Top Neo-con: Obama Can Save His Presidency By Bombing Iran

Lamarr

Star
Registered
Daniel Pipes...prominent Zionist neo-con...writes in National Review that bombing Iran would save Obama's presidency...

these are the folks hooked up with Beck and Palin.

If we hit Iran...all hell will bust loose, $9 gas?

Full Article

I do not customarily offer advice to a president whose election I opposed, whose goals I fear, and whose policies I work against. But here is an idea for Barack Obama to salvage his tottering administration by taking a step that protects the United States and its allies.

If Obama’s personality, identity, and celebrity captivated a majority of the American electorate in 2008, those qualities proved ruefully deficient for governing in 2009. He failed to deliver on employment and health care, he failed in foreign-policy forays small (e.g., landing the 2016 Olympics) and large (relations with China and Japan). His counterterrorism record barely passes the laugh test.


Full Article
 
. . . and those people and Limpbaugh are hooked up with the Tea Baggers.

QueEx

I can see Limbaugh, Beck & Palin supporting Obama on More War! The similarities of the Rep & Dem parties will be on full display so everybody can see. :smh:
 
I guess what I was really pointing to is the odd mixture commonly referred to as the Tea Party. Given the characters and the interesting point they make that the movement doesn't need any central leadership characters, who is really controlling the agenda of the Tea people and what are their real aims ??? Why do I get the feeling that the Tea movement is not what it appears ???

QueEx
 
I guess what I was really pointing to is the odd mixture commonly referred to as the Tea Party. Given the characters and the interesting point they make that the movement doesn't need any central leadership characters, who is really controlling the agenda of the Tea people and what are their real aims ??? Why do I get the feeling that the Tea movement is not what it appears ???

QueEx

You know what...............I agree with you. But allow me to say Ron Paul's people came up with the concept to "recapture" the spirit of the Tea party on Dec. 16, 2007 based upon some fundamental ideas:

Get rid of NAFTA
Audit the Fed
End the Wars
End the Patriot Act
Close the borders

It wasn't until Pres Obama got into office that FoxNews "hijacked" our movement. Palin & Beck are phony but I'll admit, they have been able to fool a lot of people. How quickly they forget about George Bush :smh:

The troubling part to me is the follow-up article by Richard Haas (President of the Council of Foreign Relations) Usually, from my past readings, the CFR dictates policy, but I don't want Obama fallin' for this!
 
Who is going to pay for godless move? Iran? When will these need for wholesale incineration of human beings end? Fuckin' vampire ass, limp dick wing nuts will learn one day.:smh:

-VG
 
You know what...............I agree with you. But allow me to say Ron Paul's people came up with the concept to "recapture" the spirit of the Tea party on Dec. 16, 2007 based upon some fundamental ideas:

Get rid of NAFTA
Audit the Fed
End the Wars
End the Patriot Act
Close the borders

Perhaps, its time for Ron Paul to rescue his movement, again?

I don't believe that Paul's "rigid" approach, however, is realistic. I wouldn't mind taking a look at NAFTA and I wouldn't object to an audit of the FedRes, but does ditching either solve any of our problems ???

I think simply ending the two wars is simply unrealistic. I believe (1) they need to be ended for financial reasons, if for no other; and (2) they must be wound down responsibly. While I think going into Iraq was serious error I believe it would be wrong to just pull up and pull out (by pulling out earlier we would have left that country in serious peril -- all at our hands). I believe we had every right and reason to have gone into Afghanistan. The problem there, as I see it, is we turned our attention away from accomplishing our objectives to deal with money drain called Iraq.

I have problems with aspects of the Patriot Act that unreasonably impinge on individual liberty and those need to be re-written so that security goals are obtained with the least possible impact on liberty and with realistic judicial oversight to protect against governmental abuse. But, scuttling the Act, without putting something in its place or adjusting the existing Act would be foolish.



It wasn't until Pres Obama got into office that FoxNews "hijacked" our movement. Palin & Beck are phony but I'll admit, they have been able to fool a lot of people. How quickly they forget about George Bush :smh:

Stated more correctly, It <s>wasn't until</s> <u>was because</U> Pres Obama got into office that the movement was hijacked. I am convinced that those opposed to the president, many of whom have made it abundantly clear that they want to the President to fail, have borrowed from Brother Malcolm: they will and have used every means available to attack, discredit and limit President Obama.


