BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran

Subject: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Goose Gander
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:00 PM

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton said.

If this transcript and article are accurate, then I'm worried.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Peace
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:08 PM

"Hillary: If Iran Attacked Israel With Nukes 'We Would Be Able to Totally Obliterate Them'"

From the lead of the article quoted. Puts a different light on it, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:12 PM

You can listen to it here in her own voice.

Olbermann and Hillary.

It is not exactly a threat to "obliterate Iran."
But it is quite troubling. She offers massive retaliation, BY THE UNITED STATES not only in the case of Iran attacking Israel. But also an umbrella of retaliation covering a host of other unspecified countries in the event of an "unprovoked" nuclear attack by Iran. This seems to me to be unwise on several levels. For one who refuses to talk about hypotheticals for something as trivial as today's Pennsylvania primary. It looks like a hypothetical offer of alliances she would not be authorized to make without congress, even if she were President. On the other hand she seems to be trying her own hands and hypothetically tying here own hypothetical hands way too prematurely.

This woman is not fit to be President. I am concerned that she will kill thousands, just to show she has balls.

Teddy Roosevelt said "Speak softly and carry a big stick." Not "Bark like a puppy and the world might fear you."

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:17 PM

Hell, if Iran attacked Israel with nukes, Israel would be able to totally obliterate them, let alone the USA!

Talk about stating the perfectly bloody obvious...

Israel does not need the USA's nukes in order to totally obliterate Iran...Israel has plenty of nukes of their own to do it.

An how is it taken when an Iranian politician makes such provocative statements in regards to Israel or the USA? Not well.

So why is it deemed perfectly okay for our politicians to make such provocative statements in regards to Iran? Why is our sabre-rattling assumed to be perfectly okay, but theirs is considered criminal?

Double standard. As usual. We are apparently considered human, Israelis are apparently considered human, but Iranians? Oh, they're just Islamic vermin...to be exterminated whenever we see fit. That is the underlying message of this kind of jingoistic blather. It's what resonates unspoken between the lines. We're human. They're not. We will destroy them.

The only question appears to be: when? Nice attitude.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:19 PM

If she'd make a similar promise in respect of Iran, if it were to get similarly attacked, it might go some way to reduce the pressure on that country to acquire a nuclear deterrent.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:22 PM

>>Hell, if Iran attacked Israel with nukes, Israel would be able to totally obliterate them, let alone the USA!<<

Not according to Hillary, who says that we must stop at nothing to keep Iran from being the only nuclear power in the region. Talk about drinking the AIPAC Koolaid.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:22 PM

"...but Iranians? Oh, they're just Islamic vermin...to be exterminated whenever we see fit..."

Oh, poppycock. Iran (and the Iranian people) was America's strongest ally in the Middle East starting in 1925, long before the modern state of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:25 PM

That was then. This is now. The script has changed.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:33 PM

For other such spectacular script changes, look at how the roles of Russia and China as "friend, ally, and trading partner" or "Godless Communist enemy of humanity" have been altered repeatedly since 1925! ;-) Why be surprised that Iran's script has totally reversed itself since 1925? It would be more surprising had it not. Official "friends" become official "enemies" the moment they have something you want and won't surrender it...or the moment they stand in the way of your next grand plan.

It's all a matter of self-interest and imperial expediency. The Empire has designs on Iran at this time. Iran is no threat to the Empire and very little threat to Israel, but the Empire is an absolutely deadly threat to Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:39 PM

And, gee, look at how the role of Japan has changed since 1925! ;-) Or Chile. (Godless under Allende) Or Venezuela. (Godless under Chavez) Or Cuba. (peachy keen under Batista, Godless under Castro)

Even dear old Canada was the official enemy back in 1812. It's all bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:43 PM

"It's all bullshit"

That is a bit more reasonable than the rest of your rant, Birdfeathers.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:51 PM

Thanks. ;-) I knew you'd come around.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Amos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 02:51 PM

"Clinton on an Iran Attack: 'Obliterate Them'
Clinton further displayed tough talk in an interview airing on "Good Morning America" Tuesday. ABC News' Chris Cuomo asked Clinton what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them." "

Yes, the context is conditional on Iran attacking Israel with nukes.

But the next sentence makes no sense at all and makes her sound sociopathic. You don't threaten to obliterate a foreign nation for "considering" launching an attack anymore than you arrest someone for "dreaming of" assassinating an incompetent, scurrilous, economically destructive nutball of a leader!

IF her political decisions are going to based on this kind of pushbutton histrionic logic, we should demote her to perfume sales at Macy's.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Wolfgang
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:01 PM

That's a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic (Clinton, after the above quotes)

The first post in this thread is an exercise in lying with a literally correct quote by leaving out the context.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:02 PM

The USA has been openly considering and discussing a possible attack on Iran for years now. Does this give someone a right to obliterate the USA? (No one can, of course, but if they could...would it give them the right?)

Like I said, it's all bullshit.

American politicians seem to feel quite free to utter death threats at other nations whenever they wish (in order to get their sillier citizens to vote for them)...but they go completely batshit berserk when people in other nations utter similar death threats for some reason...or when they are misquoted as having done so. ;-) That's because Americans think they think they are the "good guys", the real humans, the "chosen people", the self-appointed saviours and policemen of the world and the others who don't see it their way are just vermin.

And that is patently obvious to Third World people.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Goose Gander
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:28 PM

"The first post in this thread is an exercise in lying with a literally correct quote by leaving out the context."

No, it wasn't. I posted this quote, with link to the article, to start a discussion. My first thought went back that quote from the Iranian president about 'wiping Israel off the map' (which, according to Juan Cole, is not at all what he said but more about that later). Both statements are abhorrent, whatever the context, because they make the possibility of peace more distant and that of war more conceivable.

First McCain talking about 100 years of occupation (read: war) in Iraq, and now Clinton speaking openly of mass murder on a genocidal scale. Obama's looking better and better all the time. At least he seems to have something on his mind besides WAR WAR WAR.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Peace
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:36 PM

First, Hillary will never BE the C-in-C. So, relax everyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Amos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:38 PM

Your faith can move mountains. Let's do that!!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:44 PM

If Iran wasn't deterred by 200 or so Israeli nuclear weapons pointed at them from a few hundred miles, the prospect of the USA chipping in as well isn't too likely to change things.

