Yikes! bush Believes His Legacy is to 'Save Iran' Through Nuking It!!

[leftchick]

He is insane! Is anyone going to stop him? Fitzy PLEASE indict bush and cheney before they start WWIII!

:scared:

<snip>

A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that 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.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ”


http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

:scared:

Edit to add the Yahoo article...

US considers use of nuclear weapons against Iran Sat Apr 8, 2:24 AM ET


WASHINGTON (AFP) - 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."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060408/wl_mideast_afp/usirannuclearmilitary

[meganmonkey]

1. Oh, lc

This does not look good.
:scared:

Have you made up your mind about NYC? I have a place you could stay if you decide to come...

We gotta stop this one before it starts!

:patriot:

[leftchick]

24. no it does not

I am truly scared of these freaks. I won't be coming to NYC but I will be there in spirit. My folks are not well and I need to visit them in April. Thank you so uch for the invite. I wish I could sweetie.

[acmejack]

31. There is no way to stop these freaks

They just ignore the will of the People. They totally disregard us & even worse there is, unbelievably a contingent that thinks we should bomb Iran! People like my Dad, I don't know what to say to them, they listen to people like Fred Barnes and lap it up. I want to say yeah you're 75, my Niece is 18! Give her a break, PLEASE!

In guess they figure they have enjoyed enough of life and they don't really care if every one else has had enough or not...

[Radio_Lady]

2. Rumblings of (another) war from Sy Hersh. Please tell me this isn't true

THE IRAN PLANS
Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb?
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Issue of 2006-04-17
Posted 2006-04-10

The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack. Current and former American military and intelligence officials said that Air Force planning groups are drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups. The officials say that President Bush is determined to deny the Iranian regime the opportunity to begin a pilot program, planned for this spring, to enrich uranium.

American and European intelligence agencies, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (I.A.E.A.), agree that Iran is intent on developing the capability to produce nuclear weapons. But there are widely differing estimates of how long that will take, and whether diplomacy, sanctions, or military action is the best way to prevent it. Iran insists that its research is for peaceful use only, in keeping with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and that it will not be delayed or deterred.

There is a growing conviction among members of the United States military, and in the international community, that President Bush’s ultimate goal in the nuclear confrontation with Iran is regime change. Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has challenged the reality of the Holocaust and said that Israel must be “wiped off the map.” Bush and others in the White House view him as a potential Adolf Hitler, a former senior intelligence official said. “That’s the name they’re using. They say, ‘Will Iran get a strategic weapon and threaten another world war?’ ”

A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”

MORE AT: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa...

(Gulp. This is an extremely long article but so important. How can we spread the word?)

[EVDebs]

59. True. Wm. Arkin disclosed Conplan 8022 last yr. Media ignores. Why?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=879510&mesg_id=880715

[Radio_Lady]

122. UPDATE: New Yorker web link has changed on Saturday.

Here is the corrected link:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

[Old and In the Way]

123. This is disturbing

"the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”"

Bush, after 5 years and countless screw-ups, still thinks he needs to save us and that future competent administrations won't have the courage to do it. That's insane. He sounds desperate to find a legacy and this is obviously warping his thinking about the facts. Iran is not a threat in the immediate future, we don't need Bush to "fix" this problem, too. He's "fixed" enough things that'll take decades to 'unfix'.

At some point, before he's allowed to make the ultimate bad decision, we need to drag him out of the WH and put him on a plane to Crawford...permanently.

[Roland99]

135. Hmmm....what's with the "if" elected? * planning on staying past '08?

[cornermouse]

3. “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”

Does this mean he's finally admitting he lost in Iraq and Afghanistan?

[AndyA]

5. Bush more concerned about his legacy than the state of the world

I can see this selfish, arrogant, prick, son of a bitch of a man starting WWIII in order to have a legacy that includes something other than his failed presidency, his failed war in Iraq, and the hatred of the majority of the American people.

And yes, I do mean hatred. If he keeps on the same course he's been on, he will become the lowest ranking president EVER in the polls.

The man is mentally ill, he's putting his legacy before the safety and security and preservation of the country. He needs to be removed from office.

[thefool_wa]

91. You are sooooo right

He needs to be removed, one way or another, before he starts something no one will be able to stop.

Using nuclear weapons is, and always has been, the stupidest idea man kind has ever come up with. The only legacy this man deserves is impeachment, prison time, and the shame and scorn of the american people for all time.

FUGWB!

[MADem]

10. Why should that dipshit worry about his legacy?

Didn't the putz tell Bob Woodward that he, a history major, didn't give a shit about history, because he'd be DEAD?

So much for his so-called religion, no life everlasting for him, apparently.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

41. Yeah, I'm lost...I thought the Iraqi purple fingers were his legacy...

...makes you wonder what the next "legacy" will be after he gets us waist-deep in nuclear war with Iran, doesn't it? I'll bet he's like to take that Kim Jong Il down a peg or two, eh, Stretch? Kim Jong Il can RUN, you, know, but he can't HIDE...

:scared:

[Roland99]

79. I thought Iraq was his legacy? Guess he's learned from his mistakes

:sarcasm:


F U C K I N G ... B A T S H I T ... I N S A N E ! ! ! ! !

[Buns_of_Fire]

104. Beware a man who thinks only in terms of his "legacy"

These are the same people who think that "the ends always justify the means."

What good is a golden statue of Chucklenuts in every park if there's no one left to worship at its feet? What good is having a Chucklenuts Airport or the Chucklenuts pResidential Library or a Chucklenuts Street or a Chucklenuts Elementary School when the populace (what's left of it) is too busy just trying to survive to marvel over them?

No, this isn't for We, The People. This is for his newly-found God's consumption only. He thinks he'll buy his way into heaven with the bodies of thousands or millions and the strength of his ideology.

I wish someone would ship a couple of cases of Jim Beam and a hundred pounds of the finest Peruvian Flake to the WH. He was probably a better (and less dangerous) person drunk on his ass and stoned out of his mind.

[Carla in Ca]

125. When this guy gets bored

he just tries to find something else to destroy. I cannot believe he would do this. Does he think this is a board game he is playing? Time to call in the white coats!

[Skinner]

4. I don't see any mention of nuking Iran.

At least, I don't see it in this excerpt. Yes, this is very disturbing, but I don't see any mention here of nuking iran.

[allemand]

12. Here it is:

One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran’s main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz, which is no longer under I.A.E.A. safeguards, reportedly has underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year. (Iran has acknowledged that it initially kept the existence of its enrichment program hidden from I.A.E.A. inspectors, but claims that none of its current activity is barred by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.) The elimination of Natanz would be a major setback for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but the conventional weapons in the American arsenal could not insure the destruction of facilities under seventy-five feet of earth and rock, especially if they are reinforced with concrete.
(...)