On the topic (Top Neo-con: Obama Can Save His Presidency By Bombing Iran): Daniel Pipes, by his own admission, is simply attempting to place the President in a damn if he does, damn if he doesn't position. If Pipes' views prevail, if Obama seriously contemplates bombing Iran (without 'compelling' reasons so to do) the left and much of the center wouold pull the rug out from under Obama's feet; conversely, appearing weak against Iran because he won't seriously consider bombing Iran could build momentum right of center against the President. Pipes isn't seriously proposing a way to save Obama's presidency at all; he's slyly proposing another way to try to ruin it.

QueEx
 
I can see Limbaugh, Beck & Palin supporting Obama on More War! The similarities of the Rep & Dem parties will be on full display so everybody can see. :smh:

Until it went badly, then they'd be on his Black ass. He must be frustrating people like Haas (who surprised me a little) and
Pipes with all this negotiating and sanctions foolishness:rolleyes:.
You know what...............I agree with you. But allow me to say Ron Paul's people came up with the concept to "recapture" the spirit of the Tea party on Dec. 16, 2007 based upon some fundamental ideas:

Get rid of NAFTA
Audit the Fed
End the Wars
End the Patriot Act
Close the borders

It wasn't until Pres Obama got into office that FoxNews "hijacked" our movement. Palin & Beck are phony but I'll admit, they have been able to fool a lot of people. How quickly they forget about George Bush :smh:

The troubling part to me is the follow-up article by Richard Haas (President of the Council of Foreign Relations) Usually, from my past readings, the CFR dictates policy, but I don't want Obama fallin' for this!

Paul's people did get jacked by Fox News and their ilk and now Paul himself faces a "Tea Pary" challenger in his primary.

I've always thought of CFR as an advisory board and not a group that dictates policy. They had a lot of stroke with the previous administration because Dick was saw things like they did.

Neo-cons have 8 straight years of failure and have the audacity to think they have any credibility left. Shocking but not.
 
Iran threatens to close Strait of Hormuz if West imposes sanctions on oil shipments

Iran threatens to close Strait of Hormuz if West imposes sanctions on oil shipments

image.jpg

TEHRAN — A top official said Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz — cutting off oil exports — if the West imposes sanctions on Iran’s oil shipments, the country’s official news agency reported Tuesday.

According to the IRNA report, Vice President Mohamed Reza Rahimi said Iran does not want hostilities, but he charged that the West continues its plots against Iran.

“If they impose sanctions on Iran’s oil exports, then even one drop of oil cannot flow from the Strait of Hormuz,” Rahimi said, according to IRNA.

The West is considering limiting Iran’s oil trade over its disputed nuclear program. Some 80% of Iran’s foreign revenue comes from oil exports.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Mark Toner called the threat “bluster.”

He said it was “another attempt by them to distract attention from the real issue, which is their continued noncompliance with international nuclear obligations.”

Rahimi has no major role in Iran’s foreign or military policy.

Iran is conducting a 10-day naval maneuver in the area of the Strait of Hormuz, where about 40% of the world’s oil supply passes. Closing the strait would have immense world economic impact.

The Associated Press

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ira...-oil-shipments-article-1.997675#ixzz1hqKL2lsg



khovalyg

11:01 PM
Dec 27, 2011

Ah, more hype for our forthcoming war on Iran so that corporatist 1 percenters can death-profiteer and get more lucre, oil, territory. Note also that NY judge george daniels (Manhattan) recently signed a default judgement finding IRAN (as well as the taliban and al qaida) liable for 9/11. Well, well. All those years, all those bombs, all that blood, all those dead troops and dead Iraqis, and we still attacked the wrong country. Gotta do it again, for god, country, and capitalism. Cráp.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ira...-oil-shipments-article-1.997675#ixzz1hqKFivlc
MahmoudAhmadinejadUNGestureSep10AP.jpg

US judge rules Iran responsible for 9/11

By Daniel Harding, New York

Saturday, December 24, 2011

A US judge has signed a default judgment finding Iran, the Taliban and al-Qaida liable for the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Judge George Daniels in Manhattan signed the judgement a week after hearing evidence in the 10-year-old case.

The signed ruling came in a $100 billion lawsuit brought by victims’ families.

He directed a magistrate judge to preside over remaining issues, including fixing compensatory and punitive damages.

Judge Daniels signed findings of fact saying the plaintiffs had established that the attacks were caused by the support the defendants provided to al-Qaida.

It also said Iran continued to provide material support and resources to al-Qaida by providing a safe haven for al-Qaida leadership and rank-and-file members.

During last week’s hearing, September 11 victims’ families sat through a four-hour presentation from lawyers who cited evidence supporting their claims that Iran actively assisted the hijackers of planes that crashed into the World Trade Center towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania.

Former members of the September 11 Commission and three Iranian defectors also spoke.

It would be near impossible to collect any damages, especially from the Taliban or al-Qaida.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly denied any Iranian connection in the September 11 attacks or with al-Qaida.

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/irelan...responsible-for-911-178161.html#ixzz1hqK1AbM9
 
U.S. Targets Iran's Central Bank

HONOLULU—President Barack Obama signed into law on Saturday sanctions against Iran's central bank, marking the sharpest economic confrontation between Washington and Tehran yet and potentially stoking tensions in the Persian Gulf.

The measure, which Congress passed as part of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, penalizes foreign financial institutions that do business with Iran's central bank, Bank Markazi.

Mr. Obama has some flexibility in determining the strength and scope of the sanctions, which are intended to make it more difficult for Iran to sell its oil. But the administration intends to move forward with implementing the law in a way ...
 
The United States is headed for monumental collapse, and the sound you hear from the people who will suffer the most is...


applause.

Baby boomers have f***ed up this country going on 20 years. And, here comes another one in Mitt Romney.

I don't like Ron Paul, per se, but he is no baby boomer, and he is no idiot. So, he stands no chance of being elected.

This country is doomed and will be in denial all the way to the end.

Just desserts, I suppose.
 
The United States is headed for monumental collapse, and the sound you hear from the people who will suffer the most is...


applause.

Baby boomers have f***ed up this country going on 20 years. And, here comes another one in Mitt Romney.

I don't like Ron Paul, per se, but he is no baby boomer, and he is no idiot. So, he stands no chance of being elected.

This country is doomed and will be in denial all the way to the end.

Just desserts, I suppose.

That applause wouldn't come from most Americans or Europeans or Chinese or Middle Eastern countries (Israel included). And the few that did, wouldn't be for too long.
 
Que didn't I say this last year?

I said that if Obama get the job market together, and do something dramatic like a war with Iran/North Korea, he will win in 2012.
 
That applause wouldn't come from most Americans or Europeans or Chinese or Middle Eastern countries (Israel included). And the few that did, wouldn't be for too long.

See the following quote.

Que didn't I say this last year?

I said that if Obama get the job market together, and do something dramatic like a war with Iran/North Korea, he will win in 2012.

If that fool starts a war with Iran, gas prices will go through the roof. $5..$6..$8..$10 a gallon. Gas shortages, gas rationing, gas theft, social unrest over heating costs that make Occupy look like a street party.

People will want Obama's head, when they see how much it's costing at the pump.

Anyone will look better than President Obama, including Mitt Romney, or even Ron Paul.
 
See the following quote.



If that fool starts a war with Iran, gas prices will go through the roof. $5..$6..$8..$10 a gallon. Gas shortages, gas rationing, gas theft, social unrest over heating costs that make Occupy look like a street party.

People will want Obama's head, when they see how much it's costing at the pump.

Anyone will look better than President Obama, including Mitt Romney, or even Ron Paul.

Two words, Keystone Pipeline. Not to mention, he would push for drilling before he does such of thing. It's all political.
 
US Navy to Deploy Third Carrier Group to Persian Gulf

The US will dispatch another carrier strike group led by USS Enterprise to the Persian Gulf in March 2012, reported US Navy on Jan 25.

The carrier group based in Norfolk, VA will also include a guided missile cruiser and three guided missile destroyers, reports Interfax.

USS Abraham Lincoln had already entered the Persian Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz on Jan 22. She is escorted by a guided missile cruiser and two destroyers (USN), one British and one French warships.

Meanwhile, another US Navy’s carrier strike carrier group headed by USS Carl Vinson is stationed eastward the Strait of Hormuz, in northern part of the Arabian Sea washing southwest coast of Iran.

At present, the US has 15,000-men force deployed in Kuwait, expeditionary marine battalion, and amphibious landing group.
 
Such a build-up comes at a cost -- but a closure of the strait is a cost I don't think we can afford. Hence, a massive show of force to act as a deterrent; or, if undeterred, a force that can bite hard if someone gets froggy and jumps.
 
I'm telling ya, I will not be surprise if something goes down during the summer to throw everything out of wack.
 
This is what resides in actinanass' head.

I'm telling ya, I will not be surprise if something goes down during the summer to throw everything out of wack.

Fear can stop job growth faster than any tax policy.



Sadly, with the closure of military bases, fear will be able to spread.



This is a sad era we're living in.



<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/__jVRnmmHJs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Panetta: U.S. is Ready to Stop Iran from Creating Nuclear Weapons

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Sunday indirectly confirmed recent remarks by the Ambassador to Israel that the U.S. is “ready from a military perspective’’ to stop Iran from making a nuclear weapon if international pressure fails.

The U.S. and members of the United Nations Security Council recently met in Baghdad for talks about Iran’s suspected nuclear weapon program. Iran denies it has military intentions but has called for the destruction of Israel.

“We have plans to be able to implement any contingency we have to in order to defend ourselves,’’ Panetta said on ABC’s This Week. Earlier, Panetta said, “The fundamental premise is that neither the United States or the international community is going to allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.’’

Panetta defended the U.S. military’s use of drones to kill terrorists, resulting in some civilian casualties, calling them “one of the most precise weapons that we have in our arsenal.’’
 
Get ready AAA, this is the October surprise!

Panetta: U.S. is Ready to Stop Iran from Creating Nuclear Weapons

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Sunday indirectly confirmed recent remarks by the Ambassador to Israel that the U.S. is “ready from a military perspective’’ to stop Iran from making a nuclear weapon if international pressure fails.

The U.S. and members of the United Nations Security Council recently met in Baghdad for talks about Iran’s suspected nuclear weapon program. Iran denies it has military intentions but has called for the destruction of Israel.

“We have plans to be able to implement any contingency we have to in order to defend ourselves,’’ Panetta said on ABC’s This Week. Earlier, Panetta said, “The fundamental premise is that neither the United States or the international community is going to allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.’’

Panetta defended the U.S. military’s use of drones to kill terrorists, resulting in some civilian casualties, calling them “one of the most precise weapons that we have in our arsenal.’’

Seriously Lamar, do you really believe all this to be a mere pretext to a war for the purpose of attempting to win re-election in November ???

I can understand your posting this in an attempt to highlight/support Ron Paul's position on Iran and war in general; and I understand that, in general, you are somewhat politically cynical.

I just wonder though, does your cynicism extended to the point of the ridiculous have a point beyond Ron Paul ???

`
 
Lamarr and Ass are confused. Romeny is the candidate that wants to attack Iran.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/aqIggxsWyyM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Lamarr and Ass are confused. Romeny is the candidate that wants to attack Iran.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/aqIggxsWyyM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

*sigh* So, Thoughtone, I'm serious. Are you this naive? So, you are telling us that Obama gains nothing from attacking Iran, or Syria? Especially after telling the Syrians to get out of our country?
 
*sigh* So, Thoughtone, I'm serious. Are you this naive? So, you are telling us that Obama gains nothing from attacking Iran, or Syria? Especially after telling the Syrians to get out of our country?

You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

The only group that cares about war mongering is the republicans who won't support President Obama no matter what he does.
 
*sigh* So, Thoughtone, I'm serious. Are you this naive? So, you are telling us that Obama gains nothing from attacking Iran, or Syria? Especially after telling the Syrians to get out of our country?

What would he gain that wouldn't be more than offset by what he would lose ???

 
Republicans risk getting crushed on the Foreign Policy issue.

source: Think Progress


Romney Calls On Obama To Adopt A Syria Strategy Administration Has Already Reportedly Adopted

After a massacre of civilians on Friday night in Syria — including dozens of children — which the U.N. strongly hinted was perpetrated by government forces, presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney blamed the Obama administration for not taking decisive enough action against the Syrian regime.

The plan Romney and his aides proposed to deal with the crisis, however, sounds a lot like the one Obama administration officials discussed with press just a few days before. “The United States should work with partners to organize and arm Syrian opposition groups</STRONG> so they can defend themselves,” the campaign said in a release on Sunday. On CNN this morning, top Romney aide Andrea Saul echoed the call, saying that Romney would “work with our allies to help arm the Syrian opposition.” Watch it:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qbG0Ojxum3k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


If all that sounds familiar, it might be because, three days before the Romney statement, that’s exactly what Obama administration officials told the AP they were setting a plan in motion to do. The AP reported:
[T]he Obama administration is preparing a plan that would essentially give U.S. nods of approval to arms transfers from Arab nations to some Syrian opposition fighters.

The effort, U.S. officials told the Associated Press, would vet members of the Free Syrian Army and other groups to determine whether they are suitable recipients of munitions to fight the Assad government and to ensure that weapons don’t wind up in the hands of al-Qaida-linked terrorists.
As for the goal of pushing for a transition in Syria, the New York Times reported on Saturday — the day before Romney’s statement — that ” President Obama will push for the departure of President Bashar al-Assad.”

The Romney campaign “doesn’t want to really engage” on foreign policy issues. Perhaps that’s because so many of his proposals sound like what the Obama administration is already doing — albeit with more hawkish bluster. Last month, Vice President Biden, while criticizing Romney’s “loose talk of war,” noted that, other than the rhetoric, the policies were the same: “Governor Romney has called for what he calls a ‘very different policy’ on Iran. But for the life of me it’s hard to understand what the governor means by a very different policy.”
<!-- (for webtech) Posted in General, Home Page, Security
--><!-- googleoff: all --><!-- googleon: all -->
 
Republicans risk getting crushed on the Foreign Policy issue.

As soon as you Democrat supporters realize it is the same fuckin policy, we might be able to make some progress.

If Bush would've invaded Libya, there probably would've been a monumental protest every day in front of the White House. However, if Pres. Obama invades Libya, we would be greeted as liberators (damn, where have I heard that before?)

Some can advance the Anglo-Agenda without any dissent, while blacks are executed in Libya

As for Iran, just watch it play out
 
as soon as you democrat supporters realize it is the same fuckin policy, we might be able to make some progress.

If bush would've invaded libya, there probably would've been a monumental protest every day in front of the white house. However, if pres. Obama invades libya, we would be greeted as liberators (damn, where have i heard that before?)

some can advance the anglo-agenda without any dissent, while blacks are executed in libya

as for iran, just watch it play out

. . .

seriously lamar, do you really believe all this to be a mere pretext to a war for the purpose of attempting to win re-election in november ???

I can understand your posting this in an attempt to highlight/support ron paul's position on iran and war in general; and i understand that, in general, you are somewhat politically cynical.

I just wonder though, does your cynicism extended to the point of the ridiculous have a point beyond ron paul ???

`
 
You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

The only group that cares about war mongering is the republicans who won't support President Obama no matter what he does.

This is politics. Obama cannot effectively run on his record *thus the negative assault on Romney*, so what else can he run on? The best distraction any incumbent president can play is the war distraction. We already have the narrative of Syria's military killing their own citizens playing out.

Democrats do start wars too.
 
this is politics. Obama cannot effectively run on his record *thus the negative assault on romney*, so what else can he run on? The best distraction any incumbent president can play is the war distraction. We already have the narrative of syria's military killing their own citizens playing out.

Democrats do start wars too.


But,





What would he gain that wouldn't be more than offset by what he would lose ???

 
Back
Top