Pat Buchanan: Attacking Iran would be catastrophic to U.S.

[quaoar]

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45775

Is this Iran crisis for real?

Are the Iranian mullahs close to acquiring the bomb? Has Iran violated the Non-Proliferation Treaty by restarting its conversion of yellowcake into uranium hexaflouride? The answer to both is no.

By a recent U.S. intelligence review, Iran may be 10 years away from a bomb. And under the NPT, Iran is allowed to enrich uranium for use in her own nuclear power plants.

Why, then, this talk of confrontation and pre-emptive strikes? Even if Iran had a weapon, to give it to a terrorist or to use it on a U.S. target would be an act of suicidal insanity by a regime that, no matter how militant, has shown no desire for war with America.

What is the worry? Just this. If or when Iran goes nuclear, she has a deterrent to intimidation. U.S. freedom of action in the Persian Gulf comes to an end. We would have to behave as gingerly with the mullahs as we do with Kim Jong Il, something intolerable to our neoconservatives and President Bush.

[etherealtruth]

1. It is a VERY sad state of affairs ...

...when Patrick Buchanan is SANER than the POTUS!

[jeff30997]

2. You can say that again.

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. Amen

[wtmusic]

3. Well Pat, you supported W twice

You made the bed now lie in it, you hypocritical fuck

[etherealtruth]

4. These wars of Bush' will never end ...

... unless those that previously supported him come over to our side. I welcome ANYONE that will now denounce Bush's wars ... we need "everyone" screaming that these wars are illegal, immoral ...


*Pls. note: I fully understand that Patrick Buchanan is a CRAZED right winger ... but I say, let him criticize all he wants/can!

[A Simple Game]

8. Patrick Buchanan is a CRAZED right winger,

who get a lot of time on national television.

If his rant is common to our goal of no wars, let him rant. At least someone hears him. Last I knew, no one can hear me.

[etherealtruth]

13. My point exactly ...

[H2O Man]

44. Buchanan is a smart man.

I disagree with him on his thoughts on culture, but because someone is wrong on some things, doesn't make them wrong on everything. For example, this little section of this thread started with someone saying Bush supported Bush twice. In fact, as we know, Pat ran against Bush in 2000. Remember the "butterfly ballot" and the Jewish support Buchanan got, which he readily admitted was intended for Gore?

Because that post was 50% inaccurate, does it make the poster a bad person? Our sworn enemy? Of course not.

Buchanan makes far more serious errors on social policy. However, he is one of the most outspoken critics of the neocons' agenda regarding Iran. In fact, a year ago on MSNBC, Buchanan tied the neocon spy scandal together with the Plame scandal.

Buchanan reaches an audience in America that DU and TruthOut and other progressive sources simply do not. In that sense, he is kind of like Imus: most DUers wouldn't care to sit and chat with Pat or Don at a picnic, but we should not lose track of the fact that both are able to reach and influence a segment of the population that we want to turn against the administration.

[the other one]

5. Don't broad-brush Buchanan

Okay, I admit he is neanderthal when it comes to social issues, but he has been a consistent outspoken critic of the neo-con agenda. As far as foreign policy is concerned, Pat Buchanan is an ally and a friend. Its a strange contradiction, maybe, but it is real: Pat Buchanan is a mindless conserative who understands the rest of the world.

[wtmusic]

7. Agree, but to not see that W is part-and-parcel

of that agenda doesn't leave him a lot of room for criticism

[BoneDaddy]

10. Pat

I hate the fact that I agree with Pat but in this case he is correct, no matter how much I think he is an utter and complete asshole.

I find it hard to fathom that the Bush Admin are actually contemplating this. Is this a ruse to throw us off the Rove trail, to once again distract us?

With the failure in Iraq, how could we possibly attack Iran? People were eager to jump on the wartrain with Iraq, but now are highly skeptical of Bush. We would be pulling planes and troops away from Afghanistan and Iraq to attack ANOTHER Muslim country? INsane.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

15. if assholes are positioned properly, and point in the proper direction

they are very good.

Buchanan has been right much more often than wrong about Bush and his cronies.

Ever hear him wail about the growing deficit and the games they play with employment/inflation rates?
I once heard him on the star wars program (where we spend 6-8 Billion installing an untested, unproven system with major components missing) and I was shocked to find him bringing up MY position and arguments.

The fact that the neocon control over the GOP is finally collapsing should be a source of joy for us. The enemy of our enemy is our friend, at least for a short time.

[unlawflcombatnt]

36. Buchanan

I've always liked his anti-free trade positions and his deficit-hawk position. There's an old saying that says "you can get ideas even from the dumbest." That might apply here. If Buchanan would just drop his religious right lunacy he might be almost tolerable.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

45. but, he also stands for differences of opinion ande protects us

when we disagree.

In comparison, look at the nutjobs that were glorifying their version of god on sunday and are intent on creating a theocracy right here at home.

Buchanan is a much more powerful voice against them than we could ever be. at least with conservatives who are being otherwise brainwashed by the current GOP.

[European Socialist]

19. I Couldn't have said it better. He knows MYOB is the best foreign Policy.

[H2O Man]

43. Not true.

For the sake of accuracy, Buchanan ran in 2000 against Bush.

[Double T]

9. I think Pat Buchanan knows bush is crazy enough and desperate enough...

to attack Iran. Bush believes he can turn away the investigations into his corrupt administration by starting another war against 'terra'.

[gokar]

11. Pakistan is far more dangerous than Iran because...

>> It already has the nukes
>> It is one bullet away from takeover by islamic fanatics
>> Our puppet Musharraf has already had two assasination attempts
>> Pakistan gave nuclear bomb making technology to N. Korea
>> The ISI in Pakistan was responsible for annoiting Taliban in Afghanistan and Taliban gave aid and comfort to Osama
>> There are more madrassas in Pakistan than anywhere else teaching
the students of hatred of all non-believers in islam
>> Every one of the 911 hijackers had connection to brain washing
in Pakistan
>> The recent London killings of civilians was carried out by persons
of Pakistani origin

[newyawker99]

21. Hi gokar!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[gokar]

24. Thanks a bunch newyawker99

:toast:

[paineinthearse]

25. Don't forget, * wants to give Pakistan F-15's

gokar, welcome to DU

:hi:

[Nimble_Idea]

29. F-16s not F-15s

He agreed to sell only F-16s but He might want to give pak F-15s too.

But I doubt it, the F-15 is one of our best planes.

[paineinthearse]

34. Whatever the model

Pakistan and India, two belligerent countries with nukes that have not signed the non-proliferation treaty, do not need any more modern technology than they already have.

[gokar]

35. I just don't understand Bush's policy on Pakistan....

All evidence suggests Osama is hiding in Pakistan, yet Bush
won't go after the real villain of 911 because Pakistan is
a sovereign nation? Whatever happened to "YOU ARE WITH US
OR YOU ARE AGAINST US"....rhetoric??

Musharraf is cooperating on war of terror? All Musharraf is doing is playing dumbya like a fiddle, getting all kinds of goodies from US,
occasionally handing out an AL Qaeda operative every few months,
so he can continue to receive Billions in foreign aid.

[Nimble_Idea]

39. Musharraf is the leader of our Major Non Nato Ally

How dare you besmirch our ally like that.

[gokar]

40. AT the risk of sounding rude, can you name

3 things Musharaffs as done as an "ally"?

Certainly not the nuclear bazaar set up by A.Q. Khan under the
leadership of our "ally" Musharraf to sell nuclear bomb making
technology to N. Korea, Libya (who came clean and helped expose
the Pakistani role), Iran and who knows who else.

Certainly not our "ally" Musharraf who will not allow our soldiers
to pursue Osama Bin Laden in western Pakistan.

Certainly not our "ally" Musharraf who did not send a single soldier
in both Iraqi conflicts.

I hope you were using sarcasm in calling Msharraf our "major ally".

[Mister Mark]

12. I like Pat Buchanan, for the most part

I'm not sure why so many democrats villify him, other than to jump on the latest "I hate so-and-so" bandwagon.

I agree with him more than I disagree with him.

[BillZBubb]

14. So you thought Bush was the best candidate in 2004?

Buchanan supported the Chimperor. How about you?

Do you agree that Social Security is failure and needs to be scrapped or privatized? Buchanan does.

Do you agree that the environment and things like the Endangered Species act are examples of liberal extremism? Buchanan does.

Do you oppose a woman's right to choose? Buchanon does.

Do you agree that former Nazi's should be allowed to stay in this country and protected from extradition? Buchanon does.

etc. etc.

Just wondering...

[Mister Mark]

37. okay...

So, maybe I don't agree with him more than I disagree with him. I still find him to be a likable guy. Believe it or not, it is possible for many of us to disagree with someone's political views, but still like the person.

[Telly Savalas]

16. Being opposed to conservatism is bandwagon jumping?

I thought this was a progressive message board.

