I think Glenn Greenwald is right that the Bush/Cheney regime is about to start an aggressive war against Iran. And I agree that the Democrats have foolishly paved the way for this to happen.
We can't say we weren't warned. They've been telling us for years they want regime change in Iran. They've told us that Iran poses a nuclear threat in the Middle East. They've told us over and over that it is not acceptable to allow Iran's government to have its own nuclear program. They have put out one provocative and often exaggerated story after another about Iran's nuclear intentions or its capabilities, while ignoring or stepping all over stories from the International Atomic Energy Agency that countered their propaganda or described Iran's efforts to be cooperative. They've told us that they would not rule out military strikes against Iran while they've dragged their feet when pursuing any of the half-hearted efforts at a diplomatic/negotiated alternative to war. And they've told us it is not acceptable to leave this decision to the next Administration.
In the last few weeks, they've ratcheted up the inflammatory rhetoric against Iran. Dick Cheney was recently quoted as saying that military strikes against Iran are warranted. Bush has been telling our military in Iraq to pursue Iranians inside Iraq, so our military leaders have been dutifully rounding up Iranians, even diplomatic guests invited by the Iraqi government. This week they arrested Iranian energy officials who had been invited to help restore Iraq's electricity system. One provocation after another. Now every rumor of war must be taken seriously.
Now Bush has described the Iranian regime as posing the threat of a "nuclear holocaust." Not just a "mushroom cloud." This time, it's a nuclear holocaust -- terms reserved for the most heinous of crimes and the most despicable of enemies. No sane government engages in such inflammatory rhetoric. But where is the dissent? Where is the outcry?
Throughout this inexorable march to war, the Democratic Congress has done worse than nothing. They've voted for resolutions condemning Iran without having the factual basis for knowing what Iran is doing or intends, relying only on neocon and Administration propaganda. They'd listened to dishonest and crazed warmongers like Joe Lieberman, for heaven's sake. They've voted for resolutions that would support regime change, but they've refused to pass resolutions or amendments that would require the Administration to seek new authorization to start a war with Iran. Most of our Democratic Presidential candidates -- Kucinich and Gravel excepted -- have pretended to be "serious" people by refusing to rule out military strikes against Iran, even nuclear strikes. These are not serious positions; they are seriously irresponsible.
But of course, this Administration does not need authorization. It it now operating completely outside the law, outside the Constitution, outside any checks by Congress or influence from those who might counsel against war. By Presidential fiat, it has declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to be a terrorist group, effectively making them an enemy of the US without any Congressional declaration of war. We have a lawless, reckless and belligerent Administration, and it is about to start another unlawful war, even as it tries to convince the American people that it is a good thing that the regime has 160,000 US troops bogged down in another quagmire, vulnerable to an enlarged regional war. Who will tell this crazed regime to stop? To whom would it even listen?
The Administration has repeatedly told us Iran is responsible for many of the deaths of US soldiers in Iraq. They trot out their propagandists in Iraq to shows us the weapons and their markings, suggesting that their use in Iraq is a delberate policy of the Iranian government. Their neocon supporters are already spreading the theme that Iran has effectively declared war on the US by arming and training those who are killing our soldiers in Iraq.
The only thing the Bush/Cheney regime needs is the money to wage its aggressive war against Iran, but how they'll get it is patently obvious. That money is embedded in the authorizations for supporting US troops and their activities in Iraq. Congress no longer asks what the money is for: it's assumed to be for "supporting the troops." Now the regime is asking for another supplemental authorization -- another $50 billion -- and while Democrats are promising a fight, some are already announcing they will "support the troops" by giving the Administration all the money it requests.
Wake up Democrats: you are being asked to fund an aggressive war against Iran. This war will be on your heads. Stop.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Not the Fainting Goat Dems
So what’s the answer?
and ….. good morning scarecrow.
excellent (and very frightening) post.
In Memoriam — Andrew Nelson, Moorhead MN, death announced today in lead story of Fargo’s Forum. Third tour of duty in Iraq. Killed near Tikrit.
He also did a tour in Afghanistan.
22 years old. One of George Bush’s expendable human assets–’cause he volunteered.
Our hero. Andy was an Eagle Scout, and Sunshines have a soft spot for all Eagle Scouts.
Lookin’ for some heroes in Washington.
Excellent post, Scarecrow.
Caw, caw!
Good morning Scarecrow.
These warmongers make my head hurt with such arguments, this insane rush to yet another war of aggression.
Whatever happened to the Geneva Conventions? Aggressive war = bad? Have we lost our collective minds and wills?
The Lieberman Senate proposal that passed 97 - 0 contained language saying Iranians were killing Americans and that this was “intolerable.” Do we really think the neocons won’t use this in their rush to destroy yet another country?
Thanks for another brilliant analysis, Scarecrow.
Thanks Prairie Sunshine.
I couldn’t agree more– but every time I bring it up people, even my fellow Democrats, look at me like I’m an alarmist.
You have a group of people in the White House who have not learned the most basic lesson of Vietnam. You cannot carpet bomb a country into submission. But they are going to try. And then when that doesn’t work, Cheney is going to start talking about “tactical” nuclear weapons” as if that is even a meaningful phrase.
He’s nuts. Really.
Congress responds:
What are you looking at US for? It’s 2007. An odd-numbered year. Do you see an election this November? WE don’t. So don’t bother us; we’re on break.
We can always focus on things you seem to groove on — you know…justice, the Constitution, ending the war — stuff like that — next year, when our jobs are at stake.
Good Morning Scarecrow and firepups!
God Help US
Mornin’ all. Every day, as everything gets worse and worse, I’m sooo tempted to just shut off the computer and walk out the door and not stop until I get to Washington just so I can scold these lunatic, idiot, deadly jokers face to face.
GRRRRRR
Oh, the misfortune that attends life on top of a large reserve of black gold, Texas tea, oil, i.e.! — at least as long as U.S. has any say. It’s time to serve the Junta a cup of shut the fuck up.
dov12348 @ 9
cynical. scary. probably on target. nice to meet you.
wow. great post.
… and some how i hadn’t put 2 & 2 together: the $50 billion for iraq might be used for iran. thanks for making that clear.
Audrey @ 11
I believe you’ll have some company on that walk 9/15.
Good morning everyone. Sorry about the downer. I really do look for happier stories, but I was suprised to see Glenn’s post almost completely ignored. You were expecting Larry Craig?
Prairie,
I am sad for the loss of this fine young man in your community.
We have to make this stop.
God Help Us.
But aren’t we effectively “arming and training those who are killing our soldiers in Iraq” when we cannot account for millions of dollars in arms in Iraq?
This is OT, is EPU’ed from last night’s Tap three times, and may seem hollow in light of this scary post (for which, thanks):
proposal for a new acronym: ABDFBR. Another Bad Day for Bad Republicans. In use in our house on regular occasions, thanks to Abramoff, Libby, Ney, and a cast of tens, soon, it things be Fine, tens of tens.
Inspired by Egan and Kane’s WaPo article which has the deets on what Fine is asking of all applicants for all DOJ jobs, political and career, going back to Ashcroft.
And names new names as suspects of illegal politicized hiring. guess what–they are also already gonzo.
Prairie Sunshine @ 4
Eagle Scout here.
“Expendable human assets” is exactly how Bush sees them. Almost 3700 of them, not to mention the contractors, troops of other nations, Iraqis, and the ones who make it back who will never be the same.
I posted this during Late Nite FDL, but it seems on topic here as well.
Put your coffee down, and then read on . . .
From today’s WaPo:
Yeah, that whole “let’s compromise with moderate GOP members” has worked out so well in the past . . .
i’m scared for our troops in Iraq - remember that horrific photo from the Iraqi retreat from Kuwait - the one of the burned head in the tank? Guess who else has not forgotten. i don’t think our exit is going to be easy, especially if Basra, the port where the troop carriers will be docked, is no longer friendly, shall we say.
