HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » U.S., Israel considering ...

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:34 AM

U.S., Israel considering joint 'surgical strike' on Iran's nuclear facilities

Source: Haaretz

U.S., Israel considering joint 'surgical strike' on Iran's nuclear facilities

Former Clinton administration official David Rothkopf writes in Foreign Policy that attack, which he says could not be carried out by Israel alone, would only take a few hours and neutralize Republican criticism.

The United States and Israel are considering the possibility of a joint "surgical strike" against Iran's nuclear facilities, according to a Foreign Policy report by David Rothkopf published Monday.

While Israel and the U.S. still donít entirely agree on the "red line" which would trigger a military response, the report said that the Israelis are now suggesting a more limited attack than was previously debated.

Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official and international relations expert, quoted a source said to be close to the discussions, which claimed that a small-scale attack is currently viewed as the most likely military option. Such strike, the source said, is likely to only take a few hours and would be conducted by air, using bombers and supported by drones.

In order to send the Iranian nuclear program back many years, such an attack could be carried out in a joint U.S.-Israeli operation, or by the U.S. alone. The report claims Israel would not be able to carry out this kind of attack on its own.

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-israel-considering-joint-surgical-strike-on-iran-s-nuclear-facilities-1.468855

61 replies, 7398 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 61 replies Author Time Post
Reply U.S., Israel considering joint 'surgical strike' on Iran's nuclear facilities (Original post)
TomClash Oct 2012 OP
oswaldactedalone Oct 2012 #1
SamKnause Oct 2012 #18
FiveGoodMen Oct 2012 #29
SamKnause Oct 2012 #30
FiveGoodMen Oct 2012 #31
Bohunk68 Oct 2012 #2
Socal31 Oct 2012 #25
leveymg Oct 2012 #3
davidpdx Oct 2012 #23
leveymg Oct 2012 #24
dixiegrrrrl Oct 2012 #45
madrchsod Oct 2012 #4
dipsydoodle Oct 2012 #5
dixiegrrrrl Oct 2012 #47
GeorgeGist Oct 2012 #6
SamKnause Oct 2012 #17
Kindly Refrain Oct 2012 #7
Ghost Dog Oct 2012 #34
on point Oct 2012 #8
cstanleytech Oct 2012 #9
Coyotl Oct 2012 #10
torotoro Oct 2012 #11
dipsydoodle Oct 2012 #12
iamthebandfanman Oct 2012 #13
JackRiddler Oct 2012 #61
Chef Eric Oct 2012 #14
SamKnause Oct 2012 #15
earthside Oct 2012 #16
Odin2005 Oct 2012 #19
dixiegrrrrl Oct 2012 #48
Ghost Dog Oct 2012 #49
Pharaoh Oct 2012 #27
Ghost Dog Oct 2012 #35
dixiegrrrrl Oct 2012 #51
defacto7 Oct 2012 #40
Odin2005 Oct 2012 #20
clydefrand Oct 2012 #21
Overseas Oct 2012 #22
BlueToTheBone Oct 2012 #26
muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #28
JRLeft Oct 2012 #32
Behind the Aegis Oct 2012 #33
AntiFascist Oct 2012 #36
Ghost Dog Oct 2012 #37
AntiFascist Oct 2012 #39
Ghost Dog Oct 2012 #43
Ghost Dog Oct 2012 #52
Posteritatis Oct 2012 #46
oviedodem Oct 2012 #38
cpwm17 Oct 2012 #41
Douglas Carpenter Oct 2012 #42
OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #44
kickysnana Oct 2012 #50
still_one Oct 2012 #53
fingrinn Oct 2012 #54
cpwm17 Oct 2012 #56
cpwm17 Oct 2012 #55
Ash_F Oct 2012 #57
primavera Oct 2012 #58
Ghost Dog Oct 2012 #59
JackRiddler Oct 2012 #60

Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:38 AM

1. Bomb bomb bomb

bomb bomb Iran. Oh bomb Iran, that's the plan, bomb Iran.

Sung to the tune of Barbara Ann.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oswaldactedalone (Reply #1)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:35 AM

18. Iran

Sung by John McCain.

I remember it well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SamKnause (Reply #18)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 11:32 AM

29. John isn't the one singing that tune NOW...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FiveGoodMen (Reply #29)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 12:30 PM

30. John

Did he change his tune ?

