Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

This is the largest massing of military power in the region, and it is gathering for a reason.

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
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:07 PM
Original message
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15582.h...

Cheneys Revenge


.....

William S. Lind, Director for the Center for Cultural Conservatism for the Free Congress Foundation, assures us in his latest article Iraq Disaster Warning that something big will happen between Nov 7 congressional election and Christmas. That could be the long-planned attack on Iran.

Dr. Elias Akleh supports this theory in his article War on Iran providing the worrisome details of the military build-up currently taking place in the Gulf beyond the knowledge of the American people. Akleh states:


The US and NATO countries had amassed the largest military armada in the Middle East. The US armada consists of carrier Strike Group 12 led by nuclear powered aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, Eisenhower Strike Groupanother nuclear powered aircraft carrier with accompanied military vessels and submarines, Expeditionary Strike Group 5 with multiple attack vessels led by aircraft carrier USS Boxer, the Iowa Jima Expeditionary Strike Group, and the US Coast Guard. Canada has sent its anti-submarine HMCS Ottawa frigate to join the American Armada in the Persian Gulf. On October 1the USS Enterprise Striking Group has crossed the Suez Canal to join NATO armada at the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea.

The NATO force is composed of troops and naval vessels from several countries and is lead by Germany. It includes German command naval forces, Italian navy, 2 Spanish warships, 3 Danish warships, 10 Greek warships, 2 Netherlands warships, and French, Belgium, Turkish, and Bulgarian troops in South Lebanon.

Akleh adds ominously, This is the largest massing of military power in the region, and it is gathering for a reason.

Indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
williesgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. Trying to get another war in prior to impeachment of BOTH criminals
recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davekriss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. Recall Bush saying that it's great...
...that we had the recent elections despite the fact that we're at war. That means floating in that tepid jelly that sits atop his shoulders is the thought that somehow cancelling free elections in the U.S. can be justified by war.

I've never really taken seriously the idea that Bush might not leave in 2009, but, hey, who knows?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. Thank You for Pointing That Out
I missed that and yes, it is scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. Never thought of that. They could take the position that nothing
can be changed and that the new Congress should not be sworn in yet - and could get the outgoing Congress to legislate that - we are at war, yadda, yadda. Though the people would probably not go for it without being outraged.

The excitement of being at war is gone for most armchair warriors, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niallmac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. Admittedly I don't watch TV but if this is true has the American
public been sufficiently wound up by Fox news et al to accept this new
reason to sacrifice their sons and daughters?
My feeling is that there exists no sufficient war hysteria
for another front.

I don't have to start watching TV again do I?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yeah, I've been preaching this for awhile
Bush promised to do it before the end of his term.

If he doesn't do it now, the new congress won't let him

Read more at globalresearch.ca
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yea, we've been discussing this since September...just search
for "USS Eisenhower" to find relevant threads.

I thought they'd fire that thing with Iran up just before the elections, but I guess they have other plans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Let's start with this one
Edited on Sat Nov-18-06 05:51 PM by seemslikeadream
If one of our ships in the Eisenhower Battle Group were to be fired upon

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


or this one
Bush Will Start War to Try For "Rally Round the Flag", Ships to be SUNK
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

maybe this

The coming war against Iran - Part 12
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


War Pimp Alert: Charles Krauthammer Calls For Attack on Iran
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Iran "War Signals"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Robert Parry: 'The Bushes & the Truth About Iran'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Pentagon Iran Office Mimics Former Iraq 'Office of Special Plans'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

We Are Conducting Military Operations Inside Iran Right Now...'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Navy Told to Block Iran with Submarines (Raw Story)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Kucinich: The Bush Administration is preparing for war against Iran
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

FUTURE SHOCK -- A Possible Future If Bush Attacks Iran (LONG)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Why Bush Will Nuke Iran
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

WHY THE IRAN ATTACK MAY BE IMMINENT
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

IRAN, IKE (CV-69) & Marines on the move, Adm. Swift posted to Bahrain, -
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

More On The Naval Blockade
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Thanks :) It's a lazy Saturday afternoon...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
44. If there is a war on Iran, there will also be a war on us, the American people
Leopolds Ghost's "Future Shock" makes that ominously clear, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angstlessk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. The Enterprise and its group returned home to Norfolk last week
so I doubt that is going to happen. Was on the news here. Big happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Well, in yet another shining testament to our MSM, I did not know that.
Edited on Sat Nov-18-06 05:33 PM by Texas Explorer
In fact, the cited article does indeed include the Enterprise as one of those ships in the area. Guess that demonstrates the validity of that particular article.

