Sen. Feinstein: U.S. On ‘Collision Course’ With Iran

[Purveyor]

Source: Agence France-Presse

WASHINGTON — A leading Democrat warned Sunday that United States and Iran are on a “collision course” as Tehran steps up its nuclear program and escalates hostilities with its alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi envoy to Washington.

But Dianne Feinstein, the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said this was not the time for war with Iran, but for stronger international sanctions to change its behavior.

“Iran is escalating, I believe, its nuclear development. Iran is increasingly hostile,” she said in an interview with Fox News Sunday. “It’s a very dangerous situation.”

“If you project out a number of years, we are on a collision course. If we want to avoid it, we have to take action to avoid it,” she said.

MORE...

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/16/sen-feinstein-u-s-on-collision-course-with-iran/

[ixion]

1. The US is on a collision course with the entire planet

thanks to war hawks like Feinstein.

[Blue_In_AK]

3. It sure seems that way.

All we need is another war. Jeez....

[spooked911]

11. Indeed

it's insanity

[glinda]

30. +1

[Devil_Fish]

63. I was just thinking of a country that has thousands of nukes.

Perhaps U.S.A. should attack it....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................self.

[pbrower2a]

69. It's up to us

All the better to do everything possible to prevent the rise of another George Worthless Bush as President -- and to defeat as many would-be stooges of such a President in 2012. We must make 2010 appear as a Pyrrhic victory for the Hard Right... even if we are stuck with some incredible turkeys in the Senate until 2016.

[ixion]

86. They're not 'turkeys', they are war criminals

and every bit as guilty as any neocon.

[classysassy]

141. Our very own war criminals

Bush and Chaney are free to continue their evil ways and we accuse another country and their leader of war crimes.

[Amonester]

81. We are at war with the entire planet 24/365.

Soon, it will be too late to make peace.
Make no mistake, the planet will win this war.
Neither Venus or Mars are viable options.
Nor does the Moon.

[Supersedeas]

87. surely drone attacks are the answer to all of our problems

[24601]

89. If the issue is a nuclear Iran - who, besides Ron Paul, is saying

that it's acceptable? (Who in the WH or in Congress that is?)

[ixion]

90. I'm saying the US is at war with the world

and that all 3 branches of government are colluding achieve this Endless War. The US is the largest state-sponsor of terror in the world. We have no moral standing whatsoever to allow or deny other countries anything.

[24601]

91. One of the characteristics of terrorism is that attack victims suffer

the direct effects; however, the targets are not the victims but the surrounding populations. I disagree that the US intentionally targets non-combatants for the purpose of terrorizing populations. That's kool ade that I decline to drink.

If you believe that President Obama approves such missions, will you be voting for Romney or Cain, or whomever else has never voted to authorize military force?

Stalin was responsible for more deaths than Hitler. Are saying that neither Stalin nor Mao had standing to oppose Hitler?

[ixion]

92. I already said what I'm saying, and I stand by it...

and I'll thank you to stop reading in a bunch of rubbish.

As far as Kool-Aid® drinking goes, I'd check your glass, because the gibberish you're spouting is most definitely that of the True Believer.

[24601]

93. You certainly confirmed my guess that you would be unable to

address the issue other than to spout BS. I'm not drinking what you're offering - and to quote Churchill, "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons."

And my own comment - your support of our troops is truly touching.

[ixion]

95. lol... whatever, get on with your bad self

you're right on one point though, I don't support murderers and war criminals, or what you so deliriously call 'troops'

[24601]

96. The sad part is that I don't support the very small percentage

who violate the laws of war; however, you place of great soldiers, sailors, airmen & marines in the same bucket. And I bet you never served even one day.

[ixion]

97. No, I haven't... nor would I.

I don't place the same nobility on the military that you do, quite the opposite.

[24601]

98. You have confused the US with the UK. There is no nobility here.

Military service is limited to those who voluntarily accept the responsibility for the collective defense of the nation. That you self-disqualify is your decision.

[ronnie624]

102. Invading countries that have never attacked the U.S.

for the purpose of controlling their resources is not defending the nation. It's aggressive war, plain and simple. In fact, the U.S. military has never actually 'defended' this country in your entire lifetime,nor even the lifetimes of your parents and grandparents.

You spout nonsense.

[24601]

118. You mean like Germany in either WWI or WWII? Or just maybe

brother Bluto was right about the Germans attacking Pearl Harbor? And even if it was the Japanese, was Hawaii even in the United States at the time? Perhaps another criteria would be better - like attacking the US or US citizens or places like US Embassies who happen to not be in the country at the time?

What if Canada killed a sitting (or standing) President during a state visit? Probably not good enough for you. What if you found out that France was behind Bush stealing Florida in 2000? Would that do it?

[ronnie624]

123. I suggest you start reading. n/t

[24601]

126. I'll read any proof you post that Germany attacked the US. I'm not

the one that tried to establish the fiction that defending the nation requires someone to first attack the United States.

[ixion]

107. if it were about defending something, that I could see

but it has nothing to do with defense.

[Hugabear]

104. Nice straw man

"If you believe that President Obama approves such missions, will you be voting for Romney or Cain, or whomever else has never voted to authorize military force?"

What makes you think that Romney or Cain wouldn't continue to authorize military force, or even increase our use of force? When was the last time we had a rethug in office who wasn't a warhawk?

[occupyeverywhere]

137. Fallujah - we deliberately flattened an entire city

as revenge for the killing of four US civilian contractors. Looks like terrorism to me.

[roamer65]

135. Delete.

[Gregorian]

2. Wargasm

I hear the sound of the cash register chiming. War profiteers smiling.

[wordpix]

53. where is Swamp Rat? I foresee a great piece of art with that one

[Gregorian]

77. Not sure. It has been ages. I should photoshopping something.

In the meantime, if you're into this kind of music, this is the inspriation. You should google for the lyrics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbMyELNEDLs

[HereSince1628]

4. Another war...that won't go down well.

We've already figured out that Smedley had it exactly right!

[aquart]

5. ANOTHER MidEast War? Just say no.

Fucking things are addictive.

[99th_Monkey]

6. Just what we need, is a new ME war to put final nail in our own economy's coffin

and hopefully to serve as a rallying point to distract attention from the growing "OCCUPY" movements
around the world, but esp. in the USA. :sarcasm: :mad:

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. Works like a charm everytime! Well hopefully, not this time.

[Amonester]

82. For Fein$tein'$ hu$band & friend$, it $ure doe$.

On $hoRt teRm.

For the 99%, it's a long term agony.

[No Elephants]

109. Yet, DF seems to be sounding an alarm that it's time to stop "staying the course."

Stopped clock, yada, yada.

[unkachuck]

134. I wonder....

....how much her and her oldman stand to make off a war with Iran?

[newspeak]

117. if the MIC was really about protecting americans and security

then the government's focus would be on the welfare of american citizens and it's decaying infrastructure. However, if their main goal is to be the enforcers for global interest, then their intent would be in their actions.

We all must share in the economic downturn of our country, even though it was created by a bloated MIC, war profiteers, and mortgage fraud on WS. But, we must all share in the pain. The elderly, the sick, the young, the worker must share in the pain unless your a bloated profit making global corporation that have seen record breaking profits. It's not shared sacrifice, it's we sacrifice so that our tax money, instead of securing our well being, secures more corporate profits at the expense of human lives.

And if the government was so concerned about iran, some in the government wouldn't have outed a network that was monitoring iran. It's very convenient to out that network, if you have plans to create your own phony intel.

The stage was set for iran when little boot's proclaimed them part of the axis of evil. Iran saw how little boot's trumped up his charges against a defenseless iraq, so they voted in their own CONservative leader. Of course, I don't see banging the war drums over SA where fifteen of the nineteen terrorists were from, or that evil SA having one of the worst human rights record, or SA extremists crossing over into iraq and terrorizing their citizens. Poland has an evil dictator, we must free poland as Hitler says.

[liberal N proud]

7. Tells us how deep the military industrial complex has its claws

[DJ13]

8. The hawks are in need of a rplacement for Iraq

Got to keep their defense contractor campaign donors happy.

[alp227]

9. How is Feinstein progressive? She voted for ALL 3 free trade bills,

(http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=5024927&mesg_id=5025003)

also for the Iraq war resolution, and now supports the neocon war with Iran agenda? I say primary Feinstein in 2012!

[aggiesal]

13. Princess DiFi's Hubby is a war profiteer ...

No need being a progressive with
Hubby is lining his pockets.

[mod mom]

76. that about sums it up.

[SoapBox]

24. She has become more and more of a DINO...

We were just talking about her, being non-existent...but low and behold, here she is.

Time for her to be replaced with a TRUE Democrat / Liberal / Progressive...or better yet,
someone from (here's hoping that it really spawns a movement) OWS Party!

...oh if only!

[xxqqqzme]

88. Oh please, yes.

I wish there was another the CDP had primed to take her place. She should NOT be running again. She had no business running in '06. I think her husband has raked in a load of cash to out last them both. Retire already!

[No Elephants]

110. Not so easy. The Democratic Party does not believe in primarying neocon incumbent Dems.

Just ask the guys who tried to primary Lieberman and Lincoln (Blanche, that is).

[Le Taz Hot]

116. Not to metion that the

California Democratic Party is firmly entrenched in the Third Way.

[harun]

130. She is a DINO. Pro-war all the time, needs to go.

[spooked911]

10. more BS from the war party... fucking death-merchants

[expatriate2mex]

22. I have been wondering if people will get around to

recognizing WE are the war party. It gets flung at the repugs a lot, but we have definitely taken the title back.

I was in vietnam, protested us being the war party then and will do the same now. I don't think EITHER party should have that title. I have always been a liberal, that's the way we USED to believe.

[spooked911]

12. if an attack on Iran seems imminent, WE MUST ALL TAKE TO THE STREETS, everywhere

I'm happy about the Wall St protests, but the military industrial congressional complex is just as big a problem as Wall St.

[tama]

16. That's the reaction

they would be going for. Turning attention from Wall Street, people losing initiative and engaging and other reactionary and futile antiwar campaign.

In Seattle people won, WTO has been stalled ever since, and the alter-globalization movement was going strong. Then came 9/11 and all attention and energy went to antiwar protesting.

As the words of wisdom from the previous POTUS said: "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

[spooked911]

37. I disagree that a strong and sustained anti-war protest would be futile.

I would say NOT ENOUGH energy went into protesting against war-- and the 9/11 propaganda was KEY for sapping anti-war energy. Gotta get the terrists, dontcha know.

[expatriate2mex]

39. I'm with you and even less is going into it now.nt

[expatriate2mex]

23. Far as I amconcerned it applies to libya and africa also.nt

[wordpix]

55. "the military industrial congressional complex is just as big a problem as Wall St." +10000

And there you have the two biggest problems in the country

[woo me with science]

61. They are one and the same.

The banks profit massively from war, and they are behind the drive to grow the military industrial complex. They profit from the massive loans that are needed to fund our empire.

We need to take this very, very seriously. A major war may be the goal and trump card of the oligarchy.

The population is growing more restless and desperate, and the banks are feeling threatened. I think we will see a steady, purposeful escalation of tensions with Iran and a drumbeat to come together as Americans against a ginned up threat.

And what better way for the private banking cartel to remain indispensable and protected from serious reform, than to ensure an even more urgent need for the loans they provide in order to fund a necessary war?

[Amonester]

83. You mean, the loans they provide AFTER getting lower rates

loans from the Federal Reserve Bank, so they can give themselves a bigger bonus than last year's bonus.

[cpwm17]

14. Does Dianne Feinstein really believe what she's saying?

Or is she that stupid?

[Little Tich]

57. Yep. She bought the Iranian assassination plot

hook, line and sinker. Watch her on youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6h53vz1MFY

If she is able to show a shred of believable evidence, I might believe her, but mere name dropping doesn't prove anything.

[Knight Hawk]

58. Not stupid..................

greddy and fearfull she will lose her cushy lifestyle.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EvilMonsanto]

17. There is a bright side to this

This is not Afghanistan or Iraq
The people are more skeptical now

The mentality is completely different
This is a good thing

[pbrower2a]

71. Let the law take its course

Just let legal process run its course. Iran is a nasty place with a thug regime -- it executes people for homosexuality, persecutes people for religion, tolerates no dissent, and subjugates women. There's nothing wrong with Iran that a Libyan-style revolution wouldn't solve.

The plot sounds absurd, but so did the idea of some terrorists taking over jetliners and crashing them into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and probably the Capitol Building. President Obama isn't quite George Worthless Bush; the current President takes military and legal intelligence seriously and doesn't interfere with judicial process. Any Iranian agent who set out to arrange an assassination (that would have been a massacre) with the aid of drug traffickers who know how to do overkill and have shown their ability to do so deserves a nice long stay at the Federal Supermax.