Has he stated he is against a strike against Iran now ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SamKnause (Reply #30)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 12:33 PM

31. He's not the one with the choice to make, was my point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:44 AM

2. Iran is a sovereign

nation. This would be the stupid. Russia is a friend to Iran and so is China. Just like with Syria. Ya want a nuclear Armageddon? Well, that's the way to do it. The Teabaggers and extreme Evangenitals would be wildly ecstatic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bohunk68 (Reply #2)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:40 AM

25. Russia and the US have played games over Iran for years.

Russia delays the full roll-out of the S-300.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5igbfOLXp02XMK7ghdxIYL_guXqWQ



Obama delayed the newer "bunker-buster" weapons to Israel in 2010, although it is widely reported that we made a secret transfer in 2011 in return for a delay in the strike.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2011/sep/27/iran-nuclear-weapons



Nobody is going to launch nukes over Iran, with the exception possibly being Israel depending on how bad it would get. Which goes back to the point to the law of unintended consequences: we just don't know what will/could happen when/if the shooting starts.

The only obvious solution to all of this is for Iran to fully comply with the IAEA, and Israel to declare and dismantle its nuclear weapons under international scrutiny.

They are already under our nuclear umbrella, they don't need them. I don't see Iran giving up the pursuit for anything less than a nuclear free ME.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:45 AM

3. Start a war with Iran in order to "neutralize Republican criticism"? Why not just bomb the RNC?

The term "surgical strike" assumes the patient is helpless, knocked out or willing to lay down quietly on a table while you take sharp knives to his body and start hacking around to cut out organs, bones and guts. That's not the case here. Iran isn't Libya or even Iraq.

What an insane notion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #3)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:13 AM

23. I say we just deport the Republicans to a small island and leave them there

with one candy bar. Watch them rip each other to shreds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #23)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:28 AM

24. If they want to drop into Iran so bad, I'll gladly pack their parachutes.

They can take all the arms and ammo they can carry with them.

Happy landings!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #3)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:30 PM

45. I voted for bombing RNC

since it is obvious that whoever is making the real decisions is helpless to ward off the horrific effects of
"Republican criticism".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:45 AM

4. bullshit......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:45 AM

5. What may be more to the point

is the background writing of the the person referred to above : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rothkopf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #5)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:38 PM

47. Good catch!

A Kissinger protege.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:57 AM

6. Neutralize Republicans

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeorgeGist (Reply #6)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:33 AM

17. Agree

That is the best suggestion and solution to this problem.

Ship them all over to Israel, starting with Sheldon Adelson and Mitt Romney.

I try not to hate people, but I am sick and tired of the lunatic fringe, religious fanatic Republicans controlling this country and invading, attacking, and occupying the world.

They truly sicken me !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:14 AM

7. The war mongers are chomping at the bit to bomb Iran

 

You can tell, they are giddy over it. It pretty much has come down to not "if" but "when". Obama may have to commit to bomb Iran or lose the election. The powers that be have spoken.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kindly Refrain (Reply #7)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 02:25 PM

34. "Obama may have to commit to bomb Iran or lose the election."

Now that, my friend, might turn out to be very accurate.

No doubt any career politician would calculate it would be worth it, such is the sick so-called democracy under which we suffer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:32 AM

8. US and Israel conspire to commit incredibly stupid war crime - that's the headline needed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:50 AM

9. Well DOh!! It only makes sense that they may be making plans for such a strike

but that doesnt mean that they will carry it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:10 AM

10. I'm looking forward to $10.00 a gallon gas

Because I am a Big Oil tycoon

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:12 AM

11. BUT Wouldn't Iran now know?

 

...and they say Thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:16 AM

12. "surgical strike"

Operation Circumcision ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:22 AM

13. that has to be an opinion piece

as theres no factual evidence to back any of that up..

'a friend of a friend of a friend told me'
is essentially the source listed ;p

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iamthebandfanman (Reply #13)

Wed Oct 10, 2012, 10:21 AM

61. totally from his ass

He says he spoke with a source in Israeli-US military planning, but doesn't even say on which side this unnamed source is. Hence, an Israeli (because he'd say right away if it was US military talking like this). Okay, so an Israeli told him about how the Israelis presented their own idea for the United States to start an aggressive war on Iran, and in the reporting this turns into a subject of the talks, suggesting a joint plan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:27 AM

14. Military action for political gain? Great, just what we need.

Hey, maybe we can provoke Iran into taking our embassy workers hostage!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:30 AM

15. Strike

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!!!

