Iran Now Enriching Uranium

  •  April 12, 2006

I’m a little behind on this, but just in case some of you haven’t heard yet Iran has announced the fact that it is enriching uranium.
The a-typical response from Demcorats? Bush/Republicans are evil and must be stopped.
As I said earlier today, it is almost as if these people are so blinded by their hatred for their domestic political opponents that they cannot see the very real international threats that are facing our country right now. Which just shows once again that the Democrats right now are not about substantive domestic and foreign policies, they are all about “getting Bush” and “getting the Republicans” whatever the cost.
It is “gotcha” politics at its worst, and it isn’t doing a thing to help this country.

Tags: , , , ,


«
»
  • http://www.willisms.com/ Ken McCracken

    Hey Oliver,

    What are you going to say if Tel Aviv gets nuked?

    Oops, I was wrong?

  • http://www.oliverwillis.com/ Oliver

    The war on terror is very real (I live around and work in Washington, DC, easily #1 or 2 on the terrorist target list), when is your president going to get around to fighting it?

  • http://www.oliverwillis.com/ Oliver

    You mean like the "threat" of Saddam Hussein that was used to help the GOP in the 2002 elections? The Republican party is responsible for the worst politicization of our foreign policy in a generation, and it is the steadfast refusal of them or their supporters to provide common sense policy with regards to how our country interacts with the world that provokes such a sense of mistrust in their plans for international diplomacy.

  • http://www.oliverwillis.com/ Oliver

    George Bush is my president when he finally decides to start acting like he represents all of us – Democrats, Independents, whatever – and isn’t just the chairman of the RNC. Yeah, OBL is "marginalized" which is why our country is still on high alert and  Al Qaeda just keeps growing. Saddam was contained, and even if one believed he had WMDs they could have been eliminated without invasion and occupation. This isn’t hindsight, some of us were that smart in 2002.

  • Bijan

    The key Q is are they have the right to enrich under NPT ? I do not like the regime but that does not give anyone rights to tell them to stop what is thier rights.

  • robert108

    Bijan: I guess we have the "right" to nuke them as well, but would rather stop way short of that, despite what that dufus Seymour Hersh says.

    Oliver:  The war on terror is real.  How many have to die around the world before you get it?  The US is never going to be Kofi’s bitch;  you might as well give up hope of that one. 

  • http://www.oliverwillis.com/ Oliver

    Containment: Saddam was confined to Iraq and nowhere else. His military was unable to be aggresive towards his neighbors (Kuwait, Iran), our aliies (Israel in particular) or us. If he tried anything, our guys would have blown him out of the sky. See the third video here for Gen. Zinni’s explanation of containment.

  • robert108

    Oliver: So what if Rob brought it up? What is your point?  It is funny that you maintain Saddam was not a threat because he was "contained", but you hold up OBL as a threat, even though he is contained in a cave somewhere.  Double standard.  Saddam still had a country and an army, while OBL has…?

  • http://www.oliverwillis.com/ Oliver

    Saddam was contained. He had no WMDs nor any capability to create WMDs of any significance. You know who hasn’t been contained? Osama Bin Laden.

    The document dump is just so much garbage ("Here’s 1,000 random documents we picked up in Iraq of unknown origin, lineage, etc.") , orchestrated precisely so right wingers can feel like they haven’t been duped. None of those documents were available before the war, so they can’t retroactively prove the administration’s case anyway.

    You know who was and is conclusively connected to international terrorism, including 9/11? Osama Bin Laden. 

  • http://www.oliverwillis.com/ Oliver

    Actually, Rob was the first to bring up containment. And what if Al Qaeda nukes DC – does Bush say "oops" then?

  • robert108

    Even if you buy into the myth that Saddam was "contained" in his own country(training camps, bounties to families of Palestinian terrorists, oil for food), the dictator of Iran isn’t contained, which is the subject of this thread.  Nice hijack, Ollie!

  • http://www.willisms.com/ Ken McCracken

    Yes how dare that madman Bush make al-Qaeda ANGRY!

    Really, all al-Qaeda ever wanted to do was bake cookies, and hold hands, and think nice thoughts.

    But that dastardly Bush just pushed them too far!

    As if nuking DC would be Bush’s fault – although we had it coming alright!

     

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    Saddam was contained.

    What does "contained" mean? I ask because we seem to have different definitions.

  • robert108

    Clinton wasn’t smart enough in the Nineties to stop both Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.  Instead he encouraged them by his weakness and appeasement.  This President has the guts to do the right thing.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    when is your president going to get around to fighting it?

    Oh quit being petty.  He’s your President too.

    He had no WMDs nor any capability to create WMDs of any significance. You know who hasn’t been contained? Osama Bin Laden.

    Yeah, we know he didn’t have WMD’s now.  Nobody knew that before the invasion.  In fact, everybody thought he did have WMD’s before the invasion.  Hindsight is nice, isn’t it?  Especially when you can use it to hold your enemies to unreasonable standards.

    As for OBL, as robert points out…he’s marginalized in a cave somewhere.  Yeah, I know.  You Dems are promising to catch him if you get in office.  Which just proves my point.  You guys don’t get it.  Islamic terrorism doesn’t begin and end with OBL.  Islamic terrorism is born of oppression, oppression which we are fighting against in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Hell, that we’ve won against in those places.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Oliver, Saddam was a threat.  That you don’t get that just proves my point.

    Containment wasn’t working.  He was bribing his way out of sanctions and every day new revelations come out of the piles of Iraqi documents being examined that prove his links to international terrorism (if not specifically 9/11).  Now I know you’ll ignore this stuff because it is politically convenient for you to do so, but that doesn’t make it any less pertinent. 

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus