What is Digg?139 Comments
- joybran, on 10/12/2007, -7/+47Who would have thought that Bush was crazy enough to attack, invade, and occupy Iraq? But he did it, and he hasn't learned anything from all the death and destruction he caused. It wouldn't even surprise me if he is crazy enough to use nukes on Iran. God help us all.
- deanlowe, on 10/12/2007, -6/+46How's turning this Iranian cold war into a hot war going to help anything? Do you think any American will ever be safe again outside of North America? That kind of ***** will inspire a million times more anti-US hate than Bin Laden.
- LordOfTheSponge, on 10/12/2007, -5/+39Bush - FAILURE ACCOMPLISHED.
- metasin, on 10/12/2007, -7/+39this dude is actually advocating a nuclear (or is that nucular?) war. WTF?!?!?!?!
- NinjAlt, on 10/12/2007, -7/+33I guess thats why the country is in such good shape and everyone loves america. *****.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27If it happens, it'll happen after the mid-term elections when Bush officially becomes a lame duck.
- greymaxcat, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26Lets nuke them before they nuke us... hell lets nuke all the the middle east... then France... the all of Africa.... then south America.... then the 90% of Europe that hates us... then Canada...
and who ever is left can become part of America and we will have peace...
Yeah... that will work... - mlkmnz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+24"Is Bush Crazy? Or Just Bluffing About Bombing Iran"
Without reading the whole article I can answer the question:
BOTH - pong32, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25These are not "liberals" (assuming you are referring to the term per current politcal context and not by actual definition: favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms). These are Libertarians. People who believe the country would be a better place if our government paid more attention to the Constitution and the lessons of the country's forefathers who warned against big government. Do your homework - read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights... the authors were really onto something that has long since been forgotten.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20@ Glen.Leaf
"These are the people that hijack planes and fly them in buildings."
Actually, the majority (if not all) of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi Arabians, not Iranians. None of the hijackers were Iranians. Totally different country, it's like mixing up Ireland with Belgium. And we're not going after the Saudis, btw.
"These are the people that riot because of cartoons."
- again, not the Iranians.
"These are the people that kill nuns over quotes the Pope uses."
That was in Somalia. Again, not Iran.
"These are the people that kidnap and cut off the heads of their victims."
That would be in Iraq, closer, but still no cigar.
"These are the people that ride buses wearing exploding vests."
That would be Lebanese or Palestinian suicide bombers, targetting the Israelis. Again, where do the Iranians fit into all of this?
Don't tell me you're judging them based on the fact that the majority of them are Moslem? Goodness me, that would be like judging all Americans based upon the perpetrators of the Jonestown massacre.
Again, I have to point out to the blindly ignorant and hateful, that there are 1.5 Billion Moslems in the world. If they were all fanatics, then we would already have been over-run. The evidence suggests that most of them are peaceful, if backward in their beliefs.
Judging the majority by the acts of a dominant minority of fanatics is like judging all Christians based on the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church. It's ignorant, and it's profoundly stupid. - galore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19If an American city gets nuked, I'll put the blame on Bush and his policies.
Bush is a troll, an ***** who enjoys fueling the fire because it rallies the ***** idiots in the USA into voting for him. That guy is just bad news all around.
Anyone who thinks that his strongarm bully approach is going to stop terrorism needs a brain implant, desperately.
Increasing anger and hatred, the fuel of terrorism, to stratospheric heights by killing tens of thousands of innocent people in the most volatile region on earth BASED ON A LIE surely is a recipe for desaster. And now he is entertaining the thought of bombing Iran?? What the *****. There are millions of people living there - none of them did anything to the USA. You want to create even more people who hate the USA to death (and no, not every Iranian does now - but they will, should you bomb them)?
You boneheaded ignorant cattle conservative armchair evangeliwarriors are a totally lost cause. What amazes me is that you don't seem to understand the terrorists. And it would be so easy for you to understand them. Just think if the roles were reversed - you would be the first to support terrorism with your idiotic lust for revenge.
If you want to be safe from terrorism and if you want to make sure no American city gets nuked by a terrorist, leave those people in the middle east alone. They don't hate you for your freedoms, they hate you for ***** with their lives. - Sculptor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Bush is not a moron nor a complete puppet to others. The simple fact seems to me that he is endlessly self indulgent and simply doesn't give a damn. Even his own place in history is not of the utmost importance to him. He is simply riding the bronco for eight glorious years, and will forgive himself all transgressions.
When nukes are going off in our back yard (USA), I am sure he will be on a safe little island somewhere with his pals sipping smooth paradise cocktails.. - petroK, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18What better way to soldify the moral high-ground that America has already clearly taken than by acting firmly and resolutely against yet another sovereign nation that has not yet attacked us
???
...with a nuclear attack...
??? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Cue: Picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam Hussein's hand.
Appeasement, you say? - galore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16You have a severe and pathological case of liberalophobia.
- wibblewibble, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17The American Governing / Business model - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_war
America has no history of peace nor in the future anytime soon will it be a peacful nation. - dustko, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Your president is on a mission.
"Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region"
Rebuilding America's Defenses report. Written in 2000.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Why is it crazy to have a nuclear Iran?
We have nukes, Russia has nukes, the UK & Europe have nukes, Israel has nukes...
Iranians don't want to be destroyed any more than we do. Nuclear deterrent worked for 50+ years, so why won't it work in the Mid East?
Human sense of preservation trumps crazy religious talk every day of the week.
The Iranians are 10 years away from getting a nuclear bomb. The evidence suggests they are into nuclear power rather than nuclear war, all this other talk is baseless.
Israel has hundreds of nukes & a huge army. They can look after themselves. We're in no danger. - galore, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Your post makes the Iranian PM seem reasonable for trying to get nukes for Iran.
You are many times the lunatic that the Iranian PM is himself. - galore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14You bring up the Nazis so this is fair game...
I grew up in Austria with grandfathers who were Nazis. They argued just like the neocons do now. Spin, spin, spin. Fatherland, patriotic pride, us vs. them, good vs. evil etc. etc. etc.
They didn't realize that they were part of the evil side. And only terrorists and enemies of the state ended up in Concentration Camps. So they thought... - randal2k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Bush is a Criminal and should be charged with terrorism against the US and the World.
Nuclear war is an outrage. The setting off of a nuclear weapon, killing people indiscriminately is an act of pure Evil, and could only be done by the Morons of the USA, first in WW2 and maybe now under another EVIL regime, the Bush administration.
In WW2 people didn't act. Now we must!! Impeach and indict Bush, Criminal #1 terrorist against the World.
It's time to get rid of him!
http://www.worldcantwait.net/ - Oct 5th. - Mejogid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Something like 'Political Opinion', maybe?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Look up a guy named Krushchev, will you? Then get back to me on insane threats to destroy civilization.
We lived through Krushchev's crazy threats, we'll live through Ahmadinejad's crazy threats. The Iranians don't want to be glassed over with nukes any more than the Russians did: it's all just sabre-rattling.
If, however, we had reacted to Krushchev back then by unleashing the bombers, rather than diplomacy, right now we'd be having this discussion via use of smoke signals, because that's the best technology we'd probably have after the resultant nuclear ***** war. - pqrs2005, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Bush isn't crazy but a complete idiot .. a perfect pawn in the hands of the war mongers occupying the Pentagon ... He does not know what he is doing.
- xr56n44, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14is bush crazy?
***** yeah, he's crazy. drug addict, alcoholic, bully fascist, who can't even read a speech off a card without stumbling over the words. if he wasn't born into money, he'd be bagging groceries at a supermaket right now - metasin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16uh...yeah - he's ***** crazy. isn't that obvious by now?!?!?!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13"the journalist thinks it is crazy to bomb them but sane to have a nuclear iran. Is this "journalist" crazy?"
If you think bombing them is the answer, you need medication. Lots of it. We can't occupy Iran, our military can't even control Baghdad. There's no guarantee we can permanently damage or destroy their nuclear facilities. Even if we set them back they'd rebuild them even deeper underground. And where's all the fallout going to go?
