digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Cheney Aide: 2007 Is "The Year Of Iran," U.S. Attack "A Real Possibility"

thinkprogress.org — An incredible admission from Vice President Cheney's top national security adviser John Hannah.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • DrScott, on 10/12/2007, -9/+26Well then, we all better buckle up.
    • kazumaSHELL, on 10/12/2007, -11/+66Here comes the draft.....

      :-(
    • jetsetgo, on 10/12/2007, -11/+40Get your deferment papers ready.
    • diggamer, on 10/12/2007, -19/+23There's nothing we can do to stop this administration's relentless war machine, not until 2008 at least. That's all the time they need to start another war for oil.

      Here's what you can do: Buy gold bullion and oil stocks. If we attack Iran, they will skyrocket. Even if we don't, the mere possibility of an Iran invasion is raising gold prices significantly. I've invested in gold, and I am profiting handsomely from it. Gold is up over 20% in the past year, and with this administration's cowboy war policies, the bull run can only continue.
    • lukas88, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28I'm calling shenanigans. I haven't much respect for cheney but if he or his aide said that they would be able to put the whole phrase in quotes. The fact that only part of the sentance (in both cases) is in quotes makes me think this is a spin job. He might have been saying something similar but even after following up on the article's sources, I could not find the original quote.
    • stupidverizon, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16I agree with lucas. This article, and the other one it links to essentially grabbed a quote, showed it without it's full context, and built on it. You have to doubt everything you read. Have your own opinions and thoughts based on researched material, not opinions of other people and one quote, especially when reading articles on biased websites such as this one.
    • 7righthandedmen, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5what a douchebag

      since 1975
    • AKBryant54, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21@kazumashell
      There's no way i'm being drafted. Military slavery is wrong, and if i was ever going to be forced to fight for something i truly do not believe i should be fighting for, they will have to meet me at my door, rifle in hand.
    • glasmodiar, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8@Lukas88 and
      @Stupidverizon

      The quote appears to be from the Washington Post:

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/10/AR2007021001275.html
    • darkmule, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21So.. this is why we need a passport to get to Canada... its all so clear now.
    • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6"Some senior administration officials still relish the notion of a direct confrontation. One ambassador in Washington said he was taken aback when John Hannah, Vice President Cheney's national security adviser, said during a recent meeting that the administration considers 2007 "the year of Iran" and indicated that a U.S. attack was a real possibility. Hannah declined to be interviewed for this article."

      From the Washington Post, but still no source.

      Why do I get the feeling they said something like "2007 is not 'The Year of Iran', anyone who says attacks are 'A Real Possibility' is lying to you."
    • BigPapi, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7What if, as a form of protest, the majority of Americans didn't pay taxes this year?

      I'm tired of watching the government hand no-bid contracts to companies that supported Bush during his election. That's truly the only reason why anyone would concieve the idea to invade Iran - to give guaranteed business to those that will help you in the future at the expense of US taxpayers, US soldiers and innocent civilians of any poor country that's set in the sights of the Bush Administration.
    • rtakach, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5the majority of americans already paid taxes through payroll deductions....
      besides you're probably getting a refund, so why don't you protest by not sending in your return...the US could use your $700 to fight the war on terrrrrrr
    • xcoastie, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3@darkmule If you are not happy in the greatest country on earth, leave now. No reason to wait for a draft (sponsored by Charles Rangle Democrat).
      And this article is just alarmist crap, written to excite those who can't think for themselves.
    • Szandor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19"Here comes the draft..... "

      Sure, I'll go and fight.

      Just as long as you bring the congressman's kids and grandkids with me.
    • darkmule, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3@darkmule If you are not happy in the greatest country on earth, leave now. No reason to wait for a draft (sponsored by Charles Rangle Democrat).
      And this article is just alarmist crap, written to excite those who can't think for themselves.

      I live in an 'unorganized' territory of the US. I don't get the 'greatest' this country could be, I get the 'oh, we have a territory where?'. One president in 100 years of this territories existence has been here. *one*. (Though I am originally from the main land US).

      Also, if you don't understand Mr. Rangles purpose of sponsoring draft legislation, you really shouldn't use it as a tool against me.
    • TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"This article, and the other one it links to essentially grabbed a quote, showed it without it's full context, and built on it. "

      You expected something different from ThinkProgress or the MSM?
    • poxonyou, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I want to be skeptical about this. It doesn't seem to make sense to attack Iran when we're hurting so bad in 2 other countries, but who knows what is going through Dick Cheney and Bush's heads. They may believe they have some sort of duty to do it all now while they have the power, even if things didn't go quite as smoothly as they originally hoped in Iraq. They may just see them all as economic opportunities for their friends, bad for tax paying Americans, but good for the private US businesses doing the endless reconstruction. Or maybe they really do have no intention of invading Iran. Who knows?

