Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Iran’

March 07, 2012 05:00 PM

Crooks and Liars- By karoli

Mitt Romney’s pathetic efforts to stain the President’s track record when it comes to foreign policy ring hollow and are actually dangerous, or could be. During his news conference yesterday, President Obama addressed Mitt Romney’s irresponsible comments about war with Iran in recent days. Here’s a sample:

“Yet, the current administration has promoted a policy of engagement with Iran,” he continued. “The president not only dawdled in opposing sanctions, he’s opposed them. Hope is not a foreign policy. The only thing respected by thugs and tyrants is our resolve, backed by our power and our readiness to use it.”

Earlier this week in Snellville, Georgia, Romney told an 11-year-old boy that the world would be one step closer to nuclear war if President Barack Obama was allowed another term in office.

“If Barack Obama gets re-elected, Iran will have a nuclear weapon and the world will change if that’s the case,” he said.

This follows on the heels of his irresponsible statements at the last debate about how he, and he alone, would prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

President Obama had some choice words for him and any other Republican candidate who thinks war with Iran is a good idea.

OBAMA: At this stage, it is my belief that we have a window of opportunity where this can still be resolved diplomatically. That’s not just my view — that’s the view of our top intelligence officials, it’s the view of top Israeli intelligence officials. And as a consequence, we are going to continue to apply the pressure, even as we provide a door for the Iranian regime to walk through, where they could rejoin the community of nations, by giving assurances to the international community that they are meeting their obligations and they are not pursuing a nuclear weapon. That’s my track record.

Now, what’s said on the campaign trail, you know, those folks don’t have a lot of responsibilities. They’re not commander in chief. And when I see the casualness with which some of these folks talk about war, I’m reminded of the costs involved in war. I’m reminded of the decision that I have to make, in terms of sending our young men and women into battle, and the impacts that has on their lives, the impact it has on our national security, the impact it has on our economy.

This is not a game, and there’s nothing casual about it. And, you know, when I see some of these folks who had a lot of bluster and a lot of big talk, but when you actually ask them, specifically, what they would do, it turns out they repeat the things that we’ve been doing over the last three years. It indicates to me that that’s more about politics than actually trying to solve a difficult problem.

Now, the one thing that we have not done, is we haven’t launched a war. If some of these folks think that it’s time to launch a war, they should say so. and they should explain to the American people exactly why they would do that and what the consequences would be. Everything else is just talk.

It’s not just the President who thinks they’re being irresponsible with their “loose talk of war,” either. The former director of the Mossad spoke out, saying Romney is actually making the situation worse with Iran. The National Security Network has a roundup of other condemnations by highly respected current and former officials also condemning it, and reminding people that war is not “another applause line.”

Doesn’t the Republican drumbeat for war with Iran feel a lot like the drumbeat for war with Iraq back in 2003? It does to me, and so let me just remind readers and casual visitors alike that there is no evidence of Iran actually having a nuclear weapon. Further, Iran has agreed to restart talks with the world community and agreed in principle to allow nuclear inspectors to visit the Parchin site. Saying so doesn’t make it so, but it’s certainly a step in the right direction.

It frustrates me to see Republicans warmonger to create a campaign wedge, but I don’t understand why they think they’ll succeed. This is a war-weary nation and support for another war is almost nil. What do they think they gain with this kind of “loose talk”?

SOURCE

Read Full Post »

February 15, 2012

Addicting Info  By

Rick Santorum is currently the poster boy for conservatism and the candidate leading the national polls among Republicans. Every day, Romney gets a little weaker, and Santorum gets a little stronger. And that makes him a threat to be the Republican Presidential nominee who faces President Obama in the general election this fall. But who exactly would the American people really be voting for if they elected Santorum? The answer could make you throw up in your mouth a little bit.

If Americans were to elect Rick Santorum to the Presidency, they’d be electing a second George W. Bush. In fact, Santorum would be even worse. If Rick Perry is the dumber version of Bush, Rick Santorum is the extreme version. According to Congressional Quarterly, Santorum supported Bush policies over 95% of the time from 2001 to 2005. Here is just a sample of the many Bush supported policies that Santorum voted for.

Tax Cuts) Santorum loves tax cuts. In fact, he voted for the 2001 Bush tax cuts, the repeal the Inheritance Tax in 2002, the 2003 Bush tax cuts, and he voted for extending the Bush tax cuts in 2006. These tax cuts are partly to blame for the large deficits created by Republicans that continue to plague our economy today and has contributed to the largest increase in income inequality since the Great Depression. But Santorum would be worse than Bush because he wants to cut taxes even more for corporations and the wealthy.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »


Huff Post- Posted: 2/15/12 | Updated: 2/15/12

By- David Wood

WASHINGTON —  The threat of punishing U.S. military strikes underlies Washington’s campaign to halt Iran’s nuclear weapons program. But there is no enthusiasm evident within the U.S. military for a war many believe would be messy, bloody, unpredictable and ultimately inconclusive.

Seeking to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons, President Barack Obama has focused on coordinating international economic pressure against Iran and moved to strengthen economic sanctions just last week. But he warned in the Jan. 24 State of the Union address, “Let there be no doubt: American is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal.”

