And now Iran???

[suzer1013]

Forgive me a brief worried rant:

It seems we are being set up to strike and/or invade Iran soon. I fully expected this. Our warmongering President and his administration are at it again, and I don't know when this will end. The minute we invaded Iraq, I knew Iran would follow -- the question was when. Now, according to reports, we are building up troops on the Iranian border, and the British soldiers being held will be the excuse for Tony Blair to ask his buddy Dubya to help out.

When will this end? I have written letters strongly condemning our participation in the Iraq war to my senators and Congressmen, begging them to stop this war. I have attended peace rallies and tried to vote these folks out of office. But it is to no avail. They don't care what the American people want. They are motivated by profit and greed and, dare I say, evil. And they rode into office first with the support of "Daddy's" friends in the Supreme Court and "Brother's" friends in Florida, and then rode into office a second time on the backs of fear, lies and deception about GLBT people.

I cannot think of anything that will stop them. A few weeks before we invaded Afghanistan and also before we invaded Iraq, the air traffic at the nearby air reserve base increased tenfold. And in the past couple of weeks, my partner and I have witnessed the same activity.

Is nonviolent direct action a possibility here? Like Tiananmen Square, can we sit in front of the tanks and planes? What can we do? I feel powerless, and that's exactly what the government wants. I hope the Democrats will step up to the plate, grab balls (or ovaries) in hand and stop this before it happens. Otherwise, I greatly fear for our country.

The rant endeth here.

Susan

[u-dog]

Bush has no majority in congress and no support among the people even for the war we are already in... I am skeptical that W. could invade Iran even if he wanted to.

The army is stretched to capacity as it is and Iran has a HUGE military. Saddam nearly destroyed himself in an extended war with Iran back in the 80s. Its not conceivable to me that they would try anything of that magnitude... not because W is too virtuous but because he simply hasn't the resources to pull it off.

[suzer1013]

U-dog -- I hope and pray that you are right. There are times I am skeptical, too, but the news this morning (not off the major networks - I read alternative news on the Internet since the networks have so little information that is actually newsworthy) set me on edge.

I hope I will be able to rest easier with the next administration.

Susan

[BruceChris]

[IMG]item489432765.jpg[/IMG] The traditional way to catch a monkey alive is to drill a hole in a tree, and then put a nut in the hole. When the monkey grabs the nut, he cannot get his hand out, but he will not let go of the nut, not for anything. -- P&L, BC

[Diane Vera]

Originally Posted by u-dog

Bush has no majority in congress and no support among the people even for the war we are already in... I am skeptical that W. could invade Iran even if he wanted to.

The army is stretched to capacity as it is and Iran has a HUGE military. Saddam nearly destroyed himself in an extended war with Iran back in the 80s. Its not conceivable to me that they would try anything of that magnitude... .

... unless they decide to try something even more reckless, like germ warfare or even nuclear war???

If indeed the Bush administration is making moves toward expanding the war yet again, but without even remotely adequate conventional resources this time, and without the political likelihood of expanding the army's conventional resources (e.g. via a military draft), then that to me seems really scary.

[BruceChris]

Several thoughts:

That the US could not attack Iran unless Bush made extensive use of air power, and/or weapons of mass distruction.

That in no case, could our military hold and occupy Iran, as u-dog has pointed out.

That the only way thay he could possibly get any popular support for such an attack, would be if there were a Very Large terrorist attack, that could really credibly be traced to Iran, or at least credibly enough to last the few weeks that it would take to do the necessary damage.

That he really does seem to have been bought, body and soul, by the oil companies.

Thoughts?

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[u-dog]

Ok, Suzer, maybe you're right about Bush after all. Check this out!

[WillySF]

That is too funny!

[suzer1013]

"That the only way thay he could possibly get any popular support for such an attack, would be if there were a Very Large terrorist attack, that could really credibly be traced to Iran, or at least credibly enough to last the few weeks that it would take to do the necessary damage."

Well, you see, that leads to my other related thought. This is the one which will send y'all off thinking I'm just a nutty conspiracy theorist looking for a gunman on every grassy knoll. BUT,

You know the recent pet food contamination that is killing animals? Think about it. Think about how widespread it is. Does it make you wonder how easily our own food supplies could become contaminated? Does it make you wonder if this could be a test run for something even worse?

Yeah, yeah -- I know, that's a little crazy. But it was the first thing that popped into my head when I heard about the pet food recall. And it's all happening as the Iran situation is heating up. If our food or water were to be contaminated (by terrorists or by unknown factors and blamed on terrorists), and if deaths occurred, I'll bet the American public would be frothing at the mouth to get at whoever is blamed for it (Iran, possibly?). Could be coincidence, who knows.

Anyway, I am trying not to live in fear -- no use in that. But I don't trust our government, and terrorism has grown worse because of our actions, not better. It's frustrating to feel that there's not much I can do about it but pray, keep living my life the best I can, and hope that my fears aren't realized.

Susan

(P.S. For all my fellow conspiracy theorists out there -- there is NO way the single bullet theory was possible )

[ladyinred]

Bush's policies in the Middle East are unfortunately creating more problems then they solve. Knowing something about Middle East culture..I think a larger part of why Middle Easterners resent us, is we tend to stick our noses into other people's business.
The Shah was put into power with the help of the CIA instigating the coup.. And Saddam Hussein was actually an ally of America's until he "got out of line" . I will never understand the United States Government unholy alliance with brutal dicatators.
Perhaps they think it is the lesser of two evils as in the Iran, Iraq war. I personally do not think Iran would relish a war with the United States, it is too costly and they are still recovering from the after affects of the Iraqi war that when on so long, and from what I remember their own economy is suffering.
Why didn't Bush take the same stance with North Korea? I don't believe in his "War on terror" I think it will create more of it, as the animosity for the American governments policies toward the Middle East are mounting.

Frankly you cannot force your values and way of life down people 's throats and dictate to them how things should be for them.. People will never embrace democratic values especially if they feel it is being imposed on them by force,the world just does not work that way..It never has and never will.

[ladyinred]

To take a look at the other side of what we label as "evil". These countries want the right to determine their own destiny and affairs, much like the American people do.Why did we establish independence from Great Britain and it's monarchy and form our own constitution and government?

We wanted the right to govern our own country and destiny without Great Britain sticking it's nose into our affairs and telling us how to do things.Why do we think other countries are different..They see the US presence in Iraq as an occupation.. And a foreign occupation to them is much like how we viewed Great Britain's monarchy and it's influence over us. To them, it is an ultimate form of humiliation.

[ladyinred]

And while I'm presenting this perspective, it is an understanding of another culture and something about it's history, past and current events..and their perspectives. I do not condone terrorism and I am not saying I agree with Islamic fanatics who commit such atrocities.

[ladyinred]

An article on the past events in Iran's history.http://www.omnicenter.org/warpeaceco...crushdemocracy. How the Shah gained power in Iran.

[ladyinred]

Because I've lived in another culture and with and around other people of other cultures.. I guess I'm more open minded than what I used to be... And it also reminds of a buddhist proverb,"Instead of putting others in their place, put yourself in theirs.. "
Being around other people has given me some insight into their way of thinking and how they see things, and that might not correspond with our outlook or preconceptions of how things should be. But it has widened my horizons. It has helped me realize that there is more than one side to the story in any conflictual situation... Because we often have ignorance about other cultures and their practices and way of thinking, we don't always see the "other side."

[ladyinred]

Dichotomy = dualism

[ladyinred]

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html ( It is somewhat dated though) Under the regimes of Saddam Hussein and the Shaah the people suffered brutal repression.The Shah had his secret police that would carry out torture campaigns among other things. Quite frankly we are looking at human rights abuses under both these past regimes.. People greatly suffered under these regimes.
Even though Ghandi led a nonviolent resistance in India, we can compare the history of India under British rule with these two countries in that the rule was despotic.

[ladyinred]

I will say what I believe about the Iranian people.. They really are not interested in being in a war with the US. It would not really be in their interests to participate in such a war. However they will stand up to what they perceive as foreign aggression if confronted in the like.

[Diane Vera]

Iran: The religious right’s new bugbear
By Bill Berkowitz
Mar 23, 2007
originally published on the Online Journal site
copy on Faith in Public Life

[ladyinred]

They aren't a nuclear threat,they don't have the capacity yet... All hype. But thanks ,Diane for the article.. But they are exaggerating the extent of Iran's nuclear capability. India is one of the countries that has more of a nuclear capability than Iran.They lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and that was basically why the American people supported the war in Iraq... I will say that the article is an outright bald face lie of Iran's nuclear capacity...While I won't deny the potential for making such weapons, it is estimated that it will be a number of years before Iran develops this capacity, if they have the intentions of doing so.

[ladyinred]

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762462.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran This is somewhat dated:Oct,2006 but pertinent.http://www.alternet.org/story/42774/
Here is the most recent one.http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0228-28.htm
I would definitely read the last URL Common Dreams. Bush and his religious right cronies if they succeed will probably bring about the Armegeddon that they seem to believe in.. Call it a self fulfilling prophecy... But it's not the other side who will start a all -out war, it will be the crackpots here in America.
http://europeancourier.org/18.htm