The reason Iran might seek to develop nuclear weapons would be to deter attacks, such as the war of aggression launched by Iraq a few years back under Saddam when he was a valued US ally, or an invasion comparable to that carried out against Iraq five years ago, when Saddam had ceased to be a valued US ally, or an attack by Israel, with its massive nuclear arsenal, and US backing.

Those are real and reasonable fears, and they need to be addressed by firm guarantees that no such attacks will be waged or tolerated, even if carried out by friends of the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:48 PM

Threatening obliteration in exchange for any attack borders on Strangelovian lunacy. If one Iranian happens to fly off the handle and attack say an airforce base in the southern Israel, which is known to harbor Nuclear missiles which Israel is aiming at Iran, Mrs. President will kill 40 million Iranians, not known to be involved in the attacks?

Thinking strategically, from Israel's point of view a fakes attack on its own base could lead to the elimination of their biggest enemy without the loss of very many, if any Israeli lives. Heck they could have nukes on their own bases set to go off when any Iranian missile, large enough to carry a nuke, hits any of their bases.

The President of the US simply cannot make promises about such things that are so far outside America's control.

This is the woman who went apeshit when Obama calmly suggested that if we had highly reliable intelligence of highly dangerous Al Qaeda leaders in Iraq we should should take them out.

Now this woman wants to promise world war three over any attack on Israel when Israel has the missiles and Nukes to launch a counter attack of their own.

I am all for the US using its might to keep countries from being bullied, if and when that is the case. But I do not want a president who paints us into a corner by rashly trying to look tough. Eight years of that was enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Peace
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:49 PM

The converse should be said about attacks against Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 03:57 PM

I think she's after the Republican vote.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:03 PM

"Threatening obliteration in exchange for any attack borders on Strangelovian lunacy. If one Iranian happens to fly off the handle and attack say an airforce base in the southern Israel, which is known to harbor Nuclear missiles which Israel is aiming at Iran, Mrs. President will kill 40 million Iranians, not known to be involved in the attacks? "

THAT IS THE WHOLE BASIS of MAD- Which is why I want to see anti-missile systems in place that provide for some other response. Like stopping the IRBM BEFORE it goes off.

But the response to THAT ( in thread discussion) was that it was better to just have a GTW and kill everybody, since it might annoy Russia to be able to prevent that impact.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:05 PM

They are not that stupid. Republicans realise that Hillary is not fit to hold public office and a few gratuitious statements that reflect what she thinks they want to hear will be ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:06 PM

Folks,
Iran has repeatedly stated it's intention to obliterate Israel. Whether or not Israel has nuclear weapons of it's own is not "public" knowledge, but mostly highly informed speculation as there has never been a test of such a weapon that would prove they have one.

This is in all probability an attempt to secure the Jewish vote and any swing voters who don't feel that Obama is strong enough on national security (He has stated that he'd meet with the leaders of the countries which still regard Israel as a target rather than a country, something our current leadership won't do).

Considering we do have treaties with Israel that we will defend her as an ally, I don't think her statement is much of a surprise.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:14 PM

This is precisely why I have referred to Hillary as McClinton... Her views of the world are purdy much the same as McWar and Bush's... MIllions of preconditions brfore talking with folks... She is dangerous...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Leadbelly
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:16 PM

She sounds like Bismarck (Germany) long time ago and - sorry to say- like Hitler. All consequences included.
Suppose, nothing will change in US-foreign policy after Bush. Might even become worse.
Cannot understand the majority of american people. What do they think they are!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:20 PM

I figured it was a given that the US (and Israel, if they could) would obliterate Iran if it attacked Israel unilaterally.

By the way, Chief Chaos, Iran has not ever stated any intention to obliterate Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:21 PM

I should rephrase my post...


I figured it was a given that the US (and Israel, if they could) would obliterate Iran if it attacked Israel unilaterally with nuclear weapons.

By the way, Chief Chaos, Iran has not ever stated any intention to obliterate Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:22 PM

Then "wipe Israel off the map!" must have something with cartography, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:24 PM

Yeah, I think they use Windex.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:25 PM

Iran has repeatedly stated it's intention to obliterate Israel.

No Iran has not. The President has said that "It should be wiped of the map." That was within the context of a speech about the United Nations creating Israel in the first place. There was no talk of physical attack on israel with bombs.

The real leaders of Iran have not talked on the subject.

>>Whether or not Israel has nuclear weapons of it's own is not "public" knowledge, but mostly highly informed speculation as there has never been a test of such a weapon that would prove they have one.<<

Dozens of people who would know including US and UK intelligence and the people who helped design and build them have said that Israel has had the bomb. I believe that they have it. More important, the rest of the middle east knows that they have the bomb.

I think it would be a more useful umbrella of Peace if Hillary would pledge to attack Israel if it ever used the bomb on one of its neighbors.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:26 PM

Yep, "Windex, the final solution".

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:27 PM

For one thing, they didn't state an intention to make it happen. They said they think it should happen, and secondly, they were talking about the political entity (like the political entity of the Soviet Union), not the people or the physical land area itself. In fact, they themselves said they were using that term to mean they would like to see in Israel what happened to the Soviet Union. That did not happen with nuclear weapons. It happened politically. And that is what Iran was saying it wanted. It also did not state any intention to do anything to make that happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:45 PM

Not Windex, a UN resolution. Not cartography, politics.

If Israel had the same rules for democracy as the US, EU, Japan, Canada or Australia, and now even South Africa does. Then everyone within its post 1967 borders, which by any sane standard includes Gaza and the West Bank could vote and it would not exist as it does now. Certainly it would have to stop importing Jews from the rest of the world to supplant Christians and Muslims from their land, as it stands even Christians and Muslims who are citizens do not vote.

In Iran's opinion, justice would mean the colonizers would have to vote equally with the natives as is now the case in South Africa. Crazy and evil as you may think they are. Their argument is not without merit.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:50 PM

So Hillary's "If-then" statement is a terrible thing even though she is merely stating what our position is and has been since formal recognition of Israel, but the "face" of the Iranian leadership stating that "Israel should have been wiped off the face of the earth" is just some poor, misunderstood, delusional man?

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Peace
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:53 PM

Iran should actually apply the concept of justice to its own citizens. They could use some. Meanwhile the same shit will float or be flung back and forth by the same roster of players and not one damned thing will change as a result.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:56 PM

A nuclear armed Iran is not going to attack Israel, that would be suicide and they know it.

