Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NRO neocons are sweating bullets over the election and prospects for war

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 » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:01 AM
Original message
NRO neocons are sweating bullets over the election and prospects for war
:rofl:

(It's hard not to laugh at their misery, but the truth is, if the Repubs do manage to keep control of Congress, we won't be laughing.)

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGRmZWY4ODBmZTQ5ZTBlYmNjMDJiNWY5MWVmN2UxMzI=


Lost Luxury <Stanley Kurtz>

We don’t have the luxury of sitting on our hands in the next election. We don’t have the luxury of punishing slack Republican legislators on the theory that this will somehow produce a tougher conservative line in 2008. We don’t have the luxury of all this because a nuclear Iran is bearing down on the United States, while our country stands paralyzed by its own divisions. You can blame Iraq if you like. I blame the Democrats’ Vietnam syndrome. But no matter who you blame, the sad fact of the matter is, the president’s hands are tied. The president cannot confront Iran with a credible threat of force, much less actually strike it, without greater domestic support.

A slight Republican win in the next election, or even a draw, would greatly strengthen the president’s hands in dealing with Iran. Not only would a successful election change the dynamics of our international confrontation, a Republican-controlled congress would allow for an even stronger line down the road, after America finally faces up to the reality of the threat. On the other hand, a Democratic victory now would effectively take the option of force against Iran off the table. Yet a credible threat of force is actually our only hope for settling this matter short of war.

Has Iran blocked the IAEA inspectors, thereby forcing us to take pre-emptive action? That’s what Mario Loyala argued yesterday in "Point of No Return in the Iran Nuclear Crisis...?"

Well, Mario, your logic is powerful (and your article in the latest National Review print edition is excellent), but I’m afraid the politics of the moment simply will not support your favored policy. This is a disaster for the United States. We are indeed in grave danger. And there is only one way to change things.

Politics is the answer. Politics constrains us, and politics alone will free us. The Republicans must not lose this election. Don’t mope and tell me you’re sitting on your hands at home instead of voting. There is no excuse. The only good news right now is that we have in our hands the power to protect ourselves. The voting booth is the answer. No, I am not saying Democrats are all unpatriotic pacifists (although, unfortunately, a number of them are). There are genuine policy differences here. The Democrats are far more likely to favor unverifiable grand bargains, and the need for U.N. approval. They are far less likely to approve of pre-emptive military action by a U.S. led "coalition of the willing." So a Democratic victory will tell Iran that nothing of consequence stands between it and the acquisition of nuclear weapons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. I wish I could share your amusement
I find that letter very scary! These people are DESPERATE for more war, and we're viewed as just another strategic battle to be won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Of course it's scary. These guys are trying to scare.


So let’s review. A nuclear Iran is likely to give or lend nuclear weapons to terrorists, resulting in an undeterrable nuclear strike against an American city or cities. Only a credible threat of force can compel Iran to halt its nuclear program, or actually destroy that program, if necessary. In current political circumstances, we lack a credible threat of force. A Democratic victory this fall will solidify that situation, leaving Iran to race to nuclear capability before 2009 when a new president–especially a possible Republican president with greater political capital–accedes to power.

On the right they're quaking in their boots.

It's probably wise to use extreme caution around a terrified lunatic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SledDriver Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
3. how typical of them...
something to fear and someone to blame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
4. This isn't funny. These fascists are not going to go away
just because of some silly elections. This editorial struck me as a preamble, a beginning of a justification for not relinquishing power in November - regardless of the elections outcomes. Anyone who who thinks that these monsters will simply give up power has not been paying attention. 'Turning power over to the Democrats in November equals the destruction of the country' - what is that a call for? To get out and vote? If the Democrats win, we will all be killed by rabid Iranian nukes! So what would be these fascists' response to this? It was already stated that waiting for '08 would be unacceptable. This is a blatant call to the Brownshirts, IMO...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. What are they going to do if they lose?
Type faster? They're chickenhawks. They fight with keyboards and donations to think tanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhiteTara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. which is why we must prosecute every single one
of them this time. When Poppy pardoned all those criminals, our hands were tied. THis time, we must not let the war criminals slip away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrModerate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
5. With Bush in the White House . . .
You've got your "credible threat of force" regardless of public opinion. Does anyone here (or in Tehran) think that Bush WON'T use force (i.e., nukes) if Iran gets close to having a nuke of its own? I'm sure Ahmadinejad and the mullahs are dead certain that the military option is on the table -- that's one reason they're pushing so hard to get The Bomb in the first place.

So, no, paranoid little neocons, you don't need a Republicker victory in November to keep the threat option alive. You've got Georgie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
7. "...after America finally faces up to the reality of the threat."
"Finally?" "FINALLY???"

Forgive us if we don't immediately believe you...too many of us did once before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rubberducky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
8. another "coalition of the willing"???
Who would would be in this make believe coalition? The ONLY other country would be Israel. Britain seems to have had it with the chimp-in-chief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
9. So "pacifism" = "unpatriotic" . Nice. Particularly since the saber
rattling has worked so swimmingly with Iran and N. Korea so far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
11. Translation: A nuke Iran is bearing down on Israel
Iran is not and will never be a threat to the U.S. But they know they can get what they want with a few missiles aimed at Tel Aviv. This is the GOP conundrum: they want to stop Iran cold to protect Israel, but they can never admit that.

I love watching them sweat. Even if they manage to hold the house, they're going to be crippled, and there will be zero party discipline because their members, having survived a really tough election, know they will have to run again in 2008, and they will know they won't be able to accomplish a thing in the next two years, leaving them even more vulnerable.

This is a very nice time in my life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johnyawl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
12. If the Neocons win this fall, and strike Iran, it will be their last hurra
Do those idiots think Iran has no recourse? Do they think Iran has no plan for retaliation if we (or Israel) strike their nuclear facilities? Did they pay no attention to what just happened in Lebanon? Have they no knowledge of recent history, do they have no idea of the fanaticism, loyalty and resourcefulness the Iranians showed during the Iraq/Iran war? Has it not occurred to them that the Iranians have been preparing for this from the moment we invaded Iraq?

Iran does not have the conventional military might to directly confront the US, so they will not fight a conventional military war, BUT they will fight. And they will fight as Hezbollah fought in Lebanon. And like Israel in Lebanon, we will kill a lot of people, and destroy a lot of infrastructure, and ultimately fail in all our objectives.

Striking Iran's nuclear facilities will bring;
1) hoards of Iranian volunteers into the "sectarian strife" (re civil war) in Iraq, dramatically increasing the violence, and US casualties
2) full out guerrilla naval war in the Persian gulf, closing the Straits of Hormuz to tanker traffic, driving up the cost of oil, and tanking the world economy. The navy will find itself, for the first time since 1945, in a war were they could lose several major surface ships, and a large number of sailors.
3) we will be forced into ground operations along the Iranian side of the Straits of Hormuz in an attempt to keep the straits open.
4) large (relatively speaking) numbers of American POWs, i.e., pilots shot down, and sailors washing up on the Iranian beaches from sinking ships.
5) an enormous increase in the US debt, as the government tries to pay for a new war, while the economy is tanking, and tax cuts for the rich become permanent.


If the Neocons were serious about the threat of a nuclear armed Iran they would be advocating:
1) a dramatic increase in the size of US ground forces, by draft if necessary
2) new taxes to pay for the increase in defense spending
and 3) putting the US economy on a war footing, ala WWII.

Anybody actually advocating those measures, and promising war with Iran would be lucky to get elected even in the reddest of counties. If the republics ran on that platform, the Democrats would win a majority in both House and Senate large enough to hold hearings if bush so much as told a fart joke. And the Neocons know it. So they will lie, and hide, and try to squeak out a narrow win this fall. And if they do, and attack Iran with no better plan then they used in Iraq, we will be in such a mess by 2008, that not even a McCain/Guilliani ticket will save their asses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Excellent analysis of the situation.
:applause:

This is the kind of analysis that should be out there on the table, so the American people can see for themselves which option they really want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
14. He's flipped his lid.
"a nuclear Iran is bearing down on the United States"?

Yeah, let's all tremble at facing mighty Iran. They could'a licked the Warsaw Pact with one hand tied behind their back, and now let's all poop in our pants because they're looking at us.
(/sarcasm)

Gimme a break. Yes, all things considered I'd rather keep nukes out of their hands, but let's be real.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemonFighterLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-25-06 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
15. Itching to get the war on
We are so unsafe with these war makers at the helm.
:nuke:
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 Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
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