Will Bush follow this madness?
NEOCONSERVATIVE "HOPES, PRAYS" BUSH WILL BOMB IRAN.
May 30, 2007
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, prominent neoconservative Norman Podhoretz writes that he 'hopes' and 'prays' that President Bush will bomb Iran."Since a ground invasion of Iran must be ruled out for many different reasons, the job would have to be done, if it is to be done at all, by a campaign of air strikes," the op-ed continues. "Furthermore, because Iran's nuclear facilities are dispersed, and because some of them are underground, many sorties and bunker-busting munitions would be required. And because such a campaign is beyond the capabilities of Israel, and the will, let alone the courage, of any of our other allies, it could be carried out only by the United States. Even then, we would probably be unable to get at all the underground facilities, which means that, if Iran were still intent on going nuclear, it would not have to start over again from scratch. .
2007-05-31
13:20:41
·
19 answers
·
asked by
rare2findd
6
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
8 minutes ago
But a bombing campaign would without question set back its nuclear program for years to come, and might even lead to the overthrow of the mullahs."
Podhoretz thinks that Bush "intends, within the next 21 months, to order air strikes against the Iranian nuclear facilities from the three U.S. aircraft carriers already sitting nearby....If this is what Mr. Bush intends to do, it goes, or should go, without saying that his overriding purpose is to ensure the security of this country in accordance with the vow he took upon becoming president, and in line with his pledge not to stand by while one of the world's most dangerous regimes threatens us with one of the world's most dangerous weapons."
2007-05-31
13:21:48 ·
update #1
Podhoretz thinks that Bush "intends, within the next 21 months, to order air strikes against the Iranian nuclear facilities from the three U.S. aircraft carriers already sitting nearby....."It now remains to be seen whether this president, battered more mercilessly and with less justification than any other in living memory, and weakened politically by the enemies of his policy in the Middle East in general and Iraq in particular, will find it possible to take the only action that can stop Iran from following through on its evil intentions both toward us and toward Israel," Podhorez writes in conclusion. "As an American and as a Jew, I pray with all my heart that he will."
--It is NOT up to the U.S. to fight Israel's wars. WHy can't THEY do what they feel must be done?
This is all so ugly.
2007-05-31
13:22:18 ·
update #2
I don't hate Jews. I detest that Bush has allowed THEIR policies to intertwine with those of the United States. Jews live in the same community as I do. Many BELIEVE AS I DO!
Anyway, I reserve the right to dislike whomever I please, just as you do. But it isn't just a matter of dislike';
It is a matter of putting an entire nation! - the ENTIRE nation of the United States - at even further risk of harm than ever before!
Use your brain. To Jews we are nothing more than their guardian angels...
how pathetic we have stooped to such a level.
2007-05-31
13:26:30 ·
update #3
Well, lets take a look at the jews. In Ancient Egypt, they were oppressed and enslaved for many years. In the colonial era Europeans persicuted them and killed them. In the 30's and 40's, 5 million jews were killed and double the amount were tourtured in concentration camps. Even now, many countries don't like the jews. I thik you're right. Jews have had it easy way to long. It's their turn to suffer.
2007-05-31 13:33:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Nope, still the United States of America. Thing is, America is on this hemisphere, and Israel, it's on the opposite side of the planet, so the name really wouldn't make much sense.
I think 'rubber stamp' would be a more apt description than 'dictate.'
A bombing campaign against Iran strikes me as unlikely at this point. Iran is not that close to getting a nuke, and the Administration has stretched about as far as it can when it comes to projecting US influence in the form of force. Besides, if Iran does get a nuke and pass it to terrorists to use against the US, it'll probably do so on a Democratic president's watch (since we're probably looking at 4-12 or more years of Democratic presidents, here), and that would be such a devestating blow that the Republican party could be swept back into power.
2007-05-31 13:31:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by B.Kevorkian 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
enable's see if we've this promptly: Six years in the past, Israel thoroughly withdrew from Southern Lebanon after being "assured" that the Lebanese government would not enable greater rocket assaults to originate from there. And final 365 days Israel forcibly bumped off this is very own settlers from the Gaza Strip with a view to withdraw from it. And Israel's rules are "expansionist"? Israel's record in middle East problems is plenty from pristine...yet you, sir, are approximately as sensible as a bag of hammers.
2016-10-09 05:33:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The United States recently joined most of the international community in a boycott of Israel's national holiday, "Jerusalem Day (the celebration of the reunification of Jerusalem)." That doesn't really sound like the United States of Israel to me. If anything, even though still for the most part behind Israel, the USA has weakened their relationship with them.
2007-05-31 13:33:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by PekinRezen 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Norman Podhoretz is a prominent neoconservative? Are you sure? Has anyone ever heard of this guy? Norman Podhoretz sounds like a name in a Dickens novel.
2007-05-31 13:30:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I think you are not aware of the Biblical aspect of all of this. Whether anyone really cares to admit, Israel is God's chosen nation. He also gets guidance from Christians all the time. He often seeks guidance from Tim Lahaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, authors of the Left Behind series of books. Perhaps, you should go through the Bible and read the prophecies yourself and compare it to the history that is recorded in the Bible. Things in the Bible have been proven to have happened.
We are their allies, so we must protect them. It's not about being the U.S. of Israel; it's about protecting them like we promised we would.
2007-05-31 13:33:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by futureteacher0613 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
No & no. Iran poses a threat to the civilized world. They have missiles that can reach way past Israel. Why do you think they have them?
2007-05-31 13:29:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by yupchagee 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
Because the president of Iran hates the USA as much as he hates Isreal. Iran funds and arms terrorist groups like Hezbollah. When they provide a nuke to a torrorist group it may be YOU that dies intead of Irealis.
2007-05-31 13:28:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Why bomb Iran. Heck we sold them their fighter jets, just we stopped giving them support, so, they have a nice yard ornament to remind them; "Who your Daddy"?
2007-05-31 13:30:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Snaglefritz 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Iran is already interested in Iraq and has lots of influence there. If you add to it nuclear capabilities, what stops Iran from controlling all of the oil of the Mideast and threatening OUR livelihood?
2007-05-31 13:25:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Brand X 6
·
2⤊
4⤋