That is not the danger, this is what is - Now having the technology, the materials and the finances to build a bomb, there is nothing whatsoever to stop the Al-Quds Brigade of the IRRG giving that to one of the terrorist organisations they support, in order that that organisation attacks Israel by proxy. There is no "Government" to blame, those left shrug their shoulders and blame "rogue elements" and most here would meekly accept that explanation and make excuses to justify the actions of those who carried out the attack.

Iran can chose its path, if it opts for nuclear energy complete with a weapons programme, it has to be told in no uncertain manner any "accidents", such as that described above, and proof, or no proof, they pick up the tab for it.

Kevin:
"200 or so Israeli nuclear weapons" - Does Israel really have more nuclear weapons than the UK? Source please.

"The reason Iran might seek to develop nuclear weapons would be to deter attacks, such as the war of aggression launched by Iraq a few years back under Saddam when he was a valued US ally" - Was Saddam a valued ally of the USA in 1980 Kevin? Source please.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:57 PM

Personally, I think the much worse thing that Hillary is doing is repeating the lie that Iran wants to obliterate Israel. That sets things up for someone to do a false flag operation on Israel as a justification to wage a first strike nuclear attack on Iran, which is the real goal, after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Jeri
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 04:59 PM

They'd rather obliterate the US, but we're really big.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: bobad
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:00 PM

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.

His comments were the first time in years that such a high-ranking Iranian official has called for Israel's eradication, even though such slogans are still regularly used at government
rallies."

http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=15816

I guess al jazeera got it wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:04 PM

"This is in all probability an attempt to secure the Jewish vote and any swing voters who don't feel that Obama is strong enough on national security"

Correct. That is exactly what it is. Political maneuvers to get votes.

*****

Iran (meaning) Ahmadinejad did NOT state an intention to "wipe Israel off the map". That is a complete and probably deliberate misquote of what Ahmadinejad ever said. He never said that. No matter how many times you wishful thinkers say he said, he did not say it. He quoted an old statement of the Ayatollah Kohmeini that the Israeli regime (meaning the present Israeli political regime) would one day (at an undetermined time) "pass from the page of time" (cease to rule that area of land). Uh-huh. An easy thing to say, because ALL political regimes one day pass from the page of time. They pass from the page of time for a tremendous variety of reasons, such as...

economic failure
social change
a major change in policy, resulting in a new type of regime
war
and many other possible causes

No statement was made by either the Ayatollah or Ahmadinejad that the nation of Iran would be the agent of causing that passage from the page of time. No threat was made regarding military action by Iran to make the Israeli political regime pass from the page of time.

What the Ayatollah was saying was simply this, "these guys (Zionists)ain't gonna be around forever". Right. And neither will the Ayatollahs be around forever. They all pass from the page of time one day. Count on it. They do.

The Soviet Union passed from the page of time in 1989. That did not wipe Russia off the map, did it? The Roman Empire passed from the page of time. Italy and its people are still there. The Nazis passed from the page of time. The Germans and Germany are still there. The Shah's government passed from the page of time in 1979. Iran was not wiped off the map. Saddam's Baath regime passed from the page of time in 2003. Iraq has not been wiped off the map. No nation that I know of has been wiped off the map except for some very unfortunate North American Indian tribes (like the Beothuks in Newfoundland).

Ahmandinejad never said that Iran would wipe Israel off the map, and it's been discredited for so long now that he supposedly said that that it is really quite amazing that people will insist on still repeating it as a justification for their fear of Iran. Is a lie a truth once you have repeated it for the 800,000th time? Apparently. I guess it doesn't matter if you simply MUST believe it's true, does it?

He didn't say it.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:04 PM

She didn't repeat any such thing. She merely stated that if they did attack, we'd respond.
Israel and everyone else there do not want us to perform a nuclear strike in the first place. Think of the radioactive fall-out and where it would end up.

Also, they, the Iranians, speak of the "Zionist State" which is what Israel was established as. I don't think that you're going to see a departure from that. I don't think they're going to be a secular state when they were created as a result of Hitler and others trying to wipe out everyone who was even remotely Jewish.

The funny thing here is that I don't think Israel is handling the terrorist strikes against it correctly and I wish we'd stop backing them so much. It's just one of a number of reasons that radical Islamic/Muslim groups use to justify their actions.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:05 PM

You should have read further, bobad. It goes on to say this...


Addressing about 4000 students gathered in an Interior Ministry conference hall, Ahmadinejad also called for Palestinian unity, resistance and a point "where the annihilation of the Zionist regime will come".

It says right there that they are talking about the government entity (Zionist regime), not the country itself or its people.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Peace
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:08 PM

"A nuclear armed Iran is not going to attack Israel, that would be suicide and they know it."

The Israeli philosophy is a paraphrase from The Bible: "Do unto others as they would do unto you. But do it first."

I agree with that philosophy both in the context of this thread and in real life. People like to toss around half-digested bullshit that a friend of a friend, etc. Israel has sufficient nuclear weaponry to destroy the entire middle East. I'm glad the weapons are in Israeli hands rather that the hands of others there.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:12 PM

Amen to that.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:15 PM

Surely there is a difference between Zionism and Democracy. Zionism is for Jews who want to expand and steal other's land using the bible as a land deed and for those crazy "christians" who want to hasten the end times. Democracy is for everyone and is the path to peace.

Surely calling on Palestinians to resist is not a threat to destroy Israel with nukes. Even the most fanatical Likudniks would have to concede that since the Iranians want to help the Muslim Palistinians, that the Iranians would have to be aware that the physical obliteration of Israel would kill nearly as many Muslims as Jews. The people who say that Iran wants to nuke Israel are either ill informed or they are lying to promote a Zionist agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:18 PM

Getting back to Israel. Promising such retaliation was empty, rash, tough talk. We have had enough of that for the last eight years. She might be palatable is she at least had as much sense as Slick Willy.

It is the little dogs that are most likely to bite and they do it out of fear.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:20 PM

Chief Chaos, she did repeat it the lie, although she prefaced it by saying "some people say". She was referring to the gossip smear that has been making the rounds for a while now saying that the political leadership in Iran is mentally unstable and they might be crazy enough to want to become martyrs. Watch the interview with her and Olberman in JtS' link in the third post in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:21 PM

I agree that at the present time it seems almost inconceivable that the Zionist regime in Israel would ever come to an end (through an internal process).

However, it wasn't very long ago that it seemed inconceivable that the Soviet government would ever come to an end through an internal process.

But they did! And Russia was not wiped off the map.

Every form of government, every regime, someday passes from the page of time, and then it's gone. If you wait long enough (as a disembodied spirit watching the world), you will see that this is true.