      I think we all need to listen carefully to how they phrase their answers in defense to questions about the possibilities of attacking Iran. It's easy to say you don't intend to, don't want to, only in self defense (like protecting troops in Iraq?), because they did the same with Iraq. "We had no choice. They didn't play by the rules and they're a threat to our country. We have to attack." All they need to do is provoke Iran into doing something stupid, and they have their reason...acting in self defense.
    • bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The below is quoted from @big papa a poster on the Think Progress site.
      -->
      …on C-Span this morning a S/Sgt in the U.S. Army in Baghdad called in to say that…
      …Russian made weapons/ordinance are being found with much more frequency (than Iranian)…
      …will Bushiva and L’il Dick attack Russia?
      …I don’t think so…
    • bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@kazumashell: "Here comes the draft....."

      I think you're right, I think the draft will come. If we attack Iran we won't be able to support, given are 'bad ass' soldiers are stretched thin already, all three wars simultaneously. Lastly, do you think for a moment that both China and Russia will stand by, idly, while we take on Iran?

      W and his corporatist privateers are pushing hard for WW3. There's no two ways about it.

      It's time we took our country back.
  • BitSlash, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29/wrist
    • diggamer, on 10/12/2007, -21/+1That is possibly the greatest little piece of geek and emo humor I have ever seen.

      Now I'm going to revel in my ability to put backslashes in my post(bet you can't):

      \ \ \ \ \
    • gamasutra, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3\wrist
    • odinfire, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4/throat
  • jetsetgo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31I'm glad they waited until this year.

    I mean really, could they have picked a worse time to make a case for an attack in Iran as a presidential election year? If the ***** democrats can't rally together in opposition of this I might just shoot someone.
    • benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28thats the point, they're trying to cram this war in before they leave office. They're really confident they'll be able to bypass the other branches of government. And what scares me is the fact that they probably can
    • savagecat, on 10/12/2007, -22/+3The Dems won't rally. Their general strategy is to put a large number of contenders into the ring and whatever happens, happens. It's unorganized. What do they have so far - Hillary? No one wants another Clinton. She had the same qualification to be senator that Monica did - except less recent. Obama? Just can't see a black militant religous nut job getting the nod The GOP coughs up one person and pushes them all the way through giving the impression of unity.

    • d3c0yn4m3l355, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9The reason they attack another country is very easy. Remember Afghanistan? Do you still see what mess it is? Because all news focuses on Iraque you don't get that in the news, now if we move towards Iran, we'll forget Iraque with their big mess. It's just a matter of moving attention around the globe and distract us from the *****.
    • neave, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13Maybe they're planning to f*** up the middle east so much that when the Dems are elected in 2008 they'll have no option but to continue into the quagmire, then the Republicans get back into power in 2012 as the knight in shining armour. And it might just work...
    • dggeek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14"Just can't see a black militant religious nut job getting the nod"

      Apparently the other thing the GOP is good at is lying to its constituents.
    • bronstad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"apparently"?
      the GOP exists to generate money for its already wealthy participants
      and *****, smoke, and mirrors to cover its ass
    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@savagecat

      "black militant religous nut job"

      Firstly, learn to spell. Secondly, just because someone is black doesn't mean they're a militant, especially when they clearly aren't. At all.

      You prick.
    • mathmanjeffy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@neave,

      Silly neave, Quetzalcoatl trumps the Republicans!
    • kolobcreek, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I think they learned their lesson. The US is going to drop bombs and go home.
    • grabbingsand, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6"a black militant religous nut job"

      Really. Are you really so gullible? Even Fox News is backing out of this story because it is so incredibly wrong.

      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16842036/site/newsweek/
      http://www.newshounds.us/2007/01/22/fox_and_friends_corrects_obama_madrassa_claim.php
      http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/01/22/cnn-debunks-obama-madrassa-smear/
      http://mediamatters.org/items/200702020012
    • vertinox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@"I mean really, could they have picked a worse time to make a case for an attack in Iran as a presidential election year?"

      Unless of course the war goes horribly wrong and someone suspends the constitutions and Presidential election for national security reasons.
    • bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If we attack Iran and both China and Russia will get involved (militarily speaking). We will find ourselves in a third world war. Martial Law will be the rule here in the states and the likely hood of an election even occurring in 08 would be slim.

      King George is looking to rule unopposed.
  • benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14this is a really bad idea...
  • chase001, on 10/12/2007, -9/+44We need to all push for Impeachment of Bush and Cheney to end their perpetual wars.
    • richashby, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28Agreed. Somehow nearly impeaching Clinton over a sexual indiscretion now seems incredibly trivial.

      Cheney would probably get out of it on medical grounds however. Or shoot his way out...

    • savagecat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Impeachment? Pelosi already sold out and won't entertain the idea.
    • Boffbowsh, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Please America, please please remove this administration. I don't understand how the rest of the world (especially us in the UK) can have no say in the direction of a nation (well, the administration of a nation) which makes everyone else's business it's business. If only Bush would wait, Blair would be out of office and we wouldn't be involved. But once again we'll be dragged in and tarred with the same brush by the extremists, and we'll have another July 7th.
    • aceg1357, on 10/12/2007, -10/+8"Agreed. Somehow nearly impeaching Clinton over a sexual indiscretion now seems incredibly trivial."

