George Bush Believes His Legacy Is Still Incomplete
According to Seymour Hersh, the best worst is yet to come.
Seymour Hersh, The New Yorker (17-April-06)
Unfortunately, for us, Hersh has a good track record.
posted by Vigilante at 1/30/2007 10:26:00 AM
35 Moderated Comments:
my cousin's old college roomate serving on a sub had his leave canceled several weeks ago and he and his boat are long gone from port. My cousin reports that his roomate's boat is loaded with Tomahawks. Actually meet the dude once and I feel this info is realible. No telling where that sub is but the possible places is small list.
God, what a scary article! But there's hope. Ahmadineejad may believe there as no holocaust, but at least we have GWBush, who is sure he was selected by God, undoubtedly to bring on the End of Days. I feel so relieved!
By the way, have you ever seen Condaleeza Rice when she's angry? Really Scary!
Bush is not the sole "decider." His list of allies is rapidly shrinking.
Article from a few minutes ago in Yahoo News
the Wizard..........
When the bi-lateral issues are left without any sort of tending between the U.S and Iran for the past quarter of a century, and when they have been neclected in the region as volatile as this, it shouldn't come as a major suprise that there are huge complications as a consequense.
Before anything else, the diplomatic channels should be used in order to start unraveling the legimate concerns on both sides. Number one item should be the establishment of the direct diplomacy in the form of the reopening embassies in both Tehran and Washington. The next move should be to start direct talks where all the issues and concerns would be raised and possible solutions and accomondations could take place.
The unfortunate reality under the present circumstances seems to be, however, that the talk is cheap and military action would bring a quick and decisive resolution. The most of us know by now that it wouldn't. We also have this sneaky feeling, that the bombing in Iran would incubate a plethora of new sets of complications and problems. How sad it is, that this view is not shared by those in the White House!
This theory may sound ridiculous but I'm beginning to believe that President Bush is not only confused, he's also gone mad as in gone bonker mad! Maybe, just maybe, because the US failed and is failing miserably in Iraq, Bush reckons that he needs a new war front so he can prove to the world that the US has what it takes to win a war.
Anyway, what does he reckon the best solution to the "Iran problem is? Bomb Iran to stone age? Completely fatuous!
Hill, the possibility that Bush has gone mad cannot be discounted any longer. The garden vatiety stubborness will not explain all that has happened and propably will. This is the time to test the functionality of the American democracy and whether it can do it satisfactorily or not. God bless America!
Once upon a time I preached against "impeachment" only because I thought the Congress could better spend their time. I was wrong. There is no better way for them to spend their time. George Bush is dangerous to America and to the world. Impeach the prick!
"Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb?"
Of course he would! Diplomacy is for sissies.
I'm sure it is just a matter of time before the two nuts, Bush and Ahmadinejad, have their showdown.
Bush is isolated. He's a lame duck. He doesn't give a shit what people think about him now or in the future.
He's waging his little Middle Eastern epic and he's not going to let anyone dissuade him from reshaping (what most people would call fucking over) the entire region to suit his oil-loving buddies.
Hersh is a famous liar . I don`t believe anything he says. He and his good buddy Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky are disinformation specialists. They present their information like it is alternative , but they are clueless as to the real dynamic.
Bush will do as he pleases. The system will allow it because the system is built on Special Interest of money and Belief System.
Oil going through the roof in price.?
Just what they want. Maintaining scarcity in a Price System , is part of the 'Rules of the Game'.
I think he's certifiably megalomaniacal, and we are so screwed as a result. Can we do some kind of intervention where we all meet at his place and tell him he has to get help or we'll have to cut him off?
So, Beach Bum, are you saying the Straits of Hormuz are being set up by Bush-Cheney, Inc. into a Bay of Tonkin II?
Beach and Messenger:
To me this looks like we are engaging in good ol' fashioned brinkmanship and I anticipate a tipping point reminiscent of the time when General MacArthur was advancing up the Korean peninsula toward the Yalu River, and no one believed the Chinese would intervene in the Korean War.
How long do you think it will take the Persian Shi'ites to help the Iraqi Shi'ites to throw the Brits out of Basra?
Glad you have come around to our position, Mike. I don't think your changed mind is due to the eloquence of any one of us here. It's no doubt due to the fact that Bush and Cheney are themselves such a persuasive pair. All you gotta do is listen carefully.
You slappin' down my sweetheart, Lil'Bill?
Thanks for the link to Specter, Wizard. Let me draw your attention to Badger's post which clarifies the limited scope of Bush's Commander-In-Chief function.
What I think E is asking for is for all of us to draw up articles of impeachment of Bush and Cheney for invading IRAN, preventively or preemptorily (which would be so appropriate, wouldn't it?)
(1)If Bush attacks Iran this year as thought could he declare martial law next year and suspend elections?
(2)If that happens, will a military coup d'etat save us?
A military coup would save us.? That would depend on what kind of coup , would it not.? What group within the Military. The ones connected with Congress.? No, that would sink us. There are lots of people in the War College and elsewhere that know what is going on. Many would like to institute a non-Political system.
They understand why Bush got rid of the old Fema system , and instituted the New Fema into homeland defense where he is the Chief, with an internal General of the U.S. command.
Now Fema is controlled by the White house and Congress. In its former , stand alone days, it pulled the plug on the White House and Congress for 6 months in a nationwide emergency. I don`t think you people realize that it is the Congress here also, which is the enemy. The crooked politicians/special interest Corporatacracy.
The old Total Conscription aspect of Technocracy under Fema was designed to shift us into a different type of System. Bush and Congress and cohorts disassembled that . It was an entree beyond our current Price System.
Technocrats from the 1940`s designed Fema originally as a way out of the current system. Fact.
So things are going to get very messy. There is going to be a fight now between our Political and our Military system. Both sides see what is at stake. Get ready for major chaos.
The people may have to take on the winner.
Fraid the people on this site are mostly brain-washed.
This theory may sound ridiculous but I'm beginning to believe that President Bush is not only confused, he's also gone mad as in gone bonker mad!
Not ridiculous. My background is not in politics, it's in forensic psych (oh wait, those are kind of the same thing) and I voted him nucking futz quite a long time ago.
Yup, we have to impeach and we better do it soon. Repeat the same mantra I've been chanting for two years: Bush has no intention of leaving office without taking out Iran.
Agree, Pekka "This is the time to test the functionality of the American democracy and whether it can do it satisfactorily or not. "
I have this gnawing suspicion that while Blair laps up to Bush, the latter feels confident that he can go on and on ON Iraq.
Nasty pieces of work those two are.
Blair's got to go and fast.
Hersh knows of which he speaks..and that doesn't bode well for us. The Shrub..a vile.prick..indeed.
I have to tell you, I don't like the sound of this guy's words or tones in his voice. (Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns)
Don't like at all what I hear. What do others think?
Invoking Article 51 of the U.N. Charter (self-defense)?
I will surprise no one when I say that were this in the Afghanistan theater, I would be supportive of Burn's position, because we would have a credible claim of self defense, for being there in the first place. But our continued presence in Iraq has no legitimacy. Not one iota.
I agree with you. This is not good.
Vigilante you betray your war-mongering Price System roots by endorsing more and more war in Afghanistan. It is a scam to dump resources to make the economy grow. You are tricked. We knocked out the Taliban already. We have no purpose there now except economic.
Skip,
"We knocked out the Taliban already. "
Wish it were true.
Not quite Skip. Remember! Bush couldn't do it and asked the UN and NATO to take over.
Taliban ain't defeated at all (yet).
What does it matter.? It took Alexander about 3 years to defeat those tribes , and he was the last person to do so. He even had to marry one of them to do it.~!~
We are there to dump resources into a rats hole. Special Interest is making a killing .
Last time I checked the Taliban no longer ran the government there. The war is a scam to make money now.
Democracy by the Gun. Lets leave there.
We don`t need them. We will never come out well there. Remember the Russians.? It broke them down.
They whipped the British also many years ago.
It is a Tribal nighmare.
Sorry, Malfrat! Try this to get Nicholas Burn's interview. Cold-blooded certainty...
(I'll test this Link!)
Yes, this link works fine. Burn's tone IS ominous.
As the Israelis used Lebanon for a proxy war against Iran, the Iraqis expect we will use their situation for a proxy war against Iran.
Chicago Tribune
Here we go again:
Mark Weisbrot and Robert Naiman: Ghost of Judith Miller: NYT Drinks the Kool-Aid on Claims Iran is Behind Attacks on U.S. Soldiers in Iraq
I'm with you NOT YOUR MAMA!!
We should not be (even thinking about) going to war with Iran. We should go there, maybe, and go skiiing, golfing, shopping and sight-seeing.
The above is thanks to Peace, order and good government, eh?
"go skiiing, golfing, shopping and sight-seeing."
Ah Vigilante, that's a very sound suggestion that can possibly win America the hearts and minds of recalcitrant Iranians.
This is the question you should be asking:
Are we criticizing Iran's alleged involvement in Iraq because we don't like its politics, or because we think it's immoral to destabilize another government?
Post a Comment
<< Home