Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Iran - How Do We Stop the Madness????

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
qwlauren35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:06 PM
Original message
Iran - How Do We Stop the Madness????
It's not as if we didn't have a clue, a few years ago, when Bush called Iraq, Iran and Korea the new "Axis of Evil". It was only a matter of time before he went after Iran.

But what is happening in Iran is OUR FAULT. Just as what's happening in Iraq is OUR FAULT.

And I am VERY uncomfortable with the deafening silence (read: passive, unspoken SUPPORT) about Bush's hints that we'll be openingly fighting with Iran in the near future.

For those of us who don't want to see this happen - what is being done?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kohodog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. Read this (unless you want to sleep tonight). Then sign the petition.
Edited on Tue Jan-30-07 12:09 PM by kohodog
1.
SCOTT RITTER WARNS: "WE ARE ON THE EDGE OF THE ABYSS"
Synopsis by Mark Jensen

The following is a synopsis of the principal points made by the former
U.N. weapons inspector, whose warnings about Iraq in 2002 proved to be so
prescient and who has so accurately predicted the development of events
since the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Sentences and expressions in
quotation marks are verbatim transcriptons.

I. The Bush administration has a Middle East policy, not an Iraq policy
or an Iran policy. U.S. policies toward Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran are
all of a piece, along with policies toward Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and
Jordan, as well. For the Bush administration, these constitute an entire
strategic region of interest in which, motivated by "American national
interests" that "revolve around energy supplies," the U.S. is seeking: a)
"regional transformation" as a "single policy objective"; b) control of
the "flow of oil to developing economies around the world, including China
and India, so that we can control" their access to energy; and c) ways to
support Israel that are at present fixated on preventing Iran from
mastering nuclear technology.

II. George W. Bush is not, in fact, in the business of making policy for
the U.S., but in the business of selling it. Thus his remarks invariably
obfuscate matters rather than clarify or explain them, mingling
near-opposites like Shia and Sunni, Arab and Persian. Just as "the Evil
Empire" was invented by Reagan as a justification for U.S. action anywhere
in the world, so Bush's "Global War on Terror" is being used as a means of
empowerment for the military-industrial complex.

III. In the Bush 43 administration, "the crazies in the basement" that
the Bush 41 administration kept under control -- the neoconservatives --
have come out of the basement and have taken over the policy apparatus.
The goal of this faction has been, and remains, global domination, as
expressed by the Project for a New American Century, a document that is
pretty much identical to the National Security Strategy of the United
States of America documents in the Bush 43 administration.

IV. The timeline of events at present is being determined not by external
necessity, but by imperatives defined by the Israel lobby.

V. Bush claims the authority to act, and as matters stand he is right.
Congress in 2002 ceded to him the authority to carry out these designs.
Thus on Jan. 23, in his State of the Union address, Bush linked Osama bin
Laden to Iran, and no one in Congress objected.

VI. The window of strike opportunity against Iran, Ritter believes, will
open in March, after a third U.S. carrier battle group moves into place.
(The USS Ronald Reagan will be leaving San Diego for the Persian Gulf
sometimes in February, following the USS John C. Stennis, which left
Bremerton this month.)

VII. A significant risk exists that a situation will develop in which
what the administration considers to be "usable nuclear weapons" will be
employed in a "preemptive" fashion. "Ladies and gentlemen, we are on the
edge of the abyss. We can sit here and talk about Iraq all we want. . . .
But the bottom line is, this Congress has so abrogated its
responsibilities of oversight that it has diluted whatever power it once
had to affect American foreign national security policy. Unless this
Congress somehow awakens, there's no hope of preventing armed conflict
with Iran."

VIII. Bush has not so far been challenged by Congress. The judiciary has
already said it will not get involved. If Congress abrogates its
constitutional powers to a unitary executive, the courts cannot stop the
president. "The only thing we can do is to somehow implore our
representatives to invoke the power of the purse. They can't stop the
president from attacking Iran, but they can certainly say, 'You're not
going to attack it with U.S. taxpayers' money.' The Boland Amendment in
1982 . . . a crisis when President Reagan went around . . . .
Congress in the end dropped the ball, because this was a constitutional
crisis. This is one that should have brought a presidency down, with
people going to jail. It didn't happen. . . . It's time Congress came
back and reengaged this unilateral executive on the power of the purse."
Ritter advocates the passage of an amendment forbidding the use of funds
to attack Iran.

IX. The fact that Democrats are in control must not lead to complacency
on the issue of Iran. Eighty per cent of the Democrats in Congress attend
AIPAC meetings, and give speeches strongly in support of its notion of
supporting Israel. "Congress is predisposed toward conflict with Iran.
That's the situation we find ourselves in. While we are focused on Iraq,
we have an even bigger problem brewing over the horizon. As I said, it's
no longer over the horizon, it's done crested the hill, and it's starting
to roll straight at us picking up momentum every day that goes by."

***

2.

Audio link to Ritter's Jan. 24, 2007, talk:

http://www.traprockhttp://wwwhttp://www.thttp://www.tra...
<http://www.traprockpeace.org/audio/scott_ritter_012407.... >

Link to a Don't Attack Iran petition:

http://www.dontattahttp://www . <http://www.dontattackiran.org/ >
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. Stop the Mad Men! And Their Enablers
and do it quickly and thoroughly. Strip them of their offices, assets and freedoms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. John Conyers stated
on the Stephanie Miller Show this morning that if Bush started anything in Iraq, he would be impeached.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kohodog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. But then it's too late. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I assume you meant Iran
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. oops
yes, that is what I meant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luckyduck Donating Member (434 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. Why doesn't he start now for illegal wiretapping
He should not have voted yes on the Iran Freedom Support Act
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
18. The little dictator needs to be stopped BEFORE he attacks. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
4. First thing Congress should do is repeal the IWR
then bring back the war powers act

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
6. I don't buy that it's "our fault."

Lots of us protested, wrote and called Congresspeople, etc., but the neocons were hell-bent on their Iraq war.

Now, lots of us have protested, written, and called Congresspeople. What are Congresspeople doing? Non-binding resolutions.

If we storm power centers, we probably won't get very far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qwlauren35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. "Our"
I am an American, and this is my country's government's way of handling foreign policy. Even though I don't like it as an individual, I'm not ready to disown my status as an American, and so I say "Our".

It's our country, and it's our government. And it's our government doing this. And it's our government's fault, and "Americans" put them in power. No, *I* didn't vote for them. But if all of us actively refused allegiance to the government every time someone else's party won and openly, violently rebelled, we would have anarchy.

So as long as we are not in open rebellion, or threatening to secede, I have to say "Our".

And perhaps I also say "Our" because the rest of the world cannot see it any other way.

Perhaps if you wouldn't say it's our fault, you would agree that it's "Our" Problem!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Yep. And also the problem of the citizens of whatever countries
the maniac neocons decide to attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. We stop it by starting impeachment proceedings ASAP. I fear there
is no other way at this point. We are all being totally ignored; this admin does not represent us, so they need to go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. Repeat the propaganda over and over until it becomes fact...
When all else fails, return to what you know: fear-mongering. Bush vows "firm response" to the other paper lion, Iran. In so doing, he kills two birds with one stone, not to mention hundreds of U.S. troops and ten fold innocent Iraqis.

1. Troop escalation... err, "augmentation", allows for a second "Mission Accomplished" photo opt. Send in just enough troops to tidy up a bit, then announce a drawdown to the delight of all Americans.

2. Now purposefully parsing his words to distance himself from his October 2002 contention ("I believe that the success will be fairly easy."), the formidable John McCain, who has been calling for troop escalation since August 2006, will be hailed as a military prognosticator fit for Commander-in-Chief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
potisok Donating Member (67 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
9. Good question
I also wonder the same.

It has been Irans weapons program for months, now its if the Iranian supporting the terrorists, militants or any one killing our troops.

De pres says
"will respond firmly" if Iran escalates military action in Iraq and endangers American forces.

IT SEEMS SO OBVIOUS HIS INTENT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roamer65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
11. If * attacks Iran, he will declare martial law.
He will declare a "national emergency" and try to complete the move to fascism. Mark my words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Everything that is occurring here at home points to exactly that outcome!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
12. What really bothers me (other than the obvious) is
what will N Korea do after we hit Iran, and they see themselves as the only remaining NUCLEAR ARMED member of the Axis of Evil.

Given our proclivity to refuse to negotiate, even to talk, and pre-emptively attack, why would N Korea expect anything different from us? And, as Billy Jack would say, if it is obvious you are going to get your ass kicked, the only thing to do is kick first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luckyduck Donating Member (434 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. IMPEACH Bush BEFORE he attacks Iran
what are they waiting for!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qwlauren35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-30-07 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. They'll never admit it...
but I have no doubt that impeachment proceedings will proceed if there's any belief that there are 67+ Senators prepared to convict him.

Until then, it's just not worth the effort.

I know its frustrating to think that we're not being heard...

But I think it's up to the Republicans. They've got to turn on him, en masse, like hyenas on a fallen horse.

And much as I wish there was something we could do to make this happen, I can't see it...

What I bet is that it hinges on McCain. If McCain turns against BushCo, the house of cards should fall.
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 Wed Dec 17th 2014, 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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