outcome.
Wow! Good to see you have huevos, Atrios!
Remeber Bin Laden's position after 9/11? He combined denial of having anything to do with it along with threats that it would happen again. Iran would take the same approach. They're not so idiotic that they'd use nukes against the US openly because they all know the retaliation would turn Iran into an instant, permanent and lifeless moonscape. Instead they'll give the nukes to some non-state terrorist group which will then transport the nuke to the US (probably through our unsecured ports). Then when the nuke goes off, the government of Iran will issue a statement deploring violence in general, but claiming it's understandable in this case given the long US record of support for Israel and various other "crimes" against Islam and Arabs. And if our intelligence turns up some evidence that Iran was behind it, they'll say we were wrong on Iraqi WMD so why should the world believe us now?
i'dot think that's verry good thing for the word
Have you ever played a game of Monopoly with a little kid? And when they're losing, and can't take it any more, they flip the board so that the game is over and everyone loses and has to pick it up?
(You could try making the game-flipper pick up the pieces but he won't - he'll just go to bed without his supper.)
That's the magic of a nuclear Iran. The danger that they'll flip the board and make everyone lose. The Soviets wanted to win, they wanted to bury us. And you can't do that by flipping the board. But Iran/radical Islam doesn't necessarily want to win the same way.
Sir,
Kindly see the attached file.
To
All Senior & Sincere Scientists
(Research & Development-Department of Universe Science),
National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
United States of America.
C.C. To
NASA HEADQUARTERS
Attn: Sandy Grello
Code 210.H
Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, MD 20771
Sandra.R.Grello@nasa.gov
Sir,
Kind attn: Mr. Sandy Grello
Sub: Universe perfect secrets
I (T.N. Vijay Kumar) want to bring some universe facts (or secrets) to your notice, which I have got experienced through my practical life.
I’ve been working in a private organization “as a facilitator” located in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh , India. Being a facilitator, I will be getting many things from outside of the company and I will travel in a bus frequently.
In the year 2000, I proposed a lady conductor but she refused to love me. I gave a letter containing something related to “KALAGNANAM” (future according to time) to her. There are about 120 movie names and many names on advertisement boards appeared in city which are here in my letter. There is a movie released exactly reflecting the situation. In my love and its name is “Mounamelanoyee..! (A Silent Love Story) in Telugu language.
What is the need for ‘TIME’ to do such thing (love) in my life? The ‘TIME’ has to be known that:
The movie occurred because its there in my life? or its there in my life because the movie will be released in future.
There are 2 universal facts that they doesn’t have beginning and end:
1) The size of the Universe
2) TIME
of the both ‘TIME’ is most important and also constant.
In the constant and long span of time, the universe will be created and destroyed several trillions of times. The span between the creation and destroyment of universe is again crores of millions of years. This is almost infinite time, let this time span will be one “YUGAM”. The communication between one yugam and another is “TIME”.
In each yugam, every creature is created and run by time only. Yes, nothing will come from outside the universe, but there is lot of ‘matter’ coming on to earth to survive creaturtes. Throughout all planets or galaxy, the human being was and will be intelligent but even by him/her its not invented. Its very very difficult to think, then what about “CREATION..?”
Any how, from yugam to yugam how the creation of universe is happening is still confusing the people, its again an unsolvable puzzle. It’ll be known only to time. Time means: past tense, present tense and future tense. Every ‘matter’ created in universe will be destroyed as time prolong so its having its own starting point and ending point nothing is constant. But only constant thing is time. Hence we can say that time is great than anything.
The total universe is just like a movie in theatre. For this movie the direction-cum-producer are ‘TIME’ (is exactly equivalent to {GOD}). For the general movie, which we usually
college interest loan low student college interest loan low student college interest loan low student. how to get a fha loan how to get a fha loan how to get a fha loan.
test
look i dunno if anyone agrees but maybe if we had made iraq a glass parking lot none of them would be fucking with us right now or even trying to play with nukes for that matter
luxury watches
replica chanel
replica movado
rolex watch
Replica watches
louis vuitton handbags
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