The Ayatollah was saying that the Zionists would be gone one day (as something he would like to see). I'm sure they will...but that day may be a century off...or five centuries in the future...or more than that. It may be in 1,000 years. Who can say?

Does the USA not frequently express the fervent hope and desire for the present regime of Iran to be gone? It does! How is that any different from the Iranians hoping that the present Zionist regime will one day be gone? Anyone can hope that a present "enemy" will not be around at some point. That does not equal a threat of launching open war, nor are the Iranians in any kind of position to do so.

Were they to build a few A-bombs of their own, they would still be in no position to do so, but they would have a credible deterrent against being attacked by tremendously superior American and Israeli nuclear firepower.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:27 PM

"Does the USA not frequently express the fervent hope and desire for the present regime of Iran to be gone?"

Please cite a source for that. The US wants Iran to stop funding its creation, Hezbollah, and stop building its nuclear weapons program. We do not care who is in charge as long as they are not bad actors on the international stage.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:30 PM

The Israeli philosophy is a paraphrase from The Bible: "Do unto others as they would do unto you. But do it first."

This can be used to justify any kind of atrocity, because all you have to do is say "they intended to do it to me, so I did it to them first", regardless of whether or not that accusation is actually true. This is why it is particularly dangerous for the world for anyone to hold this mindset. And this is why the US government and the Israeli government are working so hard to convince people that the government of Iran intends to wage a unilateral nuclear strike against Israel. If they can get enough people to believe that lie, they can justify waging their own unilateral nuclear strike against Iran.

Iran has no intention of waging a nuclear attack on Israel. They know that to do so would mean their utter destruction. They offered to negotiate with the United States government unconditionally and the US government rebuffed their offer and instead put them on the "axis of evil" list. The reason the US government did this is because it wants a justification to unilaterally attack Iran. Hillary is saying that she is on board with this plan.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:30 PM

The USSR has been wiped off the map. So has Czechoslovakia, East and West Germany, and Yugoslavia. Before then countries across Africa such as the Gold Coast, Bechuanaland and Tanganyika. Go back further and there was the Austro-Hungarian Empire...the Confederate States of America, the Republic of Texas...

All gone from the maps, together with numerous others. Not one of those countries exists any longer. But the places are still all there, and the same people and their descendants are living there today. None of them needed to be nuked to remove them from the atlas. Apartheid South Africa exists still within the same boundaries, but it is a totally different country, and the old South Africa now seems like a bad dream.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Slag
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:32 PM

You go girl!

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:35 PM

Little Hawk,

Although it's strictly semantics, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was indeed wiped off the map. ;)

I happen to think that Iran and Syria are both working to increase their influence in the middle east and Israel (and the therefore the U.S.) is in the way. Even Al Quaida sees this (there is a rumor going around in the middle east that Israel perpetrated 9/11 supposedly started by Iran to discredit Al Quaida) and is threatening Iran. It's Sunnis versus Shi'ites (pardon the spelling if it's incorrect)

I previously stated that it's not "public" knowledge meaning that there are indeed people who know for certain but they ain't gonna confirm it.

I don't think that her statement amounts to repeating a lie. Plausible deniability!

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:54 PM

She repeated the lie, but she gave other people credit for starting it.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: skipy
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 05:58 PM

Iran, the land of volcanic glass! Bring it on!
Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Amos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 06:05 PM

Skipy:

That is a rabidly insane thing to say.

Antisocial, sociopathic, and fundamentally psychotic.

What were you thinking.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 06:08 PM

MGOH, CarolC, Little Hawk and others have stated in other words more or less what Kevin says here:

"The USSR has been wiped off the map. So has Czechoslovakia, East and West Germany, and Yugoslavia. Before then countries across Africa such as the Gold Coast, Bechuanaland and Tanganyika. Go back further and there was the Austro-Hungarian Empire...the Confederate States of America, the Republic of Texas...

All gone from the maps, together with numerous others. Not one of those countries exists any longer. But the places are still all there, and the same people and their descendants are living there today. None of them needed to be nuked to remove them from the atlas. Apartheid South Africa exists still within the same boundaries, but it is a totally different country, and the old South Africa now seems like a bad dream."

That is the appeasers mantra, the excuse and justification for burying heads in the sand and ignoring a serious problem that is developing.

I have a question for all of you who offer up such drivel regarding what holocaust denier Ahmadinejad meant when he said, "As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,"

Now put yourself in the place of an eighty year old Polish Jew who since his liberation from Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1945 has lived in Israel, tell me what you think the President of Iran meant, tell me if you would trust his word, or would you go on what the charter of both Hamas and Hezbollah clearly state as their intention.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 06:16 PM

The US government had the opportunity to negotiate with the government of Iran. Iran was willing to negotiate without putting any conditions on their willingness to negotiate. The US government instead chose to ignore the offer and place Iran on the "axis of evil" list. They are the ones who chose to ignore what needed to be done.

Refusing to negotiate while stepping up the rhetoric for waging a unilateral nuclear attack on Iran is a recipe for disaster. But this is what they have been doing. This is what needs to stop.

It's not appeasement if the country in question has no intention of waging any acts of aggression on anyone else. Appeasement in this case is to go along with whoever has the intention of committing unilateral acts of aggression. In this case that would be the US and Israeli governments. So it is you who are the appeaser, Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 06:25 PM

Answer the question CarolC

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 06:30 PM

If I was such a Jew living in Israel, I would want my government and the government of the US to negotiate with Iran, because I would know that any nuclear war in the Middle East would have a negative impact on me, even if it was in the form of a nuclear attack on Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 06:32 PM

"the same people and their descendants are living there today"

Not that I often agree with Teribus, but I think that statement is a laugh. How many of the Tsar's family still lived on in the USSR after "Russia" became a soviet socialist republic? How many of the dissenters and their families?

Although the countries may remain with the same or new names, the bloodless transition is a very rare thing.

Considering what happened "internally" in China and Cuba during their communist revolutions,and what happened under the French and U.S. and even English civil wars (sometimes also called revolutions)it seems to me that the historical weight of evidence is greater for a bloody confrontation, especially if the pressure is coming from an external source for the change.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 07:22 PM

"If I was such a Jew living in Israel, I would want my government and the government of the US to negotiate with Iran..."

Well, that would take two parties. Actually, two parties who wanted a peaceful solution. Trouble is, one wants peace and one does not.

People who know Ahmadinejad say that he wants, when the Koran is revised in the distant future, to be known as the man who wiped Israel of the map. He is delusional.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 07:42 PM

I wasn't implying that all those changes happened bloodlessly - horrible things happened.

But what Ahminedjad's ill-judged words have been taken as implying is a threat of nuclear holocaust, and in that context "the same people and their descendants are living there today" is a relevant reminder that calling for regime change generally does not imply that.

There are of course people threatening nuclear holocaust. In this thread for example. That doesn't matter - so long as the people with the power to carry out those kind of threats aren't in a position to carry them out.

That of cause implies trying to stop people having nuclear weapons.. To adapt Tony Blair's formula, it is important to fight nuclear proliferation, and the causes of nuclear proliferation. In the case of Iran that should mean some kind of guarantee that there will be no attacks on a nuclear-unarmed Iran - surrounded as it is by hostile or potentially regimes which do have nuclear arms. (Israel, Pakistan, Russia, US occupied Iraq.)

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 07:52 PM

Will the price of Persian rugs go up if most of the inventory is radioactive?

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 08:01 PM

McGrath,

She's still only stating the same position that the U.S. has had since Israel was recognized. The only thing that has changed is the names of the heads of state, and then if, and only "in the event of an "unprovoked" nuclear attack by Iran". To paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt, she's speaking loudly and carrying a big stick.

We've had these weapons for approximately 63 years now and we've only chosen to use them twice, on the same enemy, nearly 63 years ago. Hillary Clinton is much less likely to use them than the current regime.

I haven't heard Obama make any statements about getting rid of the nukes either so I tend to believe that he'd use them if nothing else than as a deterrent.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 08:45 PM

Well, that would take two parties. Actually, two parties who wanted a peaceful solution. Trouble is, one wants peace and one does not.

This is simply not true. If Iran didn't want peace, they would not have offered to negotiate. Part of the reason the people of Iran voted Ahmadinejad into power was because the previous president was undermined by the Bush administration when it rebuffed Iran's offer to negotiate. Under the circumstances, Iran has legitimate reasons to be concerned about its security. Iran offered to negotiate and the US refused. That is, in itself, an indication of an intent on the part of the US to commit acts of aggression against Iran.

Ahmadinejad is only the president. He doesn't call the shots. The US needs to support the more moderate factions in Iran by being willing to negotiate with the government of that country. It didn't do this because it serves the strategic objectives of both the US and Israel for the most extreme elements to be in power in Iran because what they want is to create a pretext for waging a unilateral attack on that country. The US and Israel don't want security. They want hegemony in the region, regardless of how many people have to get killed in the process.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: pdq
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 08:58 PM

"Part of the reason the people of Iran voted Ahmadinejad into power..."

Please support that claim, such as giving us the date on which this "free-and-fair" election took place?

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 10:08 PM

"Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran..."


                  Well, she obliterated Obama, that's a start...

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 10:09 PM

CarolC,

The US gov't can't support the more moderate leaders, the true power of the country lies with the mullahs and ayatollahs who continually disqualify any "moderate" from running.

They tossed us out during their Islamic "revolution" back in the late seventies. Any move made by the U.S. in the region is denounced. Any leader supported by the west is denounced.

According to news reports the people who do vote, vote for the most moderate of the hardliners who are left, or they don't bother.

Although I believe the people of Iran probably want peace,just like the citizens of the United States, the hard line clerics there continue to demonize the United States for everything. Hard to negotiate with people who already think you're the devil.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:27 PM

The election consisted of two rounds, pdq, which were held on June 17, 2005, with a run-off on June 24. The election had an almost 60 percent turnout. I don't know if the election was entirely free and clear or not, but Ahmadinejad's predecessor, Mohammad Khatami, was a moderate, and he managed to get elected, so I don't see how they could possibly be all that terribly controlled.

The US gov't can't support the more moderate leaders, the true power of the country lies with the mullahs and ayatollahs who continually disqualify any "moderate" from running.

This is not true, Chief Chaos. As I said above, Ahmadinejad's predecessor, Mohammad Khatami, was a moderate. He was the one who made the overtures to the US with his offers of unconditional negotiations, and by rebuffing that offer, the US undermined his position with his electorate. The US refused the offer of negotiations because the US wants Iran to be run by its most extreme elements. That way, they can justify their planned acts of aggression on that country. The more the US ratchets up its war rhetoric with regard to Iran, the more the US helps the more hardline elements in that country solidify their hold on power. Iran has quite a lot of pro-Western, pro-Democracy citizens and they are also saying that the US is undermining the more moderate elements in Iran. And they are saying that they wish we would stop doing that.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Amos
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:29 PM

Rig,

That's sort of idiotic. Obama has won 15 primary elections and 13 caucuses (28 contests); Hillary has won 15 primaries if you include PA and 1 causus. Total 16 contests.

Obama leads her by popular votes, delegate votes, contests, and is sucking up her superdelegate presumed heads like a Hoover.

Who's oblterated? Are you half blinded? Are all blind?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:33 PM

I don't know how anyone can call 55% to 45% obliterated, either. It's certainly not enough to help her substantially in the overall counts.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:36 PM

>>"Does the USA not frequently express the fervent hope and desire for the present regime of Iran to be gone?"

Please cite a source for that. <<

Google

Bush iran "regime change"

That will keep you reading for a while.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: meself
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:41 PM

"Hard to negotiate with people who already think you're the devil."

That's the kind of thing you say if you want to give some excuse for not negotiating with people.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:50 PM

And we've given the Iranians many good reasons to think we're the devil, too. Starting with when we crushed their fledgling democracy and put the Shah back in power, and when we propped him up while he brutalized his own people in much the same way Saddam did to his people in Iraq. And also when we were supporting Saddam's war against the Iranians, in which millions were killed. I think it's time for us to give them some reasons to not see us as the devil. We've certainly earned that characterization in their eyes.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:51 PM

By the way, most Iranians are very pro-US in terms of the people and culture of the US. What they hate is the way our government has been royally fucking them over for decades.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Apr 08 - 11:58 PM

Well this straw poll shows me that Hillary's irresponsible statement will help her with the Zionists and Christian Zionist Nut job vote. I'm not saying that y'all are that but if you lean this far the real nutters will lean farther. A vote for Obama is the only vote for peace.

Rig,

This is the zenith of Hillary's campaign. Pensylvania was here strongest possible state after New York. She started out 20 points up in the polls. She had the governor, the mayors of the two big cities and all of their machines, she had a primary closed to independents. She had catholics. She had that horrible debate and the press bought her "bittergate" BS hook line and sinker. She even convinced some people she was from Scranton. :-)
Obama hotly contested this state. She is going to get ten Delegates. Big deal.

