Here comes the idiots who claim we have been in a "bumrush" to war with Iran, "for no reason" for the last 5 or so years. Longest bumrush in history.
House Resolution 362 -- with 220 co-sponsors as of June 26, including many from Georgia and South Carolina -- leaves the door open for a military blockade of Iran:
"Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), that Congress demands that the President initiate an international effort prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran's nuclear program."
The related Senate legislation, Senate Resolution 580, has 32 co-sponsors. Where are the news articles on this major issue that may lead us to a war with Iran?
Bill Busser, Aiken, S.C.
Comments
Here comes the idiots who claim we have been in a "bumrush" to war with Iran, "for no reason" for the last 5 or so years. Longest bumrush in history.
Isn't the U.N. pi$$ed with them too and want stricter sanctions?? I just hope this doesn't become the Saddam game of playing everybody for decades. All during that time he attacked Kuwait, killed millions of his own, etc, etc,etc. But of course he was never a threat to anyone, huh, well except Iran and every country that borders it. Maybe Bush will sign a law for "regime change" in Iran as Clinton did for Iraq. What a hoot.
LOL...did anyone see the FOX news report over the weekend about the US removing...GASP...Uranium from Iraq's nuke program...wait there were no NUKES in Iraq...the Threats from the UN got rid of them...I thought? Scott whatever who was the nuke inspector who said he got it all should be arrested for filing false reports.
BS, yak1 and Signal Always. Nice try at DISinformation. The sad thing is that your lies work on ignorant Americans. Here's the real scoop in that natural (non weapons grade) uranium that was LEGALLY in Iraq under international law and known to both the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency. It is also PROOF that Saddam didn't have to go to Niger in Africa to get yellowcake. He already had TONS of it on hand, but it was NOT enriched to weapon grade level.
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Augusta_Alternative/index.php?showtopic=1215
The letter writer is correct. Congress is egging the nation toward war with Iran. Why not negotiate with Iran on a quid pro quo basis? Iranians are NOT crazy. When Iran does finally develop nuclear weapons capability (and they will) that does nothing except change the balance of power in the region. It does not mean Iran will attack Israel. They are not suicidal. Iran has every right to enrich uranium to make fuel for reactors to generate electricity. As long as Iran abides by the non proliferation treaty the U.S. has no legal basis to demand sanctions. Even if Iran withdraws from the NPT - that is not casus belli. NO U.S. Iraq-style war on Iran!
Iran IS suicidal, you dolt. ..and yes, they need to have their facilities taken out now.
It is hypocritical of the U.S. and Israel to demand that other nations dismantel their nuclear programs when we have enough nuclear bombs to wipe the planet out for eons. Going to war with Iran will be a big mistake. Let's hope it won't come to that.
Ishefa, sometimes you have to step back and assess who the good guys are and who they aren't. Iran isn't the good guy.
I wish we didn't have a nuclear arsenal but given the Cold War and other historic events just imagine how things could have turned if otherwise. I find it sad that nuclear energy has a greater use for weapons than providing power. I agree with Cain that we shouldn't pursue a conventional war with Iran. But that doesn't mean we can use a mix of diplomacy, strategic strikes and intervention if the need arises. The Iranian citizens are very modern, educated, and aren't against western thought. The theocratic govt is the problem, which is a cautionary tale for any religion mixing with govt. as they force their beliefs on the masses. We can encourage a coup to allow the people to once again enjoy their freedoms they use to enjoy. More proof that govt is often the problem and not the solution.
Iran's nuclear program is a source of national pride in Iran and crosses all political and social boundaries. You don't promote democracy or peace by waging covert war or by blowing up Iran's nuclear facilities.
I am not arguing for a war against the people just regime change so the peoples voice can be heard. Too many political activist and scientist are being silenced. I don't have a problem with their pride as a modern nation, but the govt interest are anything but modern and just theocratic fanaticism. I don't think much of the disgust Europeans and Asians have with the U.S. is against the people but against the govt , esp. Bush.
We waged peace by kicking the living **** out of Japan and Germany, did we not? I'm sure genocide was considered "national pride" by some in Germany, circa 1939-1945. Guess we should have allowed it? Damn, I'll never understand the mental illness that is liberalism. Iran has, on SEVERAL occasions, stated that it intended to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, yet liberals don't want to do anything. I guess Neville Chamberlain has been reincarnated. They are also willing to give up 3/4s of their population to make it happen, so if you don't think they are "suicidal", I suggest you remove your head from your fourth point of contact. We are also in a de facto state of war with them. They are training, supplying, and financing our enemies in Iraq. These same enemies are also the enemy of the elected government of Iraq.
Here is a perfect example of the bum-rush to war with Iran: "Lieberman: After Iran wipes out Israel and 'Arab countries' in the Middle East, 'we're next!'
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/07/lieberman-were-next/
Signal.. Who determines who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys"? I am sure the Iranians think they are the good guys. Our military is stretched too thin as it is. We don't need to get into another Bush catastrophe.
Actions, 40something. Doesn't take a PhD. Google Iran, executions, civil rights, women, or anything else for that matter. If you can't see that we're in the right, and they're in the wrong, I'm sure Iran will be more than welcoming to you. I'll even throw in a first-class, one-way ticket. Good and evil exists, people. ...unless you thought there wasn't really anything bad about Germany, Italy, Cambodia, etc.
..and why do I get the impression that if you liberals were living as a Jew in Germany, an educated person in Cambodia during the 70's, a Christian in the Sudan, etc., you'd all be on your knees crying like little ****** and begging for some "Imperialist" US intervention? Nice to criticize our actions and the country itself when you've never left the states, isn't it?
You see 40something's comment and it let's you know we are fighting a losing battle against the blame America first crowd.
Signal is correct that Iran is guilty of numerous civil rights violations. The people there are persecuted.
Wanna know who's "right" and who's "wrong"? Iran: http://www.flickr.com/photos/50087332@N00/298265577/
Strength in the U.S. dollar can reduce the appeal of oil and other commodities to investors as a hedge against inflation.
Oil has gained over 40 percent this year, driven partly by tension over Iran's nuclear program and expectations that global supply will fail to keep pace with demand from fast growing Asian economies such as China
Tom, was that a news flash?
AMAZING!! Cain supports the point of view of another enemy of America. Who would have guessed? I guess Carter really DID influence more then 6 people. Who knew?
How do you explain that most of the world thinks George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney are bigger threats to world peace than Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei? Most of the world thinks George W. Bush is a bigger threat to world peace than Kim Jong Il. Why is that?
Who gives a rat's *** about what the world, aside from our staunch allies, thinks? I didn't vote for a President of the World. I voted for a President of the United States. Just as I will again when I pull the lever for Captain John S. McCain III, USN-Retired.
WOW...all i can say is one million sperm cells and that one had to swim the fastest.
Yea cain, I'm real concerned with what "the world" thinks, or you for that matter. The "world" wants a weaker U.S. So do you and Ahmadinejad. The world wants Obama.
...until their *** is in a sling, justthefacts. Then they're on the front porch begging.
Here's some news for you guys. United States has 330 million people. The world has 6.5 billion inhabitants. If you think that 5% of the world can tell 95% of the world what to do you just aren't very smart. This is not the immediate post WWII era. United States is not the only superpower in the world. The neocon's so-called unipolar moment (if it actually ever existed) when the Soviet Union collapsed leaving United States as the world's uncontested dominant superpower is now 19 years in the rear view mirror. We live in a multipolar world. The colonial era is over. United States has plenty on its plate in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can't afford another war. Demographics, geography, resources, international law, and historical imperatives are against the Bush Doctrine of neocolonial aggression which says the U.S. CinC can on his/her own order military action against countries or groups which he/she thinks MIGHT be a threat sometime in the future. Russia & China will not sit idly by while United States tries to take over the Middle East and South Asia along with control of their resources. You macho men have some things to learn about what constitutes a legal war and what is aggression. Look at the headlines today, and look at the turmoil in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Retired Lt. Gen. William Odom said about 4 years ago that the worse case scenario is not civil war in Iraq. The worst case scenario is regional war. Bush's unilateral militarism aka "cowboy diplomacy" has been counterproductive in the extreme. And don't forget that Pakistan already has nuclear arms.
Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Germany, England, Australia, Ireland, Poland, Belarus, Latvia, Spain, Italy, Greece, Mongolia, Brazil, Seychelles, France, ...well, that's just a few who we don't "tell" what to do. Shall I go on? Or are you intelligent enough to recognize WHY we, the civilized world, don't have to step up and start making demands? How about because they're not ran by despots hell-bent on destroying the f'n world. You smart enough to make that correlation? Nah, I won't get my hopes up.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
