Biden stands up for Bush administration again, this time on Iran policy

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

SEN. BIDEN: Tim. I heard the vice president put a prefix in front of “stop them.” He said the international community stops them. The fact of the matter is that the administration’s gotten it right, in my view, finally, on Iran. They have joined with the international community so that we end up isolating Iran, not us being isolated like we were before, number one...


WTF- Does this idiot ever learn. Once again Joe:

1) Never publically applaud republican programs.
2) Do not trust the administration to do the right thing, no matter what they say
3) Quit trying to look "sensible" and point out what a failure Bush is, and how his lack of credibility hurts us in Iran.

[European Socialist]

1. He was for the Iraq war--how smart can he be.

[BigYawn]

2. Joe Biden for president 2008..........

Joe has demonstrated to me time and again he
really understands the middle-east. He would
make an excellent president based on his genuine
knowledge of foreign policy. He is pretty good
with domestic policy also. He would not be getting
re-elected time after time if he was a bad politician.

Joe has accomplished more than any single person on
this board, and that ofcourse includes me. He is a
good democrat and he is very astute. I can't think
of anything more stupid that blindly opposing every
republican initiateive. No democrat has ever become a
president by following that logic.

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. "Hollywood" Joe Biden would have to give up his regular job

of appearing in front of every camera in North America at least once a week if he were to become President. The guy is on TV so often, I would imagine his limo is actually a mobile hair and make-up studio.

[still_one]

13. no offense but biden has a tendancy to to blindely support

every repulbican initiative. That included the patriot act, the IWR, staying the course in Iraq, the bankrupcy bill

sorry, but biden is a political opportunist

You want someone who examines each issue carefully, it is Finegold

[wyldwolf]

16. well, ok, let's ask Mr. Feingold

Feingold called it "an absurd choice" for Bush to have gone after Iraq when much more serious problems were unfolding in Iran. Referring to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he said Iran has a leader who is "one of the scariest persons in the world" and that the United States needs to be "as forceful as is necessary" in dealing with Iranian nuclear ambitions.

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:aeVroHpcgA4J:www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10872232/+Feingold+Iran&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6

Language a bit stronger than Biden's, eh?

[IndianaGreen]

19. Feingold is not calling for war against Iran!

He is calling for international action, not war!

Congressional Record Statement of Senator Russ Feingold
On Iran’s Efforts to Obtain Nuclear Weapons and the Need for Concerted International Action

January 31, 2006

Mr. FEINGOLD

Mr. President, as a known sponsor of international terrorism, and in light of the president of Iran’s recent apocalyptic statements calling for the destruction of Israel, Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. The international community must respond quickly and decisively to Iran’s gross disregard of international treaties and obligations and to its concerted and malicious efforts to develop the capability to create nuclear weapons.

The international community must take concerted and decisive action to prevent Iran from furthering its nuclear research and technology development. In its forthcoming meeting on February 2, 2006, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors should heed the calls by Russia, China, the European Union, and the United States to reaffirm its findings that Iran has blatantly violated its international obligations, recognize the grave nature of Iran’s recent actions, and refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council. The Security Council should then speak with one voice to condemn Iran’s actions and send a clear signal that continued defiance of the international community will not be tolerated.

It is essential that the Security Council approve specific actions to prevent the furthering of Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The Security Council specifically, and the international community generally, must recognize the potentially devastating link between the violent and defiant rhetoric of Iran’s president and his regime’s determined effort to undermine approved and transparent methods of developing civilian nuclear technology for energy use.

Congress can also take steps to help stop or slow Iran’s acquisition of nuclear and other WMD-related technology, including adding teeth to export control legislation such as the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. The Iran Nonproliferation Enhancement Act (S.1976) that Senator Kyl and I introduced late last year would do just that. It would toughen the ISNA by requiring rather than merely authorizing sanctions on proliferators, extending sanctions to the parent companies, and increasing the types of sanctions that apply to proliferators. By adopting this legislation, we would be sending a crystal clear message to would-be proliferators: if you choose to assist Iran in developing nuclear or other WMD-related capabilities, you are also choosing to forgo doing business with the United States.

History teaches us that we cannot ignore the stated intent of those who seek to destroy nations. A nuclear-armed Iran would pose a grave threat to the region, to Israel, and to the entire international community. A concerted international effort is needed to prevent Iran from procuring the technology and materiel needed to develop a nuclear weapon. This effort must begin now, and it must be comprehensive.

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/06/01/2006131CR.html

[wyldwolf]

23. no one is

However, If Howard Dean says that under no circumstances would a Democratic Administration permit Iran to become a nuclear power, is he willing to invade Iran to prevent it?

[TankLV]

32. That has got to be the stupidest most ignorant thing I have ever read on

this board.

Congratulations.

Bidden can go fuck himself after he removes his head from up bush*s ass!

[wyldwolf]

4. Consider this

1. The situation with Iran is different than that of Iraq. Iran is developing/wants to develop nukes and is flaunting it.
2. The administration isn't (yet?) proposing a unilateral invasion of Iran but rather is working with the international community to isolate Iran. A wise move.
3. Biden is correct to say this is a wise move. Would you rather his position be, "No, we should invade" or "no, we should let them develop the nukes"?

[IndianaGreen]

8. Iran is no more developing nukes than Iraq was

You guys fall for this shit time and time again, and none of you ever admit that you are wrong!

Biden is a neolib pig!

[still_one]

14. I am not so sure about that, but even that isn't the point

now that the U.S. itself has broken the NPT by giving nukes to India in exchange for mangos, plus supplying tactical nukes to Israel submarines, what type of justification do we have, other than increase the arms race. We should be engaged in a dialog rather the do this or else

[The Magistrate]

30. Iran Seeks Nuclear Weapons, My Hoosier Friend

Very little room to doubt it remains.

[BillZBubb]

9. BALONEY!!!!!

"Iran is developing/wants to develop nukes": that's straight from the wingnut (and Likud) propaganda farm. Sort of like "Saddam possesses WMDs". Same bullshit based on the same amount of real information.

[clydefrand]

10. Question: Why is it ok for us to have nukes but not other

countries?

I'm opinion no one should have them, but I've never been able to understand why it's alright for some nations to have them and not others.

[BigYawn]

25. Very simple....we are a STABLE democracy, so is UK, France & India

I have no problem with that. Democratic countries have
no history of nuking others for expanding their empires.

Iran, N. Korea & other autocratic countries should not
be trusted with nukes by any SANE person.

[clydefrand]

5. Today is the first time I've ever seen Biden nearly speechless.

When asked why he hadn't gone to NOLA, he stammered around a bit and finally said after looking lost for words, I just didn't feel comfortable going there. He had said prior to this that he had a trip planned. He was asked why he hadn't gone if he were planning to run for president; didn't he think that was important to see the damage done by Katrina. I thought he gave a terrible answer. I think he was trying to say that he didn't want to run down there just to make brownie points with the public.

[IndianaGreen]

15. The reason Biden didn't go to NOLA is because they have no money

Biden prefers to go to AIPAC conventions where is rantings about Iraq, Iran, and Syria is a sure bet to raise money for his campaign coffers.

[BillZBubb]

6. Biden is hopeless.

He is the epitome of the "conventional wisdom". He hurts the Democrats almost as much as he helps. He's wrong on Iran, just like he was wrong on Iraq. No surprise.

[wyldwolf]

7. what is the right position on Iran?

[BillZBubb]

12. Number one: Stop feeding the rightwing propaganda.

Number two: Admit that we have NO FIRM INFORMATION that indicates Iran has any weapons oriented nuclear programs. NONE.
Number three: Admit that the same people pushing a big confrontation with Iran are the ones who sold the Iraq lies.
Number four: Admit it wouldn't be the end of the world if Iran had nukes. China's got em. Pakistan's got em. Israel's got em. India's got em. We've got em. North Korea's got em.
Number five: Realize that of all the problems in the world, Iran beginning a nuclear program is near the bottom of the list in urgency.

[BigYawn]

26. Get your head out of the sand, Iran has openly declared that they

will get rid of Israel one way or the other. Please
read news media from EVERY MAJOR DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY.
Since they are incapable of doing it with conventional
military means, a nuclear armed Iran is extremely dangerous.
Unless ofcourse you have no problem with our friend and ally
Israel getting nuked out of existence.

[newspeak]

27. and our glorious administration helped

create the conditions in Iran--stating in public that Iran is part of the axis of evil and then, seeing a country preemptively attack another country based upon lies, shows that Iran cannot trust us. Remember, Iran was becoming more moderate before Bush's rant of evil. The people voted for this present leader out of fear of us, just like some of our people vote out of fear--face it, Bush exacerbated the problem, and I believe it was intentional. Women can drive in Iran, women vote in Iran, women have jobs in Iran, women must only cover their hair in Iran--how about in Saudi Arabia?

[BigYawn]

29. No question, Saudi Arabia is much worse than Iran.....eom

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BigYawn]

31. You makde good points, but I still don't trust Ahmedinejad as far as

I can throw him. And like I said, I have no problem
whatsoever with any stable democracy having nukes.
I do not trust ANY dictatorship or autocratic govt.
such as Iran with nukes. I am not crazy about Pakistan
ALREADY possessing nukes. They are one bullet away from
an islamo-fascist takeover.

[mmonk]

11. Most of the democrats will support "regime change"

in Iran just like they did in Iraq. Many more years of war and suppression of the constitution await us.

[wyldwolf]

17. Let's ask a few other respected Democrats

Senator Feingold, what do you think of the situation in Iran?

Feingold called it "an absurd choice" for Bush to have gone after Iraq when much more serious problems were unfolding in Iran. Referring to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he said Iran has a leader who is "one of the scariest persons in the world" and that the United States needs to be "as forceful as is necessary" in dealing with Iranian nuclear ambitions.

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:aeVroHpcgA4J:www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10872232/+Feingold+Iran&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6

Our next guest is former Vice President Al Gore. Mr Gore, what say you on Iran?

Iran is ruled by corrupt politicians and clerics," the Democrat said in an address to the Jeddah Economic Forum in Saudi Arabia.

He said the "corrupt leadership" combined with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's anti-Israeli outbursts should raise alarm bells all over the world, including the Arab world and the Gulf region.

"There should be more voices in the region saying this leadership is dangerous for the future of the world,"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060212/en_afp/irannuclearpoliticsus_060212182612

And, finally, we have DNC Chair Howard Dean. Dr. Dean, you have a strong position on Iran. Can you sum it up?

under no circumstances will a Democratic Administration ever allow Iran to become a nuclear power.

Wow! Strong words, Dr. Dean. Could you elaborate?

For five years this Administration has been in the White House, Iran moves closer every day to producing nuclear weapons. Under no circumstances will a Democratic Administration ever allow Iran to become a nuclear power.

http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/02/governor_dean_i_4.php

Thanks to all of you. Just so you know, there are some folks on Democratic Undergound who think you all are full of shit. Especially you, Dr. Dean. Someome there thinks you've been spending to much time on the wingnut (and Likud) propaganda farm.

[wyldwolf]

18. Can I get a "Dean Speaks For Me?"

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

21. Why isn't Biden making the point Dean did?

that Bush's failures as president led us into Iran being on the verge of having nuclear weapons. Bush is responsible for North Korea and Iran developing nuclear weapons because of his ill advised debacle in Iraq. We need to pin that on him in every media outlet we get access to, instead of moderating and being "sensible"

Iran being this close to Nukes is a Bush failure, as is North Korea having nukes, as is the instability in Iraq, as are the thousand american serviceman killed and the hundreds of billions of dollars squandered.

[wyldwolf]

24. He did

MR. RUSSERT: Senator Biden, you voted for the war. Senator Edwards was on this program last week, and he said he was wrong in voting for that war. Were you wrong?

SEN. BIDEN: I was—the mistake I made was that I never imagined they’d be this incompetent in the pursuit of the war. I—on your program not almost a year ago I said that, Tim. It has stunned me, the incompetence and way in which they pursued the war, what they’re doing now.


MR. RUSSERT: Knowing what you know now, that there were not significant levels of weapons of mass destruction, if the vote happened today, would you still vote yes?

SEN. BIDEN: No. Not knowing, knowing what I know how this administration used the power we gave them. Everybody kind of forgets, Tim, the issue was...

MR. RUSSERT: Do you vote no?

SEN. BIDEN: I vote no...



But upthread, it has been said that Iran seeking nukes is "baloney" and "rightwing propoganda."

Yet we have Feingold and Dean referring to the prospect.

Seems like the only issue here is that some are upset that Biden has said the administration is doing the right thing by going through international channels. Isn't that the right thing to do, though? And if there is any lingering doubt about Iran's efforts to obtain nukes, Feingold, Dean, and Gore all contend their is a danger there.

If Dean says that under no circumstances would a Democratic Administration permit Iran to become a nuclear power, is he willing to invade Iran to prevent it?

[Andromeda]

22. Dean speaks for me!

:)

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

20. here's the deal

the Administration was working with the UN before we invaded Iraq. Remember? And then they unilateraly invaded after the UN wouldn't go along with them. What's to prevent the same thing from happening if people like Biden keep trusting the administration? This administration has no credibility.

Also, Biden needs to say, like Dean, that Bush's bad foreign policy and ill advised war have weakened us, and made it more difficult to deal with Iran, and increased the number of terrrorist. He needs to attack the administration instead of being their trusted waterboy.