On to Indiana then on to here. Hillary is out of cash. She has tapped all her doners. Obama is just getting started. Maybe we'll give him some more. Those ten delegates, much of the popular vote and the momentum swings back to Obama.

Enjoy it while you can Mrs. C.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Wolfgang
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 06:50 AM

Nuclear Weapons: Who Has What at a Glance

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: theleveller
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:05 AM

Gun boat diplomacy is alive and well and living under the banner of "Democracy".

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Wolfgang
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:21 AM

McGrath and Little Hawk have repeated here their well known (from many threads) creative reading of Ahmadinejad's remarks about Israel.

I wonder how it would read if they focused their creativity upon Clinton's remark. "Could" means of course something very different from "will". Clinton has only hinted to the obvious fact that the USA is much stronger than Iran. "Attack" could mean verbal attack in the UN. "Obliterate" of course means the country as we know it now with its present government and not the people living there.

And all these (factually correct) complaints that Ahmadinejad's remark has been exaggerated in some quotes. Can you really take yourself serious complaining about it when you can spot exactly the same pattern in this thread with Clinton's remark. One of many examples: Threatening obliteration in exchange for any attack... (JtS). Any attack?

Just BTW, since Ahmadinejad has only hinted to the obvious that like so many counties before Israel too might some day not be on the maps under this name (McGrath, Little Hawk), Clinton's if-then threat will never be executed for lack of the if-part. So there is nothing to worry about.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Slag
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 05:53 PM

Well thank God, well, no, that's not right. Thank Jack the Sailor that Jack the Sailor is the standard by which the sanity of all others, and especially anyone having an opposing point of view, is judged. At least we now know right from wrong.

I used to think that the radical Islamists hated Israel. I guess I have just been misunderstanding all I have read or heard. It was probably Zionist lies and propaganda from the Zionist presses of the world. How could anyone get the mistaken idea that Achmaddidajob was really anti-Israel? I know the man loves rocketry as a hobby and he is just developing the long range sort so he can share his hobby with his neighbors. And the greenies assures us everyday that the world is about out of oil so gee, I guess I would want to develop nuclear stuff too, just in case.

In the game of thermonuclear warfare, them what gets there firstest with the mostest wins. The other guy might be armed to the teeth but if he can't reach the button, so what? In the case of the US and the old USSR or even China such vast distances and areas are involved that no one could begin to imagine that a first strike would take out all ability to respond. Hence MAD was a tension-filled standoff. Israel is a country of around 5 million souls in an area smaller than any of the first three largest COUNTIES of California. Talk about fish in a barrel! Hillary's statement was CONDITIONAL, that is IF Iran did something so foolish as to try to take out Israel. Hers is a proper response to a VALID threat and one that ANY of our allies would like to hear from us.

The difference between a threat and a valid threat is the means and the ability to carry out that threat. Iran has the means, those long range rockets. If, IF she develops nuclear weapons look out. The threat itself shows intent. Rodney King asked the right question "Why can't we all just get along?" Unfortunately, not everybody WANTS to get along.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 06:11 PM

Sane is sane and easy to acertain.

Hillary was talking about obliterating Iran in the context of using nuclear weapons.

dinner jacker was talking about wiping Israel off the map in the context of the UN's creation of it.

But it is oh so useful for the Zionists to distort theses statements. Heaven forbid that someone point out that Israel is a semi-democratic theocracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 06:35 PM

Agreed, Wolfgang. ;-) Look, Hillary is just doing the usual thing that American politicians and Iranian politicians do to get votes and get people on their side. She is pounding her chest like a silverback gorilla doing a territorial defence routine, thus demonstrating her toughness, her patriotism, her will, and her determination to DEFEND America against all those dire THREATS out there...all those terrible foreigners who "hate democracy" and "want to destroy our way of life".

She's doing the same kind of manipulative posturing that Ahmadinejad does in Iran when he blathers on about evil foreigners who "hate Islam" and who "want to destroy our way of life".

They're all playing the same game. They raise fears about foreign threats. They appeal to national paranioa and national pride and patriotism. They brand their political opponents at home (like Mr Obama...) as being "not tough enough to deal with threats to our national security". Hillary is supposedly tough enough. Obama supposedly isn't. That's an old, OLD game in US politics, and it comes around at every election.

It is, as I have said before, total bullshit. It's bullshit when Hillary does it. It's bullshit when McCaine does it. It's bullshit when (and if) Obama does it. It's bullshit when Ahmadinejad does it. It's bullshit when the Ayatollah does it. Don't expect any of them to stop doing it. Bullshit builds governments. (and armed forces) (and nuclear weapons)

Note that I include Mr Ahmadinejad in my list of major bullshitters. Satisfied? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Goose Gander
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 06:49 PM

Related by US miliary chaplain and psychologist Gustave Gilbert, who interviewed Joseph Goebbels in his cell at Nuremberg:

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 06:49 PM

Promising the possibiluty of another evening of televised "shock and awe" is what alot of undereducated people find entertaining...

Hillary is playing to the dumbest among US...

"Yeeeehaaaaaa, Debbie Jean... Come look at at this!!! Man, are we ever great, 'er what???"

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:02 PM

So true, Bobert. Yes, the waging of blitzkrieg war "Shock and Awe" on some foreign country appeals to the dumbest and most reactionary (and fearful) individuals in any society. I remember some such yahoos in my town when the war
began in 2003. They were a small minority in this town, and all males too I noticed, but they were simply delighted to see bombs and missiles falling on Baghdad and people and things getting "blown up real good" by overwhelming American firepower. It brought some momentary excitement and bloodlust into their stupid, pathetic little lives...and at absolutely NO personal risk to them either. That was the best part from their point of view.

They comprise maybe 15 or 20 % of the Canadian electorate, those guys. That would be my estimate.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:28 PM

I think there are a lot more of them in the US, but maybe that's because they were American bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:39 PM

Yeah, welcome to the latest chapter of the Southern Strategy... Shock'n Awe, brought to by...

...Cppenhaggen Tobacco, Budweiser, NASCAR and yer US Army where no ex-con... goes unrecruited!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:47 PM

Darned right there are a lot more of them in the USA, Riginslinger. It's due to a number of factors. Your history (of many wars), your traditions (a lawless and extremely violent frontier), your status as a great power in the world, your status as a great economic and military empire. All of these are quite different from Canada's history, traditions, and modest status in the world, but you'd have to have grown up in both countries to know what I mean.