:shrug:

[Mister Mark]

38. It's fine to oppose conservatism

But when I read hysterical comments that include calling Buchanan a "hypocritical fuck", it turns me off. Sorry. I'm not that angry.

[Telly Savalas]

46. Hysterical?

The guy has a long history of working for Republicans like Nixon and Reagan who've pursued very militaristic foreign policies. His whole career has been dedicated to stamping out liberalism and progressivism using mendacious and sleazy tactics. Given Pat Buchanan's record, I don't think "hypocritical fuck" is that unfair a label, and I'm not really very angry either.

(little grammar edit)

[Caleb]

18. Maybe because Buchanan

wants to bring back the social policies of the 1840s and is a bigot.

Plus he voted for Bush in 2004.

[musette_sf]

23. it's the key issues where I have issues with Pat

* sexism
* racism
* women as second-class citizens without right to privacy

so I can never, ever, ever be a Pat supporter. I do not actively vilify him at this point, but then, he hasn't put out too many anti-woman, anti-non-white screeds lately.

But I'd pay money to see Pat kick Tony Blankley's fat ass on the McLaughlin Champeen Wrasslin' Group.

[cliss]

17. Is the Iran issue a red herring?

I'm just wondering about Rove and Cheney and their tactics. Public support is at an all-time low. People are seriously questioning the war and our involement in it.

Suddenly, Iran is on the radar screen. Why Iran? Why now? Maybe it's nothing more than "shifting the focus" away from everything else, which is going down the toilet.

[Mr Rabble]

26. Its not "now". Scott Ritter brought this up last year.

It may be hitting the MSM now, but this has clearly been on the agenda since the "axis of evil" speech.

Seems that * does indeed tell the truth occasionally.

[quaoar]

28. Bombing Iran

would blow everything else off the front page and TV news -- even Fox would forget all about Natalee Holloway.

[quinnox]

20. Yea, then why was Buchanan such a stooge for Bush in 04?

He went from an Iraq war critic to a total shill for Bush and campaigning for him all the time on MSNBC, badmouthing John Kerry every chance he could get.

[liberaliraqvet26]

33. he did badmouth Kerry...

but besides the religious crap he did beat up bush on the war, foreign policy and the deficit.

[0007]

22. bttft

[deadparrot]

27. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. nt

[Nimble_Idea]

30. Yep and then we will be off to N. Korea

They intend to bring down the axis of Evil.

And Republicans will keep winning elections because they will not be seen as weak on defense at a time of war.

I can see the 08 campaign already. I just hope they don't keep this insanse right wing religious fundy attack on America going because why fight the Taliban in Hafganee if we just create a stupid Christan Taliban at home?

The pugs are going to win on the national security issue unless we run a candidate like Wes Clark who says that we should fight extremism everywhere. Or some other Dem from the South.

Then after we make the sheeple think we meant war, we go into "diplomatic mode then bomb later" instead of the current "Bomb first , Oh shit, now what?. Maybe if we just stand here and play with our pud something will happen"

Good luck.

[IndianaGreen]

31. "sanctions on the third-largest oil producer"

It would be interesting to see how many U.S. allies are willing to support sanctions on the third-largest oil producer on earth when oil is running at $65 a barrel.

Add to that Bush's threats to Venezuela, and you will see oil reach $100 a barrel. $4 per gallon may well become the norm!

[liberaliraqvet26]

32. They didn't listen to him about Iraq...

Buchanan makes a lot of sense when he lamblasts the Neocons over their crazy wars.

[wiley]

42. Agreed.

But I'm not so sure he isn't being used to voice opinions that some want to hear so a less radical conservative can sound more reasonable. Like, say, * who could say anything and the issues oriented right was still going to vote for him.

[CAG]

41. scariest part of column: "...Bush should think long and hard"

Does Buchanan really think that is possible???? It might require the prez to READ something, for God's sake.

"What could Iran do? Plenty. Send Revolutionary Guards into Iraq to make that country a worse hell for the 135,000 U.S. troops. Incite Hezbollah to launch rockets on Israel to widen the war. Attack U.S. allies in the Gulf. Encourage the Shias in Iraq and Saudi Arabia to attack Americans. Mine the Strait of Hormuz. Activate Islamic loyalists to bring terror home to the United States.

In short, a U.S. attack on Iran could lead to war across the region and interruption of the 15 million barrels of oil a day that come from the Gulf, which would drive the world economy into instant cardiac arrest....."

"President Bush should think long and hard before yielding to the War Party a second time. Iran is a nation three times the size of Iraq and with three times the population. This would be no cakewalk."