Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rice: US may not go to war with 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 » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
mom cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:32 PM
Original message
Rice: US may not go to war with Iran
Rice: US may not go to war with Iran

www.chinaview.cn 2004-07-24 03:53:48


WASHINGTON, July 23 (Xinhuanet) -- US national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said on Friday that the decision by the Bush administration to go to war with Iraq did not necessarily entail asimilar war decision with Iran.

"I do not think that the decision to go to war in Iraq necessarily means that you have to make a similar decision in Iran," Rice said during an interview with the National Broadcasting Corporation.

Rice said that every situation was different and Saddam Husseinwas a "unique" circumstance who was accused of defying the international community, and having used weapons of mass destruction.

Moreover, the United States had a regime-change policy toward the Saddam regime, Rice said.

Nonetheless, Rice expressed concerns about Iran's ties to terrorism and its nuclear program. "We have said all along that weare concerned about Iran's ties to terrorism. We have said all along and are working with the international community to deal with the fact that Iran is not living up to its international obligations on its nuclear program," Rice said.


http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-07/24/content_16...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WildClarySage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. Jesus, that makes my blood run cold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
26. Yup, 180 degree rule applies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mara Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, well that would be very nice of them...

Thank you ms. Rice, how 'effing considerate of you and you use such civil language...

</sarcasm>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
61. Yup, I remember when Bush said on nat'l tv..there were no plans to invade
Iraq currently sitting on the table..
Perhaps he meant, the plans were already in motion. It was our mistake for not understanding Bushspeak ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #61
73. No, the plans were UNDER the table. Being passed around from
lap to lap by those sitting around that same table. Winking and nodding as they went.

Yeah, contradicta, tell us all how it's gonna go. I take it one of the MANY things you haven't bothered to read, besides all the memos and terrorist warnings and intelligence reports and Presidential Daily Briefs is the PNAC manifesto - that calls for continuous warfare THROUGHOUT the Middle East, country by country, until we've remade the whole place in our image and likeness? Maybe you missed the "must be able to fight and decisively win multiple wars on multiple fronts" part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #2
62. Of course we won't attack Iran. *They* have an army (History lesson)
Look at who the Republicans attack: Granada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq. Bullies never pick a fight with their equals.
(Um, not that I think that we should pick a fight w/ a military equal!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #62
77. Exactly. Imperial Amerika is too cowardly to attack someone who could
fight back.

Say, they really are Kinder and Gentler Nazis.

Say what you will, but at least the Nazis attacked nations which might be able to hurt them back.

Imperial Amerika IS Kinder and Gentler!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Meanwhile, in North Korea
Kim il Jong is nervously fingering the Button, knowing his country was the third in the Axis of Evil....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mountainvue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. Unless that's
who Cheney/Haliburton was about to get caught selling WMD's to when they outed Valerie Plame. I always wondered why they never paid much attention to Kim Jong Il. Forgive the rambling. Carry on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
25. Only 3rd? - I weep - always the bridegroom
never the bride - We're #1, We're #1, We're #1 /sarcasm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ellen Forradalom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #25
36. The Jan Brady of the Axis of Evil
"Saddam, Saddam, Saddam! It's always Saddam!" What does an evil dictator have to do to get some attention from the U.S.?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. Syria is next on the list, not Iran. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. What a load of crap. First of all Bushco can't AFFORD another Iraq
and second of all, the backroom deals are greasing the right palms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. The point isn't doing it cleanly and efficiently once we embark upon it.
Iraq should prove that that's the case.

Clearly, the messier it is, the better it is for the Republicans, because that means Americans need to make more sacrifices, and can expect less in terms of our own economic security and happiness. It means that more has to spent on Carlyle Group owned arms, etc.

Constant war is the goal. And spreading yourself too thin and making sure it's not easy is probably part of the strategy. Afterall, if we weren't spread thin, nobody would tolerate the inefficiency -- there's no excuse for a superpower like the US being so incompetent, unless you can say "hey, we're spreading ourselves thin all over the world for you. What do you want from us? We're working as hard as possible. You want a draft?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
40. Good point, Dover.
We've run out of troops, we'll soon be running out of money, and the Americans have run out of patience.

It's just ridiculous that they keep everybody in "suspense", like a Soap Opera "Cliff-hanger". Notice Condiment's words, "we won't NECESSARILY go to war with Iran". See the thinking behind that?

They don't want Iran to get too comfortable. Nor do they want Kim Jong Il to kick back with a Bud Light.

They just want everybody to be on guard, including us. So we'll never know what they're up to next. Bastards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. We Don't Have The Troops!
Unless a draft is initiated. The national governors are worried because they don't have the NG to help put in fires, floods, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Charlie Brown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
7. Pontius Rice: "I wash my hands of the matter"
Do with Iran as you will, Mr. President
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. What a Wonderful Headline
Right up there with, "We might not cancel the November election."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
10. MAY not???!
May not but they MAY?