I did grow up in both countries. I was in Canada age 0-10, in the USA age 10-20. Back in Canada since. I know where the differences lie between American and Canadian culture and psychology, and they are considerable.

The only wars Canada has gone into are wars they were basically asked and expected to go into by Canada's "Big Brother" of the day, which was first the UK, later the USA. They were not wars of Canada's instigation or choosing. Canada acted as an appendage of Britian in the early days. Now we are a somewhat reluctant appendage of the USA. We go along, but not with much enthusiasm. Why do we go along? Well, our politicians and our moneyed people are fellow members and employees of the very same wealthy elite that runs the USA, that's why. And the same goes for the UK. Run by the same wealthy elite...or their close friends and partners in crime.

It has very little to do with the will or intentions of the general population.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 07:59 PM

Yeah, I guess what I meant to say was there is a much larger percentage of the population here who think blowing up things in somebody else's country makes for a great spectator sport.

                   It would be interesting to know how many of them profit financially from these endeavors.

                   There was a story on NPR today about a large number of senior military officers who own shares in many of the companies who provide materials and services to the American war machine. I don't see why this isn't considered to be a personal conflict of interest for each one of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: skipy
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 08:05 PM

Amos, what I am thinking is really very, very, simple, take them out before they take Isreal out! Only an hour before will do, not a case of "lets take them out for the sake of it". So if they are not a threat they can carry on, but, when they do become threat take them out.
Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 08:08 PM

Michael Morris that was an excellent post. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 08:10 PM

Skipy,

Iran is not a physical threat to Israel. They are a propaganda threat to Israel and to the imperialists in the US government. That's why they are being demonized.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 08:13 PM

From: GUEST
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 08:10 PM

was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Slag
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 08:14 PM

Yeah, I'm with you guys. Heads firmly tucked in the sand. I don't want no fight. I don't want my kids to die. I guess if some kindly but missunderstood person or group of persons wants to nuke us, blow up a few skyscrappers with jet liners, sink the Main or take our arms at Lexington, what the hell, nothing is worth fighting for. Heck, maybe they'll let US live and still work our farms for 'em. I mean, what did Israel ever do for us anyway?

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 08:30 PM

"Take your neighbour out", skipy. He could be planning to kill you, you know, so just do it. Shoot him now. Before he ever gets the chance to shoot you. Blow his head off. People will understand your need to commit sudden murder once they realize that he was really planning to get you all along.

Can you hear someone in Iran using your very same argument for a defensive first strike on Israel to save Iran from the Israelis? I can. Would that make it right for Iran to do that?

When you have become as evil in your own intentions as the greatest evil you think you see in someone else outside you, how are you any different from them, and why should I want to see a world with people like you running it after you've killed all the people you claimed were planning to kill you?

It's a closed loop. It's an argument that justifies aggression, first strike, and premeditated mass murder....as long as you do it to the other guy, but not when the other guy does it to you. Murder isn't murder if you do it. It is if the other guy does it. If the other guy used the same argument you're using, you'd say he was insane, and you'd be right! He could equally well say you're insane, and he'd be right.

Such insane arguments are the arguments that people like Hitler used to massacre 6 million Jews.

Slag -

No one has nuked you.

No sovereign nation hit you on 911. (a private and small and clandestine group of conspirators hit you on 911...that's a matter for an international police investigation, not an excuse for a foreign war with some sovereign nations)

I highly doubt that the Spanish sank the Maine (they were desperate to avoid a war with the USA, because they couldn't possibly win it).

Iran is no conceivable threat to the USA, and Israel can blow up the Iranians fifty times over without ANY help at all from the USA. Israel has 200 or more nuclear weapons, and can hit Iran with all of them.

It isn't your life that's under the gun here, it's the lives of millions of Iranians and Israelis that is under the gun. You are NOT the injured party here or the guy in the gunsights. Iran did not cause 911.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 09:18 PM

Because of Israel's submarine nukes, it also has second strike capabilities. That's an extremely good deterrent for anyone who might have any ideas of wanting to nuke it first.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Amos
Date: 23 Apr 08 - 10:21 PM

The fact that some things are worth fighting for does NOT mean that "anything that looks similar in some way" is grounds for an attack.

The right to sanity is worth defending, and that includes the right to see the right target and differentiate between different points in time without having a push-button blowhard bully you with fear and hyper-association.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 12:18 AM

pandering to the ditto heads is the lowest most callous thing she is doing lately.

Whie Obama stands for a degree of change, Hillary stands for a degree of sameness and is only two points off McCains beam to the port side.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Slag
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 01:24 AM

You guys conveniently for get the proviso in the original statement. IT IS CONDITIONAL! For those of you who are lacking, it is an IF THEN statement. Did you miss the part about a VALID threat? No one is advocating a preemptive strike from Hillary's camp (I can't believe I am actually defending Hillary Clinton!) nor do I advocate a preemptive strike but our willingness and ability to respond had better be there. I don't know how we got to be global cop but it sure seems as though one is needed. Iran has a right to exist and to choose its own government, no matter how much we may disagree with them. Same goes for Israel. That's the current situation and no one is nuking anyone and that is FINE by me!

IF IF IF! It is important to let someone who is sounding and acting aggressive toward an ally know that if certain lines are crossed it will have certain, sure consequences. Now I know that some of you precious ones were not raised that way---but you should have been. You have got to know where the boundaries are and what the consequences are and that is what Hillary was telling Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 04:50 AM

The Commander in Chief has to run declarations of war and treaties of retaliation by Congress. She had no business to make that promise. That promise which potentially puts the Neocon agenda on autopilot.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 08:17 AM

At least she probably got the Jewish vote in Pennsylvania. She might even get an endorsement from Joe Lieberman.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Leadbelly
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 03:23 PM

A horrible couple for to govern the US: Mr.(Dr.?) Bill Jekyll and Mrs. Hillary Hyde. What a nice feeling is coming on.
Americans are a miracle to me. "When do they ever learn, when do they ever learn...".

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 04:22 PM

Unfortunately LB, we're down to 3 candidates.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Slag
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 06:56 PM

Yes Jack, and the treaties that are in place which spell out the consequences to our enemies and the enemies of our allies, who, or rather what body approved those treaties? Hmmm? On your side of the argument, they currently have a lower approval rating than Glorious Leader.

Little Hawk, isn't it nice to have the luxury of time to analyze and argue (endlessly) the finer points of what precipitated armed conflict and don't you just wish the leaders of whatever time period had "our" wisdom and insight to those various scenarios? If the action of our leaders is one of pure aggression, a la Hitler and company, then yes, I agree, we need to do something about it. And the German people should have known better and some did! Some tried to stop him before he got started, as you know.

Herr Goering had a point about leading the sheep to the slaughter but the defenders have the same problem on the other side of alerting the sheep to the danger of an impending slaughter. The sheep would rather believe that everything is fine or that it couldn't get worse. "We just want to get along with everybody!" says the sheep. So maybe Roosevelt allowed Pearl Harbor. Maybe he realized that the sheep would not take the threat seriously until they got a taste of what our looming enemy to the East was really like. Maybe the Main wasn't the target of the Spaniards. You might even argue that none of the rallying points were really legitimate. None were certainly perfect. And some were down right wrong. That's life. I know of only one perfect human and he was crucified. Every LEADER has a responsibility to alert the people to the dangers at hand and to seek an expedient and hopefully just course of action to deal with those dangers as they arise.

In the US and other democratic countries, if we don't like they way the vehicle of state is being driven, we can tell the driver to stop and let someone else drive at the next (4 year) block and if the driver is REALLY bad the people can put him out a lot sooner. It's better than a lot of other systems. But, while the driver is in control, he must steer and maneuver to the best of his ability. His isn't the only view but it IS the view from which the control comes. That, and the rules of the road (the Constitution and our body of law), are all we have. When somebody sounds the horn, that means "Pay attention, possible danger ahead." Hillary, who very well may be the next "driver" was trying out the horn, I believe. And it works!

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Amos
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 07:43 PM

Seems to me, as far as tapping the horn goes, that if you were dealing with a nation that had been plagued by random assholes blowing the horn at unnecessary intervals and failing to learn the painful costs associated with too much blowing the damn horn, you'd be a little more judicious before chattering about your great horn. If you were smart. The Iranians did not need Hillary's tootle to know what our military are capable of as they've been living next door to their practice sandbox for the last five years of gruesome, unnecessary destruction and bloodshed.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Slag
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 07:45 PM

AND!.........Amos makes a good point!

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 08 - 08:27 PM

The problem with American foriegn policy is that it has gotten bogged down in sabre rarttling and the subsequent wars that follow...

Its like repeating behavior expecting different results which Winstein defined as "insanity"...

Yes, American foriegn policy has bordered on insanity going back some 50 years...

In the words of the late, great Waylon Jennings, "We need a change"...

What Hillary has said, regardles of the if's, is that she is perfectly willing to continue an "insane" foriegn policy...

That is really the bottom line here...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 Apr 08 - 07:02 AM

Sorry, I had to turn the video off after the hideous pronounciation of "details". Would USAians please note that the first syllable should be stressed and not the second.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Apr 08 - 01:25 PM

"I wonder how it would read if they focused their creativity upon Clinton's remark. " (Wolfgang 23 Apr 08 - 07:21 AM )

I ignored Clinton's remarks because they are basically pretty meaningless - they don't change the situation in any way, except insofar as they might win a few votes for her. I don't think there is in fact any prospect of an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel. And I think that Clinton's remarks here are essentially electioneering waffle.

I think there is a very real possibility of an attack by Israel or the United States on Iran. I doubt if that would be likely to involve nuclear weapons, because there would no advantages in that and very serious disadvantages (even aside from the resulting Iranian deaths).

The persistent attempts to paint Ahmadinejad's rhetoric as much more directly threatening than they have actually been is dangerous, and that is why I focused on that. In the same way it would be dangerous if people in Iran build too much on the basis of Clinton's electioneering talk about "obliterating Iran". Unfortunately I suspect that that is just what will be happening.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Wolfgang
Date: 04 Jun 08 - 03:18 PM

Obama:

"I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Everything in my power. Everything."

Moments later: "Sometimes there are no alternatives to confrontation, but that only makes diplomacy more important. If we must use military force, we are more likely to succeed, and will have far greater support at home and abroad if we have exhausted our diplomatic efforts."

"Its (Iran) president denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat..."

(At least he corrected his embarrassing Auschwitz blooper in his speech)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Jun 08 - 06:21 PM

One prison camp is a lot like another.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: heric
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 01:54 PM

Crude-oil futures jumped more than 7% Friday, as reports about the potential for an Israeli attack on Iran combined with a slide in the U.S. dollar to lift prices to an all-time high above $138 a barrel.
"It's Iran -- all Iran," said Bernard Picchi, a senior managing director at Wall Street Access.

Comments from Israel's transport minister, reportedly a close adviser to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, that an attack on Iranian nuclear sites looked "unavoidable" has driven buying to a fever pitch, according to Michael Fitzpatrick, an analyst at MF Global.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 07:46 PM

A Bad foreig policy approach, for someone looking for a senor USA post.

Is it possible that talk like that may stimulate folks who feel threatened to seek the mosyt powerful weapons they can, regardless of the cost. Unfortunately, it may also spur extremists.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 07:56 PM

"(Iran) threatens to wipe Israel off the map"

So, Obama repeats the old mythology one more time. No surprise there. He is, after all, campaigning to be elected president of the aggressor country that specializes in first strikes on far weaker nations that have not only not attacked the USA, but couldn't even if they wanted to.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: heric
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:45 PM

I don't think it's a mysth so much as a semantics dispute, one that Aberdijiabian has been enjoying immensely. Just Monday, reportedly, he said that Israel will soon be wiped away from the "geographic scene."

I also read recently that translating from Arabic languages is exceptonally complicated. They have so many words with so many subtleties, where others have just one or a few - they can really mess you up in translation. I wish I could remember where I read that.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: heric
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:48 PM

Yeah, LH, it probably got a little addictive after Granada.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: bobad
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:16 PM

LH, if GWB said "We will wipe Canada from the map", what would your interpretation be of that?

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:36 PM

Of course the US would have a number of reason to rush to Canada's defense, not the least of which, they're right next door. It continues to amaze me as to why America keeps sticking its nose into Israel's business.

Subject: RE: BS: Hillary threatens to obliterate Iran
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Jun 08 - 12:45 PM

There are many world countries that the USA would not actively defend if attacked by a neighbour. Israel, for some odd reason, is not one of these.

Some less credible political figures may make verbal threats against Israel. I wouild expect more than this from the USA leadership.