He went on, “Nuclear planners go through extensive training and learn the technical details of damage and fallout—we’re talking about mushroom clouds, radiation, mass casualties, and contamination over years. This is not an underground nuclear test, where all you see is the earth raised a little bit. These politicians don’t have a clue, and whenever anybody tries to get it out”—remove the nuclear option—“they’re shouted down.”
The attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings inside the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he added, and some officers have talked about resigning. Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans for Iran—without success, the former intelligence official said. “The White House said, ‘Why are you challenging this? The option came from you.’ ”

The Pentagon adviser on the war on terror confirmed that some in the Administration were looking seriously at this option, which he linked to a resurgence of interest in tactical nuclear weapons among Pentagon civilians and in policy circles. He called it “a juggernaut that has to be stopped.” He also confirmed that some senior officers and officials were considering resigning over the issue. “There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries,” the adviser told me. “This goes to high levels.” The matter may soon reach a decisive point, he said, because the Joint Chiefs had agreed to give President Bush a formal recommendation stating that they are strongly opposed to considering the nuclear option for Iran. “The internal debate on this has hardened in recent weeks,” the adviser said. “And, if senior Pentagon officers express their opposition to the use of offensive nuclear weapons, then it will never happen.”

The adviser added, however, that the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons in such situations has gained support from the Defense Science Board, an advisory panel whose members are selected by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. “They’re telling the Pentagon that we can build the B61 with more blast and less radiation,” he said.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

[bigtree]

20. The Nevada non-nuclear, 700lb bunker-bomb test to be used as a gauge

for a future nuclear blast.

Bomb test in Nevada will simulate nuclear strike, critics warn

Salt Lake Tribune

April 06, 2006
http://www.startribune.com/484/story/356294.html

WASHINGTON — A powerful blast scheduled at the Nevada Test Site in June is designed to help war planners figure out the smallest nuclear weapon able to destroy underground targets. And it has caused a concern that it signals a renewed push toward tactical nuclear weapons.

The detonation, called Divine Strake, is intended to "develop a planning tool to improve the warfighter's confidence in selecting the smallest proper nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities while minimizing collateral damage," according to Defense Department budget documents.

Irene Smith, a spokeswoman for the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency, said the document doesn't imply that Divine Strake "is a nuclear simulation." She said it would be used to assess computer programs that predict ground shaking in a major blast.

not much of a denial

[leftchick]

22. that is called

practice. What does Harry Reid have to say about it?

[suffragette]

64. Looks like Harry Reid asked for and received a briefing, which changed

his stance from concerned to accepting.

http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=BOMBTEST-04-06-06
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has expressed concern about the mushroom cloud the test will produce, and asked Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for a classified briefing on Divine Strake.

Much more in this article about the likely effects of this as well as statements from various groups who are deeply concerned.

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3682730
04/07/2006

Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Shelly Berkley, Democrats from Nevada, also voiced concern over the test and met with James Tegnelia, director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, for briefings Thursday. Both said they were confident the test would be safe.
   In the private meetings, Tegnelia insisted that the Divine Strake test is not intended as a step toward renewed nuclear testing, Reid and Berkley said.
   "I do not support the resumption of nuclear testing, but this test uses only commercial explosives," Reid said in a statement. "It seems to be well-planned, and all the necessary environmental tests and safety precautions are being done. At this point, there is no reason for the test not to go forward."

~snip~

   Berkley said she grilled Tegnelia on the specifics of the test and was reassured it will be safe.
   "I will not seek to block this mammoth explosion, which will create a plume over the Nevada Test Site, but I will keep a close eye on how the public is being prepared and I will demand full answers to any new concerns that may arise," Berkley said in a statement.


Jim Matheson is still very concerned.
http://www.thespectrum.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060408/NEWS01/604080311/1002
April 8, 2006
Despite government assertions that a large explosion planned for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is not for nuclear research purposes, Rep. Jim Matheson has some serious concerns about the test.


Matheson, D-Utah, voiced those concerns Friday in a letter to James Tegnelia, director of the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency, which will conduct the June 2 test, code-named "Divine Strake," about 150 miles west of St. George.
"Although I understand that this test is not a nuclear test, I am greatly concerned that you have not provided the public with adequate assurances that the test is not being conducted in order to further misguided attempts to build new low-yield nuclear devices," Matheson wrote.

~snip~

"It makes me very skeptical when the government says, 'don't worry,' because the government lied to us before," Matheson said, referring to the dangers of above-ground nuclear tests at the same Nevada site in the 1950s and early 1960s. "It's hard to trust them on this one. I'm convinced there are folks within the government who want to develop new nuclear weapons."

Much more in this article , as well as a link to Matheson's letter to DTRA.


Maybe we need to all, but especially their Nevada constituents, send Hersh's article to Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. Shelly Berkley so they will press harder on this issue.

The test and the revelations in Hersh's article have clear links and this is all very troubling.

[Kali]

68. Divine Strake???? DiVINE??!!!WTF?

They are fucking insane why can't we stop them??????


DIVINE???!!!!!!

[suffragette]

72. We must find a way to stop this insanity

We need to press our reps and Reid and Berkley on this.
The Scripps article has various groups cited as already being deeply concerned.
Maybe we can form a coalition to band together and halt this?

[Mabus]

80. FYI: NPR interview on how bombs get their names

It is an audio file on the NPR website. I heard the end of this the other day when I got in my car. It is worth listening to, here it is: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5316466

Here's the accompanying text to the story.

All Things Considered, March 31, 2006 · The Pentagon announces it will explode a new bomb at a Nevada test site on June 2. The 700-ton bomb is called "Divine Strake." William Arkin, author of Code Names: Deciphering U.S. Military Plans, Programs, and Operations in the 9/11 World explains how bombs get their funny names.

[arikara]

105. Strake???

Divine: emanating from God; "divine judgment"; "divine guidance"

OK, divine has religious connotations and they always use religious words for their nefarious mass murders. But strake??? What the hell does the hull of a boat have to do with a nuclear bomb?

Strake: An unbroken line of planks or plates running along the side of a vessel from stem to stern.

[darkmaestro019]

126. So It's named divine....planks? Or can he not spell 'strike'?

What is it about being a fundy/Regressive that infects you with the complete inability to be anything but gaggingly cheesy and lame?


Yeah, I know. This is serious. But somehow how lame that is AND how serious this is makes it even scarier. It's like he thinks we're all in a GI Joe cartoon......

[liberalhistorian]

138. That's exactly what the idiot sociopath

thinks, to him this is just a giant GI Joe cartoon and/or a giant board game. God help us all!!!!!!!!!

And, so he thinks that our bombs will cause Iranians to "rise up and overthrow their government?" Just like Iraq greeted us as liberators, with flowers and candy? God in heaven, what in the FUCK are they smoking?

[FatDave]

114. "divine" is chillingly scary

But WTF is a Strake?

strake
n : thick plank forming a ridge along the side of a wooden ship

I thought it was a misprint, and the name should have been "divine strike" which would be even scarier if more meaningful.

But that word "strake" is so weird I actually went looking for anagrams. Vie and strike? End via strike?

[leftchick]

71. how can reid be so clueless??

It has been evident for years that the DOD is anxious to develop and use new nukes! Rummy has an itchy trigger finger for them and if reid can not see that, I am concerned! I mean WTF???

[suffragette]

74. That was my reaction as well.

When I saw your question, I searched out articles and then tripped once I saw Reid's responses.
He may feel reassured right now, but I see nothing reassuring about any of this.
We must make him take another look and question this more.
As I noted in my last post, maybe we can form a coalition with other concerned groups to press this.

Edited to add these groups cited in the Scripps article:

Federation of American Scientists

Health Environment Alliance of Utah

Downwinders

Andrew Lichterman – mentioned as a blogger, found what looks to be his site, http://disarmamentactivist.org/

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

139. Those Commercial Explosives

http://www.janes.com/defence/land_forces/news/jdw/jdw060403_2_n.shtml

US military officials plan to stage a massive explosion in the Nevada desert in June, igniting a buried 700-ton charge of ammonium nitrate/fuel oil (AN/FO) high explosive primarily to study shockwave effects on deeply buried structures.

Meanwhile, the first test of the air-dropped Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) - a 15-ton-class munition being developed to attack hard and deeply buried targets - is being delayed one year until Fiscal Year 2007

[mom cat]

84. Does the name "Divine Strake" seem all too messianic?

I am afraid that Bush and his neo-con buddies have totally lost their senses. To even consider using nuclear weapons is despicably evil.

[Skinner]

28. Thank you.

That is very disturbing.

On edit: I've added this thread to the DU homepage.

[Radio_Lady]

103. Thanks, Skinner. I've decided to go to a Sunday service tomorrow.

Perhaps a group of Unitarians can help me fight this horrible feeling that we're going down with this Middle East problem. It's an albatross. Saturday's news is full of difficult subjects.

[Swamp Rat]

34. I wonder if there will be a military coup?

Just the thought of that is scary too! :scared:

[sasha031]

39. I have often fantasized about the same thing

but didn't clean house of anyone who had a normal brain with retirements and demotions:scared:

[stubtoe]

52. Or a mutiny.

[Poiuyt]

54. It's like Seven Days in May in reverse

[lumpy]

86. Kick up

x

[MADem]

14. It's in there, plain as day

One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran’s main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz, which is no longer under I.A.E.A. safeguards, reportedly has underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year. (Iran has acknowledged that it initially kept the existence of its enrichment program hidden from I.A.E.A. inspectors, but claims that none of its current activity is barred by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.) The elimination of Natanz would be a major setback for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but the conventional weapons in the American arsenal could not insure the destruction of facilities under seventy-five feet of earth and rock, especially if they are reinforced with concrete.

THIS is NOT GOOD...

[leftchick]

16. bunker busters

to start with....

<snip>

One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran’s main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz, which is no longer under I.A.E.A. safeguards, reportedly has underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year. (Iran has acknowledged that it initially kept the existence of its enrichment program hidden from I.A.E.A. inspectors, but claims that none of its current activity is barred by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.) The elimination of Natanz would be a major setback for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but the conventional weapons in the American arsenal could not insure the destruction of facilities under seventy-five feet of earth and rock, especially if they are reinforced with concrete.

There is a Cold War precedent for targeting deep underground bunkers with nuclear weapons. In the early nineteen-eighties, the American intelligence community watched as the Soviet government began digging a huge underground complex outside Moscow. Analysts concluded that the underground facility was designed for “continuity of government”—for the political and military leadership to survive a nuclear war. (There are similar facilities, in Virginia and Pennsylvania, for the American leadership.) The Soviet facility still exists, and much of what the U.S. knows about it remains classified. “The ‘tell’ ”—the giveaway—“was the ventilator shafts, some of which were disguised,” the former senior intelligence official told me. At the time, he said, it was determined that “only nukes” could destroy the bunker. He added that some American intelligence analysts believe that the Russians helped the Iranians design their underground facility. “We see a similarity of design,” specifically in the ventilator shafts, he said.

[Mel]

19. I would consider this to be what one may

view as 'nuking Iran' a nuke is a nuke, right? If this does happen it very well may set off WWIII.

<snip>One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites.</snip>

They use tactical nuclear weapons and if they miss ho hum let's say they hit a city will they then use the military doublespeak Collateral damage sure they will and the world will not buy it.

[ClintonTyree]

60. I think setting off WWIII is the plan.......

Bush is certain (along with his "wife", Condi) that his legacy and true greatness won't be realized for decades to come. It fits right in with his and his fundy pals apocalyptic scenario for the "end times" and "rapture". :eyes: Bush must destroy the world to save it. :scared: This POS scares the bejebus out of me. He's fucking crazy enough to do this for that exact reason.


:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: George Bush's "legacy". :scared:

[formercia]

6. Inquisition mentality

convert or die.

[leftchick]

37. "messianic"

<Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”>

:scared:

[MADem]

7. Is he going down the "destroy the village in order to save it" route?

Someone ought to tell that asshole that plan didn't work too well in Vietnam...oh, that's right, the chickenshit turd DIDN'T GO TO VIETNAM, so of COURSE he wouldn't know much about that!

[shenmue]

8. "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war room!"

:scared:

Get these people away from the rest of us...

[DS1]

9. my stupid mistake

:donut:

[Cooley Hurd]

15. Not hyperbole - Sy Hersh's latest article lays it out...

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

<snip>
One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran’s main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz, which is no longer under I.A.E.A. safeguards, reportedly has underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year. (Iran has acknowledged that it initially kept the existence of its enrichment program hidden from I.A.E.A. inspectors, but claims that none of its current activity is barred by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.) The elimination of Natanz would be a major setback for Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but the conventional weapons in the American arsenal could not insure the destruction of facilities under seventy-five feet of earth and rock, especially if they are reinforced with concrete.

There is a Cold War precedent for targeting deep underground bunkers with nuclear weapons. In the early nineteen-eighties, the American intelligence community watched as the Soviet government began digging a huge underground complex outside Moscow. Analysts concluded that the underground facility was designed for “continuity of government”—for the political and military leadership to survive a nuclear war. (There are similar facilities, in Virginia and Pennsylvania, for the American leadership.) The Soviet facility still exists, and much of what the U.S. knows about it remains classified. “The ‘tell’ ”—the giveaway—“was the ventilator shafts, some of which were disguised,” the former senior intelligence official told me. At the time, he said, it was determined that “only nukes” could destroy the bunker. He added that some American intelligence analysts believe that the Russians helped the Iranians design their underground facility. “We see a similarity of design,” specifically in the ventilator shafts, he said.
</snip>

[Swamp Rat]

26. Yep! I got your hyperbole right here!

:yoiks:

[Cooley Hurd]

29. EEP! That's almost as scary as your Chertoff graphic...

Excuse me, while I change my underwear...:scared:

[Swamp Rat]

33. Bushler is definitely outta control!

He must be stopped. :scared:

[Rhiannon12866]

65. One of your best, my friend, captures * perfectly and is scary as hell!

WWIII doesn't even begin to describe what these warmongering monsters are capable of!!!:grr:

:scared::nuke::scared::nuke::scared::nuke::scared::nuke::scared::nuke::scared:

[MADem]

18. Using bunker busting tac nukes isn't hyperbole...

These guys are actually considering the option, this is very troubling:

He went on, “Nuclear planners go through extensive training and learn the technical details of damage and fallout—we’re talking about mushroom clouds, radiation, mass casualties, and contamination over years. This is not an underground nuclear test, where all you see is the earth raised a little bit. These politicians don’t have a clue, and whenever anybody tries to get it out”—remove the nuclear option—“they’re shouted down.”

The attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings inside the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he added, and some officers have talked about resigning. Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans for Iran—without success, the former intelligence official said. “The White House said, ‘Why are you challenging this? The option came from you.’ ”

The Pentagon adviser on the war on terror confirmed that some in the Administration were looking seriously at this option, which he linked to a resurgence of interest in tactical nuclear weapons among Pentagon civilians and in policy circles. He called it “a juggernaut that has to be stopped.” He also confirmed that some senior officers and officials were considering resigning over the issue. “There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries,” the adviser told me. “This goes to high levels.” The matter may soon reach a decisive point, he said, because the Joint Chiefs had agreed to give President Bush a formal recommendation stating that they are strongly opposed to considering the nuclear option for Iran. “The internal debate on this has hardened in recent weeks,” the adviser said. “And, if senior Pentagon officers express their opposition to the use of offensive nuclear weapons, then it will never happen.”

The adviser added, however, that the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons in such situations has gained support from the Defense Science Board, an advisory panel whose members are selected by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. “They’re telling the Pentagon that we can build the B61 with more blast and less radiation,” he said.

[DoYouEverWonder]

11. They just want to hurry up and finish

implementing the PNAC plan before they all go into forced retirement/exile.

At this point though, I seriously doubt they will get away with something like this and if they do, the public outcry will be so great that it will be the last thing they do.

[mikelewis]

17. What public outcry? The only way we could get an outcry is to outsource..

our demonstrations to the "illegals". Anti-war rallies pale in comparison to the Immigration rallies. Maybe we could hire some of these "illegals" to march in opposition to the war for us. Then maybe we'd have the numbers indictative of our dissatisfaction with the war.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. We have taken to the streets

and the M$M ignores us, so it is as if it doesn't happen.

In the meantime, many of us have turned to the internet and our impact is enormous. In five years we have gone from tin foil hatters and Bush being an untouchable god, to the current implosion of his entire administration.

The streets are virtual now and that is where you will find me. It sure beats getting wet and cold and risking having my head bashed in.

[salin]

13. Megalomania disconnected from reality and empowered

by the presidency is indeed a frightening thing.

Were he to pursue this seriously, he ends the GOP. Only hope is that the 'strategists' try to push it for the 2006 election cycle - prematurely and that the public and international skepticism derails it before action is taken.

Bush and those surrounding him planning this appear to be dangerously deranged, hopefully they would be derailed prior to setting off a serious international catastrophe that would change the world dramatically in a moment.

[leftchick]

23. In a logical world this makes no sense

There is no imminent threat from Iran. I have heard from several mainstream sources that at the very earliest they could possibly produce one nuke in five years. The more likely scenario is ten! I can not imagine how they could possibly think this could be supported anywhere in the world. Including here at home. That is where the insanity comes in. :(

[salin]

30. in the early days after the Taliban fell (jan/feb 2002)

when the rhetoric was just beginning per Iraq... and troops were being moved from Afghanistan to the Gulf... the common response when raising the question if Bushco was trying to ramp up a second war was... "they wouldn't be crazy enough to do that" (ala the international community wouldn't support it, and the public wouldn't support it) - yet a year after the drumbeats were sounded regularly, including regular shows on MSNBC and CNN with titles like "Countdown to War..." well you know the rest. We thought "that would be crazy, but it sure looks like it is what they are planning to do...." - all to familiar and eerie? Eh.

That said, the public context is very different today. But they are still crazy ... so who knows.

Hadn't thought of it til I started typing this note ... those damn cable tv drumbeat shows. Started MONTHS before the invasion. Almost like they were coordinated... perhaps we should be looking for a similar type of flag waving coordination as a tip off to the 'major selling to the public' phase of buildup before striking.

Perhaps we should start paying close attention - not just to who is being brought on to different talk shows (that was constant after 911 and continues... so wouldn't indicate a shift) - but watching for specific whole shows or segments devoted to 'drum beats' to Iran. :shrug:

[leftchick]

32. Fox has been at it for a while now

I was forced to watch Fox for a week while visiting my parents two weeks ago. The run up to an Iran war is in full swing on the DOD propaganda channel. That at least will convince bush's base of the 'threat'.

[salin]

36. wonder if their viewership is still dwindling

along the lines of the blind party support for bushco?

[in_cog_ni_to]

48. I'm thinking...MARTIAL LAW here in the U.S. AFTER they nuke Iran

and their excuse will be a HUGE THREAT OF A "NUKULAR BOMB" from Iran because they can't know if they actually destroyed everything Iran had.:scared: Of course, they would be VERY CONCERNED that Hezzbollah has activated their terrorists and they will be attacking us too.:scared:

That's the only way they could get away with this....MARTIAL LAW. How convenient would THAT be right before an election???? Can you imagine these psychos in power forever? OMG...the thought makes me ill. We already know the little Nazi thinks he's above the law. HE WILL DO THAT. HE WILL DECLARE MARTIAL LAW. There's no doubt in my mind. We know what he's capable of.:(

[MsMagnificent]

107. Exactly

what I was thinking -- are they destroying their own Party?
Can the Republican Party survive all of this? Does any of them realize how bad it is, "Brand W Republicans" nevertheless?

What a terrible time for America!

[Nothing Without Hope]

112. They don't care - fair elections are not something they would even

consider, so why should they care about ratings and polls? They have no intention of letting go of power and believe they cannot be removed. They have subverted as much as possible of the military brass, so I wonder where the primary loyalty of the US military leadership lies at this point. I fear that it is no longer to the Constitution.

[ClintonTyree]

25. Notice that Yahoo stuck that one in at 2:00 AM..........

it won't get a lot of viewing then, will it? :eyes:

I have bo doubt Bush will do this. He see's himself as god's anointed messenger on this earth. He believes his "legacy" won't be fully realized until decades from now, when he'll be viewed as the man that saved the world. Problem is, he's destroying it now. Maybe he sees that as the only way to "save it". That would fit the apocalyptic view of the fundies to a tee. Bush is the most dangerous man on the earth right now. As some dear woman said on, "Washington Journal" yesterday, Bush is the devil himself. Evil personified. I totally believe that myself.

[Swamp Rat]

27. We can at least vote it up and email it to others. n/t

[Justice Is Comin]

35. This is the most deranged Napololean

clone that could have ever came into our consciousness.

Somebody drug him and take that football away before we end up in World War III. This is one sick bastard.

[SammyWinstonJack]

38. I thought he believed that "liberating" the Iraqi people was his legacy?

:shrug: And yes, he is INSANE!

[sasha031]

40. the rapture ready crowd are celebrating

http://www.raptureready.com/rap2.html

his psychotic base, like attracts like

[enid602]

81. rapture

Wow, they've already hiked up the index up to the 'fasten your seatbelts' category. What would we expect with Bush at the helm?

[in_cog_ni_to]

42. THIS is the paragraph that scared the hell out of me....

:scared: THESE PEOPLE ARE INSANE! I'm sending this article to Durbin and Obama. They need to get the ball rolling on stopping these psychopaths!


The House member said that no one in the meetings “is really objecting” to the talk of war. “The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq. At most, questions are raised: How are you going to hit all the sites at once? How are you going to get deep enough?” (Iran is building facilities underground.) “There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action, the House member added. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.” Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

[leftchick]

44. I agree that is indeed one of the worst

and the scenario for what to expect after the nukes fly....

<snip>

Iran, which now produces nearly four million barrels of oil a day, would not have to cut off production to disrupt the world’s oil markets. It could blockade or mine the Strait of Hormuz, the thirty-four-mile-wide passage through which Middle Eastern oil reaches the Indian Ocean. Nonetheless, the recently retired defense official dismissed the strategic consequences of such actions. He told me that the U.S. Navy could keep shipping open by conducting salvage missions and putting mine- sweepers to work. “It’s impossible to block passage,” he said. The government consultant with ties to the Pentagon also said he believed that the oil problem could be managed, pointing out that the U.S. has enough in its strategic reserves to keep America running for sixty days. However, those in the oil business I spoke to were less optimistic; one industry expert estimated that the price per barrel would immediately spike, to anywhere from ninety to a hundred dollars per barrel, and could go higher, depending on the duration and scope of the conflict.

Michel Samaha, a veteran Lebanese Christian politician and former cabinet minister in Beirut, told me that the Iranian retaliation might be focussed on exposed oil and gas fields in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. “They would be at risk,” he said, “and this could begin the real jihad of Iran versus the West. You will have a messy world.”

Iran could also initiate a wave of terror attacks in Iraq and elsewhere, with the help of Hezbollah. On April 2nd, the Washington Post reported that the planning to counter such attacks “is consuming a lot of time” at U.S. intelligence agencies. “The best terror network in the world has remained neutral in the terror war for the past several years,” the Pentagon adviser on the war on terror said of Hezbollah. “This will mobilize them and put us up against the group that drove Israel out of southern Lebanon. If we move against Iran, Hezbollah will not sit on the sidelines. Unless the Israelis take them out, they will mobilize against us.” (When I asked the government consultant about that possibility, he said that, if Hezbollah fired rockets into northern Israel, “Israel and the new Lebanese government will finish them off.”)

The adviser went on, “If we go, the southern half of Iraq will light up like a candle.” The American, British, and other coalition forces in Iraq would be at greater risk of attack from Iranian troops or from Shiite militias operating on instructions from Iran. (Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, has close ties to the leading Shiite parties in Iraq.) A retired four-star general told me that, despite the eight thousand British troops in the region, “the Iranians could take Basra with ten mullahs and one sound truck.”

... Armageddon anyone? :scared:

[in_cog_ni_to]

46. Armageddon is right.

This is the worst thing these psychos could do.:scared:

[Cerridwen]

43. Saving the "soul" by destroying the "body"

How Medieval.

As another poster has noted, this is the mentality used during the inquisitions throughout Europe, England and Scotland as well as witch hunts in the U.S. and other countries.

We will never learn from our history, is seems.

[iamahaingttta]

45. Stop paying your taxes, people...

...stop using your credit cards, stop using any petroleum products that aren't absolutely necessary! And do it LOUDLY!

That's it... it's time for the revolution, and that's the only way to starve this beast.

The only reason these Oil Killers are doing all this stuff is to secure more oil that they can turn into profit, and if WE stop giving them their profits, the game will change. Sorry, I know it will be difficult. But it's the only way.

Stop paying your taxes, stop using you credit cards, stop using any petroleum products that aren't absolutely necessary.

I'll go first!

[imouttahere]

56. iamahaingttta, that IS the only way!

Starve the beast! Although maybe these beasts are beyond the point of being affected by starvation. The only way to find out is to try!

[gglor]

124. taxes

pay for this insanity....we need to hold back money

[darkmaestro019]

127. Yeah, really. Look at it this way, if you go to prison for tax evasion

you'll have health care AND a decent shot at college, and you won't have to try to hold down a job while you study! Oh yeah, and you'll be karmic-load free for the puddle of glass that used to be called Iran.


(not quite :sarcasm: but a first cousin)

[gglor]

137. your sarcasm is accurate

It just makes me so mad that we pay for this insanity. I keep thinking about bill maher's comment on he is sending a joint to the irs with a note that if your think I am paying for this war you are high. This comment makes me cry inside, because if we do not pay taxes we will all be locked up. You could not even get 40 percent of the population to withhold taxes. It would take at least 90 percent of the population to stop payment on a government that is performing illegally.

[Rose Siding]

47. Murtha's a "A senior member of the House Appropriations Committee"

"A senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, who did not take part in the meetings but has discussed their content with his colleagues, told me..."

Other possibles: Obey, Mollohan, Hoyer, Dicks, Moran...those are the names on the committee that are most recognizable to me-

http://appropriations.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=AboutTheCommittee.MemberList&SubcommitteeId=18

Since the administration will know which dem was in the briefing, they can probably flesh out who they might have spoken with. Hmmm, a media hit went out on Mollohan yesterday. Still, I'd bank on Murtha.

[in_cog_ni_to]

50. MOLLOHAN is on the committee? It's him them.

This is the beginning of the swiftboating of him...just watch. The hit piece on him yesterday and The repukes just called for him to RESIGN! I'd bet anything it's Mollohan.

[Rose Siding]

53. I don't know- How would they have known it would be him?

I doubt Hersh runs his work by the admin they way the networks and the WP and the NYT do.

There's a piece on a Murtha speech in LBN- He's getting more rigid in his criticism. He says flat out that we've lost in Iraq. That fits with some of the remarks made by Hersh's source.

Who would the dem be in the Senate mtg? Lieberman wouldn't have spilled. Maybe Rockefeller?

[in_cog_ni_to]

62. Lieberman was my first thought, but you're right, he wouldn't have talked

to Hersh. Rockefeller? He could very well be the one. He was one of the Senate Dems briefed on the NSA program. He was ordered not to speak to anyone about that and he may be seeing how dangerous these people are and is talking to try and stop this craziness.. I know he was very upset about the NSA program and kept quiet because he was ordered to. Maybe he's had enough?

As for Mollohan....NSA wiretapping. It's my belief they have everyone in Congress wiretapped (for blackmail purposes)...all their homes and in the Congressional offices and the Senate office building. They would know through info gained from a wiretap. Just a thought.:)

[Rose Siding]

83. The anon Senator didn't talk to Hersh, but to a House dem on aprop

I can't imagine which dem Senator bushco would have trusted in that briefing. The more nefarious the topic, the more he'd want to be able to send a mouthpiece out to say BOTH parties had been included. Maybe it *was* Joe. He coulda been gamed into "sharing"?

I agree about wiretapping. Files on all the dems are waiting. Rove has had the keys to the kingdom for many years and his stripes haven't changed.

[darkmaestro019]

129. That's what I think, too.

About the NSA wiretapping and blackmail, I mean.

And no, I'm not using the cute little "ignore my opinion" tinfoil hat smiley, either. I'm dead serious. That's PEANUTS compared to what these guys have done and will do to get their way. And it explains a LOT about the no-eyecontact, mumbling, shrugging silence that seems to be all we get from most of the opposition. Nobody wants to be Spartacus when they are pretty sure massa WILL cheerfully beat every slave who stands up into a bloody puddle of sorry.

I suspect that Conyers, Feingold, Boxer, etc, do not have the "dirt" to expose that the suddenly silent Dems have. And most of it is probably peanuts too--blowjobs and weekend lines, etc, but enough for the Regressives to ruin their lives politically and privately.

EDIT: For grammar, and to wave a large flag that says OCCAM'S RAZOR

[PATRICK]

49. This should not be news

anymore than Bush's long ago planned war on Iraq.

The RW has been lusting, the proper word here, salivating for use of a tactical nuke. The target hardly seems to matter. they want to set an example, a precedent of our willingness to use the "big one".

As with the budget Bush has willfully destroyed conventional capacity so as to almost justify this extreme as well.

As an issue in itself, sans oil, it is an abomination. Any American who is not a craven monster has the obligation to stop this and closed eyes, faint imaginations are no excuse.

As for Hitler, as with the search for evil in the WH they need only look in the mirror. They are the same old crap history has been afflicted with and shamefully stalking our nation's soul through the stolen corridors of the Whitewashed House.

And the spin has been long prepared. The target is not so much in a populated area. The bomb will be a "tactical" "small" nuke even "clean". World War III will not commence. Bush will be forced to become more of a global dictator to assert himself this time. All so neat. All so damning. And filled with lies, evasion and the lowest depths to which a man can sink who has stolen the highest platform of naked power.

As with Iraq when our worst fears and most logical predictions were only realized in the long run this monstrosity will play out badly for everyone in the world. Everyone in the world must pledge themselves to stop this and punish the planners.

Democracy in Iran! A Big Lie. Getting rid of nukes. A Bigger Lie considering Pakistan and NK and others. It is the iron fist of fear, the exaltation of the savage Right Wing, the false machismo hiding behind the work of scientists they despise and the soldiers they can never be.

Forget Nuremberg. Put them on trial in NYC, where they abandonned thousands to die horribly for their own mean advantage and the destruction of our nation.

We have the death penalty in New York thanks to the GOP.

[babylonsister]

51. This maniac needs to be stopped, but how?

:(

[leftchick]

55. in theory Senior Pentagon officials could stop it

it seems as though rummy has sewn up that angle. :(

<snip>

The Pentagon adviser on the war on terror confirmed that some in the Administration were looking seriously at this option, which he linked to a resurgence of interest in tactical nuclear weapons among Pentagon civilians and in policy circles. He called it “a juggernaut that has to be stopped.” He also confirmed that some senior officers and officials were considering resigning over the issue. “There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries,” the adviser told me. “This goes to high levels.” The matter may soon reach a decisive point, he said, because the Joint Chiefs had agreed to give President Bush a formal recommendation stating that they are strongly opposed to considering the nuclear option for Iran. “The internal debate on this has hardened in recent weeks,” the adviser said. “And, if senior Pentagon officers express their opposition to the use of offensive nuclear weapons, then it will never happen.”

The adviser added, however, that the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons in such situations has gained support from the Defense Science Board, an advisory panel whose members are selected by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. “They’re telling the Pentagon that we can build the B61 with more blast and less radiation,” he said.

The chairman of the Defense Science Board is William Schneider, Jr., an Under-Secretary of State in the Reagan Administration. In January, 2001, as President Bush prepared to take office, Schneider served on an ad-hoc panel on nuclear forces sponsored by the National Institute for Public Policy, a conservative think tank. The panel’s report recommended treating tactical nuclear weapons as an essential part of the U.S. arsenal and noted their suitability “for those occasions when the certain and prompt destruction of high priority targets is essential and beyond the promise of conventional weapons.” Several signers of the report are now prominent members of the Bush Administration, including Stephen Hadley, the national-security adviser; Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence; and Robert Joseph, the Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.

[AlabamaYankee]

87. Where the Hell is Congress?

Surely there are at least a couple of Republicans who aren't willing to follow bush over the cliff and enough Democrats with a spine to raise absolute hell. There is NO way an attack on Iran could be rationlaized by the resolution Congress passed to get us into Iraq,and so far Bush isn't even pretending to go to Congress. At this point I don't think he intends to.

Then again I've always been an incurable optimist.

[long_green]

57. There's an interesting quote from a retired colonel

on the "analyst circuit" who says that hitting Iran's nuclear capability would involve at least 400 targets and he says "you wouldn't want to stop there," we would to try to wipe out as much of their ability to defend themselves as possible.
So, once we start, it's bomb, bomb, bomb and this time we use nukes. What wouldn't we deserve in retaliation?

[sellitman]

136. Exactly!

It's opening Pandora's Box. After these monsters Nuke Iran watch Israel get destroyed and then who knows? It is possible they get help from Russia or China with long range missiles with the capability to hit us.

WW III

Some Legacy!

[Beelzebud]

58. Ghengis Khan, Napoleon, Adolph Hitler

And now, America brings you: George W. Bush.

[Generic Other]

61. Terrifyingly certifiably insane

“...a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.”

Reminds me of the Greek king who went to the Oracle of Delphi to ask whether he should attack the Persians ancient Iranians)2000 years ago. The Oracle's prophecy was this: "If you attack Persia, a great king will die." The Greek king took this to mean the Persian king would fall. Evidently the Greek king was as stupid and arrogant as Bush because he was the one who lost his crown when he attacked the Persians.

Those who fail to learn from the lessons of history...

[cornermouse]

67. A sustained bombing campaign in Iran

will bring out every single Arab against the U.S. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, UAE? Forget it. They're leadership will be forced to be on the "against us" side.

[Warren Stupidity]

76. I suspect it would result in the collapse

of the Egyptian, Saudi, Jordanian and various gulf mini-states. It would bring on the catastrophe our religious maniacs have been pushing for. Armageddon, full speed ahead!

[SOS]

106. Interestingly

Today's NYT quotes US ambassador to Iraq, Khalilzad, as saying that the violence in Iraq is now threatening to escalate into a regional war.
That's Bush guy in Baghdad saying that!
And now this?
If they do this, the consequences are limitless.

[leftchick]

110. exactly

it is all in the PNAC plan. WTF? Do the neofreaks think they will be isolated from the violence? I believe it will be world wide. :(

[darkmaestro019]

130. Not just the "Arabs" either.....

I can't imagine ANY COUNTRY on Earth having the moral bankruptcy to support this or even silently sit by. None. And that includes America herself.

[JackDragna]

63. If this happens..

I'm done with the government as it is. I won't vote for a single person currently in office ever again unless they vehemently opposed the bombing.

[mnhtnbb]

66. Bush is a complete maniac

This guy has to be stopped. Who is going to do it?

[McCamy Taylor]

69. Bush is about to commit a war crime.

[Warren Stupidity]

73. You mean yet another war crime.

He already has plenty to his credit.

[Neil Lisst]

70. Bush is Greg Stilson, and that scares Hell outta me.

As played by Martin Sheen in the original film THE DEAD ZONE, based upon Stephen King's book of the same name.

In his mind, great presidents are the ones associated with the most war - Washington, Lincoln, FDR.

The dude is dangerous.

[darkmaestro019]

131. Thank you, I'd been thinking of that all day, except in the context that

if King was writing that today he'd probably be turned in to DHS

[Warren Stupidity]

75. "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a potential Adolf Hitler"

You know, they are so devoid of creativity that they cannot even change the damn script.

The evil saddam was adolf, now the frootloop Ahmadinejad is playing adolf, next Chavez will be standing in.

This is total bullshit. What sort of reparations do we owe the planet after we nuke some nation for no good reason? How exactly do we atone for that crime?

[thereismore]

77. So we're gonna nuke them because they have ventilator shafts?

I actually believe that Iran may be going for the nuclear weapon (who wouldn't?), but the shrubies have lost all credibility on crying "Wolf!". A regional conference with Russian and American presence is urgently needed. Fvck the bush*! How one ignoramus can throw a monkey wrench into the Earth's axis...

[darkmaestro019]

132. for want of a nail ..........(nt)

[Laurab]

78. An acquaintance in the Air Force is being deployed May 12

for 6 months, rumor has it, to Iran. I heard this 2 days ago, and was terrified. Now it makes sense. These people ARE insane. It would appear once again, Sy Hersh is on the money. I already knew they were insane, but I didn't think they were THAT insane. I. am. terrifed.

[Jack Rabbit]

82. Bush needs to be removed from power sooner rather than later

This crisis is an entirely logical outcome of the policy and outrageous behavior of Bush and the neoconservatives. Of course Iran is pursing a nuclear weapons program. She would be stupid not to pursue a nuclear weapons program. If the neocons have their a nation in their sites, all they will do is say that nation is a threat, that it has WMDs or is pursuing the construction of nuclear weapons, whether it is true or not. Iran doesn't want to wait to be invaded and have the CIA made the fall for bad intelligence while some US administrator in Tehran unilaterally rewrites the laws on foreign investment. If the neocons are going to claim a nation has nukes as a pretext to invade, that nation is well advised to make sure the neocons are right.

No one should welcome Iran to the nuclear club. It makes the world a more dangerous place. But we know why they are doing it. It isn't the Iranians who have made the world dangerous.

Another reason that this is a logical outcome of the behavior of Bush and the neoconservatives is that, with the US military tied down next door occupying Iraq, there really is no US military force that can strike Iran were that necessary. A nuclear strike becomes an alternative to invasion and occupation. Bush's occupation of Iraq is going badly. Whether Mr. Bush has the capacity to understand it or not, somebody in the White House or the State Department or the Pentagon undoubtedly realizes that an occupation of Iran would be even more difficult. Iran is about three times larger than Iraq geographically and has about two and a half times as many people. While Iran's Islamic Republic is not a true democracy, it resembles one far more than Saddam's Iraq did; there will be even less reason to suppose US forces will be greeted as liberators by the Iranians than there was to suppose Iraqis would. The population of Iran are more homogeneous than that of Iraq; unlike Iraq, resistance to occupation will be unified.

Bush has really made a mess of the Pax Americana. Bush's American imperialism has all the bad effects that an imperial system imposes both on its colonies and its own masses at home, but none of the benefits of sustained political stability or security.

As long as Iran is about five years away from developing a nuclear weapon, there is time to deal with the threat. I would prefer that, like Iraq, Mr. Bush leave this to his successor. Unfortunately, unlike Iraq, Iran may be a real threat that requires a real solution. Yet five years into Mr. Bush's reign of terror and error, we have no reason to have any confidence in him to solve any urgent problem.

Right now, Iran is less of an urgent problem than Bush is. It is no more a danger to international peace or US national security than Bush is. If Iran is such an urgent problem that it needs to be addressed sooner rather than later, or even if Iran is a less urgent problem but for which a constructive policy needs to be developed sooner rather than later, than the US needs competent leadership sooner rather than later. We need to replace this clumsy junta with a competent administration, sooner rather than later.

[Spinzonner]

85. Looks like they have the wrong Hitler

[BlueStorm]

88. Will this start the Nuclear Holocaust?

So many people have feared a nuclear holocaust in the past, if Bush decides to carry this insane plan out, we will be looking at the start of a nuclear war that only Hollywood has played out. It wouldn't be just a fantasy anymore.
If he does carry this out, hopefully the world will have enough sense to arrest him and his cronies and try him out at the Hague.

Damn!

Blue

[idlisambar]

89. ....

:wtf:

:scared: :scared:

[Ilsa]

90. Bit here is a tidbit of good news in the article, about

40% of the way down:

...He also confirmed that some senior officers and officials were considering resigning over the issue. “There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries,” the adviser told me. “This goes to high levels.” The matter may soon reach a decisive point, he said, because the Joint Chiefs had agreed to give President Bush a formal recommendation stating that they are strongly opposed to considering the nuclear option for Iran. “The internal debate on this has hardened in recent weeks,” the adviser said. “And, if senior Pentagon officers express their opposition to the use of offensive nuclear weapons, then it will never happen.”

[benfranklin1776]

94. But here is the nightmare constitutional scenario.

Knowing this petulant juvenile's bellicosity, and his deranged megalomania, his repsonse will be"I am the Commander in Chief and do as I say." At that point these generals have a duty I think to expressly disobey his order as it is an illegal one. He has absolutely no authority, certainly none given him by Congress, to unilaterally order an unprovoked nuclear attack on a sovereign nation. Under these circumstances the generals have a duty to disobey that order as it is illegal. They should not step down as that would only enable him to appoint new lackeys who will carry out his orders. If the government is frozen in crisis so be it, the nuclear weapons usage is averted. But the million dollar question is whether these generals will refuse the order. And if they do it is still a nightmare scenario as this is an utter breakdown in the functioning of our government. But it would at least give Congress a chance to reassert its Constitutional duty to rein in the executive branch, however I am not sanguine about this group doing it but they damn well better act, right now, seize this chance to reestablish their Constitutional role or be prepared to be relegated to oblivion as a permanent rubber stamp parliament like the Soviet Politburo. And we should be prepared to be the pariah of the world if Bush carries this out.

[leftchick]

100. briefly, until you read the next two paragraphs...

<snip>

The adviser added, however, that the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons in such situations has gained support from the Defense Science Board, an advisory panel whose members are selected by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. “They’re telling the Pentagon that we can build the B61 with more blast and less radiation,” he said.

The chairman of the Defense Science Board is William Schneider, Jr., an Under-Secretary of State in the Reagan Administration. In January, 2001, as President Bush prepared to take office, Schneider served on an ad-hoc panel on nuclear forces sponsored by the National Institute for Public Policy, a conservative think tank. The panel’s report recommended treating tactical nuclear weapons as an essential part of the U.S. arsenal and noted their suitability “for those occasions when the certain and prompt destruction of high priority targets is essential and beyond the promise of conventional weapons.” Several signers of the report are now prominent members of the Bush Administration, including Stephen Hadley, the national-security adviser; Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence; and Robert Joseph, the Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.

.... Chairman Schneider is a PNAC Neo-Con! Rummy has loaded the DOD with them.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=William+Schneider%2C+Jr+neocon+pnac

:(

[Roland99]

113. They'll just be replaced with people that will enable the BATSHIT INSANE

madmen in this administration to attack at will.

[DearAbby]

92. saving Iran is going to be his legacy?1?

who will be the brave knight that will save US/WORLD from * and his insane idea of a legacy...what legacy, if there is no one left in the world to remember it?

I am seriously having questions about his sanity...remember the people that claim god talks to them are in institutions,ie Andrea Yates claimed god told her to kill her children, god told *, according to him, to kill other people's children... this one is running our country...:hide: :nuke:

[Jersey Devil]

98. Bush thinks of it as "mein kampf"

He is just as forken crazy.

[LunaC]

93. TOLD Y'ALL back in January that this was coming!!

The ingredients for a NUCLEAR CONFLICT are all in place!
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/LunaC/10

[Jersey Devil]

99. Yes, and we also know it will come before November

because though those strange glasses he wears he thinks it will be good for him politically.

[leftchick]

102. I never doubted you LunaC

I just hoped you were wrong. :(

[Rocknrule]

117. I knew in January 01 that this would happen

[darkmaestro019]

133. Ditto. My exact words were

"We are so, so fucked."

And everyone made fun of me. "You just don't like him because he's a "Christian" and you're just being paranoid...."


That sick, falling feeling in my stomach has never been wrong. Damn it. I was hoping this time would be the exception, too.

[debbierlus]

95. So many people who I have warned about this....

Refuse to believe it.

I got into a heated discussion with my brother-in-law. He didn't think we would ever use a nuke (in this context).

I told him that Bush is a madman and he would be crazy enough to do anything!

[bushmeister0]

96. Congress folds again.

Sy Hersh wrote that the adminstration is briefing selected members of Congress:

"A senior member...said that no one in the meetings 'is really objecting' to the talk of war. 'The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq. At most, questions are raised: How are you going to hit all the sites at once? How are you going to get deep enough?”

Like John McCain for instance? This sounds just like his interview on Meet the Press last Sunday.

Tim Russert quoted an interview he did in the Financial Times where he he said, "I do not think would be successful. There is no guarantee we would get all those facilities. If you have a strike and leave them with nuclear capability, you have got a hell of a challenge on your hands.’"

Of course, then he said, "This is one of the most dangerous challenges we’ve faced since the end of the Cold War...And for us to say under no circumstances will we use the military option would be the height of foolishness in my view. And again, I want to applaud the president’s handling of this issue, keeping our European allies with us.

MR. RUSSERT: So we could have two wars at once?

SEN. McCAIN: I think we could have Armageddon.

[ToolTex]

97. Who can stop him? Several can, but won't until the world can

document that he is truly another another Hitler. Then, if my high school friends figured it out 40 years ago, surely someone in the nuke club also has by now, and when * is gloating over Iran in the House chamber, our screens will go dark and after a couple of minutes local stations will announce they have lost the feed from DC.

Well, who could cause that to happen? Any country with nukes or anyone with enough money to bribe a Russian General or Pakistani physicist. Why would? Tony Blair knows for sure that * is insane. The French must believe it. The Saudis maybe in hopes of self preservation. Maybe NK, maybe India? Probably Libya.

WIth our port situation, surely someone has smuggled in a device in a shipping container that right now sits in a garage in DC awaiting a signal from a satellite phone. When MAD depended on tracing incoming rockets, to know which sender to blow away, the garage pack only made sense. No warning time, and no tell tale rocket trail. Since every thing we had was pointed at the USSR, probably we can't count on them to solve our problem in a flash. But someone else probably will. I think I'd move away from the DC area before the first ker-pow ricochets around the perimeter of Iran. (Any one else recognize that phrasing from your 1952 Weekly Readers)?

[Botany]

101. True insanity

No war w/ Iran.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

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

[EC]

109. Will someone please put this guy in a straight-jacket

**, I mean...for God sake this guy is crazy...

[Brigid]

111. Saving a Village

This sounds like the same logic used in Viet Nam -- destroying a village in order to save it. You can tell this comes from a guy who hid out in the Alabama National Guard during that war.

[FatDave]

115. What exactly is he trying to save Iran from?

He's going to save them from becoming a nuclear power? He's going to fight nukes with nukes?

And the plan here is that once we start bombing Iran, the Iranian people will rise up against their government? Why the fuck would they do that? How deranged do you have to be to come to that conclusion?

No, the Iranians would become even more pissed at US, and every US soldier in Iraq would lie dead in a matter of days. Fighting Iran will make fighting Iraq look like a fucking training exercise.

(Sorry for the language, but I'm pissed)

[Imagevision]

116. I'm convinced Bush has gone mad and dangerous to the world>nt

[leftchick]

118. I agree and wish a few people in congress would get a clue

how in the hell can anyone ignore this?

[Imagevision]

119. Nixon was going nuts when he was being impeached . Bush is already there!

and his administration is going to back him as he nukes another country? doesn't the UN. count for anything anymore??

[progressivebydesign]

120. Bush has always been obsessed with is legacy!!!

I heard something, probably on Thom Hartman or Ed Schultz program... where Bush was talking before he was selected, and said that he wanted to be "remembered" for achieving something, like toppling Saddam, because his daddy didn't finish the job. He's insane..

[darkmaestro019]

134. Exactly. He's never ACCOMPLISHED anything in his life

And he knows it. And that's all he wants--not for the sake of anyone or anything but his own "See, I did something. There's my trophy." (points to the plain of glass that used to be Iran beside the radioactive craters that used to be Iraq)


Serial killers take similar trophies.

[stevietheman]

121. Time to rise up

If this plan to attack Iran is for real, it will be time for the American people to truly rise up against the Bush Regime, and I'm sad that this will require storming the White House and physically removing the President, whether the military or a million-person-mob does it.

There is no earthly rationale for these plans against Iran. None.

[symbolman]

128. I discussed the possibility here before

actually more like DEMANDED that the Joint Chiefs of Staff Immediately arrest and detain Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and whoever else is signed on for these bizarre anti constitutional, war crimes, war profiteering, etc.

I still would like to field that same demand as a Citizen and a Veteran, that the Military refuse all orders from Bush as they are illegal and detain him, if nothing else to have him examined for the possibility that he may be mentally ill, and according to the Constitution there is a remedy for that situation.

At this point is appears that the only thing that will save us is the oath taken by those in the military, one that I took myself, "to Protect and Defend this Nation against enemies both WITHIN and Without.."

Bush is the REAL Terrorist, his Pre-emptive attack campaign is forcing soverign nations to defend themselves PRE-EMPTIVELY, at what point are THEY the Terrorists, when BUSH is FORCING them to DEFEND themselves in advance, at which time they use HIS EXACT SAME DOCTRINE.

I hope to god that Baltimore doesn't light up like a Fireworks factory on fire, especially with unguarded ports as we've seen reported.

There should be no doubt in anyone's mind at this point that these persons claiming to be the executive branch of the united states are imposters, and criminally insane.

It's up to the Joint Chiefs at this point, god forbid any resign, they'll be replaced with CIVILIANS (read:CORPORATE SHILLS) who Swear no Alligiance to the Constitution and supply no Oath to protect and defend this country.

These people are TRAITORS.