Yikes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt Remarque Donating Member (709 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. i guess the decision will be whimsical
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
27. Totally arbitrary - but depends on
the Word of God proceeding from the Son, suddenly in competition w/the Moon for perfection of sanguinity, like TWINS, Arnold & DeVito.
I'm not laughing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
11. It's so fucked up that their starting point is that there should be war
with Iran and that they have to consider if their reasons not to go to war.

War's not the default starting for American foreign policy -- or it shouldn't be.

We should be meeting burdens of proof for going to war, not for not going to war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mom cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. What a quaint idea. But meeting the burden of proof would require
LAWYERS and Bush is agin' um. So we can't do that unless we have a new president. Sarcasm rating: orange. :dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
12. First of all Iran's population's nearly three-times that of Iraq's
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 06:57 PM by BJ
Iraq 25,374,691 (July 2004 est.)

Iran 69,018,924 (July 2004 est.)

A tip'o the hat to The CIA World Fact Book
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IranianDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
67. And look at the military spending and GDP also.
Before Gulf War 2 Iraq was spending about 900 million dollars on military spending compared to Iran's 9 billion. Now it's around 11 billion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
16. "Moreover, the United States had a regime-change policy toward the Saddam"
Is she saying we won't go to war unless we have such a policy?

Well, now I'm really confused, Condosleaza, or maye you are--didn't I read recently that the U.S. is pursuing a "regime-change policy" toward Iran, too?

And will Iran's situation also become "unique" when in due course it can also be accused of "defying the international community" over its nuclear weapons program, and of "having used weapons of mass destruction" in the Iran-Iraq war?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Charlie Brown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
17. To make matters worse
Iran has a long history of discrimination against the Kurds. At least some people at the CIA believe Iran may have been responsible for the mass gassing in '88. Expect to hear "they gassed five thousand Kurds" all over again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #17
79. Since when do they care about Kurds????
And why should the Kurds trust them? Bush* the Smarter left them for slaughter in the 1st Gulf War To End All Gulf Wars(tm).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfkrocks Donating Member (846 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:13 PM
Response to Original message
18. WTF!!!!!!
Rice Stop this war talk-for the love of GOD really-Who the hell lets these people out in public let alone lead us and BTW-what army is going to go to war?-the one Condi and company beat into the ground???? :argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordout Donating Member (355 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
19. wise decision
the Prince of Persia is not easily overcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tlcandie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #19
59. Yay!!!
More Armageddon warmongering?! What's the word to get out...Jesus reigns supreme and we're gonna dominate the world for Jesus?

/sarcasm orange alert off
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realisticphish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
20. not necessARily *wink wink*
but more than likely


:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doctorbombeigh Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
21. She's scary - and a bad liar.
She was on the Newshour the other day (yesterday?) - whatever. Anyway - she's fielding these questions about Iraq and the 9/11 Commission Report and blah blah blah. But she's clearly lying because "Yes," is coming out of her mouth, "the President will be moving quickly on these - he takes them very seriously," while she shakes her head no. Repeatedly. And with that wierd, fake, frozen grin... it was creepy.

Then sometimes it really got to be too much for her and her head kind of went round and round, as if she couldn't quite figure out whether to shake it yes or no, regardless of the lie she was telling. Poor thing. One good aspect of a Kerry administration - no more Condi.
She's gotten steadily creepier in this job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #21
56. I hate to be ugly, but..........
Only from the inside can one see that Condi is Butt Ugly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hamlette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
22. Translation: Iran doesn't have any oil, why would we want it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Oh yes they do. Iran is a major oil producer
and has the second highest gas reserves after Russia.

They are not efficient in their oil production but I'm sure Halliburton could help out with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mokito Donating Member (710 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #28
52. YES...we need to liberate the oil...again!
Edited on Sun Jul-25-04 01:51 AM by Mokito
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aidoneus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #22
30. No.. "They can defend themselves, so fuck it.."
With the discovery of a new field, they have in fact the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world, after Saudi, and something like the 2nd or 3rd largest natural gas supplies.

They also have 70,000,000 reasonably healthy citizens that haven't been bombed and starved for the last decade to prepare the way first. Maybe President Kerry will help that along, so President Jenna Bush can lead the heroic charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IranianDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #30
68. State media says that 8 million people have already volunteered.
On top of the 1 million strong proffesional military.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lastliberalintexas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #30
75. Nope, they won't put a woman in charge
Even if it is Jenna. If it's not Jeb, the next one will his son, yet another George (insert initial) Bush.

But you are correct in reminding people that Iraq was the "pushover" it was because of the sanctions. Neither Iran nor Syria have been subjected to those. Yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darranar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
23. This sounds more like leaving the possibility...
of no war open than dismissing the speculations about war with Iran.

Bad news....

I don't see how the military will be able to wage war in Iran while also fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, too, short of a draft. That last part scares me a lot.

Syria is another possibility, though they may decide to leave that to Israel. Another Lebanon-style invasion on Israel's part will be costly, however, and Syria seems to have WMDs as well. It would be a dangerous path for either state to attempt.

Venezuela may also be a target, though it will be more difficult to manufacture a case against, and the evidence seems to indicate that the US will likely try other means than invasion.

Despite the fact that the US military is clearly overextended and probably incapable of handling the present situation, I doubt that the neocons will stop in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
24. Just like she couldn't "imagine" planes used as weapons.
Her saying they aren't necessarily going to war with Iran leads me to believe that is exactly what they're planning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #24
46. They also "don't have any plans on my desk to invade Iraq".
If ANYBODY believes these sociopathic criminal lying SOB's, they deserve what they get - unfortunately, we're joined at the hip so we'd be cheneyed, too.

WAKE UP AMERIKKKA!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maeve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
29. What, is this a game of "Condi May I?"
We're already over-stretched, running out of bullets and calling up 68-year-old retirees...gee, Condi, ya think????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Keirsey Donating Member (508 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. countdown on the Axis of Evil?
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 08:02 PM by Keirsey




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bush_Eats_Beef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
32. Yes, Saddam was "unique" because he tried to hurt Pappy n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
33. Like I believe anything she has to say anyway.
Ms. "Certainly if we had ever imagined that people might fly planes into buildings we would have stopped them" Rice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
34. How Very Reassuring!
Does this woman ever listen to herself? Regime Change Policy? International obligations? Give us all a break!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
35. bullshit, it's all in the PNAC papers
more lies, condiloma!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychopomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #35
45. Speaking of PNAC, what happened to Chalabi?
Is he still on the outs for being an alleged spy for Iran? I have not been able to make heads or tails of that twist in the story. Has the Chalabi spy-issue just dropped off the radar?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #45
65. haven't heard anything else either
we are being bombarded with news now, it's hard to keep up sometimes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az_lefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
37. Thank You condi!!!!
these people are so transparent. I've never seen a so screwed up admin in my life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
38. Shut up Condi
Nobody wants to hear from your traitor ass anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
39. How very heartening! Now I can sleep soundly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John_H Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
41. Translation:pretty good air defenses & good anti-tank weapons
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 10:29 PM by John_H
mean that it's not a good idea to start an vote-getting war against Iran. Now, Syria maybe...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. The Condi and Colon Show
Flop!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Green Lantern Donating Member (277 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
43. Kindasleazy Rice lays down
the basis for the "October surprise"-What a way to go-leave Iraq and pack up for Iran-let the Brits handle the Iraq 'occupation' so our people would be free to go to Teheran-unless we do a REAL October surprise and use a tactical nuke.

Boy-that would give them a good reason to shut down the elections-'Can't have them today-got a war to run-national security, ya all know?'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarface2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
44. i thought it took an act of congress to go to war??!!
oh i get it now...if rice wants a war she ll get her fucking war, is that it??!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
homelandpunk Donating Member (787 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
47. "does not NECESSARILY mean..." OMFG, they have the plans drawn up
for war with Iran. Until I saw this statement, I thought they had figured out that they could not get away with it. Now I see that they don't care if they "don't get away with it". In reality, they did not "get away with it" with Iraq, and it did not stop them pre-war, and their being called on the bogus reasons have not caused them any moment of reflection post-invasion.
THEY ARE GOING TO INVADE IRAN!!!! Even though I have posted that they want to go to war with Iran, if you had pressed me and said "Come on...invade Iran??", I would have relented, and admitted I was kinda talking out my ass.
BUT NOT ANYMORE. IT IS SET IN STONE. IRAN WAR. IRAN WAR. IRAN WAR. DRAFT. I NOW WOULD BET MY _LIFE_ ON IT.
It just got far scarier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. They've had plans for years...Israel launches 1st strike against nuclear
targets....Israelis list reasons/threats of why they needed to hit them hard and then because of either some retalitory threat to Israel by Iran, the US is "drawn" in without the US actually having to declare war with Congress until its too late any way....This is their plan....

You heard it here first....this has been my theory/dream for years...even more frightening, is that my dream ended in Nuclear War...

I've had this recurring dream 3 times in the last 5 years....its what scares the shit out of me about this administration....I hope its only a nightmare, but I fear where they are going with all this...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. I second that!!!
No fucking shit! I have had THAT nightmare a few times too!

Dat's ok. Dey got bad mojo and dey gonna get payback someday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. Swamp'R....your scaring me...did you really have that same dream?
Edited on Sun Jul-25-04 01:47 AM by Pachamama
I'm dead serious...I've had now since 1999 a dream where when I wake up I'm in a sweat and it was about Nuclear War and that is how it got started....

It's one of the reasons why on the day SCOTUS selected Dimwit to occupy 1600 Pennsylvania, that I was crying....It's like the dream that the Huarani and Achuar Shamans had warned me about in 1997...

Yeah, they got bad mojo...I just don't want to be around or within ICBM range (or radiation range) of their mojo coming at them....

Hey only 23 more till you lose your DU virginity for your 1000th post!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no safe haven Donating Member (202 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. Rumblings in the collective unconscious
My recurrent nuclear war nightmare has been happening for ages now. Columns of men dressed in black, balaclavas, scarves, rifles, all running...on the horizon, a blast. Thinking I can't look otherwise it will burn my retinas, but somehow I just have to witness it. Then panic thinking I have to get underground before I breathe in the radioactive dust. I thought with the end of the cold war things would change, but they just keep on coming regular as clockwork, always the same.
Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #53
70. Greetings down under!
And welcome to the DU....Wow...only 10 posts and you posted one with me....thanks for sharing! :hi:

It is strange how many are having this "nightmare".....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mokito Donating Member (710 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:45 AM
Response to Original message
50. WTF
Rice: US may not go to war with Iran

Man! Does anyone realize how totally f*cked up that sounds! That's almost the equivalent of saying they have the clear intent to go to war with Iran, but this may be hindered by some "pesky" external factors.

Newspeak has come a long way... :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 05:46 AM
Response to Original message
54. I'll tell you why we won't go to war with Iran.
It's because, despite General Shinseki's warning, we've already locked ourselves in a twelve-division strategy with a ten division Army.

We don't have anything left to deploy that isn't in the middle of retraining or refitting. When they're ready, the forces which have already seen extended duty have to return for the same.

If the Iranians decide to kidnap every American within their reach and hang them like Christmas ornaments from Golestan Palace, all we can do is throw proverbial rocks. And when it comes to rocks, we can't even send a rack of cruise missles their way, because we've used 'em all up.

But talkin' shit is cheap, as the Iranians no doubt know. I just hope they don't decide to prove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
55. Krauthammer is beating the Iran preemptive attack drums...
....

Which makes the question of preemptive attack all the more urgent. Iran will go nuclear during the next presidential term. Some Americans wishfully think that the Israelis will do the dirty work for us, as in 1981, when they destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor. But for Israel, attacking Iran is a far more difficult proposition. It is farther away. Moreover, detection and antiaircraft technology are far more advanced than they were 20 years ago.

There may be no deus ex machina. If nothing is done, a fanatical terrorist regime openly dedicated to the destruction of the "Great Satan" will have both nuclear weapons and the terrorists and missiles to deliver them. All that stands between us and that is either revolution or preemptive strike.

Both of which, by the way, are far more likely to succeed with 146,000 American troops and highly sophisticated aircraft standing by just a few miles away -- in Iraq.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7530-200...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #55
69. My god, that is utterly horrifying
Are all these PNACkers on the pipe, or what???

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #55
78. This kind of thinking would make the Nazis proud:
Instead of "we invaded the wrong country, how the fuck did that happen?", the thinking is "we invaded the wrong country, guess we'll just have to invade another country."

If I weren't laughing, I'd be crying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
57. The Next Bush War should be a campaign issue. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight armadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
58. Don't forget
Wimps go to Baghdad and real men go to Tehran. according to the neo-cons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
area51 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
60. Neo-Con Connie
Condosleazy Rice said, "we may not go to war w/Iran." What she means is, "we won't go to war w/Iran unless Bush is elected in Nov. (@ which time we'll have a draft)."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
63. Oh, how cute! Condi flirts with the anti-milaritarists! What a tease! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
64. More outrageous lies to rival those of her "husband's".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
66. Whatever monies we paying her is way too much.
She was supposed to advise the Shrub and she dropped the ball.. her advice is advice a 2nd grader could have thought up. Worthless almost..

Cost us Big time...

Made America look like shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlFrankenFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 02:02 AM
Response to Original message
71. Woah wait, were we ever planning to go to war with them?! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tight_rope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
72. Yeah...they know that Iran would kick ours asses....that's we won't go!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gatlingforme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
74. humm, I can only hope Kerry wins this. THis current admin. is sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-26-04 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
76. why is this from a China daily? if the interview was by NBC
do they mean the chinese national broadcasting agency, and why the fuck isn't this news in the states
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 Jul 29th 2014, 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News 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