Do not believe these people.
Serial numbers and other markings on bombs suggest that Iranians are linked to deadly explosives used by Iraqi militants, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday in some of the administration’s first public assertions on evidence the military has collected.
1.08.03, George W. Bush:
The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.
Do not believe these people.
Oliver,
You know this is just the second step into the war plans of Bush/Cheney-Burton. The set-up was in the State of the Union Address, now we have unverified evidence amid speculation. Poll numbers are down, why not start a new war to divert attention from Iraq and get those flags waving again? Oops, my bad, did I say war “plans?” We won’t engage with a plan. We will just engage.
Why not just lay it out right now Ollie:
Do you believe that the Iranians are NOT involved in the current insurgency in Iraq?
There is one big difference. When Bush was crusing for his misadventures in Iraq, his poll numbers were high post-9/11. Now, everybody hates George. Of course, he still has Hillary Clinton and friends falling over themselves to say just how they would kick Iran’s ass, so we might be in for a long ride, but the voters are not interested. The spellings of the two countries are so similar that even a typical American who flunked geography would be reminded of Iraq when he heard Iran.
The biggest obstacle to Bush attacking Iran right now is that the whole idea is really insane, as nutty as attacking Russia in the winter. Impeachment isn’t fitting for someone doing this; a straight jacket is. Is there a cocaine dealer at the White House? I’m completely serious — and I prefer to think that someone high would attack Iran than someone not high.
Nancy Reagan gave us a fitting antiwar slogan for these guys — Just say no.
“Serial numbers and other markings on bombs suggest that Iranians are linked to deadly explosives used by Iraqi militants”
So they can track the explosives. Where are all the ones they left unguarded in 03?
Do you believe that the Iranians are NOT involved in the current insurgency in Iraq?
I’ll answer for myself — I do believe that they are not involved in the current insurgency in Iraq. The Iraqi government is so hideously pro-Iranian that they’d have to be crazy to want to topple it. Plus, we have no evidence of this save the Bush Administration’s say-so, the say-so of pathological liars.
So, Pedro, do you believe that the Iranians ARE involved in the current insurgency in Iraq? Why do you believe or not believe this?
I believe if we did any attack or strike against Iran, we would see how involved Iran could really be with Iraq.
Apparently no one here understands the difference between “intelligence” consisting mainly of foggy guesses and opinions and estimates, versus something physical that you can hold in your hand.
Which brings up another interesting question — considering how much emphasis the President’s critics put on “WMD” and “imminent threats” (things that Bush NEVER cited as primary reasons for toppling Saddam, by the way) don’t you think that the eeeeeeviiiilll Bu$hCoBurton regime would have at least tried to plant phony chemical weapons somewhere in Iraq? Since you are accusing them of currently planting phony evidence or lying about finding it, why would they wait until now, after their reputation has been ruined? Don’t you think that Darth Cheney and Adolf Rumsfeld would have thought of this sooner? Really … I’d like to know.
Put quite simply: if the Bush administration is saying it, I do not believe it. They’ve given me no reason to believe anything they’ve ever said their entire time in office, why the heck would I start now? Maybe Iran is a menace, maybe they’re developing a nuclear arsenal. I certainly do not believe these assertions when they come from the Bush administration because they are not a credible or believable source.
Mike: The Bush administration and its allies do consistently lie about finding WMD in Iraq, purporting old practically empty mustard shells as the rationale for going to war (as opposed to the mushroom cloud and imminent threat they rattled their sabers over in ‘02-03).
Oliver Willis | Feb 10, 2007 12:13:15 AM
“Put quite simply: if the Bush administration is saying it, I do not believe it. They’ve given me no reason to believe anything they’ve ever said their entire time in office, why the heck would I start now?”
Nicely and simply put, OW. Seems to me that sentiment was clearly and loudly conveyed by the American people last November.
Simply put, the bush crowd has zero credibility. Zero. Both here and in the rest of the world.
They could be telling the absolute truth for once, and still nobody but thirty-percenters like Pedro would believe them.
The only solution, for the good of the country, is for them to resign. All of them. The sooner the better.
I doubt the Iranians have anything to do with the insurgency against the pro-Iranian government that we put there in our infinite god damned wisdom and justice.
War with Iran. Shit. Is Bush trying to beat DC Comics to World War III?
Mike lives in the wonderful land of delusion. What were the reasons?
1. WMDs & Terrorism
2. WMDs
3. WMDs
4. WMDs
5. Threat, WMD
6. Brutal
7. WMDs
8. Bush Sr. Assassination, threat
9. Al Qaeda
10. Terrorism
11. 9-11, WMDs
12. WMDs, terrorism
13. Threat, Wmds, Brutal
14. Brutal
15. Terrorism, WMDs
16. Terrorism
17. 9-11 Terrorism
18. Terrorism
19. Threat
All taken from the Use of Force resolution.
10 out of 19 WMDs
8 out of 19 Terrorism including a few 9-11.
3 for threat to the region or US.
1 Bush SR assassination attempt
3 Brutals.
Iranian serial numbers does not exactly prove Iranian govt. involvement. Black market, covert arms dealers, thefts of materiel, etc.
I’m sure the insurgents have a shitload of weapons with US serial numbers left over from when Saddam was an ally, does that mean the US is helping the insurgency?
Everybody there seems to have Russian and Chinese AK-47’s; does that mean the Russians and Chinese are helping the insurgency?
According to these asshats, I guess it does.
I am sure the insurgents and terrorist have their share of US arms and equipment stolen or walked off with since the invasion. Alot of the Iraqi army we train by day are militia members by night.
So what should we do? Invade America?
Especially since I think the biggest terrorist threat AMerica faces today is not from Muslim fanatics but from right wing extremists.
Except that you historical revisionist forget that it wasn’t just the Bush Admin that made these claims.
So did the French, the Italians, the Germans, the British and the UN to name a few. Hell, the french and germans were taking payoffs from Saddam, and even they were agreeing withou our intelligence.
The american left CANNOT afford for the US to make headway in Iraq. So they will continue to do whatever they can to make the job harder.
Pathetic….
Irrational Conspiracy Theory Concocted in Desperate Attempt to Cover Up Obvious Wrongness coming in to land….
Define headway in Iraq.
pedugger, define victory in Iraq in one sentence.
And yet nobody but George Bush and Tony Blair made the final decision to invade and occupy Iraq. It is the American right, who has denied reality since before the war began, who has stymied any possible success we may have had – from Paul Bremer leading the Republican looting of Baghad to “Dead Enders” and “Bring It On” it’s all GOP time and time again. But we’re supposed to be so dumb that we believe them on Iran.
Pedo, you can put together that list of Bush Administration WMD claims that turned out to be true. Bear that torch.
Talk about Historical revisionism. All of those countries you named Pedrugger were willing to wait for the inspection process to finish except for GW Bush. I seem to recall the UN inspectors calling all US tips “garbage”. In other words, those other countries were all looking for confirmation. Bush on the other hand, knowingly had forged documents and unreliable witnesses to help him make his decision.
Don’t forget Oliver, everything Bush & Co are demanding of Iran right now, Iran offered three years ago before we pushed them away from the table.
“the president shook hands with Washington Life Magazine’s Soroush Shehabi. “I’m the grandson of one of the late Shah’s ministers,” said Soroush, “and I simply want to say one U.S. bomb on Iran and the regime we all despise will remain in power for another 20 or 30 years and 70 million Iranians will become radicalized.”"
“nd yet nobody but George Bush and Tony Blair made the final decision to invade and occupy Iraq.’…..
Are you serious oliver?
Remember the oil-for-food scandal? Those other countries were taking payola to give Iraq more time . The UN demanded action from Iraq to PROVE to the world that it had destroyed its KNOWN WMD’s, not permission whenever they felt like it to let someone in to look around.
But the fact that you accept that it wasn’t REALLY a BushCo conspiracy, that you admit that a bunch of countries and the UN agreed demonstrates some hope for you.
And lets remember who the people are that you and your leftist fellow travelers want to leave in charge of Iraq:
““AQI is both feared and hated,” Capt Broekhuizen said, referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq. “They’ve been running a brutal terror campaign. No city leaders are left here who will take a leadership role.” Marines from Golf Company said they recently fished two bodies out of the local river: a man had been decapitated, and his 4-year old tied to his leg before both were thrown into the river and the little boy drowned. The killings were a product of Al Qaeda terror”
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,124583,00.html?ESRC=eb.nl
Define. Victory. In. Iraq.
If you don’t it suggests you can’t. And if you can’t you have no business acting like William F. Buckley up here.
and close your html tags.
And a hilarious reminder of pedugger’s stunned silence after November’s elections following months of smug arrogance about how the Republicans had nothing to worry about.
sorry about the tag…
Victory in Iraq.
Stable democratically elected government
Growing capitalistic economy
Control of internecine violence
Control of foreign insurgents
Construction of stable infrastructure (water power etc.)
S you moron, go back and check my pre-election posts. I said the current crop of republicans deserved to be defeated. Stop making shit up….
And the US chances of achieving any of those conditions with Bush in command? ZERO.
If Bush had been able to go in with a decent level of troops and international support we might have had a chance. Instead he blew diplomacy squandering international creatingoodwill, sent too few trooops thus allowing internecine violence to escalate, looted the country, made a rallying point against US aggression, and has failed to restore the infrastructure and wasted hundreds of billions of US taxpayer dollars in the process.
Moron.
Bullshit, pedugger.
Like the moving goalpost criteria for victory in Iraq, you and Dugger smugly awaited a Republican victory last November. The deafening silence in the weeks following was a welcome change.
- Stable Jeffersonian democracy
- End to all conflicts between Sunnis and Shi’ites
- Moon on a stick
Well, one party is the party of surrender, the other is the party of pressing on until the job is complete.
The democrats want to be the party of failure,it is pretty clear.
S just shut your pile hole, or alternatively, back up your BS with a reference.
Dear god you’re an idiot.
And that’s not for want of anything of more substance to say. I’m certain that this is the single most appropriate response.
pedromd07 | Feb 11, 2007 3:08:48 PM
” …the other is the party of pressing on until the job is complete.”
According EITHER to The Decider’s Talking Points 4,385, 4,386, 4,387 & 4,388 (hard to keep count from the slam dunk, bring ‘em on days)
OR
When The Decider hands over the presidency and the next person gets to clean up the clusterfuck.
The democratic party wants to end the policy of republic failure, Pedo. That much is abundantly clear. It’s like the republic party is the party of compulsive gambling, flushing the US’s money and resources down the toilet.
Well, one party is the party of surrender,
I, for one, am getting really tired of hearing this bullshit, but if it helps you sleep at night, dreaming of Bill oooo, whatever.
I do wish you’d stop believing it, though. It just ain’t true.