Israel can not do it on their own. BS. The U.S. has armed them to the teeth. Why can't they defend themselves ?

Neutralize Republican criticism. I don't give a flying F*** about Republican criticism.

The consensus of the world is that Iran does not have nuclear weapons, has not made nuclear weapons and is not close to being able to produce nuclear weapons.

Netanyahu has been accusing Iran of having nuclear weapons since 1992.

Why is the United States being bullied by Netanyahu and the insane warmongering Republicans ???????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:33 AM

16. "likely to only take a few hours "

Right ...

Because the Iranians will just lay down and merely say "Well, we had it coming, so we won't retaliate."

And the Saudis will flood the world with oil to keep the wild speculation in petroleum prices completely tamped down.

Of course, there is no chance that a U.S. or Israeli planes could be shot down by Iran's Russian-made anti-aircraft system because nothing ever goes wrong in these kinds of attacks.

No errant cruise missile would hurt or kill any Iranian civilians, either.

Oh, and the release of radioactive material into the atmosphere? No chance of that?

David Rothkopf is an idiot. He worked in the Clinton administration as a trade official ... but after that he worked for Henry Kissinger's company.

Gosh all fishhooks ... I sure hope no one in the Obama administration is listening to this guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to earthside (Reply #16)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:40 AM

19. In 1914 they all said the boys would be home by Christmas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #19)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:59 PM

48. "Shock and Awe" against Iraq was to be a brief attack.

and the population would welcome us with open arms and give us their oil to pay for the cost of bombing them, remember?
That is EXACTLY what Rumsfeld and Bush said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #19)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:23 PM

49. April is the cruellest month, breeding

Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.
Winter kept us warm, covering
Earth in forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers.
Summer surprised us, coming over the Starnbergersee
With a shower of rain; we stopped in the colonnade,
And went on in sunlight, into the Hofgarten,
And drank coffee, and talked for an hour.
Bin gar keine Russin, stamm' aus Litauen, echt deutsch.
And when we were children, staying at the archduke's,
My cousin's, he took me out on a sled,
And I was frightened. He said, Marie,
Marie, hold on tight. And down we went.
In the mountains, there you feel free.
I read, much of the night, and go south in the winter.

What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow
Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man,
You cannot say, or guess, for you know only
A heap of broken images, where the sun beats,
And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water. Only
There is shadow under this red rock,
(Come in under the shadow of this red rock),
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
- Frisch weht der Wind
- Der Heimat zu
- Mein Irisch Kind,
- Wo weilest du?
"You gave me hyacinths first a year ago;
"They called me the hyacinth girl."
- Yet when we came back, late, from the Hyacinth garden,
Your arms full, and your hair wet, I could not
Speak, and my eyes failed, I was neither
Living nor dead, and I knew nothing,
Looking into the heart of light, the silence.
Od' und leer das Meer.

/... http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1321/pg1321.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to earthside (Reply #16)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:58 AM

27. nobody seems to realize

how easily Iran could tale out the Saudi oil facilities.

That would totally fuck the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pharaoh (Reply #27)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 02:35 PM

35. It is not difficult to adopt a speculative financial position

such that significant profits could be booked as a result of such action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pharaoh (Reply #27)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:56 PM

51. Blocking the Strait if Hormuz would also do the trick.

The fact that US has moved a bunch of ships, including minesweepers, to that area has some significance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to earthside (Reply #16)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 05:23 PM

40. And what will become of the presidency

if there is a downed aircraft and Americans are again paraded before cameras with blindfolds?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:41 AM

20. *FACEPALM*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:43 AM

21. No more damn wars!

anywhere unless we are in danger.

Are we in danger now that Iran will be attacking us?

Have they said they will attack us and why they want to?


Are the nuclear weapons just for Israel?


Why do we keep talking about attacking them because they have nuclear weapons? We have had them for many years. We have more than they have or will get.

I have a feeling that most people in Iran don't even know what a nuclear weapon is. Now they are being punished by the embargo, while the rich are living well.

WHY CAN'T WE JUST GET ALONG?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:06 AM

22. Disgusting and dumb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:53 AM

26. Sounds like Bibi spent a lot of time with Wolfowitz.

I don't see a sign off from the SOS or POTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 11:24 AM

28. I hope the guy is talking out of his arse, but it may be worth parsing his words

Here's his FP blog: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/08/wanted_a_truly_credible_military_threat_to_iran

What he says is:

Despite the public histrionics in the run-up to the U.N. General Assembly meetings, both White House and Israeli officials assert that the two sides behind the scenes have come closer together in their views in recent days. While there may not be exact agreement on what constitutes a "red line" -- a sign of Iranian progress toward the development of nuclear weapons that would trigger military action -- the military option being advocated by the Israelis is considerably more limited and lower risk than some of those that have been publicly debated.

Indeed, according to a source close to the discussions, the action that participants currently see as most likely is a joint U.S.-Israeli surgical strike targeting Iranian enrichment facilities. The strike might take only "a couple of hours" in the best case and only would involve a "day or two" overall, the source said, and would be conducted by air, using primarily bombers and drone support. Advocates for this approach argue that not only is it likely to be more politically palatable in the United States but, were it to be successful -- meaning knocking out enrichment facilities, setting the Iranian nuclear program back many years, and doing so without civilian casualties -- it would have regionwide benefits. One advocate asserts it would have a "transformative outcome: saving Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, reanimating the peace process, securing the Gulf, sending an unequivocal message to Russia and China, and assuring American ascendancy in the region for a decade to come."


Now, I don't think that means he is saying the most likely outcome is a joint attack; I think it's saying that, if there is a military strike, then the most likely form it will take is a joint bombing one. And the fuzziness of "a source close to the discussions" may mean it's just some neocon, either in the USA or Israel, indulging in wishful thinking, even if they are involved in talks somehow. The advocate claiming a "transformative outcome" sounds delusional - hopefully they're someone not actually involved in government in any country. Daniel Pipes or John Bolton, perhaps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 01:31 PM

32. I have come to the conclusion that man has decided to eradicate hisself.

War and pollution causing climate change. Greed is the culprit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 02:15 PM

33. bullshit...but plays well in the hands of haters/warmongers/and the chicken little crowd

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 02:39 PM

36. Please tell me...


they are not considering doing this in order to "neutralize Republican criticism"!

If this were to escalate, how many people must die because Republican panties are in a wad?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiFascist (Reply #36)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 04:53 PM

37. (Electoral) 'Business' as usual?

... Rothkopf's article is titled "A Truly Credible Threat To Iran" and his analysis gives several reasons for the, let's call it, further defining(sic) the administration has suddenly given to its military options for Iran.

- Diplomatic: Iran's currency is in crisis, but it doesn't think the U.S. will strike ó it knows Israel doesn't have the tech necessary to do it alone, a it's prickly diplomacy with the U.S. makes it seem like the administration is "dragging its feet." Now that Iran knows exactly how, they might be more likely to stand down ó essentially, releasing the plan constitutes a diplomatic foot in the door.

- Public Opinion: A public 'tired' of protracted war is more likely to support a no-muss no-fuss few hours of military strikes if it "sets back Iran's nuclear capabilities by years"

- Presidential Politics: It's no mistake that less than 24 hours after Romney accuses Obama of having no plan for Iran, that suddenly a plan pops out of the administration (albeit an anonymous one).

Other reports have framed Rothkopf's article as "the U.S. is considering," but in all likelihood, these plans were long ago considered, and are just now being released in light of Obama's slipping polls, Romney's aggressive stance, and the impending foreign policy debate.

/... http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-admin-to-romney-heres-our-plan-for-iran-2012-10#ixzz28px0J8Cc

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ghost Dog (Reply #37)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 05:11 PM

39. People should be really pissed....

but of course they are kept in the dark.

Prior to the Iraq invasion there was an article that appeared in Forbes about how regime change in Iraq would be good for the oil industry and help the economy. I believe this article was instrumental in selling the war to the majority of non-warmongering Republicans. Of course, the invasion ended up costing 100s of billions (if not trillions) and only benefitted the war industry. Republicans then blame the Federal deficit on ongoing programs like SSI and Medicare, totally ignoring the vast increase in debt due to ongoing war!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiFascist (Reply #39)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 06:02 PM

43. People should. Yeah.

But then, there's the daily struggle for survival, and then to satisfy all those cravings, and then there's all that brainwashing that you just can't miss! It's so exciting isn't it so don't forget never to tune out and keep watching this channel! Big prizes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiFascist (Reply #39)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:59 PM

52. Also see (Haaretz):

... Rothkopf argues that the threat of a limited strike would seem more credible than a full-scale attack, and so it has "a real chance of deterring the mullahs." This threat, the report said, may also increase the chances that diplomacy would work.

The source said the possibility is also aimed at having a regional effect: "Saving Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, reanimating the peace process, securing the Gulf, sending an unequivocal message to Russia and China, and assuring American ascendancy in the region for a decade to come."

According to the report, another consideration for a limited strike is a political one. Bringing up the possibility of a limited, aerial assault, could defuse Romney's criticism, since the likelihood of such an attack of being carried out is higher...

/... http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-israel-considering-joint-surgical-strike-on-iran-s-nuclear-facilities-1.468855


One would expect such an "unequivocal message" to provoke a quite "unequivocal response", n'est-ce pas?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiFascist (Reply #36)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 07:34 PM

46. Haaretz has been claiming this every week or so for years. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)


Response to oviedodem (Reply #38)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 05:44 PM

41. No, it's Americans that favor Israel that have far too much influence over our foreign policy

It's really harming the US and the world. Indirectly, Israel has great influence over our foreign policy.

This is a symptom of our corrupt government, the terrible media in the US, the ignorant public, and far too many selfish crazies in the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 06:00 PM

42. wouldn't it be a pity if the U.S. finds itself in another protracted un-winnable imperialist war in

Middle East- this time not started by a Republican President? Remembering the history of LBJ and Vietnam - I'm afraid it is all too possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 06:09 PM

44. I call bs. I wouldn't doubt that a scenario for this is in the Pentagon's files....

...but I doubt seriously that anything will take place before the election, or anytime in the near future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 08:52 PM

50. Dear Israel, a word of warning.

Warning:

The US has a long history of turning its back or worse on its assets in the Middle East ie Ben Laden and Saddam when our interests diverged from the interests of our assets.

We simply cannot do another war. We are broke and overextended but we do have the intelligence that says unlike Saddam Iran can mount a pretty good response (that would reach you before it reaches us.) Also they have some pretty big scary allies in Russia and China.

I would suggest you retire your hawks and pull out the diplomats and cold warriors cause nobody needs WWIII aka global annihilation especially since you claim your Messiah has not arrived yet so your future appears more uncertain than our crazy Christian hawks or the Muslims with the get into Paradise free if you are a martyr plan. If God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims takes sides in wars started over perceived threats.

Signed,
A disillusioned fan of Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:10 PM

53. I say bullshit. At least not now, and besides there is no

Such thing as a surgical strike, the nuclear facilities are underground, and why the fuck would they announce it, they don't want it to be a surprise

It would also be a stupid contra productive thing to do

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:20 PM

54. I have a very basic opinion on this matter

 

Israel lies, people die.

The whole Iran situation is bullshit.
How many allied bases surround Iran with a massive arsenal pointed at them? 37, yes that's right 37.
And yet they are a threat to world peace?
The simple reality is Israel does not want to lose the balance of power if Iran makes nukes.
God help us if the do, the unthinkable will happen.
Stalemate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fingrinn (Reply #54)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:35 PM

56. "The whole Iran situation is bullshit."

Yes, it's total bullshit. The sanctions on Iran are criminal. Clinton played the same evil game against Iraq. We all know how that turned out. Plus the genocidal sanctions against Iraq helped provoke 9-11.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:29 PM

55. "Former Clinton administration official David Rothkopf"

President Clinton had far too many officials like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:01 PM

57. "Let's murder people to placate Republicans" /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 10:58 PM

58. I love the casualness with which we contemplate violating the territory of a sovereign state

It's like international law just isn't a thing to even be considered. Unless, of course, it works for us, and then we invoke it as inviolable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to primavera (Reply #58)

Wed Oct 10, 2012, 12:18 AM

59. "Exceptionalism", I believe that's called,

in polite circles. "Master Race" and/or "Chosen People" syndrome, otherwise...

History tells.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Original post)

Wed Oct 10, 2012, 10:17 AM

60. Sheer promotion.

How do these guys sleep?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread