When past government officals warn Bush is planning a nuclear war sould we listen ?

Question

The point is that the neoconservatives do realize this. Their defeat in Iraq and Israel's defeat in Lebanon has taught the neoconservatives that the US cannot prevail in the Middle East by conventional military means. As I have previously explained, the neoconservatives' plan is to escape the failure of their Iraq plan by orchestrating a war with Iran in which the US can prevail only by using nuclear weapons. As previously reported, the neoconservatives believe that the use of nuclear weapons against Iran will convince Muslims that they must accept US hegemony.
The neoconservatives have put the elements of their plan in place. They have powerful naval forces on station off Iran's coast. They have convinced President Bush that only by attacking Iran can he prevail in Iraq.

The neoconservatives have rewritten US war doctrine to permit preemptive US nuclear attack on non-nuclear countries. (2) They have demonized Iran as the greatest threat since Hitler.

Neoconservatives have invented "Islamofascism," something that exists only in the neoconservative propaganda used to instill in Americans hatred of Muslims. The neoconservatives have dehumanized Muslims as monsters who must be destroyed at all costs. Recent statements by neoconservative leaders such as Norman Podhoretz read like the ravings of ignorant lunatics. Podhoretz has written Muslims out of the human race. He demands that their culture be deracinated

Just as Goebbels said, some lies are too big to be disbelieved. It is this disbelief that is so dangerous. The inability of Americans to see through the Big LIe to the secret agenda allows the neoconservatives to escape accountability and to continue with their plot.

The neoconservatives also believe that nuclear attack on Iran will isolate America in the world and, thereby, give the government control over the American people. The denunciations that will be hurled at Americans from every quarter will force the country to wrap itself in the flag and to treat domestic critics as foreign enemies. Not only free speech but also truth itself will disappear along with every civil liberty.

http://mostlywater.org/nuclear_war_on_iran_the_neocon_threat_to_american_freedom

Paul Craig Roberts - above

Brezenski warns Congress of a war with Iran and the possible attack on America - that would be blamed on Iran - as a prelude to war

General Wes Clark - has said the Bush 2-3 weeks after 9/11 had a plan to attack 7 nations in 5 yrs Iran being the last - This means that the inteligence has to be made to fit the plan not the other way around

Generals and Admirals threatened to quit - if Iran was attacked

Commander of the 5th fleet off the coast of Iran - said the water were too congested and risked accidental war -
He is now gone retired

Has there been a purge of US Generals since that threat to quit ? Maybe - maybe not ?

http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?video_id=JN6IwFsJk2U&eurl=http%3A//ca.video.yahoo.com/video/play%3Fvid%3D1110091968%26fr%3Dslv1-msgr&iurl=http%3A//img.youtube.com/vi/JN6IwFsJk2U/default.jpg&t=OEgsToPDskJvGOyhEc_Uh7YFmj6ATduL&rel=1&border=0

Answer 1

what you have said will baffle and go over the heads of most neoconservatives. emphasis on "cons" in conservatives.

like some kind of nightmarish boardgame, this administration jumps from country to country, guns blazing, each time it fails to accomplish anything productive. leaving ashes, maimed bodies of women and children, and damaged infrastructure behind.

george bush is the most dangerous terrorist on any continent. no more letting the supreme court pick leaders...

Answer 2

"Islamofascism" is an invention. Yeah right. So, maybe you don't like the label and maybe you object to it being applied specifically to Iran but are you really denying what should have been obvious from the moment it was established that it was Al Queda who was behind those planes slamming into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon?

As is the case, what is even more annoying than the rhetoric found on the right (and yes, I will concede that sometimes happens) is the counter rhetoric on the left, a small sampling of which you have given us.
And what I mean by that is the alarmist "Bush is going to attack Iran with nukes!!!" when the truth of the matter is that the issue is far from settled on what to do, and yes, that applies to neo conservatives' views.
So, your argument (sorry, copy/paste) that the neo con view is to attack with nukes just doesn't wash.
There are those who do advocate that war is the only answer to dealing with Iran.
But most of those (all?), as far as I can tell, do not advocate that it be a nuclear strike.
And then there are many that advocate sanctions.

The truth of the matter is that the latest NIE shows that at the very least, Iran did have a nuclear weapons program (that was cancelled). That itself is worrying and it is even more worrying that some people think that can just gloss over that fact.

Answer 3

putting a missile protection gadget in Europe shouldn't alarm the Russians. besides the undeniable fact that it does. Why? Why be dissatisfied some protection gadget in case you have not objectives in the direction of Europe? Why not ask to affix that protection and deploy a number of your individual protection structures there? the factor is that Russian nor China prefer an instantaneous war with the US. Why? Becuase there are 2 cities which will constantly remind the worldwide what it skill to be on the incorrect end of a worldwide power. Iran is yet a chess piece in this worldwide sport of chess. And precise now the US is the Kasparov of the worldwide. united statesa. has taken it upon itself to preserve the worldwide's much less effective. For what ever reason. And in all certainty who cares if we are close to to a nuclear war. that is going to ensue sooner or later. that is common and easy. human beings prefer power. the only thank you to get power is to do away with your enemy. the priority with that is, the quantity of retaliation that a united states of america can stand up to till now being completely destroyed. Reagan outfitted us a missle preserve. We nevertheless have it. in case you do not have self belief it properly, i might say go stick your head back interior the sand. different international locations have something like it yet in certainty we spend extra funds on protection than any 4 international locations prepare. yet what's the main convencing reason to not attack the US, is the 5999 ultimate nukes ought to we ought to apply only one. the worldwide is a merciless and nasty place. human beings fairly do have it fairly good. no remember what you could think of. visit the different united states of america and in simple terms look. Forgive the spelling blunders verify Spelling in simple terms sat there.

Answer 4

Come on now, Do you really believe President Bush would use a Nuclear Bomb on Iran? The real threat to the middle east is if Iran were to get a Nuclear Bomb, who would they use it on. The President of Iran has already said, he would like to wipe Israel off the face of the map.

Answer 5

I could only see him using a nuke, if we were hit with one or some other devasting wmd attack by someone like Iran.

Frankly we have fuel air bombs that will do the same amount of damage and are less dangerous to use.

Answer 6

The day our country detonates another nuclear bomb is the day I flee it.