That doesn't even begin to cover the political fallout, which would be an even bigger disaster for the US than Iraq. Take a look:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.theodora.com/maps/new8/middle_east.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.theodora.com/maps/new/middle_east.html&h=938&w=776&sz=76&tbnid=jbzVZgJoNSxsnM:&tbnh=148&tbnw=122&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmiddle%2Beast%2Bmap&start=3&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=3
25% of the worlds oil flows right past Iran's southern border. Tankers are the sitting ducks of maritime targets. Iran has Russian antiship missiles that can be ground, air or sea launched. Think the Navy can guard ships along that much coastline? At what cost? We're one lucky rocket away from waking up to $6/gallon gasoline or even higher.
All that assumes the Russians haven't already sold them nukes under the table. How sure are you of that? The Pakistanis, Indians and North Korea already have nukes. Israel and Saudi Arabia might have them, Egypt used to have a couple don't know if they still do.
You ***** really are deluded. I've never seen anything like it. If we could power our cars off stupidity, the one commodity we seem to have in abundance, we could tell the Saudis to cram their oil. - Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15And if you "fought the KKK" by bombing the ***** out of any city that a KKK'er had visited lately, that is precisely what would happen!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13You left off:
- Katrina
- Spying on Americans
- Using taxpayer dollars to fund propaganda
- No-bid contracts to Haliburton
- Torturing suspects
- GITMO
That's not the whole list and that's only the ***** we know about. I'll bet what we don't know is an even longer, more horrifying list. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15We heard the same ***** "we're all gonna get nuked!!!" from the keyboard commandoes before the Iraq war, smearing the anti-war crowd. It turned out to be a tissue of lies, didn't it?
It's *****, & it always will be. You're living in fear. Grow a pair, get a solid spine, and realise bombing the ***** out of sovereign countries half-way around the world is never gonna make America safter, it's gonna do the exact opposite. You've got a guy in office who hasn't even secured the Mexican borders & refuses to, plus there's no security on the ports. Defending America starts at home, with efficient security & rational leadership, not knee-jerk insane attacks on countries that pose no threat to us & never made a threat to us, nor could ever attack us. The people behind the 9/11 attacks were almost all of them Saudis, not Iranians, yet we're not going after Saudi Arabia, are we? Ask yourself why not?
The reason you crazy war mongers never hear alternatives, is because you close your ***** ears and don't listen.
If you weren't so addicted to sitting behind your screen imagining your self a big heroic marine, instead of a sad little man mentally jerking to war porn, you might have time to read some history, keep up with the reality of current events & commentary from people who are in fact suggesting plenty of alternatives. - Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Nukes are bad, and Iran shouldn't have them. Neither should the US. But it's a bit rich for the US government, who have them, and who have no intention of getting rid of them (and who are the only nuclear power to have used them, and the only one with a policy that allows first use) to have the balls to tell anyone else they can't have them.
I wonder how Bush would react if Ahmadinejad decided to tell him what he could and couldn't do, demand access to LLNL, etc., shut down American nuclear programs, and so on? Do you think he'd jump to comply immediately? I rather suspect not. - Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12"Now we have the ruthlessly anti-semitic Iranian regime led by a delusional madman who believes an apocalyptic war is imminent in order to bring about the return of the 12th Mahdi. This regime is flouting every international agreement and regulation in a desperate attempt to create atomic weapons. They have repeatedly, directly threatened to blow Israel off the map once they get the bomb."
As opposed to an American regime led by a delusional madman who believes an apocalyptic war is imminent in order to bring about the return of the messiah. This regime is flouting every international agreement and regulation in a desperate attempt to...well, OK, I don't actually know what they're trying to do. They have repeatedly, directly threatened to blow Iran off the map, and they already have the bomb, as well as suitable delivery vehicles.
(The only real difference is, I'm more inclined to believe Bush would actually do it) - Libberkey, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17Charley may be wrong, but I'm more likely to believe he's closer to right. And his last paragraph is a truly astute summation, just as I would expect from Charley.
- Scarblac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Stupidest comment of the thread. Iran is a mortal enemy of Al Qaeda.
Al Qaeda are Sunnis, Iran is Shi-ite. Iran has actually helped the US capture terrorists in the Afghanistan/Iran border region, after the Afghanistan war.
Just that they have sponsored terrorists in the past doesn't mean they're allies of Al Qaeda.
Which reminds me, wasn't that alleged of Iraq too? And also found to be a big lie? - CubicZirconia, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Under the current leadership and conditions, I would say a nuclear US is crazy !
- Arkonnan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15I'll take ***** crazy for 500, Alex!
- frostedflakes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Remember, you only bomb countries that don't have nuclear weapons (Iraq) compared that those that do (Korea). Why? Because they actually HAVE THEM.
- Osmanthus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11You haven't been paying attention if you think anyone is bluffing about attacking Iran. This was planned a long time ago, before Bush was even in office.
- opencad, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Since the Bush administration doesn't care about things like how much it will cost, how many people will die, or what the people of the US want . . . its pretty much assured we'll be attacking Iran. All their rhetoric supports this. "Iran funds terrorists" and "We will not allow Iran to acquire Nuclear Weapons". These guys think if they _don't_ attack while Bush is in office, they'll have lost the change to "remake the middle east". Buy oil stocks. The price will be going back up.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"The anti-Bush commenters here will look pretty stupid (although they are clueless enough that they won't feel stupid) when a city, likely an American one, is vaporized in a nuclear blast in the next few years."
No we won't. That could happen anyway. The question is how are we going to react if and when it does? We going to nuke whoever was responsible? What if it turns out to be a Chinese warhead and the Chinese deny any involvement? You going to nuke Beijing anyway? Or Saudi extremists operating out of Oman. You going to bomb Saudi Arabia or Oman? Or both?
Goddamn you ***** are clueless. Anyone got property in New Zealand? I feel an extended vacation coming on. - raada, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Oh you mean the muppet with Cheney's hand upp his ass..
- AhmedB, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13You know Sculptor, you're like reading my mind, earlier today I was actually thinking about this 'Him being remembered in history' thing, and I thought Ok, how is he actually going to go down in history books...and frankly I found the following...
1. 9/11,
2. Afghanistan,
3. Iraq
4. Biggest deficit in history,
4. Iran?
Doesn't look like a good list
For Clinton it was like
1. .com boom.
2. Monica,
3. from era of deficits to era of surplus - dustko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Well said galore.
- galore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The biggest flaw in your beautiful essay is that you regressive rightwingers seem to follow the Nazi template to the T to stamp out some perceived new "holocaust" threat while setting the precursors to one yourself.
Next thing is that you will claim the Nazis were progressive liberals... (instead of the conservative rightwingers they were in reality). - wibblewibble, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Well you see, Europe has learnt its lesson about previous conflicts but has America?
They don't appear to have. - reda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"but Iran is the only country telling people that he is going to destroy Western Civilization."
US was telling people they were going to destroy Iran
they tell people they are going on "war on terror" against the axis of evil, iraq was invavded, and Iran is next (on the axis of evil).
and for the israel thing it's a lie,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel
"BLITZER: But should there be a state of Israel?
SOLTANIEH: I think I've already answered to you. If Israel is a synonym and will give the indication of Zionism mentality, no.
But if you are going to conclude that we have said the people there have to be removed or they have to be massacred or so, this is fabricated, unfortunate selective approach to what the mentality and policy of Islamic Republic of Iran is. I have to correct, and I did so." - Ikioi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"As one of a very few conservative journalists in DC, I wish they were, but they aren't."
Yep, there sure are few, only 2 right? Wait, which one were you again. Are you the White House's press room plant brought in to use questions to bad mouth liberals or one of the writers on Cuban affairs paid to write anti-Castro stories?
So, when you say they are "NOT" (x3), well, we know what that means, *wink* *wink*. I'll head out and stock up on jugs and jugs of gasoline before people realize the truth. Heh, NOT, good one!
(Stupid) People will believe anything the US President tells them. "I did not inhale." Bahahaha, I loved that one! - Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I agree; it should have been posted under "Political Opinion"! Errm....
- petroK, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Funny I thought he's been a lame duck for a year now...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 138 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 