      I don't know if many people on the left are just plain ignorant or if they purposefully don't understand. Clinton was in fact impeached. Impeachment occured when they had the vote. But I digress into a civics lesson. Anyways, Clinton perjured himself, that is, he lied under oath in a court of law. Perjury is a felony. Presidents can be and should be impeached for felonies. HE WAS NOT IMPEACHED FOR A "SEXUAL INDISCRETION"

      Now before I hear anything about well Bush bla bla bla....... This post isn't about defending Bush. It is simply informing people on the left that Clinton was impeached for Perjury, not sex. I'm also really curious if you are a liberal, if you really didn't know this or if you purposefully misrepresent the facts.
    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@aceq1357

      You're right, he was impeached for perjury. The fact remains, though, that others (not mentioning names, you know who) have done much worse but get away with it because the right-wing gutter press are on their side. The whole Ken Starr thing was a total fit compared to political norms and you know it.
    • Ryan83, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@aceq1357

      Of course he was impeached for perjury. He perjured himself to hide a sexual indiscretion. Most people in society feel that you have the right to lie about a blowjob. In fact, lying about a blowjob is not a lie at all. The Supreme Court has ruled that sexual privacy is a foundational freedom, allowing me to enjoy sodomy (Lawrence) and to make my own medical decisions (Roe). You probably disagree with those too.
    • Homerr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I've been waiting 6 years for Cheney to kick it, but the RoboHeart-6000 keeps on ticking.
    • aceg1357, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Ryan83

      Ummmm. It doesn't matter what you lie about under oath, it is still perjury. And it doesn't matter what most people "feel" is OK, the law is the law. And your other argument has absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic.
    • stevebee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Instead of calling it "perpetual war" call it perpetual defense.
      It's time you admitted that there is an Islamic war against the West. And that means us.

      They bombed the WTC in 1993, the embassies, the USS Cole, Sept 11, the Madrid trains, the London trains...those are just the highlights.

      As crazy as it sounds to us, they have a religious requirement to bring the rest of the world under Islamic rule.

      They have declared themselves to be enemies. And we cannot permit these declared enemies to have nukes. The balance of power, MAD (mutually assured destruction) that we used to keep the Soviets at bay will just not work with these religious fanatics.

      They must be faced down and stopped. Whatever it takes.
  • laterthandawn, on 10/12/2007, -7/+31how the hell is this even being discussed? can we impeach these asshats yet?

    and, for the record, i'm sick of neocons pulling out the "framer's intent" bs. forget flag burning or gay marriage...if our forefathers got wind of THIS *****, they'd be calling for revolution all over again.
    • jcm267, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16The ***** is going on with both sides, it's just different *****. The Libertarian party is the way to go if one would like to govern based on the founder's intent.
    • nnnr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15The forefathers would be calling for a revolution anyways because our country is run by corporations. More wars=more spending on weapons/ammo and the Lockheed Martins get richer.
    • benjpw, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3@jcm Please stop posting the libertarian mantra in every thread! The forefathers did a good job setting up the base for our country - but they didn't envision a multicultural world - or Digg for that matter! We don't need to go back to 1776 to make a better world rid of the moronic wars of Cheney, Bush, & Co!
    • bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2VIVA LA REVOLUTION
  • Waiting2awake, on 10/12/2007, -6/+38 Your system is broken, your laws and lawmakers owned. Your politicians owned. You, as American citizens have been sold out by your system. Any idea of change happening within that system is naive, and only wasting time. You all know, deep down, where this invaribly ends. Either you stand up for America, or your children will have to, or your grandkids, or..... The chioce is yours.

    • lookitsbeige, on 10/12/2007, -23/+4Yes, the choice is ours. What amazing country do you live in that's so damned perfect? This is America. Don't worry about us. We'll be fine.
    • dukeinlondon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7@lookitsbeige : that's ironic isn't it ?
    • YumYumKittyLoaf, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16waiting2awake isn't making fun of America, he's making a true statement. Our system IS broken. There is a huge lapse between a lot of people I see (Friends of mine, fellow diggers, etc.) and the people running the nation.

      I blame myself for not putting some interest into politics, I didn't vote, and I should have. Atleast i'm 18 and have a lot more chances to vote later on.

      This is still sickening. I thought everything would be alright if we just kind of... got out of the mess we made in Iraq. But now... now we're going headfirst into Iran.
    • AKBryant54, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Yeah, he's right. Our system is broken simply because the only thing putting restraints on the power of our American government is the constitution, and the only thing that gives the constitution any validity is the vigilant persistent populace that demands it be followed. When you have a lack of that kind of determination within the American public, then the government becomes freer to do as they wish.
      It's very sad, but if you want to do something about it you can, go public speaking, get your voice out there. I have personally resolved to get into politics as much as I can, and perhaps even make a career out of it. It's not too late to change our nation politically, that principal is what makes our country so great. However we wont get anywhere as a people if we do not have true dedication.
    • stevebee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oh really? And where in the world is it better?
      In France where they knuckle under to the Islamic immigrants?
      In China where they can grab you and take your kidney if someone needs a transplant?
      Where is it better? Where in history has the average person been better off?
  • manifestdata, on 10/12/2007, -14/+10You people never cease to amaze me. Cheney says something and you guys absolutely refuse to believe it and swear up and down he is lying "just like all the other times." Then some journalist takes a sentence spoken by Cheney's aide, spins it to work his way, and you kids swear up and down it is the truth. The bandwagon effect at its greatest.
    • PeteLP, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Why would any of us ever think cheney's a liar?

      Why would any of us think cheney would ever want to go to war for false reasons?

      Maybe because EVERYTHING he's ever said has been a lie? maybe so.
    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1I'm well prepared to think this is basically left-wing propaganda (it is thinkprogress.org, after all) but even so, I still don't trust Cheney as far as I can throw him.

      I mean, this is the sort of guy that if he shoots you in the face, YOU have to apologise to HIM.

      Propaganda or not, I'm deeply, deeply suspicious of what this administration is planning next.

      However, two rays of light - Rumsfeld has been sent to the glue factory (shame it wasn't earlier) and the Democrats control both houses, so, with a bit of luck, that SHOULD mean no war.

      But Bush and Cheney will probably still get away from this whole nightmare scot-free.
  • skytimelapse, on 10/12/2007, -16/+3It doesn't mean we'll invade and keep bases there. Much more likely is some sort of air strike on the buildings we'll claim to be weapons factories.
    Don't overreact.
    • IMADV8, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Oh, is that all.
    • avasol, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Yeah so people dying in droves because two people who own the country want to get richer is OK with you, right?

      I find your lack of any form of humanity scaring.
    • Protean1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Oh man, and i thought your work showed humanity and a love of life.
      What level of reaction do you think is appropriate to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran?
      How is it overreacting to feel that this is bringing us to the brink of not just a wide regional war, but truly global-scale war for the first time in 60 years?
    • Protean1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1...and what's this "we" you mention?
  • bariswheel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15The government can't just decide to do this, not if we revolt. Invading Iran will be a criminal act, and if you have one bit of sense and decency in you, you will stand in the doors of washington and make sure this president and its henchmen get impeached before they can do any more damage. The American people aren't going to just sit there while everyone gets drafted to fight a war to steal energy from another country. That's not what patriotism is about.

    Too many people have died for a democracy in this country, let's not forget that and let's tell our governmnent what it can and can't do. We do not live in a dictatorship folks, so don't pretend like you have no power. This 'But i'm just one person' attitude makes me sick to my stomach. Get your ass up, STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS, and VOICE YOURSELF.
    • JoeyDeacon, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6I can't stand up. My ass is too big.
    • stevebee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Attacking Iran will NOT be a criminal act.
      It's a monstrous regime. They've declared themselves to be enemies of the U.S.
      The leaders have crazy religious beliefs that call for bringing on the end of the world. Their holy book calls for them to kill us. And to top it off...They are working furiously to get nuclear weapons.

      Come on! It's like you have a neighbor who is a homicidal maniac. And he's heading out to buy a machine gun. He's got to be stopped.
  • bariswheel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9The government can't just decide to do this, not if we revolt. Invading Iran will be a criminal act, and if you have one bit of sense and decency in you, you will stand in the doors of washington and make sure this president and its henchmen get impeached before they can do any more damage. The American people aren't going to just sit there while everyone gets drafted to fight a war to steal energy from another country. That's not what patriotism is about.

    STAND UP.
    • adrenaline33, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2Yeah because Iran is such a good country...
    • neave, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8It's not as simple as "you're with us or against us", them or us, terror or freedom. Use of blanket military force is only going to exacerbate the situation.

      Diplomacy, sanctions, pulling out of Iraq, leaving behind a powerful combined Sunni, Shiah and Kurdish government in Iraq, pushing for a viable Palestinian state, Palestine's recognition of Israel... and myriad other points all need addressing. But if the US goes in all guns blazing, we could end up with more terror in the world, not less.
    • avasol, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21The American people will do what they always do best. Eat cheetos and watch TV.
      The spine was ripped out of Americans eons ago. What remains are amorphic brainwashed drones.

      How the ***** would you protest if most Americans are even afraid of speaking their opinion in public?

      Pathetic. And sad.
  • AnotherCanadian, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5i can only pray that american doesn't find some trumped up reason to go into venezuela. that place could be a socialist (go ahead and bury me) paradise :(
  • bariswheel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Sorry about the duplicate above, still getting used to the ajax digg comments...
  • CodyBrown, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Jesus mother ***** christ.

    I'm sorry, I can't think of anything more restrained when I hear news like this.

    Cheney is doing more to invigorate organized terrorism than Osama could have ever dreamed of.

    I can only hope that the Democratic majority has enough brass, skill, and maturity to counter act this.
    • Growly, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Jesus mother ***** christ indeed.

      Maybe the war on terrorism should about face?
    • bronstad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7meanwhile, bin laden is still loose. Good job Dick
  • dakotaClrk, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3So, Good luck to our troops..
  • kazuhima, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5if there was a draft, me having dual citizenship, would i still have to go? or is there some kind of loophole?
    • AKBryant54, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11You shouldn't go anyway, when the government tells you that you have to go to some country and fight to the death for some cause that they tell you is important, it's nothing more than them expressing ownership of your life. It is wrong on every level of what makes us American, and you should not stand for it, we as a nation should not stand for it.
    • riverside71, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2don't worry.. the people who are pushing for the war are themselves all dual citizens.. u're in good company.. they'll find a way for dual citizens to avoid any drafts.. but they will go out of their way to serve their own country in any wars they fight.. ask Rahm Emanuel..
  • yaroslav1980, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Just nuke Iran, it would be cheaper. Also, it's a possibility do get rid of end-of-life warheads.
  • BillDoE, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Why the ***** is Bush trying to start WWIII? We need to find some way to Impeach this whole administration NOW!
  • Jerky1312, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6We will invade Iran before this administration's term is over and there is nothing the American people can do about it. That is the sad truth. We elected this president and we have to deal with the decisions they make.
    • bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Jerky1312

      Sir, no Sir! We did not elect this administration. They were appointed by the Supreme Court and later used rigged voting machines to steal the election.
  • jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I don't think an impeachment will help at this point. They will just conscrue the law against it somehow. They've already managed, with all their clever lawyers, signing statements and such, to circumvent the law in almost every possible respect.

    Perhaps, the only thing left that will work is to march up to the Whitehouse en masse and throw GW Bush, Cheney and the rest of them out...

    But remember to do so non-violently, of course.

    If they try to use force, the national guard, the military, whatever... if you resist non-violently, and they get violent, they will lose in the end like the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution
    They lose the belief and trust of the public in general. And a government cannot operate for long if a certain threshold of their population is against them... no matter how totalitarian it is.


    It's your country. Fight for it and what you believe on. Turn off the T.V. once in a while. Call your local politicians and let them know your opinion(s). If you give politicians an inch, they take an arm. If you don't let them know you support them, they will just do what is easiest, which is to support whatever is to their advantage (corporate interests, etc). Thats the problem with power: if it goes unchecked, it corrupts absolutely. And I really don't see how much more corrupt Bush/Cheney could possibly get... or shall I say, I don't see how much more corrupt they need to be before convincing everyone how they are screwing America up.
  • adinb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Oh crap. I wonder if they'll pull deep enough to call me back up (recently medically retired)
  • salobaas, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Putin, also not an entirely nice guy, seems to be right when he lashed out against the current US administration as being the main source of turmoil in the world at the moment. What has to happen before these guys get impeached? Committing mass murder under false pretenses seems not to be good enough. Send in the bimbo's...
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Putin also said invading Iraq would be a huge error.
  • justgeorge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Don't want to get drafted? get motivated... tell everyone you know:
    http://impeachforpeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

    You see, the amount of time you spend arguing here could be spent actually getting him impeached. Average digg article gets read by say 2000 people, if half of you get 10 people each to become active, and say 3 of them really active about this issue that'd be 3,000 really active and 7,000 names to help get the impeachment through - and believe me it works. We had 2 people take mcdonalds to court in the UK which lead to a CHANGE OF EUROPEAN LAW..
    that was 2 people with NO legal position (they actually represented themselves)..

    Really you could just let these bastards get away with this, or get involved and do something. I'm not sure if that's the best impeachment movement - but check it out. Don't settle for this crap - you all know it's lies - do their kids go to war? No they sit round doing coke with daddy's enron and exxon money. Get them out of office. There are more of you than them and you've got the internet.. It will only take 30 mins a day - and a bit motivation, but you can make a difference: together.

    GET INVOLVED - THE WORLD NEEDS YOU!! :-) (and you don't need to get killed in a phoney war for someone elses billions).

    And here is where your politicians stand on the issue (they get paid by the same businesses as bush.. DONT TRUST CLINTON, etc):
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush

    good luck!
  • mattxb, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4don't worry guys, we'll be treated as liberators
  • Kokichi, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Isn't it obvious enough that there won't be a draft? It's political suicide - Republicans would never gain office for YEARS. With so much controversy surrounding the war in Iraq as it is, there's no way the American people will go along with it. WWII was different; for that, we had an obvious, very real, very evil enemy. Also, we needed The War to pull us out of The Great Depression. But this current war, this "war on terror", is a war against a strategy, not an army! There is *NO* chance for a draft, period.
    • justgeorge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4you sould still impeach though:
      http://impeachforpeace.org/ImpeachNow.html
      :-)
    • kelbear, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1I don't think there is any power to attack Iran without the U.S being attacked or having an attack staged. And a draft is absolutely out of the question, it could have been doable in the beginning of the war, but impossible at this point.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That's not how Dubya is thinking (if you call that thinking).

