Bush calls Iran a 'grave threat'

[doublethink]

WASHINGTON -- President Bush declared Friday that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose "a grave threat to the security of the world" as he tried to rally support from other major powers for U.N. Security Council action unless a defiant Tehran abandons any aspirations for nuclear weapons.

In using the phrase "grave threat," Bush invoked the same language he used before launching the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and he highlighted in particular the danger to Israel. But during a White House appearance with visiting German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Bush stressed that he hopes to forge a "common consensus" with other world leaders for a diplomatic resolution of the escalating confrontation with Iran. -snip-
http://www.tdn.com/articles/2006/01/14/nation_world/news02.txt

Now my mini rant, why can't Bush get original speech-writers on shit like this? They are using the same f .... ing blueprints on this shit. I knew the jig was up when I read this next article a week ago and Condi Rice used the 'buzz words' A time of our choosing .. the article also stated ....

"Rice would not lay out a timeline for action, saying the administration wants to get as large a vote as possible from the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors to refer the matter to the Security Council. But she asserted that the Bush administration has worked hard in the past year to build a consensus for action, first by settling differences with European allies over the best diplomatic approach and then by demonstrating that the Iranians are not serious about the talks.-snip'

by demonstrating the Iranians are not serious about the talks, sounds suspiciously close to actively 'fixing the intelligence around the policy' to me (see DSM) Tell me I'm wrong? Any other 'buzz words' you guys can think of we can expect to hear in the near future from these idiots? Peace.

oh that last Rice article here ..... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/05/AR2006010502082_pf.html

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. Upwards of 100,000 Iraqis have proven Amerika is a

grave threat.... just check their graves iffin you don't believe the "ttt", tough tawkin texan.

[CrispyQ]

6. You can't have nukes, but we can.

Only we can be trusted with nukes. :banghead:

[HysteryDiagnosis]

8. The only thing we can be trusted with is that we can always

justify whatever "preemptive military action" we take, no matter the loss, no matter the cost, in treasure, morality, rightousness, or diplomatic subversion.

[doublethink]

19. And the USA is the only ......

country in the history of the world to have ever used them. And threatens to use them again. :crazy:

[noahmijo]

2. With what army bitch?

Let's see what are you gonna do? Pull the already exhausted troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and have them fit yet another nation full of people who are simply pissed that their homes and families are now just scattered pieces of rock and flesh?

Oh you're gonna build another "grand" "mother of all coalitions" like you did last time??

Asshole YOU'RE the fucking grave threat to America.



PS Iran's citizens despise DESPISE the ruling mullahs. We here also despise our government. But you see if a bunch of foreigners came parachuting into our backyards after having bombed the living shit out of our homes we'd fight them-not because we're loyal to Bush or our country-but because we hate violent tresspassers who blow up the land we live on.

Think about it morons.....

[doublethink]

7. And therein lies the problem .....

they don't think ...... they just 'stay the course' whatever the f .... that was ever supposed to mean. Peace.

[noahmijo]

12. Well it'd be different if Iran sent planes over and bombed a city

or something like that. That would be an act of war. Not that it justifies killing their civilians but you get my drift.

Point is name once in history where the nation that started the war or the aggressor came out as the winner when the smoke finally cleared.

Did it work for Rome? did it work for Germany? did it work for Japan? did it work for Russia?

Did it ever work for us?

[doublethink]

15. You are correct.

Did it work for Rome? No.
Did it work for Germany? No.
Did it work for Russia? No.
Did it ever work for us? No.

Any lurking freepers .... take note. Peace.

[Terran1212]

38. Iran would make a living hell in Iraq for the USA

They have leverage in the form of hundreds of thousands of militia members in Iraq who could increase the insurgency's size by 20 times overnight if they are attacked by Israel or the USA.

[doublethink]

85. Could this be why FINALLY ......

our troops are getting the body armor they've been asking for in Iraq the last couple of years? :shrug:

'He said the Army has finished determining the specifications for the plates and hopes to begin production soon that 230,000 sets can be provided this year.'

'The Marine Corps said that since June it has shipped to Iraq 9,000 sets of side plates and that a total of 28,000 will be in the combat zone by April.'

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1496504

note: How about the 'permanent military bases (fortresses) in Iraq being built. Bet they are done just in time for this aggression against Iran. Peace.

[AngryAmish]

71. Umm, yes aggressors often win

(I agree with you US v. Iran)

The Punic wars? Carthage no longer exists.

Rome? Gaul was a province for 300+ years.

How did the Mongols do?

How did the Moguls do?

What about the Bantu migration?

on edit: How did Europeans do in North America?

[doublethink]

77. So how many Empires still exist today?

Or those seeking 'empire' ..... as seems to be the U.S. policy?

[noahmijo]

78. That's my point

Short term the aggressors may win but think long term.......but you have a point with the Euros coming to America overtaking the Native Americans but at the same time alot of intertwined events led to the ultimate take-over of America by European settlers.

But you get the point thus far no nation seeking an outright empire via invasion of an established sovereign nation has in the long run succeeded.

[AngryAmish]

82. Russia, China, US

Poland, France, Germany, United Kingdom

All these are confederations of different peoples who once considered themselves to be independent. I suppose one could throw Mexico, Brazil, Viet Nam, Cambodia, OMG India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran. Many more (I have ignored all of Africa but mind you most nations contain ethnic groups that used to be independent at some time.

By your definitions "the long run" may be hundreds or thousands of years. I think if a conquering people subjugate another population than that would be successful as empires go (morality aside).

I think it would be foolish not to call Rome successful.

[sarcasmo]

93. Twelve more years of Republican rule America will fall like Rome.

[win_in_06]

22. Maybe he'd use the Nuclear Option

the real one

[qanda]

75. It's getting a little drafty in here

Don't you think?

[noahmijo]

79. I'm a 24 year old male in decent shape

Hmmm............maybe it's time I moved to Mexico for an extended vacation?

[qanda]

80. Yeah, vacation sounds nice for someone your age

[doublethink]

86. Yea go for it .....

but in the meantime sing this song ... http://nonamesoldier.com. "No Blood For Oil" Peace. :)

[seemslikeadream]

3. They must be running out of graves in Iraq

No Man Can Find The War

Photographs of guns and flame
Scarlet skull and distant game
Bayonet and jungle grin
Nightmares dreamed by bleeding men
Lookouts tremble on the shore
But no man can find the war

Tape recorders echo scream
Orders fly like bullet stream
Drums and cannons laugh aloud
Whistles come from ashen shroud
Leaders damn the world and roar
But no man can find the war

Is the war across the sea?
Is the war behind the sky?
Have you each and all gone blind:
Is the war inside your mind?

Humans weep at human death
All the talkers lose their breath
Movies paint a chaos tale
Singers see and poets wail
All the world kows the score
But no man can find the war

--tim buckley

[theHandpuppet]

50. White gloves with camo and ball caps?

Um... since when was this dress uniform for our military?

[Smarmie Doofus]

4. Completely ' off the wall'( yet utterly reasonable) idea:

If Iran is a grave threat to Israel, why doesn't Bush sponsor negotiations between those two countries as part of the effort... that he presumably (?) is making.... to achieve a lasting regional peace?

[doublethink]

9. Not off the wall at all ......

your saying two nations actually 'talking to one another' .... has that ever been tried before? :sarcasm: I'm sorry but your making too much sense for bizzaro bushko world. Peace. :)

[leeroysphitz]

58. Exactly, the definition of a "diplomatic solution"....

Two sides engaging in good faith discussions to resolve differences and if ANYONE in the M$M had the sense or balls or honesty to point that out the sheeple might not be so quick to swallow this next military "adventure" quite so readily.

[Smarmie Doofus]

65. I'm not so sure we have to rely on MSM....

Aren't there any DEMS in the senate bold enough to suggest the obvious? This alone would guarantee at least a minimal level of MSM attention to the idea.

Trouble is, everyone involved... the Mullahs... Likudniks.... BushCo... all have a hidden agenda which involves in part keeping this deadly dynamic going by perpetually stirring the pot. What better way to call their bluff than by proposing face to face talks to defuse the situation.

Kennedy or Dean might have the nerve to call for it. A couple others. Quite a few in the House also, but the media has imposed a functional blackout ( no pun intended) on them and it really doesn't matter what they say. But Kennedy or Dean would be hard to ignore.

[leeroysphitz]

67. I'll buy that but I think it's safe for us to assume

that Kennedy and others KNOW they have the power to draw attention to the smoke and mirrors of the Bush* admin's foreign policy. So the question I'll ask is why the continued silence? I can't believe Ted Kennedy is afraid of smear tactic reprisals as he's successfully weathered, for decades, nearly constant smear campaigns from his opponents.

[fasttense]

5. Oh crap, here we go again.n/t

[fortyfeetunder]

25. Smells like "preemptive strike"

This has the makings to another strike on another country that hasn't done anything to us lately.

[kurth]

10. Next headline: "Supreme Court Says 2002 War Authorization Applies to Iran"

[doublethink]

14. With Alito's nomination .......

that about sums it up ..... here's another article dealing with the Supreme Court you might want to check out referring to The “unitary executive” theory this guy and a few others on the court spew .....

"The “unitary executive” applies as well to the President’s authority to interpret laws as he sees fit, especially in areas of national security where right-wing lawyers argue that the commander-in-chief powers are “plenary,” which means “absolute, unqualified.”-snip-

recommended reading : http://www.baltimorechronicle.com/2006/011306Parry.shtml Peace.

[kurth]

16. Excellent article. Thanks!

[doublethink]

49. No problem.....

your welcome! :)

[CoffeeCat]

11. Just remember Junior...

...when you point your finger at Iran, you have three pointing back at yourself.

Assjack.

[rucky]

13. They're just replaying his Iraq speeches

and dubbing in "Iran"

[doublethink]

17. Right click 'start'

click on 'search'
Type in 'Iraq'
Open available files .....

Highlight 'Iraq'
Select 'All'
Hit Delete ......
Replace with 'Iran'

Close all files.

[madrchsod]

18. the guys running iran are

playing a game of chicken with the rest of the world. in different times this would not have been a huge problem but with bush it is. the un is not going to go along with any military action so he will have to start this one just like he did in iraq.

[MadHound]

28. Gee, isn't that what they said about Saddam? It was his fault,

He was playing chicken, etc. etc. How about the US exercise some restraint this time around, and not invade a country simply because *gasp* their exercising their sovereign rights.

[doublethink]

29. Yea same thing different day

errrrrrr or Country, enemy, whatever Bush rambles on about.

"America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully. We believe in the mission of the United Nations." -snip-

... "the United States and our allies have worked within the Security Council to enforce that council's longstanding demands. Yet some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced that they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq. These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it." -snip-

"The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours." -snip-

Those quotes were taken from Bush's speech 48 hours before he invaded Iraq. Like a previous poster said just replace the 'q' with 'n' and here we go again.

for history's sake link here .... http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/17/sprj.irq.bush.transcript/

My gawd, after re-reading that article myself it's amazing the lies, deception on and on looking back. When Bush mentions something about the 'Tyrant' is gone, torture chambers, and what-not .... the pictures of Abu Ghrub etc.. etc... come to mind. Evil is as Evil does. Peace.

[ladjf]

34. I don't understand why the president of Iran keeps saying that

Israel should be wiped off of the map. Obviously, he has neither the intention or military wherewithal to accomplish that wish. His actions make no sense. Is he being bought by the U.S. to help provoke a war? Why would he do that? Is he trying to appeal to his political base?

He seems to be inviting an attack.

[doublethink]

37. He sure as hell ain't helping the situation is he?

Gawddddd give the Bush regime the press to further their PNAC plans and just let them run with it. I think they should just both grow up or let Adults take their positions of power. What do you think? Peace. :)

[ladjf]

43. You know, if Saddam had had at least a half of a brain, he

could have avoided the invasion. Just a soon as Bush made it clear that he was going to invade because of the WMD threat, Saddam should have immediately opened up Iraq to any and all inspectors. He eventually did do that but by that time is was too late. Bush kicked the inspectors out and invaded.

The Iranian President is either crazy or has some personal reason for wanting the U.S. and Britain to bomb his country.

[doublethink]

47. I see your familiar with PNAC by your post #31 on this thread.

See my response there. I'm not too sure Saddam could have avoided an invasion no matter what he did. Cheney's secret 'energy task force' which I doubt we will ever see the documents for in public, in the long term called for building an Oil pipeline through Afghanistan as a start. Then we have this ....

"1. In 1992, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney had a strategy report drafted for the Department of Defense, written by Paul Wolfowitz, then Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy. In it, the U.S. government was urged, as the world's sole remaining Superpower, to move aggressively and militarily around the globe. The report called for pre-emptive attacks and ad hoc coalitions, but said that the U.S. should be ready to act alone when "collective action cannot be orchestrated." The central strategy was to "establish and protect a new order" that accounts "sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership," while at the same time maintaining a military dominance capable of "deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role." Wolfowitz outlined plans for military intervention in Iraq as an action necessary to assure "access to vital raw material, primarily Persian Gulf oil" and to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and threats from terrorism. -snip-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/05/27_pnac.html

I'm just saying this stuff goes way back, even to the Reagan days, before the above article. Iran is just the next thing to 'staying the course' on the agenda. The rest is just a smokescreeen. Oh and look for the 'buzz words' ad hoc coalitions too in the coming days. I don't really know the Iranian's Presidents motivations on all this, bravado, 73 virgins in his life after? Makes as much sense as the Rapture and the Right Wing Fundel- 'mentalists' wanting to see Armageddon. :crazy: Peace. :)

[ladjf]

52. You are correct about the war intentions of the PNAC.

The only question in my mind about is that if there was absolutely proven that Saddam in no was a threat to anyone, Bush would have had a harder time getting approval from Congress and the American people.

[doublethink]

53. In a nut-shell ....

"Listen to the words of Hitler's right-hand man, Reich-Marshal Hermann Goering. In a cell at Nuremberg, Goering confided to an army psychologist: "Naturally, the common people don't want war, but ... the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism. ... It works the same in every country." -snip-
Read this article about 'Beware of history: Most tyrants started out as 'men of the people'
http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/stories/20050927/opinion/20745.shtml

Sound familiar? Bush rules through fear and not facts, or the truth. Congress was mis-lead by outright 'faulty intelligence' on Saddam's WMD's..... (See Downing Street Minutes, or Memos if you will on the parts where the intelligence was fixed around the policy to be achieved.) and Congress did not see the same intelligence as Bush did prior to the War. If they were privy to that, then 911 could have been prevented when his daily briefing stated August 6, 2001 - CIA PDB memo titled "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" .......

Let me ask you ..... how many Americans know about these coming events of March 2006?

1. March 20, Iranian Oil Bourse becomes reality (in effect declaring economic war on the U.S.) If Oil is traded in Euros instead of Dollars (which is the standard) the Dollar will come under so much pressure it could collapse and make the 'Great Depression' look like a walk in the park. The U.S. Government/U.S. Oil Company's beyond their greed know this and are taking their own shots over the bow financially to fire back pre-emotively before the actual bombing starts.
2. March 23, M-3 U.S. Money Supply Hidden from the public. ( a precedent since records kept in 1971) which will among other things, artificially hold up the stock market from collapsing by pumping who knows how many bills into the system. But you can't do this indefinitely and the financial world investors know this ... hence they are buying 'Gold' in droves. It hit a 25 year high like 2 days ago. Hint: Buy Gold :)
3. March 28 New Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke will hold his first meeting as Chairman. (this guy is a nut case)
4. March 2006 U.S Govt. reaches it‘s debt. limit. - Treasury Dept. Secretary John W. Snow said that “If the department were to carry out various accounting maneuvers -- as it has done in the past to avoid breaching the limit -- that would free up finances and allow the government to keep paying its bills "no longer than mid-March," Snow said that the United States could be unable to pay its bills in early 2006 unless Congress raises the government's borrowing authority, which is now capped at $8.18 trillion. "I am writing to request that Congress raise the statutory debt limit as soon as possible."

My point here is there are other things going on leading up to this 'War' with Iran we won't hear a word about in the MSM. The above is the tip of the iceberg not taking into account what China, Russia, Europe, and the rest of the World is skittering about hedging their bets on. Oh and prior to the Iraqi invasion 2003 Saddam started selling Oil in 'Euros' too and did quite well for himself and his Country ... but Iran is taking it a step further and starting their own Bourse.

Iranian Nuclear Weapons? 25% of a problem, 75% smokescreen. Peace.

[ladjf]

57. Good piece of analysis. Thanks.

[doublethink]

69. Your welcome.

Good conversation with you, nothing is cut in stone. Lot of speculation. Keep the faith, never give up, never surrender! Peace. :)

[ladjf]

70. I will keep an eye out for your post.

[doublethink]

74. Well I come and go ....

but am taking a bit more time off from work through 'March' to do more Activism. I think this year could see a lot of change. Hopefully for the better. Come what may Peace will prevail someday. :hug:

[ladjf]

94. Peace may prevail someday. But, I believe that major chaos

will precede that peace.

ladjf

[AngryAmish]

72. Iranian President is religiously deluded

So is Bush.

The thing about Iran is the president runs nothing. The council of religious elders runs the show. The game they are playing (I think) is to make this guy look nuts, back everyone off by deposing him, and hopefully buy themselves enough time to get some nukes. The gov't/religious authorities are very unpopular in Iran but once they get nukes then they can do whatever they want in the country.

Plus, realize the Iranians consider themselves the natural hegemon of the region (because they are Persians have have usually ruled the region for thousands of years. A nuke allows them to resume (to them) their natural and proper role. They are amazingly bigoted (and so are their neighbors).

edited for spulling

[Deja Q]

20. How about the terrorists getting into India?

And those within who'll steal confidential information and sell it on the black market dirt cheap, which is great for real terrorists... (the game works both ways and for every one person caught, I bet there are several more not caught...)

Iran is a real threat, but other issues of equal merit (if not more) are not given much of any news.

[doublethink]

81. I stumbled upon an Op Ed piece late last night ......

sorry I don't have the link right now but ..... it basically speculated that the recent air strikes to get Ayman al-Zawahiri (you know the #2 man of Al Queda who has rising from the dead like 10 times more then Christ) was really a first strike against Pakistan! That turned my head. I said :wtf: would Bush be striking out at Pakistan for? His Dictator friend Musharraf? Hey they already have Nuclear Weapons, don't go there. Then I read that Musharraf himself said right after Iraq was invaded that 'his country would be next' again I said :wtf: ...... they have no oil ...... but then I learned that his Military (along with his population) is comprised of overwhelming religious fundamentalists not sympathetic to Bush's conquests in their neighboring states. The population attitude I knew, but the Military ....... well anyway all speculation aside ..... Pakistan could be the fanatical muslim hope in actually getting a few Nukes ... quicker than any Iranian research could achieve. An attack on Iran could mean a Military Coup taking place in Pakistan. Which could mean the radical Islamic fundamentalists getting their Nukes anyway. Point is an attack on Iran will unleash the gates of hell over there with so many unknown circumstances. And yet Bush will say 'freedom and democracy' is on the march. And the American people will buy it. :crazy: Peace.

note: since when do we have the right to go into Pakistan and invade their 'airspace'? If that was the case all along then why did the Bush regime make the excuse not to go after Osoma Bin Laden (where they said he was) because of Pakistan's sovereignty?

[Contrary1]

21. Just a matter of time

before one of the asshats slips up and uses the word "imminent".

Brace yourselves.

[doublethink]

48. Buzz Word ......

'Imminent' ..... check, I put it on the list. If you think of any more put them in this thread. Peace. :)

[no_hypocrisy]

23. "Grave threat" literally. This is going to be a mistake of

historical proportion. A miscalculation of risk and death of this magnitude has not been encountered since Austria went after Serbia after Archduke Franz Joseph was assassinated in Bosnia.

[spanone]

24. Hey Mr. Boosh, Shut Up. Lying bastard.

[Deja Q]

73. Why is * lying? I hate to say this, but with the EU and Russia worried,

I dare say Iran is a genuine threat. And even though *'s talk is more or less the typical scripted stuff, it doesn't mean he's wrong. (Iraq was a farce and a lie, but Iran is quite another issue and damn right that I'm worried too.)

I've yet to hear anything from * that is "unscripted", but the fact other countries are voicing concerns should have us re-evaluate our beliefs regarding Iran and look at all available public information. Particularly Russia, for reasons I shall now adumbrate:

I'm curious why Russia, which until very recently (late 2005!!!) has been happily HELPING Iran, has done a 180 a couple weeks ago and has voiced concern as well. (Maybe because Russia has readily helped Iran all these years; including AFTER 2001 which means Russia has been working with a terrorist nation? And Russia isn't keen on being a target - and I can't blame them...) But why make the sales and then kiss-up?

Emphasis added. Maybe that should have been the first paragraph...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=russia+iran&btnG=Google+Search - has a truckload of results; CNN (2002 article), CNS and globalsecurity.org caught my eye. Read all the page 1 results and convince me that ALL the articles are right-wing plants. (newsmax.com is obvious; CNN (2002) may or may not be... but there's far more that simply can't be discounted.)

Forgive me, and there's plenty I will never agree with * about, but I will not automatically shrug something off. Especially when given the above. Iran is a concern; Russia's big 180 on the issue seems a bit disingenuous to me; and with the EU in a concerned tizzy over Iran, I think something big is afoot.

[LiberalEsto]

26. Bush is a grave threat

to peace, democracy, freedom and so much more.

[juliana24]

59. So true!

[SammyWinstonJack]

27. Who believes this LIAR anymore? HE'S THE GRAVE THREAT

to the security of the World.

[tatertop]

30. At least he is not calling it a grave and growing threat

When he starts calling it that, he means business.

[doublethink]

36. See post #21.

the 'buzz words' are starting to emanate into their language. sigh ..... Peace.

[tatertop]

40. same plan, same script

I am still hoping for a different outcome.

[doublethink]

42. Me too........

Never give up, never surrender !!!!!!!!! Ever! Peace. :)

[ladjf]

31. I'd like to believe that the administration is too smart to start

another war while the other ones are still going on. But, one should never overestimate the intelligence of the PNAC'ers. I'm beginning to believe that they actually believe some of the doomsday Armageddon crap and are hell bent on stealing as much as possible before that happens.

[doublethink]

41. I'm beginning to understand it when Bush says ....

'Stay the Course'
PNAC Plans = Stay the Course. Come hell or high water. Some call it Armageddon, some call it Insanity. I really doubt God would really approve of either. Peace. :)

[malaise]

32. Bush is the gravest threat to the planet

time for th rest of the planet on demand sanctions.

[ladjf]

35. If Bush declares martial law in 2008, other national forces will

step in to unseat him and it won't be pretty or bloodless. The rest of the world is not going to put up with his boorishness forever.

[MellowOne]

33. Like the little boy crying "wolf"

When do we know it's for real!

[Jara sang]

39. Bush is a grave threat

...to peace and understanding in the world.

[lpbk2713]

44. Tick ... tick ... tick ...tick.

How much longer before BushCo and all the co-conspirators think it 's time for a "pre-emptive" invasion?


Remember there's three years left to this badministration. They will do whatever they want. They have always acted like they have to answer to no one.

[RC]

46. And what about the sunset clauses set for 2009/2010?

I don't think the result of that will be very pretty.

[doublethink]

88. Well March of this year looks pretty interesting ....

see post #53 in this thread. Could be April, I just heard John Mc Cain this morning say 'Iran could have the Nuclear Bomb in 6 months'. (yea right) Anyway he said it on one of the Sunday morning news programs. We will hear more propaganda soon I am sure. Maybe Jan 31 Bushco will let us know more on the imminent threat Iran is during his State of the Union Address. Ohhhhh I'm :scared: Not. Peace. :)

[spanone]

45. As if Bush* knew something???? Dumber than a bag of hammers.

[graywarrior]

51. He's an aggressive cancerous tumor that won't go away

Three more years. God help planet earth. In fact, God help the solar system.

[doublethink]

89. Gawwwwwwd let's just try to get through this year okay

......... to think he could have power for 3 more years makes me ill. sheesh. Peace.

[Rex]

54. Here we go...

Buckle up.

[dogday]

55. Bush called Iraq "A Grave Threat"

here we go again folks.....

[leeroysphitz]

56. "A grave threat", "A diplomatic resolution "...

Hmm... Where have we heard these phrases before?

[wadestock]

60. NUCLEAR PARANOIA of REAGANITES

Reagan started it.
Everyone else since then marches on in brain dead single file.

[doublethink]

90. Reagan always has been my arch enemy.....

Did you ever read the book back then called 'The Fate of The Earth' by Jonathan Schell, that did it for me. Peace. :)

[DanCa]

61. when he says "grave and immenient" I think it's time to worry.

[Ksec]

62. Here we go again.

This mthrfr wont stop until someone throws his ass in prison. Hes Crazy. Really hes Nuts!!

[NNN0LHI]

63. I hope he didn't say there were no war plans on his desk n/t

[Gloria]

64. Clark: you'll see the "appearance of diplomacy"---but, we've

NEVER talked directly to them. Before you bomb someone, you should at least talk to them.

As stated on FAUX recently.

He also says Syria and Iran should be brought into talks,along with other countries in the region, to talk about Iraq and the whole Middle East.

That's what sane people would do. But Bushco isn't sane. Who will call them on this? Democrats apparently don't listen to Clark....

[Smarmie Doofus]

66. Clark is right but apparently is not being heard.

A senate DEM like Kennedy or Feingold might be harder to ignore . Or our DNC chairman.

There's also a role here for the international community. Seems like a lot of the steam can be taken out of this push toward the brink by proposing regional talks now. Bush et al will have to explain why they won't talk.

If it achieves nothing else, it will call BushCo's bluff.

[doublethink]

84. Both Clarks.

the General, and Richard (author, 'Against All Enemies' 2004) Peace :)

[Cleita]

68. This is the same BS that they propagandized to go into Iraq, except that

this time they are going to skip going to Congress and the UN. Hey they got away with it back then, why not now?

I think our military has to say NO!

[doublethink]

92. I've been wondering if because of a perceived need to ...

'surprise attack' if Bushco will just do it and then all of a sudden one night we will have 'our local programing interrupted to bring you this special bulletin from the President of The United States' come on the air ...... I would hope to think he would at least have the humanity to come out and tell the Iranians, Russians, Civilians working at these Nuclear Plants ... or in the area to Get Out Of The Way. But I doubt it. He and his regime is Evil to the core. Also did you see how the 'doomsday line of command' in the Pentagon was shaken up recently? Intelligence 'Loyalists' to Cheney and Rumsfield have moved up above any Military position ..... go here ...

http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkyNSZmZ2JlbDdmN3ZxZWVFRXl5Njg0NzI4OSZ5cmlyeTdmNzE3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTU=

Peace. :)

[Eurobabe]

76. here we go!

more dead kids, and more dead muslims. Ugh.

[Imagevision]

83. Bush will use anything to draw away heat from indictments, investigations

that will be coming down in upcoming weeks/months -- while Rove continues to be investigated further by Fitzgerald.

[Swamp Rat]

87. That's because Bush keeps calling various countries a "grave threat,"

then attacks them or does nasty things to their respective leadership.



In the End, the Germans had no allies except those who fell with them... and nor shall we.

[bridgit]

91. yeah, accent on the "grave"...