This is not a time for war. Further military or diplomatic sanctions? Sure. Iran must import its gasoline, so just think of what happens when all the cars have to be parked for lack of fuel.

Patience and caution, folks.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pbrower2a]

72. Only one problem

The Iranian agent was caught plotting the demise of the ambassador of Saudi Arabia... Saudi Arabia is as hostile to Israel as is Iran.

[kestrel91316]

19. Well, Diane, that's what happens when you keep taking a stick to that

particular hornet's nest.

[on point]

20. Gin up he war machine, start the demonization engine, sucker the American people...

[midnight]

21. Congress needs to do their jobs and create jobs and not wars...

They want chaos to keep us without jobs...

[wordpix]

56. They think their job is creating wars, not jobs, and that's the problem

[bahrbearian]

25. Ever since Petraus started running the CIA

[lovuian]

27. word on the web is that Israel has been given the go ahead

to bomb Iran

the bunker busters Israel already has

WWIII in the works

Madness prevails and the New World Order is desperate
High gas prices on their way folks

[sarcasmo]

33. Plus another war would take OWS off the front pages.

[durablend]

129. Bingo!

I think we have a winnah!

[valerief]

28. Will this be another PNAC war? nt

[Zorro]

29. She is head of the Senate Intelligence Committee

She's in a position to know and understand the threat Iran poses to the US.

[EFerrari]

41. So, Senator Cruella has presided over a committee that allowed us to go to war

against the wrong country. She had no credibility whatsoever.

[Zorro]

45. Are you declaring that Iran is no threat to the US?

[EFerrari]

46. I was very clear: Feinstein has no cred at all on national security.

Thousands of American troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died because of her.

[Zorro]

47. Oh, you're quite clear

Iran is not escalating its nuclear development. Iran is not increasingly hostile. It’s not a very dangerous situation.

Because as the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee she has no credibility on national security issues.

Got it.

[walerosco]

48. What is so wrong with Iran escalating its nuclear development?

Military or civilian? We all know what happened to the last 2 US enemies who got caught without nuclear weapons. With people like Diane Feinstein leading intelligence comittees, they sure better sure up their defense with something other than conventional weapons.

Remember that the US has stated that nothing including nuclear strike at Iran has been taken off the table

[pbrower2a]

74. Ask the Russians

Countries that already have The Bomb don't want others to get it. The Soviet Union ensured that members of the Warsaw Pact did no research on atomic weapons... and Nicolae Ceausescu doomed himself by having "Agent 235" attempting to get nuclear materials. The US didn't want a country like Italy or South Korea developing The Bomb, and the Soviet Union didn't want a country like Poland, Cuba, or Romania getting one. That's why a sociopathic thug like Brezhnev was so willing to agree to an arms treaty; we begged him to do exactly what he wanted to do.

Nuclear power is not The Bomb. Many countries have nuclear power and no atom bomb program.

[NickB79]

67. Replace "Iran" with "Iraq" and you'd be making the same arguments

Made 10 years ago. And look where that got us.

[Arugula Latte]

94. We're the ones who are always bombing and invading.

We're the hostile country.

Fuck Feinstein and the lobbyists she rode in on.

[24601]

119. Sure, and Iran had nothing to do with the EFPs that killed US

troops. No, Iran is completely innocent - likely the EFPs were linked to the Easter Bunny. And Iran has nothing to do with funding/supporting Hizballah - that was more likely done by Israel's Mossad.

Sure - you got great insight into Iran. Not only that, they are absolutely secular and have outlawed any linkage between Islam and their government. Not only that, they respect gay rights and the next Supreme Leader will be a woman. And the IRGC Qods Force is a purely humanitarian organization.

Iran's so-called nuclear program is really a cover for feeding starving African children.

And of course you know that Jimmy Carter faked Iran holding any US hostages because he secretly wanted Ronald Reagan to be elected.

In fact, we should elevate Iran to a Permanent member of the UN Security Council and make an Iranian the US Secretary General for Life.

After all, Persians aren't Arab but pure blood Aryans - like you know who...

I'm with you on this one!

[Prometheus Bound]

70. Iran is no threat to the US. You know it, I know it and the US government knows it.

[Zorro]

99. Nope

You assert I know that Iran is no threat to the US?

Bzzzzt! Wrong. I happen to believe that Iran is a threat to US interests, as evidenced by their Mideast mischief-making over the past 30 years.

You assert the US government knows that Iran is no threat to the US?

Bzzzzt! Wrong. Apparently you aren't paying attention to what leading administration and congressional Democrats have been saying.

You assert you know Iran is no threat to the US?

Ding ding! Good for you. Your sources must be much better than the administration's sources.

However, I tend to believe that's not the case.

[ronnie624]

103. "Threatening U.S. interests"

is code for 'becoming a deterrent to U.S. aggression in the Middle East'.

It's interesting that you cite Iranian "mischief-making" in the Middle East, but make no mention of U.S. crimes there. It's instructive of how Americans can be bamboozled into believing nonsense, like their presumed exceptionalism.

[Zorro]

112. US exceptionalism is nonsense?

If that's what you truly believe, perhaps you could emigrate to Iran and give us a book report on how much better life is there.

[Nihil]

114. "you are either with us or with the terrorists"

If that's what you truly believe, perhaps you could emigrate to Free Republic.

[Zorro]

120. Belief in US exceptionalism is unwelcome on DU?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but many Democrats -- especially those that have actually ventured abroad -- recognize that the US is an exceptional country, despite all its faults. As do hundreds of thousands of foreign citizens who apply to immigrate here every year.

And many Democrats believe senior Democratic congresscritters and administration officials when they state that Iran is posing a serious threat.

But you and your comrade are most certainly welcome to migrate to peace-loving Iran. I'm sure you'll be warmly welcomed.

[Nihil]

124. Jingoism & fascism are.

And as for the "you and your comrade" crack ...

:eyes:

McCarthyism is most definitely unwelcome on DU.

[Zorro]

125. Do you believe US exceptionalism is nonsense?

As does your comrade?

[Nihil]

127. Well, Mr McCarthy, I have no intention to speak for anyone else during your witch hunt ...

... but yes, I believe that US exceptionalism is nonsense.

It is a very dangerous nonsense as it is supported by a
great number of jingoistic idiots who are verging on the
fascist in behaviour at times but it remains nonsense.

Americans are no better and no worse than anyone else.
They have the same mixture of fanatical right-wingers and
liberal left-wingers as any other arbitrary grouping of
the same number of people.

They have murderous sadists and self-sacrificing heroes.

They have exploitative capitalists and generous humanitarians.

The pretence that the basic nature of the human being changes
when an arbitrary nationality - a totally artificial construct,
unsupported by any scientific evidence - is draped over a
particular person is so utterly ridiculous that it provides
proof of the irrationality of those supporting its validity.

Bye bye Mr McCarthy.

[Zorro]

128. Witch hunt? Jingoism? McCarthy?

"...emigrate to Free Republic..."

"US exceptionalism is nonsense..supported by a great number of jingoistic idiots who are verging on the fascist in behaviour..."

Quite an impressive torrent of high wankerism triggered merely by the use of a perfectly acceptable word of the Queen's English.

But you've convinced me of the depth of your affection for the US, and how it's your firm belief there's no qualitative difference between life in the US and elsewhere. And those hundreds of thousands of immigration applicants obviously don't know there's no difference between lives in their homeland and the US.

And since there's no qualitative difference of life between nations, I look forward to future postings from you and your fellow traveler to Iran.

[ronnie624]

122. The next time the U.S. government decides to invade another country,

maybe you should go live there and give us a book report on American exceptionalism, as U.S. bombs are falling on your head.

[harun]

132. Define "U.S. Interests"

[Lydia Leftcoast]

75. Yes, as long as we stop poking them with sticks

Look at it from their point of view:

Iran is surrounded by U.S. troops on all sides:

West: Iraq
North: Uzbekistan
East: Afghanistan and now Pakistan
South: U.S. fleet in the Persian Gulf


Suppose a foreign power had troops in Canada and Mexico and warships in both the Atlantic and the Pacific within shooting distance of our shores. Wouldn't that make Americans nervous?

[Hugabear]

106. It's okay when we do it to other countries. US = GOOD.

We're the good guys. If we use our military to surround other countries, it's only because they're bad and need to be put in their place.

