Lieberman Calls For Bombing Iran

[Solitaire]

Lieberman Calls For Bombing Iran (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/10/ftn/main2908476.shtml)

"I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq," Lieberman told Bob Schieffer. "And to me, that would include a strike into... over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers."


One wonders how the Iranians will respond.

[FarmallMTA]

One wonders how the Iranians will respond.

Burning American flags, burning effigies of Bush, screaming profane epithets about the criminality and immorality of America, attempting to undermine worldwide confidence in our country:

In short, responding like Democrat candidates for President.

[Texastwister]

Its exactly what the Iranian government needs.......to take away the spotlight from their poor domestic poilicies, and create a common Iranian enemy in the West.

I almost believe the leaders are actually hoping for some type of conflict. Look at their actions of kidnapping British soldiers, all the rhetoric concerning Israel, and total refusal to negotiatite their nuclear ambitions.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I think some EMP bombs if we have them would be a sweet wake up call...

[Texastwister]

In short, responding like Democrat candidates for President

Democrats get their talking points from the Venezulean government....I thought that was common knowledge

[Jeff Corey]

Burning American flags, burning effigies of Bush, screaming profane epithets about the criminality and immorality of America, attempting to undermine worldwide confidence in our country:

In short, responding like Democrat candidates for President.
They have free speech and we don't? What a paradox.

[Zep]

Nice cherry-pick, guys, obviously so you can demonize a third party you don't like. Let's see what else the report say:The Independent former Democrat from Connecticut said that he was not calling for an invasion of Iran...

[Texastwister]

How does bombing correspond to invasion?...we bombed Sudan, Kosovo, never invaded. Why would you think thats cherry picking?

[Azure]

Oh great.

Here we go again.

'Yes we should' 'No we should not'
'Yes we should' 'No we should not'
'Yes we should' 'No we should not'
'Yes we should' 'No we should not'
'Yes we should' 'No we should not'
'Yes we should' 'No we should not'
'Yes we should' 'No we should not'

[Zep]

How does bombing correspond to invasion?...we bombed Sudan, Kosovo, never invaded. Why would you think thats cherry picking?How does "former Democrat" correspond to "Democrat"?

[Darth Rotor]

One wonders how the Iranians will respond.
IIRC, bombing in Cambodia worked for some tactical reasons, but it hardly changed the strategic problem.

Bombing within Iran for a tactical reason may or may not have a short term succes in stopping an operation or two, but the political and strategic costs, not to mention the propaganda cost in detriment to the nuclear negotiations still underway, seem to outweigh any tactical benifit in the short term.

Lieberman is playing to the hawk audience.

DR

[NoZed Avenger]

They have free speech and we don't? What a paradox.

People all over the world are free to criticize America *and* Bush.

That kind of freedom has always been with us.

[coalesce]

Is Lieberman's evidence for Iranian bases as good as the intelligence Colin Powell was given by the White House when he went to the UN in 2003?

Michael

[latent aaaack]

Burning American flags, burning effigies of Bush, screaming profane epithets about the criminality and immorality of America, attempting to undermine worldwide confidence in our country:

In short, responding like Democrat candidates for President.

If I didn't hear the former chief strategist for Mitt Romney's campaign say something similar to just that I might've written off this comment as coming from somewhat of a lunatic fringe, but in fact this kind of political thought is increasingly actually the norm.

Anderson Cooper had two chief political strategists from each party on his show talking about the repuplican debate. Halfway down the page of the transcript Mike Murphy, former lead strategist for Romney's campaign, responds to the democrat's (Begala) criticism of Romney for saying that the war wouldn't have needed to be fought if Saddam let the inspectors in. After denying Romney made a mistake Murphy says simply "Saddam is the bad guy not Bush."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0706/05/acd.01.html

I would've liked to see this new idealogy further explained.

[Charlie Monoxide]

I look forward to seeing Lieberman leading the charge into Iran .....

Charlie (fight for peace) Monoxide

[Darth Rotor]

I look forward to seeing Lieberman leading the charge into Iran .....

Charlie (fight for peace) Monoxide
"Iran: we don't take the NPT seriously, and we don't take American Express!

VISA, it's everywhere you want to be -- and a few places you don't! "

*End TV spot*

The visual of Joe Lieberman shopping at a bazaar in Teheran, and trying to use an American Express card, had me giggling.

Thanks for the inspiration. :)

DR

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Is Lieberman's evidence for Iranian bases as good as the intelligence Colin Powell was given by the White House when he went to the UN in 2003?

Michael

Somehow I knew this was coming...now only Intel during a Democratic Administration will be correct..a very dangerous gambit for our country.

[MIKILLINI]

IIRC, bombing in Cambodia worked for some tactical reasons, but it hardly changed the strategic problem.

Bombing within Iran for a tactical reason may or may not have a short term succes in stopping an operation or two, but the political and strategic costs, not to mention the propaganda cost in detriment to the nuclear negotiations still underway, seem to outweigh any tactical benifit in the short term.

Lieberman is playing to the hawk audience.

DR

Lieberman's a Republican even though he's not a Republican..He just used the party of Democrat to get the votes in a Democratic state. He used his name and association of Democrats, after losing the Dem primary, and ran as an independent. He votes like a Republican over 75% of the time. (Ok, bit of a derail there).
But anytime I hear Joe Lieberman....I don't want to hear Joe Lieberman.
And the vision of Lieberman holding an American Express card...."don't come to Tehran without it". Bizarre TV

[Thunder]

Let the Israelis take care of it. Iran is a threat to them, not us.

[coalesce]

Somehow I knew this was coming...now only Intel during a Democratic Administration will be correct..a very dangerous gambit for our country.

Hardly. A future Democratic administration could--and probably will--have as many axes to grind and go off charging half-assed as the present Republican administration. My only point was that this present administration has a woeful record on intelligence. I do not pretend that all Republicans are evil profiteers and all Democrats are all beneficent do-gooders. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Michael

[TragicMonkey]

Why does Lieberman want to attack Iran? Do they have violent video games he disapproves of?

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Hardly. A future Democratic administration could--and probably will--have as many axes to grind and go off charging half-assed as the present Republican administration. My only point was that this present administration has a woeful record on intelligence. I do not pretend that all Republicans are evil profiteers and all Democrats are all beneficent do-gooders. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Michael

I will again say the Intel community does not change just because a different party administration takes over as George Tenet proves...and again the British MI6 was in consensus with the CIA over Saddam and WMD. Sometimes Intel is good sometimes it`s bad...the nature of the beast

[Art Vandelay]

Saying that we should be prepared isn't the same thing as calling for it.

Anderson Cooper had two chief political strategists from each party on his show talking about the repuplican debate.Was that a typo?

[MIKILLINI]

I will again say the Intel community does not change just because a different party administration takes over as George Tenet proves...and again the British MI6 was in consensus with the CIA over Saddam and WMD. Sometimes Intel is good sometimes it`s bad...the nature of the beast

Like many businesses or agencies, Intel is only as good as the person in charge, and how well He/ She is organized and runs the organization. IMO If John O' Neill was appointed director of the FBI instead of Louis Freeh, there may have been no 9/11, but as the saying goes; Hindsight is 20/20.

[boloboffin]

How exactly is bombing Iran supposed to stop them from attacking our troops in Iraq?

[Azure]

How exactly is bombing Iran supposed to stop them from attacking our troops in Iraq?

They are doing.....what??

;)

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Like many businesses or agencies, Intel is only as good as the person in charge, and how well He/ She is organized and runs the organization. IMO If John O' Neill was appointed director of the FBI instead of Louis Freeh, there may have been no 9/11, but as the saying goes; Hindsight is 20/20.


Well Clinton appointed Tenet...didn`t he?

[Comrade Ogilvy]

His career...


Early career

After he received his M.A., Tenet became research director of the American Hellenic Institute from 1978 to 1979.[6] He then began working for the Senate, first as a legislative assistant and later as Legislative Director to former Senator H. John Heinz III of Pennsylvania (1982-1985). He was a staff member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) from 1985-1988, then Staff Director of the SSCI from 1988-1993. He had no military service. Later, Tenet joined President-elect Bill Clinton's national security transition team. Clinton appointed Tenet Senior Director for Intelligence Programs at the National Security Council (1993-95).[7][8]

[edit] CIA career

Tenet was appointed Deputy Director of Central Intelligence in July 1995 and served in that capacity until he became Director on July 11, 1997, after a unanimous confirmation vote in the Senate. This followed the withdrawal of Anthony Lake, whose nomination had been blocked by Republicans in Congress. While the Director of Central Intelligence has typically been replaced by an incoming administration ever since Jimmy Carter replaced DCI George H. W. Bush, Tenet served through the end of the Clinton administration and well into the term of George W. Bush.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_University_-_School_of_International_and_Public_Affairs

[Texastwister]

is career...

And why did Bush keep him? In my opinion, it was to de-politicize the position.

[MIKILLINI]

Well Clinton appointed Tenet...didn`t he?

That's the CIA... The FBI's Robert Mueller was appointed by Bush after Freeh resigned in June of 2001. Mueller was sworn in on September 4th..1 week before 9/11. John O'Neill had some who didn't like his "style".

ETA:Returning to the Washington headquarters in 1995, he became chief of the counterterrorism section. On his first day, he received a call from Richard A. Clarke, who had just learned that Ramzi Yousef had been located in Pakistan. O'Neill worked continuously over the next few days to gather information and coordinate the successful capture and extradition of Yousef. Intrigued by the case, O'Neill continued to study the 1993 bombing Yousef had masterminded and other information about Islamic militants. He was directly involved in the investigation into the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. Frustrated by the level of cooperation from the Saudis, O'Neill purportedly vented to FBI director Louis Freeh, saying that they were “blowing smoke up your ass.”

In 1996 and 1997, O'Neill continued to warn of growing threats of terrorism, saying that modern groups are not supported by governments and that there are terrorist cells operating within the United States. He states that veterans of the insurgency by Afghan rebels against the Soviet Union's invasion have become a major threat. Also in 1997, he moved to the FBI's New York office, where he was one of the agents in charge of counterterrorism and national security.

By 1998, O'Neill had become focused on Osama bin Laden. When his friend Chris Isham, a producer for ABC News, arranged for an interview between bin Laden and correspondent John Miller, Isham and Miller used information put together by O'Neill to formulate the questions. After the interview aired, O'Neill pushed Isham hard to release an unedited version so he could carefully dissect it.

Later that year, two United States embassies were bombed in quick succession in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. O'Neill hoped to be involved in the investigation because he had gained a tremendous knowledge of Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terrorist network. However, turf wars and dislike of O'Neill by some superiors in Washington first meant that the FBI's New York office was left out of the investigation, and later that O'Neill was left behind when other New York-based agents were sent to the region to pick up leads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._O'Neill

[coalesce]

I will again say the Intel community does not change just because a different party administration takes over as George Tenet proves...and again the British MI6 was in consensus with the CIA over Saddam and WMD. Sometimes Intel is good sometimes it`s bad...the nature of the beast

I wholeheartedly agree. But just like in public relations, intelligence can be shaped to form a desired product. It must be disheartening to have the people on the ground do their job to the best of their abilities and then have the people in charge take their hard-earned information and twist it into something far from the truth but close to a predetermined political agenda.

Michael

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I wholeheartedly agree. But just like in public relations, intelligence can be shaped to form a desired product. It must be disheartening to have the people on the ground do their job to the best of their abilities and then have the people in charge take their hard-earned information and twist it into something far from the truth but close to a predetermined political agenda.

Michael

Yeah...like Plame and her husband?

[Ion]

Tell Lieberman to report to my office tomorrow morning.

[SezMe]

Yeah...like Plame and her husband?

Plame and her husband were "the people in charge"?? News to me. Or maybe you didn't read the post carefully. Try again.

[MIKILLINI]

I wholeheartedly agree. But just like in public relations, intelligence can be shaped to form a desired product. It must be disheartening to have the people on the ground do their job to the best of their abilities and then have the people in charge take their hard-earned information and twist it into something far from the truth but close to a predetermined political agenda.

Michael

If only they would leave politics out of it:rolleyes:

[Puppycow]

How exactly is bombing Iran supposed to stop them from attacking our troops in Iraq?

Bombing people always makes them more cooperative. So does tough talk about bombing them. I'm sure the people of Connecticut are very proud. [/sarcasm]

[Comrade Ogilvy]

Plame and her husband were "the people in charge"?? News to me. Or maybe you didn't read the post carefully. Try again.



Nah...but her husband also works for the NYT`s.

[Azure]

I wholeheartedly agree. But just like in public relations, intelligence can be shaped to form a desired product. It must be disheartening to have the people on the ground do their job to the best of their abilities and then have the people in charge take their hard-earned information and twist it into something far from the truth but close to a predetermined political agenda.

Michael

There were no boots on the ground in Iraq in the first place.

That was the problem with the intelligence gathering effort. No CIA unilateral agents doing their work for them.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

There were no boots on the ground in Iraq in the first place.

That was the problem with the intelligence gathering effort. No CIA unilateral agents doing their work for them.


Wasn`t that because some where in the past we decided to emasculate the CIA`s human agent capability and started using only electronic surveillance... I`ll look it up.

[Puppycow]

Wasn`t that because some where in the past we decided to emasculate the CIA`s human agent capability and started using only electronic surveillance... I`ll look it up.

Just going from what I've heard, the CIA used to run amok quite a bit, running its own foreign policy, fomenting coups, supporting one faction over another in civil wars (and often not very nice guys, like the Shah of Iran, Pinochet, etc.) without the approval of the congress.

[shecky]

Lieberman is a special character in American politics. Almost everything he does is wrong, and when he does something right, it's for the wrong reasons. Perfect hybrid DemRepub.

[SezMe]

Well, actually, he's not a Dem - he just caucuses with them. Technically, he's independent.

Perfect IndDemRep. But who wants to quibble.:)