      This whole war has been for Israel. We invaded Iraq on totally false pretenses. Why? Because you can't invade Iran without being in Iraq.

      Iran was the plan from the very beginning, because, since 1984, Iran has funded Hizb'allah in Lebanon. Now you COULD argue that Israel is just catching blowback for invading Lebanon, but clearly they didn't learn and tried again, and failed again.

      Does Israel care what is costs? Nope. They have not even been told to pay for blowing up Lebanon again. They could not give a ***** if your kid gets shot in Iran and you go broke paying for it.

      THAT is what explains the seemingly irrational behavior. We are p0wnd by Israel.
  • motters, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The solution to all international problems is to launch a bombing campaign and/or invasion.
    • friedcalamari, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Or “Why negotiate when we can settle our differences in a battle?”
  • mos6507, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2If I felt we were threatened by a future nuclear attack from Iran, hell yeah.

  • yuutokun, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2tormented screams of incestuous rage fill the morning headlines
  • zadadka, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5May God help us all.

    The cretins in power in America should realise that a repeat of striking a sovereign nation on any pretext that is not supported by ABSOLUTE proof, will deservedly earn them the direspect and distrust of EVERY nation and right-thinking person on the planet.

    If we had no need to be fearful of the claim of many and deadly terrorist attacks on western civilian populations before, we most certainly will have if they concoct some tentative travesty as this would indicate is to occur over the coming months.

    Ignorant, arrogant, and entirely deaf to its own people, let alone its allied nations...they are themselves a travesty.
  • mindsnare, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6America, if there's ever been a time for an anti war protest it's now (well not now, like, a little further on from now, but close), don't let those rat bastards do it.

    I'll be sure as hell protesting Australia's involvement if it ever comes to fruition.
  • nixfu, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2
    Ummm, like this is news?

    IRAN has been acting like ***** for a while now and threating to kill just about everyone on the planet except Santa Clause. If they REALLY are getting nukes then we need to blow them the ***** up, or they will blow our ***** up.

    Thats the facts of life.

    • calvmari, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3To take international action we need support from multiple nations. To go it solo like a cowboy turns the world against the US, the US looks like it's on a rampage.

      We need to be on damage control of our world image, not continue the tirade that's smearing our face to the world.
    • Pedwidget, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Being Right is more important than what anyone else thinks. These idiots that care what the world thinks sound like power-hungry Libnut Dimocrats that think and do what they think the polls want rather than having the guts to just stand for something good and right.
    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Oh for God's sake. Is a getting on for a million dead Iraqi's 'Right'? Providing they're Muslims, you probably don't care.

      What makes you so sure that Iran wants to get you, anyway? Is it because you know what you've done to them and others like them?

      I suggest you try not to piss everybody off so much in future.
  • Red_Eye, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2To this article all I can say is Wow you're kidding?!?!

    /sarcasm
  • nixfu, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3The Telegraph reports this morning that rifles imported from Austria by Iran have surfaced among insurgents in Iraq. Steyr-Mannlicher exported 800 of its high-powered HS50 models, capable of piercing body armor, to the National Iranian Police Association for their anti-narcotics efforts:

    Austrian sniper rifles that were exported to Iran have been discovered in the hands of Iraqi terrorists, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

    More than 100 of the.50 calibre weapons, capable of penetrating body armour, have been discovered by American troops during raids.

    The guns were part of a shipment of 800 rifles that the Austrian company, Steyr-Mannlicher, exported legally to Iran last year.

    The sale was condemned in Washington and London because officials were worried that the weapons would be used by insurgents against British and American troops.

    This appears to aubstantiate the findings of the Department of Defense, presented this weekend, that Iran has actively supplied weapons to the Iraqi insurgencies, and that those weapons have killed American troops. The DoD focused on the EFPs, explosive devices that can destroy vehicular armor, and counted 170 American deaths from the super-IEDs. The HS50s have also killed Americans, and seem designed to do so. The first American to die from the HS50 was shot 45 days after the Iranian police received their shipment.

    US forces have captured over a hundred of the HS50s from the Iranian police shipment. That amounts to over 12% of the total number of rifles imported by Iran to fight drug dealers, a dodge that has grown more threadbare ever since the invasion of Iraq. The Iranians have not claimed -- yet -- that they managed to lose one-eighth of all the new rifles intended for their police, and the Iranian government was clearly the recipient of the arms. In fact, Austria defended the sale on that very point.

    Pardon the pun, but this is literally the smoking gun. We can trace these weapons from its manufacturer directly to the Iranian government. The quantity in which they have been found in insurgent bases precludes any explanation that a few just got mislaid; they obviously have been transferred from an Iranian state organization to the terrorists in Iraq. It's the clearest evidence of Iranian involvement in attacks on Americans. The involvement of the mullahcracy is undeniable, and it is a direct retort to those who keep claiming that Iran has no stake in Iraqi instability.



