Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

We're Not Going To Iran

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 10:51 PM
Original message
We're Not Going To Iran
Looking small and humbled on the big stage, trying to appear at once defiant and reasonable, President Bush yesterday addressed the United Nations General Assembly with few arrows in his quiver. Never before has the United States had so few allies, never before has an American president appeared before the world body so utterly bereft of credibility. The sprawling wreckage of American foreign policy was figuratively strewn across the room as Bush spoke. And when he addressed the central diplomatic question of the daynamely, what to do about Irans quest for nuclear technology and its likely plans to build a bombthe president appeared naked and unarmed.

After three years of bluster, after three years of menacing Iran with military options ever on the table, after three long years of declaring forcefully that Iran will never gain access to nuclear technology, the presidents stunningly mild-mannered comments on the topic yesterdaywere working toward a diplomatic solution to this crisismay be a sign that the corner has been turned on Iran. It may be a sign that once and for all that the realists have won, that the international community has triumphed, that the opposition of Russia and China to sanctions on Iran has been victorious, and that Western Europes far more level-headed approach to Iran has prevailed.

For the neoconservatives, David FrumMr. Axis of Evilwrote soon after Bushs speech: Make no mistake: boring as it was, the president's speech to the U.N. today was one of the most important of his presidency. It marks the final fizzling out of his Iran policy of the past three years. Indeed.

Tom Paine
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CHIMO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. UN General Assembly Hears Bush, Ahmadinejad Trade Criticism
UN General Assembly Hears Bush, Ahmadinejad Trade Criticism

AMY GOODMAN: Its good to have you with us. Can you talk about what President Ahmadinejad and President Bush -- the major conflict going on, expressed on the world stage at the UN?


That would be reflected in the new stories that have come out in the last couple of days in Time magazine and elsewhere, indicating that there have in fact been orders preparing to deploy U.S. Navy warships towards Iran with the goal being not necessarily a direct military strike, but rather a naval blockade of Iranian oil ports, which, of course, constitute an act of war. In that situation, the danger, of course, is that if there was, for example, imagine, a week or so of a U.S. blockade of Irans ports, Iran knows, its government and its people know, that that's an act of war. Most Americans don't know that a blockade is considered an act of war. And if Iran responded militarily, which unfortunately would be their right under Article 51 of the UN Charter calling for self-defense rights, the Bush administration would very likely call that an unprovoked attack on peaceful U.S. ships and would respond militarily, claiming to be responding in self-defense. That's, I think, a very serious danger that we face right now. And seeing Bush at the United Nations choosing not to use that rostrum as a podium for escalating threats, direct threats, against Iran, it makes the danger of a unilateral military move right now all the greater.

Frigate to patrol in Mideast

Canadian warship to do six-month tour in tense region

Matches up pretty nicely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Iran will stir things up in Iraq, on the q.t.
Meanwhile bleating loudly to the UN, stalling, etc. They have figured out how the game is played, I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. We Are Conducting Military Operations Inside Iran Right Now... /

Just now on CNN, Air Force Col. Sam Gardiner (Ret.) said, “We are conducting military operations inside Iran right now. The evidence is overwhelming.”

Gardiner, who taught at the U.S. Army’s National War College, has previously suggested that U.S. forces were already on the ground in Iran. Today he added several additional new points:

1) The House Committee on Emerging Threats recently called on State and Defense Department officials to testify on whether U.S. forces were in Iran. The officials didn’t come to the hearing.

2) “We have learned from Time magazine today that some U.S. naval forces had been alerted for deployment. That is a major step.”

3) “The plan has gone to the White House. That’s not normal planning. When the plan goes to the White House, that means we’ve gone to a different state.”

Watch it:
transcript here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 05:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Hard to know what's posturing, and what's real. No troops, no $$
to go into a HUGE and difficult place like Iran and try to take them over or whatever the plan is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Yeah, don't doubt it.
Been going on for some time I think. That is a different thing altogether from a concerted bombing attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cliss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. The US has a rather big toolbox.
I'd say the Tools of the Trade are a very wide range of options. You can -

threaten a country, bang on the war drums 24/7
infiltrate a country, fix their elections
infiltrate, just for the hell of it, cause unrest
install your own dictator, hope for the best
torture people
get up in front of the UN make lots of speeches
bribe people
bribe & kill people
bribe, kill & threaten people, make alliances with tribal leaders
hold out foreign aid as a carrot
withdraw foreign aid as a stick
have the World Bank give loans, use them as a bludgeon against country

The list goes on and on.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-21-06 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. It's good to have choices I suppose.
This one is fairly good on why we won't attack Iran too:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov 15th 2019, 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC