Ed Schultz: We're not gonna to exterminate 'em unless we nuke 'em. uh, ha ha ha!

[TheWebHead]

Is this the voice of the Democrats on radio? This is the second day in a row he's talking about nuking Iran... Yesterday he was talking about how we could turn Iran into glass if we "nuke 'em" after they respond to our provocations. I understand a lot of his plain spoken appeal to a traditional conservative radio listener looking for what they view as a digestable alternative to the rabid right, but I think it would be wise to have MediaMatters and the like keep an eye on our "own" hen house and call him out on some of his remarks.

[eleny]

1. No, he's not the voice of the Democrats

Not if he talks like that.

[nashville_brook]

2. i can't stand Schultz. used to listen on satellite. he's a putz.

[RethugAssKicker]

3. Don't know why anyone here ever thought Schultz was a liberal

He's a fucking RW nut too.

[valerief]

4. He calls himself a lefty but he's more center and right on some

issues. He appeals to people who like to hunt and fish and have a good ol' boy personality.

[IndyOp]

5. Would you consider calling him on it? 100,000's of deaths could result...

DEMS MUST STOP ATTACK! Nuclear bunker buster dropped on Iran would kill 100,000's.

Visions of victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki should flood our minds when we think "nuke" -


I am 100% on your side in regards to policing "our side" as well as theirs -- the Dems have again and again gone along with and/or been the sponsors of unjustified military/CIA action.

[YDogg]

6. i listened to him for about a week. was all i could take of his bluster.

[wryter2000]

7. He said that?

:wow:

Are you sure he didn't mean it like, "The only way we could beat Iran is if we nuked them, but no one in their right mind would do that"?

I can't stand him and don't listen to him, but it's hard to believe he's advocating nuking Iran.

[madinmaryland]

8. He actually said that?

Doesn't sound like him.

[Joe for Clark]

9. I believe his point has to do with containment.

Logic goes like this - How much of a problem can Iran ever be if we can in fact destroy the entire country in 45 minutes??

It is a good point. And great argument against use of conventional force in Iran.

If Iran ever sponsored a terrorist group that made a WMD attack on our country - what do you think we would do??

Its MAD all over again.

I don't justify the argument - but can understand why he may have said it.

Joe

[Warren Stupidity]

10. "Its MAD all over again." No it is UAD.

MAD requires two or more players with nuclear parity. Iran is not likely to attack us because they can be assured that we can destroy them. It is Unilaterally Assured Destruction, not Mutually Assured Destruction. And while UAD is a strong argument against Iran actually attacking us, it says nothing at all about our attacking Iran.

[Joe for Clark]

15. Maybe so.

But the point needs to be fully digested. The only reason we should have to attack them is non-conventional. And if that is true - we don't need an army to do it.

If Iran in any way sponsors a WMD attack against the US - we will destroy the country. They know it.

So until that day they can threaten us with a non conventional attack - even if that day was today - there is no cogent argument for going in there like "John Wayne" (a draft dodger in WWII, by the way).

SO, the whole argument is indeed MAD.

Joe

[TheWebHead]

11. ed's logic

Yeah I probably should clarify his remarks were made in "jest" and he said "but we can't do that" afterwards, though he was pretty serious about our ability to turn Iran into glass if we were attacked. But the point is, I don't believe using terms like "nuke 'em" and "exterminate" are acceptable for a self-described liberal talk show host... Neither are a remotely funny issue and the terms are ones often used by racist conservatives to describe how to deal with non-white non European nations were on bad terms with.

[LSparkle]

12. He's a "nouveau Dem" -- think he used to be a Rethug

and he's still got some of the "I wanna keel, I wanna keel" mentality in him. (He's a "hunter from the heartland," remember ... )

[sakabatou]

13. That's not funny

[Horse with no Name]

14. He is the voice of a Conservative who couldn't out-Rush Rush

so he repackaged himself as a Democrat.

[wellst0nev0ter]

16. I Heard His Interview Of Keith Ellison Last Summer

He was just as bad as Glen Beck, if not worse

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=160&topic_id=20955