I understand that Iran is persueing Nuclear weapons ambition

I resurrected this post because a year ago everyone knew Iran was pursuing Nuclear power and for nefarious reasons.

Now a year later the NIE report says that Iran shut down its nuclear ambitions in 2003. Ok folks there are two interesting points here.

1. The NIE report is correct and Bush with his superior foreign policy wit successfully demonstrated to Iran shut down your nuclear program or pay serious consequences. For this act of heroism Bush should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
2. Or the NIE report is flawed and Bush is right we need to be concerned and increase diplomatic pressure on Iran to cease its nuclear ambitions

Of course the media will have none of either one of those scenarios so they will try to paint a different picture to their liking.

So which theory to attack first?

Neither at this point instead attack conservatives for questioning the validity of the report. This strategy dodges the obvious diplomatic victory for the administration. And changes the subject to yet another we cannot trust those Bushies those Neocons.



Here laughably we have the media attacking anyone who questions the validity of the report. To that end Dan Abrams does an editorial that he deems to be news. He feels compelled to inform the sheep that anyone who questions the report simply does not like the results of the report. Now it is an interesting point that I see here in that Abrams was all sort of suspicious about the report that the same commission was touting in 2001 regarding Iraq. Dan still asserts that the reports then are inaccurate. But this one you see it is different. There is no reason to doubt this one what so ever.
So he has his two guests on the air Abrams and he and his defense and international intelligence report expert (that was a joke people) Arianna Huffington go into a tirade about how wrong the current administration is and how ludicrous any idea that the report may not be valid.

Then enters Cliff May into the conversation most people do miss this but it is simply because the sheep are stupid. They have been told what to think and they will stubbornly think what they are told to. Cliff May actually made both Abrams and Arianna spin right around and admit they do not believe the validity of the NIE report.

All he had to do is state the NIE’s findings on Iraq, of North Korea, of Libya, also of Syria. Then point out that it may be prudent given the history of the NIE no to put to awful much weight in the report. He then mentioned that to him it seems that Bush is a bit less of a threat at this time than Ahmadinejad. He then goes on to ask weather they were worried about Ahmadinejad. Then Abrams and Arianna go into the this “Oh’ yeah sure we are concerned blah blah blah…..

 

Is it just me or does anyone else think the current rhetoric about Iran and nuclear weapons has more to do with Iran trading oil in euros instead of US dollars. http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9j8eu6zC...071208/ts_afp/iranforexdollaroil_071208115434
I mean they may be trying to get nuclear weapons but I don't believe they are of any real threat to the US.With permanent US bases being built in Iraq the US could conceivably destroy all of Irans infrastructure without putting a troop on the ground in Iran.The average Iranian is being fed propaganda about the West the same as we are being told the Iranians are looking to destroy eveyone and I know the president of Iran says it all the time but I believe that is more for the population than anything else.The wealthy and powerful in Iran are more concerned about getting richer than they are about getting in a war that will most certainly destroy their country.
With the growing credit problems in the US and the dollars fall I think the Bush administration will continue to show Iran as a major threat to try and stop other OPEC countries from following Iran and continue to trade oil in US dollars.
A nuclear threat is just that a "threat" and not a real strategy because in the end everyone loses.
Who is to say that a leader doesn't come to power in India,Pakistan,Israel,Russia or even the US who perceives some country as a threat and launches an attack,there are nuts everywhere.
Just this week alone in the US how many people have been killed by some lone gunman and how many US troops were killed in Iraq?
So who is the real threat, your neighbor who hates the world ,or some figurehead who is posturing for his people?

 

Some figure head who hates the world?

Pretty soon there will be a Dem running the executive office as well as the house. The current strong economy (numbers do not lie) really will be going south and not because of Opec or because of Bush's failed diplomacy. But because stocks will start dropping as speculators see the grip actually occurring and they see taxes are going to rise. Then when tax hikes actually occur there will be a reversal of GDP progress made.

What will the conspiracy stories be then? I'm sure the Dems will undermine national security to stage a grandiose stage show about new diplomacy and cooperation with Iran and who ever else buys the hate rhetoric.

But beyond that the real effect will be chilling over the next four years.

All the while terrorist will sing their love songs to the people who's throats they desire to slit. This will be fine for the environ whack jobs who think the key to nirvana is the destroying of the U.S. economy.