I didn't think so.
And that statement is ridiculous, Iran and Iraq enemies, remember the Iran-Iraq war? Iraq would jus
nm
Less Safe
Bush and his group of neocons say we are more safe and secure due to his illegal war. That is so not true. We are less safe because of the Iraq war. We have created a terrorist breeding ground and a reason for people of other countries to hate us even more. I was shocked when the neocons linked up 9/11and Iraq. There was no connection whatsoever, yet so many Americans believed the lies. I can understand that a lot of Americans are not really into politics, gee, having to work two or three jobs, take care of a home and kids leaves little time..so we trust our leaders. Well, in this situation we should not have trusted our leaders. My motto always has been, **Question Authority**.
How exactly did he keep us safe?
What actual credible plot was derailed by him?
It is safe to say that his
future political career is in the dumpster. At least he admitted it when he got caught instead of lying under oath like Clinton and at least his wife wasn't dying of cancer like Edwards wife supposedly was....but whatever. Keep trashing pubs for mistakes that dems make all the time if it makes you feel better JTBB!
It is a shame that we have to hear about politicians doing this sort of thing and I do feel for his wife and kids. He will have to live with the consequences of his actions.
Agree with you, PK, but safe is only
a state of mind...just as is FREEDOM. We have no freedom anymore, face it! It's gone!, gone to the people who HATE US! Just dispicable. And the really sad truth, Bush didn't do this all by himself, he's TOO STUPID. For some reason, the higher echilon wants to be rid of the middle class which doesn't make much sense either as the middle class foots all of the bills. By the time we all figure this out, it will be WAY TOO LATE. Pessimistic? You bet I am. But, I just keep plugging away from day to day, doing the best I can, but waiting for the shoe to drop. At least we aren't in the dark, which is more than I can say about the other 25% of the American people.
I don't think it's safe too share too much on here. SM
I did it once and I was crucified for it. Won't do it again. Truthfully, and this is not meant to be mean, I don't think I would have much in common with most on this board at all.
I don't feel particularly safe -
I am not a Bush basher - I actually voted for him and have never once said that I should have voted differently. And you will not find one single bad comment about him on this board that has come from me.
That being said, from things I have been reading that are going on in the administration right now, I am really worried about how much damage can be done and how long it will take to fix that damage.
I felt the same way when Hillary/Bill left the white house - they screwed up a lot in those last days and that is one reason why Hillary did not get my vote this time.
I feel like Bush has actually done a pretty good job over all with all the problems he had to face during his 8 years - never said otherwise...
Bush Kept us Safe?
You are sadly mistaken. We're lucky he didn't get us blown off the face of the earth. Read history, don't try to rewrite it.
Who was keeping us safe before
9/11? So tired of hearing this crap. This was the first time ever (not this present president on watch) that the US was attacked on its own land and yet you talk about since 9/11. Why not even before then?? I think the attitude of most on here sucks. All chicken littles, scared. booooooo. See, made you jump.
Praying for his safe return....nm I sure hope you are right because I sure do not feel safe. sm
Have you heard this one?
As for your calls being listened to....that happened many many years ago. I do believe it happened during the Regan years (I'll be honest and tell you I can't find anything on the internet as to when it actually started) but I know for a fact it was happening during the Clinton administration.
Wonder how many who worked at the WTC felt safe on 9/10/01?
I'd bet about 100%. Doesn't mean much, does it? In fact, the majority are often wrong when it comes to things like this.
Gosh, this site might not be safe since you have IP information!!!
It is not possible for other countries to differentiate between the people of Iran and the government leaders. They deal with the leaders.
You know, we were fed a line in this country as far as back the first George Bush administration back in 1988-1992 that the people of Iraq did not support Hussein and that he would be overthrown by internal forces. That did not happen. We went in there 3 years ago to free the Iraqi people and it is now a huge mess that has cost thousands of lives, mostly Iraqi, and cost an unbelievable amount of money. Now Iran is making more noise. They hated the Shah because of his close ties to the West, so they put in a lunatic Islamic cleric and turned the country into a religious state. Islam teaches brotherhood and tolerance, so why are the leaders of this religious state so full of hate and spite?
Frankly, I think we should completely withdraw from the Middle East, including Israel. We should deport all Middle Easterners from this this country and from our American territories. We should quit buying your oil and anything else you produce. Leave us alone and we'll return the favor.
I think it is apparent that democracy is not possible in Arab Islamic countries. It works in other Muslim countries, like Turkey and some other places, but obviously the Middle East is not evolved enough to be able to tolerate other people's viewpoints and value systems. Until that happens, there can be no democracy.
Iran
" Rafsanjani, one of the most influential politicians in Iran, supports opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, who says that June 12 elections were rigged in favor of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. That puts him in conflict with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who has approved of the electoral win. "
" In Washington, President Barack Obama urged an end to the crackdown. “We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people,” he said in an e-mailed statement. "
Till now the verbal support of Obama suffice to give the protesters enough moral support to continue with their just protests. Khatami is detaining his own people and their relatives!
I was listening to a variety of news shows and visiting a number of news sites this morning for my "daily dose" when it struck me that the coverage about Iran is already diminishing - even on sites like Fox News.
Sometimes I think that we Americans have the attention span of a fruit fly...and I also think that people like the Ayatollah rely on the fact that after a brief period of outrage, Americans will forget that there may be thousands of Iranians either in hospitals or sitting in cells waiting to hear exactly how they will be executed.
Iran's increasingly isolated opposition leader effectively ended his role in street protests, saying he'll seek permits for future rallies. A leading cleric demanded in a nationally broadcast sermon Friday that leaders of the unrest be punished harshly and that some are "worthy of execution."
Well, here it is, folks. The beginning of the end of humanity, as Congress sits paralyzed and watches it happen (unless they finally grow a backbone and say *ENOUGH* to Bush).
The administration of President George W. Bush is planning a massive bombing campaign against Iran, including use of bunker-buster nuclear bombs to destroy a key Iranian suspected nuclear weapons facility, The New Yorker magazine has reported in its April 17 issue.
The article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said that Bush and others in the White House have come to view Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a potential Adolf Hitler.
That's the name they're using, the report quoted a former senior intelligence official as saying.
A senior unnamed Pentagon adviser is quoted in the article as saying that this White House believes that the only way to solve the problem is to change the power structure in Iran, and that means war.
The former intelligence officials depicts planning as enormous, hectic and operational, Hersh writes.
One former defense official said the military planning was premised on a belief that a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government, The New Yorker pointed out.
In recent weeks, the president has quietly initiated a series of talks on plans for Iran with a few key senators and members of the House of Representatives, including at least one Democrat, the report said.
One of the options under consideration involves the possible use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, to insure the destruction of Iran's main centrifuge plant at Natanz, Hersh writes.
But the former senior intelligence official said the attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings inside the military, and some officers have talked about resigning after an attempt to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans in Iran failed, according to the report.
There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries, the magazine quotes the Pentagon adviser as saying.
The adviser warned that bombing Iran could provoke a chain reaction of attacks on American facilities and citizens throughout the world and might also reignite Hezbollah.
If we go, the southern half of Iraq will light up like a candle, the adviser is quoted as telling The New Yorker.
Yes, and regarding that final paragraph re: Iran
Seymour Hersh has yet to get it wrong, no matter how much the King George and his men attack.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact
I believe he made the statement concerning Iran...
because Ahmadinejad has said publically that Israel should be wiped off the map and he had a vision of the world without the United States. Don't recall North Korea saying anything remotely like that. The big difference in Kim Jong IL and Ahmadinejad is that Ahmadinejad does not care what happen if he nuked Israel or the US...because to him, being martyred is the most wonderful thing that can happen to anyone. And if his attack ushered in the coming of the 12th Imam, mores the better. If you will look at his statements, especially the one about the 12th Imam...that will tell you why he could very well be the one to start a world war III if he had nukes. I believe that is what was meant.
And one could surmise he used that word to shock some out of their complacency.
marks the location of current message within thread!["](http://images.bloomberg.com/r06/global/odot.gif"){kind=small}
![](http://images.bloomberg.com/r06/news/story_tl.gif"){kind=small}
![](http://images.bloomberg.com/r06/news/story_bl.gif"){kind=small}
![Iran](http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20090617/videolthumb.ec330d8bf51ff0f97896c253d0a81a66.jpg?x=213&y=160&xc=1&yc=1&wc=399&hc=300&q=85&sig=n02llinss0WKJvn1w3HGlg--")