    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/13/wiran13.xml
    • calvmari, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4When US and other forces took down Saddam, he was more worried about his Iranian neighbors than he ever was about US interference. Now we see why.
    • Elohir, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10"The HS50s have also killed Americans, and seem designed to do so. "

      A gun...designed...to kill Americans!!! DUN DUN DUNNNNNN!!

      Sensationalist trash.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Undeniable"

      Just like those WMDs.
  • dangermen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Where the ***** is the declaration of war? How the ***** can he just take us to war with Iran without the Congress and the Senate approving?
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Illegally.

      And, by the way, there was no declaration of war on Iraq. The "use of force resolution" was limited to enabling UN inspectors to return to Iraq. We are way past illegal already.

      IMPEACH.
  • hilbertspaceboy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1John Hannah, yet another right-wing zionist neocon jew.

    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Ah, that's called antisemitism, isn't it?
  • Syntaxis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14So basically:

    - Tens if not hundreds of thousands more innocent people killed.
    - Hundreds of American terrorists killed in military action.

    Oh sorry, I mean:

    - A few dead ragheads that are probably terrorists anyway.
    - Thousands of brave American freedomfighters killed in action.

    Or did I mean:

    - Bush sends thousands more soldiers to certain death.
    - Bush makes the world an ever less safe place to be in.
    - "You're either with us or against us" again, note: I'm NOT with the USA. I just don't give a f-word.

    Billions of Dollars spent on war. Thousands of innocent and unnecessary deaths. Years and years of suffering and fear. Uncertainty. Mass murder. Threats. Attacks. Revenge.

    But sure. Keep that Bush guy on the throne. He's doing such a good job! Go America - the world laughs at you.
  • Pedwidget, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2I know, let's pretend the world is full of lollipops and and gumdrops and there's no bad anywhere at all.

    Maybe, if we ignore Iran and all the other countries controlled by evil, they will just dissappear. Maybe they won't ever bother us. Maybe they won't commit attrocities against their own people. Hey they aren't us what do we care?

    Let's all stick our heads in the sand.

    Power-hungry Liberal nutcase Dimocrats will be the downfall of the US and all free peoples if we let them. Think for yourself. Don't be brainwashed.
    • galore, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Hush, hush, go sign up, brave armchair warrior.
    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Iran certainly isn't perfect, but they've been getting by for thousands of years without your help.

      Who are you to go around judging different countries?

      Mark my words, history will remember people like you in the same vein as the German National Socialists.

      Millions dead are millions dead, whether they're Jewish or Muslim, whether you put them in gas chambers or bomb them from afar.
    • bronstad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5i know, let's pretend that our great leaders are on our side and that their military interventions in the last few years have been successful and haven't destabilized the middle east enough already

      oooh, a lollipop... what was i saying again?

      prick
    • MrESaulved, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@pedwidget

      Your comments' content and patterning, when examined closely, display intellectual incompleteness and insincerity. It is clear you don't even believe the assertions you make.

      What (or who) is motivating you to post comments you do not personally believe in?
  • Neorio, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Maybe John Titor got it right after all with his predictions for 2008.

    Except his civil war just so happens to involve Americans on foreign soil
  • curme, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Bush has made the USA as weak as a kitten and unable to carry out his loud mouthed threats and whining. We barely have enough troops for Iraq, how in the heck are we going to attack Iran?
    • Pedwidget, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3If we had no Power-hungry Libnut Dimocrats more interested in themselves than their country we'd be doing a lot better.

      IMAGINE if they actually supported their country and troops!

      they DO NOT
  • anj747, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6412995,00.html
  • Mageant, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I guess it's easy to predict when you know what the game plan is.

    Btw, the evidence of the Iranian-manufactured munitions being used in Iraq is FALSE.
  • hilbertspaceboy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I hope they don't hit the Halliburton office when they bomb Iran!

    That would be ungodly!
  • cr4ft, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7What do you do when you start one war and fail? You start another of course!

    ***** idiots
    • Pedwidget, on 10/12/2007, -14/+0America started no war.

      Seems the idiot is you.
    • TheMrFlibble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yeah, it was a police action.
    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@pedwidget

      Who started it, then? Your imaginary friend?
  • skeeto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Good Morning America has been in Iran the last couple days. Diane Sawyer doing the reporting. It really is a beautiful country with interesting people that (surprise) don't all hate us, aren't all oppressed, etc. They showed protests at some schools against their president who they feel is causing them problems. Sawyer interviewed Ahmadinejad face to face, which was interesting.

    As nutty as Ahmadinejad is, I think a better way to go about it would be to support the people already inside the country that are against him and let them take care of the guy. Or better yet, try to handle him diplomatically like they apparently just did with the loon in North Korea. Bombing the holy hell out of Iran, making a mess out of it and killing hundreds of thousands is not going to solve anything. It's just going to cause us a lot more problems. I think it's pure evil that people like Cheney have openly talked about using "tactical nukes" on Iran (because they obviously don't have enough troops - yet; watch those "national service" bills, kids). So, lets nuke a country because they might someday get a nuke. A nuke they'd be stupid to use anyway because as soon as they did, Israel (with it's 400+) and the US (with it's 9,000+) could destroy Iran within hours.

    As for the garbage argument about "lets get Iran because they're providing weapons to Iraqis to kill Americans". Well, newsflash, governments (including the US) sell weapons to other countries all the time. If you want to use that rationale as a reason to destroy someone, then North Korea would a right to hit the US because the US sells weapons to South Korea. Palestine and others can hit Israel because of the billions of aid and weapons they get from the US that are used to oppress and kill them. Etc etc etc.

    Also, some of those pictures the monkeys in DC are flashing of bombs look like the same garbage they were flashing about Iraq's supposed nuclear sites. Iran apparently gets its weapons, including mortars, from Russia. Russian mortars do not use 81MM rounds. They use 82mm. Plus Modern Iran uses a solar Hijri calendar that is 621 years less than the Western solar calendar, so if those munitions were really made in Iran the date should read 1384 or 1385 (their new year starts in March) not 2006. The letters in the center of those "Iranian shells" appear to be "HE". "High Explosive" is a common category of mortar shell. But "High Explosive" is English, not Farsi. How fortunate for the warmongers looking for any little excuse to kick off (or expand) World War 3 and the media that these "Iranian weapons" bear English markings and not Farsi or Russian.
    • Pedwidget, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2"As for the garbage argument about "lets get Iran because they're providing weapons to Iraqis to kill Americans". Well, newsflash, governments (including the US) sell weapons to other countries all the time. If you want to use that rationale as a reason to destroy someone, then North Korea would a right to hit the US because the US sells weapons to South Korea. Palestine and others can hit Israel because of the billions of aid and weapons they get from the US that are used to oppress and kill them. Etc etc etc. "

      What mind-boggling garbage you spew.

      Yeah, there's no difference between the US and Iran. No difference between North and South Korea. No difference between Palestine and Israel.

      What an incredibly brainwashed buffoon you are.

      It's hard for Libnuts to understand for some bizzare reason, but there is good and evil. There is right and wrong. It's not relative. Sit down and let the adults take care of you. Smoke a joint, play your kazoo and waste away.
    • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@pedwidget

      No, there is no such thing as evil, only madness and hate. But you are getting pretty close, since you seem entirely indifferent to how many innocent civilians die for your sick politics.
  • morningmatters, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2One of the foundations of democracy is freedom of the press. At the moment that very notion is being attacked by right wingers. US conservatives have been undermining the media for years as "liberal biased" to the degree that they wouldn't believe anything unless it came straight out of the Bush, Cheney & Co's PR team. As evident by some responses here, people would rather believe that the media is biased than to look at the historical pattern of deception from Bush Cheney &Co which lead us to Iraq, and think for themselves. The fact that conservatives trust Dick "terrorism is on its final throes" Cheney will speak the truth is a testament of the sheep mentality enabled by that "liberal" media.
    • xcoastie, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2No left wing bias in the media? Remember Dan Rather?? He was so filled with hatred and discontent that he just made ***** up to make Bush look bad. Now that is journalism!
    • morningmatters, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"No left wing bias in the media? Remember Dan Rather?? "

      Ah, a right winger sets up yet another tiresome strawman argument. So the good ol' "lefty" Dan Rather represents the entire media, and rightwing FOXNews doesnt. It's old news that in 2003 majority of Americans actually believed that Saddam caused 9/11. If the media is so "liberal" and "anti-war", why was the public so pro-war and ignorant?

      Of course a question which bush/cheney lovers continue to dodge: At this point why would anyone in their right mind believe Cheney?
  • ebola, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6After Iraq, if they have the audacity to invade Iran, that's the end of the USA and the middle east. You can bet your ass the Iranians will do everything to destroy western civilization, through terrorist attacks, poisoning of freshwater sources, dirty bombs and anything else they can get their hands on. This would also be the proverbial last straw among the middle eastern nations, who would most probably withdraw all support for the US, knowing very well that they could be next after Iran. There goes the oil supply. We're headed back to the Iron age folks. Buckle up.
  • Pedwidget, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Now I know where the Yahoo Libnuts went when Yahoo turned off their cesspool message boards.
    • hilbertspaceboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4pedowidget is still smarting from the Dem sweep last Nov.
  • truegodofwar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=56147511&size=l
  • toneii, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Let me guess - its a "Slam Dunk", right? A "Cakewalk"?
    They'll greet in the streets with flowers and chocolates.

    "Ready, Aim... Backfire!"
  • jambox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0And they'd be right to do it!

    Altho, there's no such thing as a dirty bomb.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.