USS Enterprise - http://news.google.com/news?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. That was when I conceded that the election
has produced some positive result. I was CERTAIN that if the Repukes maintained their majority, Iran would go up in smoke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
independentpiney Donating Member (966 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
11. Germany leading, Greece, Denmark, Belgium, France Turkey..,
Why would all these countries that didn't support the Iraq invasion be secretly in collusion with a Cheney led plan to attack Iran? Anything's possible, but i'd be interested to hear any ideas as to logic of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
12. Not sure but it is very difficult for me to see countries like Germany joining the U.S. in such an..
endeavor. For that reason, I would say this report could be erroneous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. U.S., allies practice intercepts in Gulf

http://washingtontimes.com/world/20061029-115609-7004r....
U.S., allies practice intercepts in Gulf
By Nicholas Kralev
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
October 30, 2006


The United States and five other countries will begin an exercise in the Persian Gulf today simulating the interdiction of a ship carrying nuclear materials to a state of "proliferation concern" -- most likely Iran.
U.S. officials said that Muslim countries will take part for the first time in a Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) exercise, part of Washington's global effort to disrupt traffic in weapons of mass destruction and related materials.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
13. NATO will not join an attack on Iran, imho
Edited on Sat Nov-18-06 06:00 PM by Selatius
The reason other nations like Canada and Germany are in the Indian Ocean is to support ongoing operations in Afghanistan.

These guys are likely not going to attack Iran either:

The NATO force is composed of troops and naval vessels from several countries and is lead by Germany. It includes German command naval forces, Italian navy, 2 Spanish warships, 3 Danish warships, 10 Greek warships, 2 Netherlands warships, and French, Belgium, Turkish, and Bulgarian troops in South Lebanon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
15. Smirk's answer to every problem is to kill people
Trying to neutralize the upcoming snowstorm of subpoenae. Since the chances of impeachment and prison sentences for all of his cronies looms large, he will likely commence to killing again before the new Congress can take their seats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
16. USS Boxer's USMC...
...component, the 15th MEU (SOC), is going to Al-Anbar province.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jcrowley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
18. Need the oil
It is clear that the geopolitics of oil have changed, and this is a point made in Naked Imperialism.In the chapter "U.S. Imperial Ambitions and Iraq" there is a bar graph superimposed on a map of the world showing very visibly the extent to which the oil reserves of the world are concentrated in the Middle East. There is a lot of discussion today about whether the world has reached or even passed "peak oil" production. No one really knows the answer; there are still too many unknowns, though the peak oil hypothesis is a plausible one. What we do know for certain is what the oil industry calls reserve/production ratios (or simply r/p ratios), which give you the number of years before reserves are likely to be exhausted for various oil-producing countries in the world, based on current production levels. This tells us that with each passing year a larger percentage of the world reserves will be located in the Middle East, since the reserves to production ratios there are far higher. It is obvious then that control of the Middle East reserves becomes more critical each year if world oil supplies are to be secured.

The United States has long designated the security of world oil reserves as a vital strategic interest, which translates ultimately into U.S. leverage over the production and sale of these reserves, not to mention the profits to be derived from this. A whole series of foreign policy doctrines -- the Eisenhower doctrine of 50 years ago, the Carter doctrine, the Bush doctrine -- have been principally aimed at the Middle East, and amount to the extension of the Monroe doctrine (which asserted U.S. hegemony in the Americas) to the Middle East. One of the reasons given by the administration for the Iraq war was to prevent Saddam Hussein from having a "stranglehold" on world oil. Perhaps this was the closest to an honest reason they gave.

Beyond the larger geopolitical issue of securing the Middle East and its oil for the empire of capital there is the question of who actually exploits the oil and who profits from it. U.S. and British corporations are now positioned to gain control over the production of, and to reap huge profits from, the Iraqi oil reserves through so-called "production sharing agreements," which will give them rights to the exploitation and sale of the bulk of Iraq oil reserves for decades to come -- even allowing them to book this oil as "assets" in their accounts. In other words they will have the material equivalent of the old imperial concessions system for oil. This is apparently the main thrust of a new proposed oil law in Iraq that was written by Washington and London with the help of leading oil corporations, and that, in accordance with an IMF deadline, is supposed to be approved by the Iraqi government by the end of this year.

Defenders of U.S. imperialism in Iraq naturally contend that "It is not all about oil" and try to present the "NO BLOOD FOR OIL" slogan of the antiwar movement as unpatriotic and the voice of irrationalism. They act righteously indignant regarding any suggestion that the United States is planning to loot Iraq's oil wealth. But it is impossible to deny that much of this conflict is about oil directly. And indirectly all questions regarding Iraq return in the end to oil, which from a geostrategic standpoint is what makes Iraq so important. In a recent poll of Iraqis less than 2 percent thought that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was to promote democracy in Iraq. More than three quarters of Iraqis believed that the single most important reason for the invasion was control of Iraqi oil.

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/foster171106.html

:hi:

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
19. Where the hell are these guys going to hide once this is over and
the investigations begin? They are out of control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoBushSpokenHere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Paraguay
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0610/S00308.htm

BUSH REPORTED TO HAVE PURCHASED 99,000 ACRES IN PARAGUAY

Why might the president and his family need a 98,840-acre ranch in Paraguay protected by a semi-secret U.S. military base manned by American troops who have been exempted from war-crimes prosecution by the Paraguayan government? - Wonkette

More at link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. They can't expect to control that base forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
22. 
December 7th would be a symbolically appropriate date for the onset of "Shock & Awe II".

pnorman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mme. Defarge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
24. I would be more worried about this if
last week's election had not been a landslide on a national scale. They can't imprison the majority of the U.S. population. It's over. Bush and Cheney are toast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 02:56 AM
Response to Original message
25. The Enterprise is on its way back to Norfolk
It docked in Lisbon last week for shore leave. If they wanted to attack Iran, it would still be in the region.

Sorry, but we've been hearing a lot of this stuff for months -- it's really just psyops aimed at keeping Iran off-balance while U.S. forces are withdrawn from Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 03:19 AM
Response to Original message
26. attacking Iran would be insanity . . . it would also be illegal and immoral . . .
and the Congress damn well better step up and do something to stop it . . .

Democrats in the current Congress should initiate something -- anything -- that will bring this pending disaster to public attention and generate sufficient public pressure to force Bush and his Republican cohorts in Congress to back down . . . before he starts World War III . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheBaldyMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 05:47 AM
Response to Original message
27. Won't happen. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 07:21 AM
Response to Original message
28. Horseshite!!!!!
THe Entgerprise in on its way back to Norfolk.
Many of these thia "armada" is in the mes supporting the buffer ub siuth Lebanon.

But mosy importantly Baker and oppy will not let hime do it and I suspect the militryu wan't nothing to do with it.

You guys were posting this drivel earlier saying that it was going to happen before the election. now it is before convening... then it will be before the SOTU, then Tax day, then memorial day...then just in time for the fourth of July.



Go away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. Please don't tell me to go away
I have every right to be here if I follow the rules. Please don't try and silence people censorship is not nice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. You are more then welcom to stay and say anything you want
I should not have said that... Nonethless it is still a suppositionin search of credible evidence that does not exist. This is the same sort of logical falacy which led Bush to conclude there "must be" WMD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. Thank you so much for allowing me to stay, can Sy post here too
if he is so inclined? ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. Sy is more than welcome as well
But has he said war with Iran is imminent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. It depends what your definition of imminent is
Edited on Sun Nov-19-06 01:48 PM by seemslikeadream
before leaving office sounds pretty imminent to me.


http://www.newyorker.com/fact

Cheney began reminiscing about his job as a lineman, in the early nineteen-sixties, for a power company in Wyoming. Copper wire was expensive, and the linemen were instructed to return all unused pieces three feet or longer. No one wanted to deal with the paperwork that resulted, Cheney said, so he and his colleagues found a solution: putting shorteners on the wirethat is, cutting it into short pieces and tossing the leftovers at the end of the workday. If the Democrats won on November 7th, the Vice-President said, that victory would not stop the Administration from pursuing a military option with Iran. The White House would put shorteners on any legislative restrictions, Cheney said, and thus stop Congress from getting in its way.

.....


The consultant added that, for some advocates of military action, the goal in Iran is not regime change but a strike that will send a signal that America still can accomplish its goals. Even if it does not destroy Irans nuclear network, there are many who think that thirty-six hours of bombing is the only way to remind the Iranians of the very high cost of going forward with the bomband of supporting Moqtada al-Sadr and his pro-Iran element in Iraq. (Sadr, who commands a Shiite militia, has religious ties to Iran.)

In the current issue of Foreign Policy, Joshua Muravchik, a prominent neoconservative, argued that the Administration had little choice. Make no mistake: President Bush will need to bomb Irans nuclear facilities before leaving office, he wrote. The President would be bitterly criticized for a premptive attack on Iran, Muravchik said, and so neoconservatives need to pave the way intellectually now and be prepared to defend the action when it comes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 01:54 PM
Original message
End of the administration? Hmm the original post contended it waqs going to happen by xmas
which one is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. End of the administration? Hmm the original post contended it waqs going to happen by xmas
which one is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. Being informed of what the adminstration is thinking
Edited on Sun Nov-19-06 02:12 PM by seemslikeadream
is what is important here. I don't know WHEN it would happen and being lumped into the "you guys" group is not polite of you. First of all it's not true.

BTW check post #6 I don't see my name in any of those threads
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. This is similar to what the CIA was saying before Iraq, too...
"The Administrations planning for a militar attack on Iran was made far more complicate earlier this fall by a highly classified draf assessment by the C.I.A. challenging the Whit Houses assumptions about how close Ira might be to building a nuclear bomb. Th C.I.A. found no conclusive evidence, as yet, o a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons progra running parallel to the civilian operations tha Iran has declared to the International Atomi Energy Agency. (The C.I.A. declined t comment on this story.

The C.I.A.s analysis, which has been circulated to other agencies for comment, was based on technical intelligence collected by overhead satellites, and on other empirical evidence, such as measurements of the radioactivity of water samples and smoke plumes from factories and power plants. Additional data have been gathered, intelligence sources told me, by high-tech (and highly classified) radioactivity-detection devices that clandestine American and Israeli agents placed near suspected nuclear-weapons facilities inside Iran in the past year or so. No significant amounts of radioactivity were found....

The former senior intelligence official added that the C.I.A. assessment raised the possibility that an American attack on Iran could end up serving as a rallying point to unite Sunni and Shiite populations. An American attack will paper over any differences in the Arab world, and well have Syrians, Iranians, Hamas, and Hezbollah fighting against usand the Saudis and the Egyptians questioning their ties to the West. Its an analysts worst nightmarefor the first time since the caliphate there will be common cause in the Middle East. (An Islamic caliphate ruled the Middle East for over six hundred years, until the thirteenth century.)

According to the Pentagon consultant, The C.I.A.s view is that, without more intelligence, a large-scale bombing attack would not stop Irans nuclear program. And a low-end campaign of subversion and sabotage would play into Irans handsbolstering support for the religious leadership and deepening anti-American Muslim rage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. 
Edited on Sun Nov-19-06 04:12 PM by Ms. Clio
And thus the neocons will have created the monolithic "Muslim enemy" they have been obsessing about for years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #29
36. I want you around here forever,
my good friend. :hi: :kick: :thumbsup:

Who says we always have to agree on everything? That just wouldn't be DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. Thank you my friend, I just like to be able to read everything
Edited on Sun Nov-19-06 01:58 PM by seemslikeadream
and then judge for myself what to believe and what not to believe. With the attitude some have here I would not be able to do that and neither would you. And just because I post an article does that automatically mean I agree with it? Am I supposed to interject my opinion in every link I submit? I'd like to leave that up to the readers. There are so very many intelligent people here, it's great to get their take on things. That helps me make up my mind. I've learn so much here.

:toast: To free discussion!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #39
46. To free discussion and nickel beers
Cheers.
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. and please read this from Hersh, I guess he should go away too!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

"If the Democrats won on November 7th, the vice president said, that victory would not stop the administration from pursuing a military option with Iran," Hersh wrote, citing a source familiar with the discussion.

Cheney said the White House would circumvent any legislative restrictions "and thus stop Congress from getting in its way," he said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retired AF Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #28
40. And hopefully my son that is stationed on the Boxer
will be home soon to see his new daughter. (the one that knows how to use a sling)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota_Lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
33. The inclusion of NATO in this makes me highly skeptical. Also...
..I must consider the source.

Red Flag Warning! The Free Congress Foundation (more formally the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation, and Free Congress or FCF for short), is a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C. founded and led by Paul Weyrich. Paul Weyrich? LOL

These folks are some of the biggest purveyors of the "liberal media" myth.

Red Flag Warning! TheocracyWatch, a project run by the Center for Religion, Ethics and Social Policy at Cornell University and critical of much of politically active religious conservatism, says that the Free Congress Foundation has ties to what TheocracyWatch calls the Dominionist movement. As an example of "Dominionism In Action," TheocracyWatch says FCF's manifesto The Integration of Theory and Practice: A Program for the New Traditionalist Movement "illuminates the tactics of the dominionist movement."<2> The manifesto is no longer on the FCF website.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Congress_Foundation

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cool user name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
34. Hell hath no fury like a Cheney scorned ...
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
41. "Bomb Iran" By Joshua Muravchik, in the LA Times today
Edited on Sun Nov-19-06 02:08 PM by bloom
"JOSHUA MURAVCHIK is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute."

WE MUST bomb Iran.

It has been four years since that country's secret nuclear program was brought to light, and the path of diplomacy and sanctions has led nowhere....


http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-...


blah, blah, blah, war, war, war...



This guy was on Democracy Now the other day. And he was a first class jerk.


It looks like they are trying to get people ready... :nuke:


Edit: link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #41
48. What a nut case. And to think that a prominent newspaper gives him a pulpit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. I wonder why a prominent newspaper would do that?
:shrug:

Maybe to let people know what they're planning next? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-19-06 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
47. The thing that gets me about Bush
Edited on Sun Nov-19-06 04:40 PM by Horse with no Name
is that he is always in your face. "Whatcha going to do about it"? type mentality.
After reading some of the posts in this thread, my blood ran cold.
Is this why election fraud didn't occur on a widespread basis? Because when this happens nothing matters anyway? They already have the getaway vehicle in place.
:scared:
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 Sun Oct 13th 2019, 05:13 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