How do we stop this coming nightmare?
selise @ 14
Congress spends almost no time checking what the money is for on the main appropriations bill — it’s at $147 billion or so for Iraq/Afghanistan — but you just know some of that has to be for activitives related to getting ready for Iran or secret operations already there. And then they come in with one of the supplementals — as though they had no idea what our requirements would be and hadn’t realized war is so wasteful.
I have to just shake my head at why anyone would ever cooperate with/believe/approve anything this regime does.
Scarecrow @ 16
Who me? I was expecting to still be asleep.
TexBetsy @ 15
Hi TexB
Yes, I saw that. September in DC is gonna rock! I just hope that others who feel the same way will actually be able to go. I’m stuck…and that makes the urge (and the outrage) difficult to deal with.
Scarecrow @ 16
No more Larry, please!! :P
Thanks for not going there, Scarecrow. Great post even if it isn’t fun.
And after this NEXT war, will they let us impeach him?
Of course not.
Audrey @ 11
oh! oh! Can I go with ya?
I don’t think anyone can stop these people. I think a large number, maybe even a majority, of Americans agree with the basic premise of the administration that it is the responsibility of the US to do whatever it takes to stop the Iranians from getting nuclear weapons, including use of our own arsenal of nuclear bombs. If you ask why, no one can explain, it just seems obvious.
congress’ multiple actions wrt to iran this year, is what first got me really pissed off at them. such irresponsible actions…. and until siun’s post on the lieberman amendment, they weren’t getting much (any attention).
i am so grateful that they are now being held accountable for their stupid and irresponsible actions. if they know they can’t get away with bad behavior - that it will be noticed - then maybe they’ll think twice and stop this bs.
Peterr @ 21
Notice that Reid’s prior tough stand only “earned him critics” — I guess we don’t exist.
I believe Reid is a thoughtful, well intentioned man. I interpret his reaching out to the Repubs as a sign he’s losing votes — because those Repubs don’t want to end the war, they want to lessen the animosity towards them for continuing to vote for appropriations with no conditions or withdrawal. It’s political cover for them, and for some reason, Reid is willing to give it to them. I’d like to know why.
Audrey @ 27
Oh wait. There is one more thing. Whether or not he’s gay. I think his preferred cruising style wouldn’t go over as well(?) if he was doing it in the ladies’ room, anyway. So, what choice did he have? ;)
(Disclaimer: I’ve been up all night and the news has been all about the tape of his arrest and “explanation” to the cops. YUCK!)
Peterr @ 21
Unfortunately, he may just be facing reality. The Reps will not agree to any timeline of any kind as long as Bush is President. Reid is soliciting suggestions, saying “I’ve tried. You’ve blocked my efforts. If you want to end this war, give me suggestions.” This may be the only option left.
angry_cyclone @ 29
I would love to have an angry cyclone along! Adds dramatic effect, ya know? But as I’m stuck here with no one to take care of the animals…I can only dream. :P
Unfortunately, he may just be facing reality. The Reps will not agree to any timeline of any kind as long as Bush is President. Reid is soliciting suggestions, saying “I’ve tried. You’ve blocked my efforts. If you want to end this war, give me suggestions.” This may be the only option left.
I think that’s about right.
Start a war with Iran?
Uh. with what? Who are we going to send in?
Now, kiddies, we have to take note that on this new supplemental none of the McNerney dodges apply. There is no need for 67 votes in the senate. There is no need for a veto proof majority. There is no way that the republicans can stop a united caucus that simply refuses to appropriate these funds. That appropriation has to come from the House. First, they don’t have to bring up a bill at all. This is at Congress’ discretion.
Just say no to further escalation.
when it comes to anti-muslim bigotry and war mongering, the house has it’s very own lieberman in tom lantos, chair of the foreign affairs committee.
cahuenga @ 36
We could send Zell Miller and his spitballs…
Elliott @ 10
God help the rest of the world from US bombs!(Again).
The nation of Israel, do they want a war with Iran? I know they don’t want the Iranians to have a chance to get the bomb. But are they pushing for a war?
masaccio @ 30
I’m working on these people one at a time, patiently asking them to explain their logic that ends with us declaring aggressive war against yet another country.
They’re softening up. I got a higher level, thoughtful response just this morning from a “gotta bomb ‘em” family member.
Keep pushing. It’s gonna be a close one.
Scarecrow @ 32
One of the repeated McNerney refrains was that he knows that his republican colleagues want to end this, that it’s not working, that the occupation is doing great damage to Iraq and the US, and they want to find a way out. You’ll recall that he kept pushing us to find a way to pressure republicans. This means, of course, to give them a reason for resisting the president’s desires.
I suspect something similar is happening here. Yes, he’s lost the Bush Dogs, but Reid may think he can pick up Collins, Smith, Sununu, Coleman because they are so vulnerable. That, he may be hoping, will give cover to the Hagels and and Warners.
The strategy Schumer stated right after the midterms was to wait until the Republicans were forced to give in, and end the occupation. This was supposed to happen “by the end of summer.” i think they are trying to make sure the republicans own the defeat as well as the start of the war.
Of course, in doing it in this way, they run the (greater to my mind) risk of gaining part-ownership of an unending occupation.
TexBetsy @ 13
Thanks — you too!
angry_cyclone @ 29
Everyday I turn on the computer and feel powerless.
This is still our country. Aren’t there enough people who want to stop the war to make a difference.
Go to DC with tents, stay until they listen or more likely stop supporting them with our money.
Scarecrow,
Powerful post! ‘By Presidential fiat…’
What a telling phrase!
And I thought the scariest, most reckless, thing our Country had done was the Iraq
waroccupationinvasion. I could not imagine anything worse, but you’ve outlined it. Thanks for the dose of truth, although it will leave me with a heavy heart for a while (at least until after January 2009).hey jayackroyd - as an extension to your analysis of the dc consensus on iraq, have you considered if there is a consensus (at least among dems) on iran?
Unfortunatally everything you say is correct. When Bush/Cheney decides to bomb Iran we can, in part, blame Nancy Pelosi for taking impeachment off the table. The only way to stop this madness is to impeach Bush and Cheney.
Idaho Al @ 49
Indeed.
Good morning. Found this at Dailykos.
A C-130 cargo aircraft carrying an Alabama senator and congressman was fired on this evening as it flew from Baghdad to Amman, Jordan. The airplane was carrying Senator Richard Shelby (R-Ala) and Rep. Bud Cramer (D-Ala) and two other [as of yet unnamed] senators.
In a telephone interview, Shelby said that three rockets were shot at the plane and were “near misses.” He added that the pilot was forced to take evasive maneuvers to avoid being hit. The plane subsequently landed unscathed in Amman at about 4 pm central time.
cahuenga @ 37
Not “send in.” More like, “leave there” but fighting the Iranians by proxy and air war. Every American, soldier or civilian, will be a target, everywhere in the world.
cahuenga @ 37
I believe it would be air strikes. They have appearantly reinforced a runway in Iraq that may be used for the strikes (can’t remember where I saw this. Anybody got a link?).
Their thinking seems to be just like their thinking before Iraq - we just need a small force, cakewalk, etc. They’re delusional if they think that is all it will take.
Whats another 50 billion to the complex while the economy tanks and Iraq costs 3 billion a week?
Lets see if a few billion head to people who took advantage of sub-prime mortgage devises today.
…O’ Brother can you spare a dime?
CNN says Sens. Mel Martinez, R-Florida; Richard Shelby, R-Alabama; and James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, were also on the flight.
scarecrow @32, JF @ 33,
Reid strikes me as a good guy, but in many instances he seems unable to think beyond the next vote. “Gosh, I can’t get 61 now, so let’s roll over. But wait til next time.”
The GAO says only 3 of 18 benchmarks have been met in Iraq. The DOD has been outrageously manipulating members of Congress who go to Iraq (Ellen Tauscher and Jim Moran are really ticked off). The White House has been caught saying they will write Petraeus’s report and had to backtrack from saying he might not testify publicly.
And Reid wants to tone things down and back off?
Sorry, it’s not the only option. Force a vote every other day on some aspect of this mess. Force the GOP to say “we won’t require that troops be given a decent amount of downtime between rotations in Iraq” on Monday. Force them to say that they won’t require the DOD and CIA to quit using
tortureenhanced interrogation techniques on Wednesday. Force the GOP to say they support yet another outrageous aspect of this war on Friday.You want another option: Put the GOP on the record. Give them a seat on the political bus that Bush is driving over a cliff, and ask them to buckle in.
Dems do something? Dems like Brian Baird?
So tell me again why I shouldn’t support Kucinich in the Democratic primary?
I would like to see his poll numbers start to climb dramatically — that would send a clear message that we are serious about changing our foreign policy.
jayackroyd @ 44
Ok. I’ve been mulling over a “what if” on this and thought I’d share. What if the Dems in both houses tell the Reps that they won’t investigate them…will grant them immunity from any charges of fraud, money laundering, you name the corruption, in exchange for taking out this administration and it’s filthy wars? It would provide them cover to do the right thing. Just a thought.
That way, we can give the Republicans a “come to Jesus moment” instead of sitting around waiting for them to come up with one on their own. We can’t afford to wait.
There’s a hearsay report over at Juan Cole’s place by a person reporting a conversation he had with someone who knows someone at AEI. The gist is that they got ‘orders’ from Cheney to roll out the pro-war campaign starting this coming Monday. It will be coordinated with WSJ and the National Review. According to the report, Cheney understands he can’t take the whole country with him, but they figure if they get get back to 35 to 40 percent, the mouth-breathers carry the day.
Christ! This is like Germany in May, 1941. The German public believed the war was basically over at that point. They didn’t know what their administration had in store for them. Neither do our people.
And yes, our nation is led by people who are entirely outside the law.
Madness, madness, madness.
Scarecrow @ 52
As will every oil tanker moving through the Straits of Hormuz.
selise @ 48
My impression is that the democrats don’t think Bush is crazy enough to actually attack Iran, and that therefore these toothless resolutions are costless ways of being “strong on security.”
I have to say I agree with the idea that he can’t be that crazy, can he? I cannot see what possible objective the US could have that it could achieve. Bogged down in two much weaker states would surely deter him from adding a third, wouldn’t you think?
snowbird42 @ 46
My job is to wake us up; Christy will be along to get us organized. I believe we make a difference in the long run, even though it’s not clear day to day.
GMFORD @ 59
Support who you want or abstain.
Actually I think they see Edwards as the only possible threat that could be elected - Fox goes after him daily (last time they were saying how the far right and rich actually liked him but that the “Moderate” republicans did not since he was so aggressive).
jayackroyd @ 44
And won’t that be swell if this gives Collins, Smith, Sununu, Coleman et al. enough “cover” that they get re-elected in ‘08.
Where is Nancy Reagan with her “Just Say No” buttons?
The problem is not whether or not Bush is crazy enough. The problem is Cheney.
Sometimes I feel like Im crazy. Everything I read indicates the Surge isnt working and then I read this.
http://www.theaustralian.news......77,00.html
What has happened to our country?
Has Edwards voiced a position on this?
ccmask @ 55
A few hail marys were no doubt said.
Scarecrow at 64
It’s happening. Just keep pushing. Lot of stuff going on behind the scenes, but there is no time to waste.
ccmask @ 52
Someone on Air America this morning was hoping Shelby would speak up when Petraus says how great things are going in Iraq.
Yeah, right.
snowbird42 @ 68
Persiflage told us last night that this is a Murdoch report filed by a Murdoch reporter in a Murdoch paper.
ccmask @ 56
I won’t go there, because it’s against the ethos of the Lake, but you know what I’m thinking. . .
[MOD: Wise decision]
Peterr @ 57
I share Greenwald’s pessimism that the Dems are not going to stop this regime, but it doesn’t follow they have to cooperate either. I’m wondering if the Dems would be better off if they just said, “this is a criminal, insane regime, and we won’t cooperate with it, won’t approve of anything it does or asks, and won’t negotiate with thugs. What have they got to lose? I think a lot of us would support that position.
“This week they arrested Iranian energy officials…”
But of course that is the point of the war, get some energy & feed the complex with billions in cash while everyone else in the econenemy~ goes gown.
Or is this the truth? from Informed Comment
Excellent post. I feel the same way.
When I heard about the new arms deal with the Saudis I knew the war with Iran would be coming sooner than later. Make no mistake people, this is happening. Just look at the recent arms deals we have made with people in the Area (Israel, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia)… they are stocking up their weapons right now.
Couple that with the firepower we have in the Gulf right now… about 300 - 400 combat aircraft and over 2200 cruise missiles. All just miles from the Iranian coast.
If this doesn’t get more public scrutiny in the very near future, we’ll all be watching it on CNN.
gotta give a shout out to congressman DeFazio - he submitted an amendment in may to the defense appropriations bill:
DeFazio (OR)/Paul (TX)/Hinchey (NY)/Lee (CA) amendment #31
sadly, the amendment failed with 99 dems voting against it (including murtha, reyes, van hollan, waxman and lantos) and speaker pelosi not even bothering to vote.
Peterr @ 57
With the personalities in congress now, I believe most would just harden their positions. It may be great for a 2008 election campaign for the Dems, but if the goal is to end the war, then we have to pull some R’s over to our side. If it means letting them give some suggestions on how to end the war, so be it. If there are any Reps that really want to end the war, this may be a good way to get them. Let them think it was their idea.
snowbird42 @ 46
Everyday I turn on the computer and feel powerless.
This is still our country. Aren’t there enough people who want to stop the war to make a difference.
Go to DC with tents, stay until they listen or more likely stop supporting them with our money.
Hi Snowbird. I’m looking for a September schedule. Most of the month is full of events. I would be willing to go to DC with just the clothes on my back and a sign that says:
IMPEACHMENT
It’s not an option!
It’s your job!
I don’t care about a tent or anything else. Except for the 25 dogs and cats in my care. I wouldn’t want to bring them with me.
mauimom @ 74
Well, for one thing, it should keep the pesky Senators from taking trips to Iraq. Bet a lot of those chickenhawks will cancel their upcoming travels plans. Its good enough for soldiers though…..
mauimom @ 65
If that’s the price for ending the occupation, I’d pay it gladly. My concern is that Reid does not seem to understand that he has the whip hand here. The clock is working against the republicans. There may a revolt against the Blue Dogs, but that won’t help those four. Part of what is going on is they are facing strong candidates–because they are clearly vulnerable.
As for Collins, she promised to term limit herself. Mainers remember stuff like that.
Peterr at 57 - Absolutely right. Steve Soto at The Left Coaster has been on this as well with great tactical suggestions about how to necklace these guys with this morass. It might also help put some of the Bush Dogs on notice as well. We can’t keep bleating on about what we don’t have (veto proof majority), we need to shift the debate and get in their faces.
Why is this so hard? The president has no respect, and the repubs are a laughingstock. It’s time the country stopped being run by less than 30% of the electorate. OR, let’s assume we represent about 30% and figure out how to make that the ruling majority.
Audrey — Ok. I’ve been mulling over a “what if” on this and thought I’d share. What if the Dems in both houses tell the Reps that they won’t investigate them…will grant them immunity from any charges of fraud, money laundering, you name the corruption, in exchange for taking out this administration and it’s filthy wars? It would provide them cover to do the right thing. Just a thought.
Marcy and others think that’s effectively what the Dems are doing, except the deal is, we back off on the investigations of the Justice Department if Bush gives us an honest, independent AG nomination. That’s the interpretation of Schumer and Feinstein olive branches and suggested lists of nominees.
Audrey @ 80
I really would love to go.
Found this from my state
http://www.concernedtncitizens.org/