It’s a truism of diplomacy to never to make a threat that you’re not prepared to carry out. There is no doubt that if ordered, the U.S. military would launch devastating attacks against Iran. Whether such strikes would come along with or instead of Israeli attacks, tactical planning is already under way, as is done routinely for a variety of potential military operations the Pentagon might be ordered to carry out, senior officers said.

“If called upon, I have no doubt that the armed forces of the United States will deal with whatever contingencies might unfold there,” Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz said last week when asked about a possible military confrontation with Iran.

But Gen. Martin Dempsey, the crusty Army general who heads the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told National Journal last month that a war with Iran “would be really destabilizing … I personally believe that we should be in the business of deterring [war] as a first priority,” he said.

The Joint Chiefs are hardly a bunch of shrinking violets. Dempsey commanded the 1st Armored Division for 14 months of hard combat in Iraq and served there another two years directing the training of Iraqi security forces.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

  • Whitehall figures say Iran is ‘newly aggressive – and we are not sure why’
  • Iran ‘has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons’
  • Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushing for invasion
  • Tel Aviv test-fires rockets capable of carrying nuclear warheads into Iran
  • Report reveals China continues to supply Tehran with missiles and other conventional weapons
  • Obama says nuclear programme remains a threat and calls on Iran to reveal its intentions

 
By Ian Drury
Created 11:01 PM on 2nd November 2011

The UK and U.S. are drawing up plans to attack Iran amid growing tensions in the Middle East, it was claimed last night.

Barack Obama and David Cameron are preparing for war after reports that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hardline regime in Tehran has been linked to three assassination plots on foreign soil, according to senior officials in Whitehall.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056873/Iran-attack-drawn-UK-US-Middle-East-tensions-rise.html#ixzz1celsUFdb

Read Full Post »

Iran Opposition Leaders Should Be Tried And Executed, Hardline Lawmakers Say

AP/The Huffington Post NASSER KARIMI  First Posted: 02/15/11 08:29 AM Updated: 02/15/11 12:40 PM

TEHRAN, Iran — Hardline Iranian lawmakers called on Tuesday for the country’s opposition leaders to face trial and be put to death, a day after clashes between opposition protesters and security forces left one person dead and dozens injured.

Hundreds of thousands of people turned out for the opposition rally Monday in solidarity with Egypt’s popular revolt that toppled President Hosni Mubarak after nearly 30 years in power. The demonstration was the first major show of strength from Iran’s beleaguered opposition in more than a year.

1,500 people have reportedly been arrested.

At an open session of parliament Tuesday, pro-government legislators demanded opposition leaders Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mahdi Karroubi and former reformist President Mohammad Khatami face be held responsible for the protests.

Pumping their fists in the air, the lawmakers chanted “death to Mousavi, Karroubi and Khatami.”

“We believe the people have lost their patience and demand capital punishment” for the opposition leaders, 221 lawmakers said in a statement.

Hardliners have long sought to put senior opposition figures on trial, but the calls for the death penalty signaled an escalation in their demands.

MORE HERE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Obama says Iran should allow peaceful protests

AP- Feb 15, 11:29 AM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says peaceful protests similar to those that brought down the government in Egypt should be allowed to take place on the streets of Iran.

Instead, Obama says the Iranian regime has celebrated the undoing of Hosni Mubarak’s (HOHS’-nee moo-BAH’-rahks) government in Egypt but at the same time has gunned down and beat Iranians who similarly were trying to express themselves peacefully.

Obama says what has been true in Egypt should also be true in Iran.

MORE HERE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read Full Post »

C-SPAN

For a second time former British Prime Minister Tony Blair testified before the Committee of Inquiry on the Iraq War. January 2010, Mr. Blair testified before the five-member group on his role during the lead up to the war, military preparedness, and his relationship with President George W. Bush.

Chilcot Inquiry: Tony Blair heckled as he expresses regret for this loss of life in the Iraq war

The Telegraph

By Rosa Prince, Political Correspondent
2:31PM GMT 21 Jan 2011
Relatives of those killed in the conflict shouted out “It’s too late,” as an emotional Mr Blair told of his sorrow at the bloodshed, while two female witnesses walked out and another turned her face away.

Video & More

Read Full Post »

William Blum, Foreign Policy Journal, August 5, 2010

If and when the United States and Israel bomb Iran (marking the sixth country so blessed by Barack Obama) and this sad old world has a new daily horror show to look at on their TV sets, and we then discover that Iran was not actually building nuclear weapons after all, the American mainstream media and the benighted American mind will ask: “Why didn’t they tell us that? Did they want us to bomb them?”

The same questions were asked about Iraq following the discovery that Saddam Hussein didn’t in fact have any weapons of mass destruction. However, in actuality, before the US invasion Iraqi officials had stated clearly on repeated occasions that they had no such weapons. I’m reminded of this by the recent news report about Hans Blix, former chief United Nations weapons inspector, who led a doomed hunt for WMD in Iraq. Last week he told the British inquiry into the March 2003 invasion that those who were “100 percent certain there were weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq turned out to have “less than zero percent knowledge” of where the purported hidden caches might be. He testified that he had warned British Prime Minister Tony Blair in a February 2003 meeting — as well as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in separate talks — that Hussein might have no weapons of mass destruction.[1]

Continues >>

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: