Should I throw it in just one more time?

What the hell..why not.

IRAN DOES NOT HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!

Yeah tdbach, LET’S TRY AGAIN.  Iran DOES NOT HAVE nuclear weapons!  So IRAN cannot “nuke” Israel!  You are totally off the mark.  Again, IRAN DOES NOT HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS.  Israel and the US both do. 

Also, your assumption, “whether or not you are personally appalled at such a tough, absolute response, the majority of Americas agree with it, and Hillary knows it”  IS BOGUS!

The AMERICAN PEOPLE don’t support bombing Iran!  Why would we…?  A minority of warmonging republicans and “democrats”, the neocons, and the military/industrial complex support bombing Iran.  Normally the individuals in these groups are one and the same.  So your analogy is not only inaccurate, it’s downright ludicrous.

You spew propaganda like it’s going out style.  One more time. IRAN DOES NOT HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS!  Instead of imagining some Tehran fantasy involving Bush/Cheney, I’ll try to imagine, that you heard me.

IRAN DOES NOT HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS!

“Hillary Plays the Crazy Card”
Is she playing? Or is she simply crazy?

heavyrunner:

“Clinton Announces She Would Ignore Constitution”

“The U.S. does not have a mutual defense pact with Israel.  This means that any action against Iran in response to an attack by that country on Israel would require Congressional action as required by Article II of the U.S. Constitution.”

“So Hillary’s comment was chilling on several levels.”

***

Oh good point. Tells us Hillary is not only completely void of empathy and compassion, but she embraces the unitary presidency position of the republican fruitcakes in D.C. and the White House as well. And that is one thing Obama has specifically addressed. He DOES NOT!

Here’s another scary possibility. Bush plans on attacking Iran before he leaves office. At least that seems to be the general consensus among Bush watchers. Perhaps Hillary and Bill have cocktails with George and Laura. Perhaps she knows something we don’t know. Perhaps she believes when and if that attack comes, the good folks who cant think unless they are scared and being lied to, will vote for the candidate they believe will be as blind stubborn and determined to have war as Bush is.

OK, I know ... it sounds crazy. But what in this really weird campaign hasn’t been?

But then even that doesn’t make any sense, cause crazy George could just suspend the elections if he starts another war! Particularly a war with Iran which would pull in Russia and could lead to another World War. And if that isn’t bad enough, crazy George badly wants to use one of his new nukes. What a terrific excuse! And we need to remember a Bush doesn’t understand truth and consequence. We all know that.

Now Hillary ... poor Hillary appears to have slipped just far enough off the rails that one has to wonder if she hasn’t got the same ambition! [and lose screws]

Oh my. These are indeed the times that try men’s souls. Especially those who love a lie and getting scared into sitting in their own shit!

And what’s that crap about Iran obliterating Israel?

Really.

Israel has been so busy obliterating Palastine they haven’t had time to worry about Iran. And probably really don’t anyway. That’s just one more bit of handy bullshit Bush shovels on us all because he really, really loves to see things blown up by big bad bombs.

[And I think he might be a little scared of Israel. Like the rest of our politicos] 

Haven’t you figured that out yet?

They, Iran and its leaders, are being asked the same hypothetical question, would I carry out a counterstrike if attacked, myself, or if an attack on an ally?

Who in their right mind is going to answer that question, no?

Again, those promoting racial hatred keep heating the tensions in the Middle East with these hypothetical questions, and claims of the answer being a threat.

Also, we went to war for cheaper oil from Iraq, we now pay $3.00 or more at the pump for gas. Will Iran bring us free urianium? No. It’s time to use the old U.S. know how and make a deal. If we want uranium from Iran, we want peace, not war, and to pay fair market value for it.

Then we have to work on our radiation record, the last time we had a nuclear program we killed everyone in it, with radiation poisoning.

The question is, should the U.S. have more uranium?

Not, with its radiation record, we do not even know enough to wear radiation suits to mine it. They won’t have to attack us, we will kill everyone with the uranium, if we have hold of it.

After all, I care, I am a U.S. citizen.

Check out my blogs:
http://benevolentlybeloved.com

You clearly missed my point. When Bush says something along the lines of, “Iran is a menace to the region and we will take whatever measures are necessary to ensure they pose no threat to the people of Iraq or Israel” - That is UNILATERALLY threatening. It offers no specific cause and effect. It’s open to all kinds of inteerpretation, and if I were Iranian, I’d be trying to come up with some kind of strike-back capability. That is warmongering and bullying and destablizing. And that is comparable to what Ahmedinejad said. It says, “You are a problem and we want you gone.” It’s beside the point if you are threatening a government or a people, it’s the nature of the threat I’m talking about.

What Clinton said wasn’t really a threat, because she has no power, but regardless, she was responding to a hypothetical. Iran nukes Israel, what do you do? The cause and effect is unmistakable. And whether or not you are personally appalled at such a tough, absolute response, the majority of Americas agree with it, and Hillary knows it. So it’s politically smart. And in terms of dealing with leaders of countries who make unilateral threats, it’s geopolitically wise, too.

Imagine if Tehran had placed a nuclear device in one of our cities, and we didn’t know which one, where it was, but we knew it was really there, and if Ahmedinejad said, “If Mr. Bush dares invade our country, we will detonate that bomb and obliterate all of the Americans within 5 miles”, do you think that might change Bush and Cheney’s tactics a little?

tdbach:

your quote: “I have never advocated threatening Iran. Hillary’s statement was in response to a hypothetical question, fer chrissakes. Her answer, under the circumstances was both politically and geopolitically smart.”

>You ARE advocating threatening Iran when you claim Clinton’s rash answer to be “politically and geopolitically smart”.

Your quote:  “If you can’t see the difference between a unilateral threat, like “Israel should be wiped from the face of the earth” (I know! Don’t give me lecture about translations and what it really means - it was still a threat to the Israeli government if not the people) and a threat of “If you do X, we will do Y” and “X” is known to be immoral, illegal, destablizing, and unnecessary, then I can’t help you.”

>You are talking in circles.  Are you claiming there’s a difference in saying one would OBLITERATE A WHOLE COUNTRY or WIPE A COUNTRY OFF THE MAP.  Same shit different pile, that’s all that is.

Then you assert that the WAY Clinton said it makes all the difference YET, you then claim that an accurate translation of Ahmadinejad’s words don’t count.  There’s no logic in your argument.  What you are saying is obviously driven by some emotional attachment you have to Clinton, since it certainly is NOT driven by logic.

Ahmadinejad is stupid for shooting off his mouth, but even at that his country DOES NOT HAVE the military might that ours does.  In that regard Clinton’s comment was much more dangerous and threatening, not to Iran only but to the world.

It’s a wet dream, Jim. Time to wake up and change the sheets.

I have never advocated threatening Iran. Hillary’s statement was in response to a hypothetical question, fer chrissakes. Her answer, under the circumstances was both politically and geopolitically smart.

If you can’t see the difference between a unilateral threat, like “Israel should be wiped from the face of the earth” (I know! Don’t give me lecture about translations and what it really means - it was still a threat to the Israeli government if not the people) and a threat of “If you do X, we will do Y” and “X” is known to be immoral, illegal, destablizing, and unnecessary, then I can’t help you.

I’m very, very wary of what Bush and Cheney have been doing and saying. McCain, too. We, the opposition, are the conscience of America. And yes, the Republicans are infinitely more dangerous than Ahmedinejad, because they have a lot more power - in every sense of the word - in their hands. Which is why Democrats HAVE to win this election. Getting our collective panties in a twist about what Hillary said ain’t going to help. But don’t take my word for it.

So this is about Israel, not an abstract moral dilemma? The fact that the hypothetical that Clinton responded to had Israelis killed by the hudreds of thousands meant that any response of equivalent force would be AIPAC-driven, and therefor reprehensible?

Let’s rephrase the question: “If an ally of the United States is attacked with nuclear weapons by a country who espouses hatred for the West, what would your response be?” Does that change the calculus for you?

The hysterics evident on this page aren’t coming from Clinton or her defenders (I’m a defender, not a supporter). Read down through the comments. You tell me whose posts have a hyserical tone and whose don’t.

The hysterical rhetoric resides with you, my dear. Hillary hasn’t been threatening Iran any more than Obama has. I completely agree that any preemptive action against Iran would be foolish, immoral, and deadly to our interests, for the same reason it was in Iraq. She’s not advocating that.

How did this whole broohaha begin? With a hypothetical question to a primary candidate for president: “IF IRAN STRUCK ISRAEL WITH A NUCLEAR WEAPEN (which would presumably kill hundreds of thousands of people and esccalate on oft-spoken-of jihad against Israel and the West to a new and horrifying level), what would be your response?” At this point it isn’t about whether or not Iran has a nuclear program - that’s taken care of by the premise of the question.

There may be a more intellectually subtle and nuanced answer to that question, but I’m telling you, most voters would have little patience with it. It would play into every stereotype the Right has drummed into their heads for the past 30 years. Her response was satisfyingly (to these voters) crisp, to the point, and harmless. And geopolitically smarter than you’re giving her credit for.

The fools - and the hysterics - are the ones like you and Conason who are going nuts about this and calling Hillary insane, war-mongering, etc. YOU are why we (Democrats) could lose this election.

Your “diseased” friend,
Tom

Our leaders say threatening things too, so then using your assertion we are a threat to them.  Why do you see this only one way.  Where’s your “wary observation” when it comes to us threating them?  Iran does not have WMD of any kind that we are aware of.  But we do and so does Israel.  Clinton and McCain are the epitome of “foolish recklessness” and are no different than Ahmadinejad in their stupidity.

Oh please tdbach, stop with all of the hysteria.

How in the hell do you figure that Iran has just tried to obliterate Israel?

And why do you place so much stock in the rhetoric of one man, Ahmadinejad, when he is simply an elected official (democratically I might add) in the same way that GW Bush is, with the minor exception that he didn’t have to cheat, or otherwise pull a coup to win the election, and with the obvious other exception that he is far less ‘dangerous’ than Dick Bush.

The Mullahs are the regime of Iran. Maybe this would NOT be the case if the the USA/CIA had not overthrown the democratically elected Mossadeq back in 1953, to install their own regime in Tehran. The Shah. SINCE THEY DID, and since Iran has taken back control of their own politics, ONE of their elected leaders has been Ahmadinejad and anybody who knows anything knows that he is ONE person, and that he does not control the actions of the political regime of Iran, and that his rhetoric is nothing more than that, and far less dangerous than the rhetoric that comes from the US.

Iran hasn’t attacked ANYBODY, and they DON’T have any nuclear weapons, and they’ve indicated time after time that they are not interested in acquiring any nuclear weapons, and ALL evidence of the past decade gives witness to that.

So..STOP with the hysterical rhetoric.

BTW, YOU do not represent ‘our party’ either. You speak for a limb of the Democratic Party that has become diseased and needs to be amputated to allow for the continued HEALTHY growth of a party that actually represents the principles of democracy.

If she had a choice between nuking Iran or losing the election, which would she choose?

I hate nightmares like this.

Purplewolf,

I LOVE IT!!!

But you’re right…I’m sure medicare is not an accepted form of payment.

Very nicely done, purplewolf.  The only thing you left out was the army of adoring fans (computer generated, of course).  A good metaphor for power escapes me right now; that, too, would have been a nice touch.

Seems as if the long campaign is not such a bad idea after all. It’s wearing off Hilary’s fake veneer.

The U.S. does not have a mutual defense pact with Israel.  This means that any action against Iran in response to an attack by that country on Israel would require Congressional action as required by Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

So Hillary’s comment was chilling on several levels.

Why is Iran a threat? Because its leader says threatening things. Because it continues to develop technology that can be used, though not necessarily is used - for creating nuclear weapons. It’s not a racist thing, it’s a geopolitical thing. If the French or the Germans were making the same kind of noises, the reaction would be the same.

Empathy is a noble impulse. But if it isn’t tempered with wary observation and a strong posture in the face of what appears to be threatening behavior, it is foolish recklessness by a flattering name.

Like all Americans, and the majority of white people, Hillary just is misguided, by those who provoke racial hatred against Assyrians.

Why is Iran a threat?

The Assyrians who live there are strangers to white folks and Americans in general, and yes, in this one regard of racial hatred, I will no longer share the title American.

I am of the Assyrian Nation, a Believing Jew.

Again, why is Iran a threat?

Of course that was a super-stupid, totally inexcusable remark even though Hillary did not say “I will obliterate them” and the Iranian leaders know well that we have the means to do just that. What about Obama? He is seemingly less of a saber-rattler. Nevertheless, his position vis-a-vis is: ” negotiate but everything must remain on the table”. Everything? Does that not include nuclear bombs? When he was recently asked by Tim Russert whether he favored attacking Iran, Obama gave a totally ridiculous and evasive answer.  Why does everyone give this slippery and dangerous ‘imperialist-lite’ a free ride?

Each time I hear something about Clinton, it’s worse than the previous thing.  This last seems to be coming not from insanity but hunger and desperation.  I expect to hear even wilder stuff in the next few weeks.  Reminds me a lot of Nixon, fighting like a cornered rat.

Hillary’s mask has fallen off. It is no doubt she has always been this vile person- she just hide it better during the ‘90’s.
I was dumbfounded by the ‘Obliterate’ comment- and even more shocked the media let it slide. but with a little Internet connceting the doctrine which appears to be guiding her bacame very Clear. That was not ‘just acting tough’ any fool would ahve known such statments were reclkless and certianly no ta Democratic Party value. It was a Nod & Wink to such Religious crazies as Hagee -who’s stratedgy to provoke ‘Armegeddon ’ is to pre-emptively strike Iran which will get both the Russians and Chinese to react.Granted the ‘End of Days’ folks have been around for Centuries- but when their projected date for the ‘Rapture ‘comes - they either kill themselves or make a new date. With th eHelp of such Politicians as Mac, Hillary, Bush, Liebermann- Hagee has the posssilbity of MAKING IT HAPPEN! While the rest of Mankind is being Killed from Nuke attacks or the aftermath, they think they will be whisked off to heaven. And when they are Not- they will have started the most deadly of World wars with No way of stopping it. I’ve wondered why the Corps the Neo cons and the Neo Dems (DLC) have no concerns about what happens in the future, they are working towards there Not being One. These traitors, War and Humanitarian criminals Must be exposed and Prosecuted for th ecrimes they have already committed and stopped from committing the most heinous of all crimes NOW!

HILLARY: Your custom order designer straight-jacket with personal fabric choice is ready, included with your reservation at Sunnyside International Rehabilitation Center. Your room comes with a deluxe, extra soft padded executive suite with soft glow lighting and relaxing piped in music, as well as those extra amenities you require. Special diet prepared by the top chefs of the world. It is covered by your all inclusive medical insurance, paid for by the taxpayers of America, no co-pays. Only the best for our elected officials.

Sunnyside offers the best doctors, therapists and other professionals to serve our important guests with the latest in electro-shock therapy, hypnosis and medications. 24/7 surveillance and the best security for our guests provided by Blackwater International, always there when you need us. Refer a friend. They’ll thank you for it.
Most insurances denied.

All of the posters around here seem to think that pols are bound to tell the truth . . . evidently the “fat lady” thinks AIPAC is going to come to the rescue at the last minute, but they may be in the process of buying yet another black, much like they do in the entertainment and sports arenas. (Or they may already own him….)

I don’t know whether you are going to get McCain, Obama, or 8-16 more years of the present moron, but I do know that what you will get will be just exactly what you deserve.

Thanks be to God I’m 75 with heart disease and won’t have to deal with this shinola much longer. You say it’s NOT shinola? What could it be, then?

Clinton’s campaign bluster threatens no one. As the Secretary General said, if she becomes president and says such things, that’s one thing. This is quite another. The problem for Democrats isn’t a tough-sounding Clinton, it’s the reaction of guys like Conason in the Left that will do in our party if they become the dominant voice.

A majority of voters watch this theater and think, WTF? Of course, if Iran kills millions of Jews in Israel, they’re gong to get hit and hit hard back, and they should know that. Obliterate? Why the hell not? They just tried to obliterate Israel, didn’t they? If the Democrats would rather sit on their hands and just say, “Gee golly gum. You shouldn’t do that, Mr. Amadinijad . It’s not nice. We’re just going to have to put some very harsh sanctions on you!” then I ain’t going to elect any Goddamned Democrat, that’s for sure!

There’s a world of difference between Bush’s belligerence, with all his talk of “evil doers” and “axis of evil” and pre-emptive war, and warning that a quantum leap in jihad would result in a lot more death and destruction than they would want. And the people of Iran aren’t as stupid as our Liberal peaceniks either. They don’t buy Amadinijad’s whining “no fair” anymore than most Americans think Hillary’s reply was inhuman. Knowing their necks are on the line, they’re not going to stick with their president or the ruling Islamic council if they think these guys are going to do something that will get them all killed. That’s what deterrence is all about.

I know the Hillary haters love to think of her as Lady Macbeth, unbridled bloodlust ambition. But could it be that she thinks it’s vitally important that the Republicans not win back the presidency, and that she, better than Obama, understands what makes the heartland tick, and that Obama, as someone from the intellectual wing of the party that espouses nuance even when it’s deadly to voters, will get creamed in the general election? She may be right. I hope not, because I like Obama. But it’s a real possibility.

The real Shakespearean model to call upon here may not be Macbeth, but Hamlet. Do we really want to dither away in intellectual reflection until the consequences of our actions turn out to be death, not only to our enemy but to all, including ourselves?

She’s not playing any cards…she’s showing her true self.  She is crazy.  She is a chicken hawk.  She is a megalomaniac.  She is narcissistically self-entitled.  She’s the total package, and if America is stupid enough to elect her to the highest office in the land than America deserves whatever it gets.

The rest of the world doesn’t deserve it, but since when does America give a flying fuck about the rest of the world anyway?

^ Clinton is one sick puppy!  As are the majority of us humans.  Frankly; I quit. I’m outa here!

An example of Clinton’s unconscionable comment of obliterating Iran:

“But Yamaoka is remembering not the horrors of 9/11 but those of Hiroshima 60 years ago, when an atomic bomb detonated as she walked from her house into the city’s center on Aug. 6, 1945. The only warning was the familiar drone of a single B-29.

Yamaoka’s 15-year-old face was destroyed in an instant. Even today, after over two dozen operations and under heavy make-up, it looks mottled and lumpy, like it has been reconstructed from burnt clay. She rarely looks at interviewers directly.

As she flew through the air from the force of the blast, Yamaoka knew she’d been bombed. “I thought: ‘Goodbye Mother’ in my heart.” It was her mother who helped pull her from the wreckage; face swollen like a balloon, skin hanging from her arms in ribbons.

“I lost all my hair and there was blood when I went to the toilet. My face was so awful I hid for a long time. If I had been alone I probably would have killed myself but my mother was there every day taking care of me, even though she was sick herself. I stayed alive for her. She told me to live.”

Her mother died in 1979; when they cremated her body they found shards of glass in the ashes, still embedded deep in her body from the force of the bomb.”

http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_vie w.asp?no=236976&rel_no=1
The latest released pictures of the Hiroshima aftermath:
http://faculty.ucmerced.edu/smalloy/atomic_tragedy/pho tos.html

Pictures from one of the only Japanese photographers to take them:
http://fogonazos.blogspot.com/2007/02/hiroshima-pictur es-they-didnt-want-us_05.html

US propaganda film of the aftermath, showing the magnitude of the destruction of the bomb. The human toll however, is CONSPICUOUSLY MISSING.  You’d almost think no one died to look at it.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3045600655345 409226&q=hiroshima&ei=3A0jSIzrL4GMrgK04eW-Ag

Does Clinton understand that these are PEOPLE she’s thinking of obliterating!  Obliterating human beings could never be construed as simple campaign rhetoric, especially by someone bucking for the job of a world leader.  Clinton is one sick puppy.

Having initially supported her candidacy, Senator Clinton has become an embarrassment. Her foreign policy looks more and more like that of Pres. Bush. Her shameless pandering on matters of domestic policy is unequalled. What a disappointment. Hopefully she can turn things around by staging a graceful and magnanimous exit that can heal some of the divisions within the Democratic Party. I personally think that she is deeply cynical about the political process but can no longer make out the dividing line between her pandering and her convictions.