[Hugabear]

105. How exactly does Iran represent a direct threat to the US?

Iran has no ability to directly attack the US.

There wouldn't even be a quarrel with the US if we didn't insist on meddling in the region.

[Zorro]

121. Well let's see

Have you heard about the Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the US? Or do you demand a smoking hole on US territory as evidence?

Iran declared themselves a committed adversary to the US over 30 years ago. I find it quite disturbing that so many are quick to reflexively dismiss the statements of senior Democratic congressional and administration officials about a serious issue.

[ronnie624]

60. I want to see conclusive evidence.

Presumably, I'm not obligated to accept the government's word on any issue.

The U.S. is a far greater threat to Iran than vice versa.

[chill_wind]

31. My god, she hasn't stopped with this. Who needs Dick Cheney??

Truly scary that she has so much intel clout.

[sarcasmo]

32. Democratic politicians warning of war with Iran, means there will be war with Iran..

[RoccoR5955]

34. Why do you think they are pulling out of Iraq "early?"

So they can start the war with Iran. This is inevitable.

[area51]

64. I hope to hell you're wrong. n/t

[Utopian Leftist]

35. She is not a progressive by any means.

And IT IS TIME to primary any and every politician we can who is not a progressive.

The world is watching.

[totodeinhere]

42. So only progressives should be allowed to hold office? If we take that attitude we will permanently

be a minority party.

[BeHereNow]

36. Pssst DiFi, Corrupt politicians like you are on a collision course with

We, the people.
Californians have been on to your bullshit for years.
CAN'T wait to vote your ass out of office, you scumbag.
BHN

[BlueIris]

38. We cannot go to war with Iran. It will go nuclear and destroy the planet.

NO, Mr. President. You'll have to find a different way to keep your charade going.

[totodeinhere]

43. I doubt if it would go nuclear. What country with nuclear weapons would have a nuclear shootout with

us over this? Russia? No. China? No. And Iran's nuclear program isn't advanced enough to be any danger to us.

What would happen in a war with Iran could be catastrophic however, but not because of nuclear war. It could mean an economic collapse due to skyrocketing oil prices. Iran has already said that in the event of an attack that it would block oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. That would be a catastrophe.

[Knight Hawk]

54. Dont bet on ............

anything more creative than another war.The right wing evangelicals really want those Muslims...............

[PurityOfEssence]

40. And neocons cream their jeans

Frothing at the mouth and raging into oblivion, they just can't wait.

Diane is an accident of history: if Dan White hadn't gone off on his little killing spree, she'd never have been anything on the political scene.

She is now, and always has been, EXTREMELY moderate, as well as weak.

[totodeinhere]

44. Why do we need Neocons when we have so-called "moderate Democrats" like Feinstein? n/t

[expatriate2mex]

79. Lots of delusional people still blaming neocons for what some democrats do.

If anyone has bothered to notice WE are the war party.

[solarman350]

50. Dr. Carl Sagan: Nuclear Weapons-capable countries don't get invaded/attacked

The flip side of that may be:

Non-nuclear weapons-capable countries are vulnerable to invasion/external attack. Dr. Sagan's "truism" appears to be standing up to the test of time. So, that means that the U.S. and/or Israel (with its newly acquired bunker busters) may before Iran becomes nuclear weapon ready, attack it. Iraq is a great staging ground for U.S. to mount such an attack. We have four SUPER BASES all up and running there at the present time....the perfect war storm may be about to occur. You can be sure that the attack/invasion war plan has long ago, been drawn up/mapped out by both Israel and the U.S. The PNAC cretins/proponents are burrowed in over at the Pentagon, and just waiting for the "go" signal. President Obama would be assured of a second term if he orders up an attack on Iran. Looks like war to me. Hopefully, the OWS Movement will keep pushing for a paradigm change. That's all we have right now....

[lonestarnot]

51. Fucking A. What she wants to send the homeless to fight this one now?

[Knight Hawk]

52. How obvious can one be?

Softening the public up for an attack on Iran.Probably has been given the heads up that Israel is getting ready.Where is Dwight Eisenhauer?

[wordpix]

59. calm down: "the question is: do we want to go to war with Iran at this time? My judgment is no."

I do not see DiFi beating the war drum here. It's not clear what she IS for in the way of sanctions but it seems clear, IF YOU READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE, she does not want war.

[leveymg]

62. Time to primary DiFi.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Fool Count]

66. US is on "collision course" with Iran only if it wants to be.

And it looks like it (or at least those who rule it) really wants to be.

[coalition_unwilling]

68. Feinstein - member of the 1% (fifth richest Senator and married to

war pig\investment banker Richard Blum).

I'm going to start flagging any politico with a D after his or her name who is actually a 1%er.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

73. I suppose if you aim your car directly at something you can be said to

be on a "collision course" with it...

But seriously, invading Iran would be monumentally stupid, even by the generous standards of American foreign policy.

Iran has a continuous civilization going back almost 3000 years, the vast majority of the people are the same ethnicity and religion, and its armed forces are modern and well-equipped.

The people may not like their current government, although it's hard to say what percentage of the population actually supported last year's youth protests, but I suspect that they would all turn into ardent nationalists if their country was invaded.

The Nazis found this out when they invaded Russia. Even though Stalin had committed atrocities and even though some of the ethnic minorities initially welcomed the Nazis as liberators (until the Nazis blew that advantage by committing their own usual atrocities), the Russian people did NOT like the idea of foreigners taking over their country, and they fought like tigers to drive them out.

[coalition_unwilling]

108. Iran has some 1,000,000 men under arms and approx 100,000 in

its Revolutionary Guards. Iran will administer a serious ass-kicking if it is attacked.

[lutefisk]

78. I'm waiting for Colin Powell, I mean Hillary Clinton, to present the evidence at the UN!

I need to see the PowerPoint presentation before I can decide.:sarcasm:

My guess: IDF air strikes, Iran retaliates, and the US has "no choice" but to defend its ally.

[Nihil]

111. I fear that your "guess" is all too likely

> My guess: IDF air strikes, Iran retaliates, and the US has "no choice"
> but to defend its ally.

Why have so many people got such short memories?

Are they *really* so stupid that they can't hear the echoes of the run-up
to the Iraq attacks?

:-(

[LongTomH]

80. If the US is effing crazy enough to start a land war, there will be a revolt in our military!

Someone update me on just how many deployments our servicemen and women have had to Iraqnam and Quagmiristan? I'm surprised we haven't had revolts already!

Probably we'll just do this with air strikes. The born-again bombardiers coming out of the Air Force Academy will be happy to bomb the heathens back to the stone age!:grr:

[expatriate2mex]

113. Um, the military is freely joined, not draftees. Why would they revolt? nt

[Safetykitten]

84. Couple of days ago, I posted the "when will the war start?"..."That's absurd! Crazy talk!"

[bobthedrummer]

85. Senator Feinstein-you might like to read this active linked GD thread and get educated like WE are

Also DUers looking for some kind of "rationale" for this "plot".

"Hmmm, Iran, Central American drug cartels, Saudis, October...it reminds me of some hidden histories" (thread started 10-12-11)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2104315

RECALL SCOTT WALKER!

[workinclasszero]

100. We got all the damn $$$$ in the world for endless wars of empire

But not a cent for universal health care or social security, or medicare, or the environment, or green energy, or education, or debt relief for homeowners and students, or a massive jobs program to rebuild America etc!:nuke::grr:

[mvd]

101. Very frustrating indeed

But I think the Occupy movement has started to get to the politicians. Even Cantor is having an "income gap" speech. I hope I can join in a Philly occupation sometime. It is our big hope that our system will be changed so that the 1% doesn't mostly benefit, and the Occupy movement started it.

[closeupready]

115. When she and her husband divest of their MIC holdings and eliminate that conflict of interest,

then I might be inclined to listen to what she has to say.

[Critters2]

133. Why are we always on a collision course with someone?

Other countries don't seem to have this problem? Is Canada on a collision course with anyone? No, no it is not. :banghead:

[Nihil]

136. 'cos you've always got really shitty drivers behind the wheel?

(No matter how nicely they talked before they wheedled their way in there)
:shrug:

[Critters2]

138. That seems to be it. nt

[harun]

139. Stop censoring real post's DU !!!!!!!!

[AverageJoe90]

140. I don't like where the Iranians are headed, BUT...........

I AM getting sick and tired of all the damn fearmongering out there. Truth is, it's already been stated that no military action will be taken because of the plot.