Evil Toys for Evil Boys

A Scary Possibility

January 27th 2007 10:49

Lawrence Eagleburger, who was part of the Bush 41 cabinet, said yesterday that he considered it a possibility that Ahmadinejad might supply Hugo Chavez with weapons to use against us. The two have become very chummy lately, their mutual hate for the US (and all other free countries) drawing them together. Ahmadinejad is developing nuclear technology for "peaceful" purposes, about as much as he's going to convert to Christianity. There's nothing to stop him from sending a few warheads south of our border and giving us an ultimatum. As Mr. Eagleburger pointed out, "the Soviets used Cuba" the same way back in the 1960's. The recent tests of Iranian "space technology" becomes even more concerning when taken in that light, doesn't it? If they can fire a rocket into space to put a satellite into orbit, how easy would it be for them to aim nuclear weapons from either side of the planet? If that were to happen, I sincerely hope George Bush is in office at the time. But I doubt that even Ahmadinejad or Chavez is that stupid. They'll wait for some liberal lump to be sitting in the Oval Office before they try to push us that way. Someone like Clinton, for example, who couldn't see beyond his own zipper. Or a phony "environmentalist" like Gore. Threaten him with a nuke and he'd be hiding under the desk to sign surrender papers, covering his personal cowardice with concern for the environment. All the Dem noise about diplomacy isn't worth much with a nuke aimed at us, is it? With any luck the White House resident at the time of such a stand off would have the courage and integrity to fight back. If not, I guess we'll have to go buy prayer mats, huh?

Vote

subscribe to this blog

follow this blog on Orble

start your own blog

[ Link ]

Posted By: S.L. - Category: No Category

Related Posts:

Relate This Post

[ Previous - Rosie's New Target ]

[ Next - Harry and Al ]

Comments

20 Comments. [ Add A Comment ]

Comment by youranter

January 27th 2007 11:18

youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern

The other day, I was going through the list of writers here at Orble. I found one guy named Santa and naturally stopped in for a look at some of his stuff. He actually tries to make a case for Iran needing a nuclear bomb. Not just wanting one, but needing it. The whole thing was so ridiculous I couldn't comment, but his Dem buddies sure did support him. Sad.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 27th 2007 11:28

Ahmadinejad needs a bomb like Ghengis Kahn need his hordes! The results would be about the same... Why can't people learn from history? Maybe that's why it keeps repeating...

Comment by Howard

January 28th 2007 01:23

Real Crash

Everyone has the need for nuclear energy- for electricity, water desalination, etc.. No one has a need for a nuclear bomb. Mankind has to get its head out of the gutter, or else this civilization is not going to make it.

By the way, Larry Eagleburger is also on the Baker-Hamilton commission, that recommended that the US talk directly to Iran and Syria, and that we need a political solution to the Middle East and Iraq situation.

He also said that when he met GW Bush in the morning, W was drunk. Yeah.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 28th 2007 03:20

Nuclear energy is one thing (one questionable thing, at best) but rogue regimes like N. Korea and Iran don't have "peaceful" things in mind when they get nuclear means. They've made it abundantly clear while protesting the whole time. Now that Iran has a missile that can get into space and "friends" like Chavez Ahmadinejad can launch a nuke whenever he wants to. If you think he's really planning to use nuclear technology for "peaceful" energy, you're dreaming.
As to Eagleburger saying the Prez. was "drunk", sorry I don't buy it. He quit drinking years ago and there has been no real evidence to the contrary.
Anyone who believes that we can "chat" with terrorist countries is dreaming. Diplomacy has already been tried... and failed.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 28th 2007 03:25

Hello, Howard. First off, nuclear technology is too dangerous for the likes of a rogue nation. N. Korea or Iran could cause lots of damage (and have threatened to). Now that Ahmadinejad is so chummy with Chavez, we could have a nuke aimed at us from this side of the planet. Wouldn't that be nice?
As for the Prez. being "drunk", as far as I know, he quit drinking years ago and I've seen no evidence to the contrary.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 28th 2007 03:26

Sorry about making two responses. My computer appeared to drop the first reply so I wrote a second. Then they both showed up. Be patient with me... the damn thing is a Dell....

Comment by Howard

January 28th 2007 13:06

Real Crash

Hi Bradish,

The key is diplomacy. That is why republican stalwarts James Baker III and Larry Eagleburger are actually going after W! America's tradition is that of diplomacy, in the tradition of the (before America) treaty of Westphalia of 1648, which ended 30 years and more of religious war in Germany and Europe.

The tradition of the British Empire, the Dutch Empire, etc is divide and conquer and endless war. Their philospher is John Locke, who believed in the right to life, liberty and property, not Leibniz' notion of life, liberty and the pursuit of empire. If the US gives up diplomacy and the pursuit of happiness for all, we will be like the British Empire and be destroyed. So be careful what you wrap the flag in.

Comment by Howard

January 28th 2007 13:08

Real Crash

pursuit of happiness, not, pursuit of empire, that is!

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 28th 2007 13:15

Hello Howard!! I have nothing against diplomacy. There are times when it can be very efective, indeed. Having said that, remember how the UN insisted on "diplomacy" with terrorists. How many empty, meaningless sanctions did it impose on Iraq? Boy, that diplomacy worked really well, didn't it? The only time diplomacy can work is if both parties are willing to negotiate. It won't do a bit of good against someone with a pathological hatred. Negotiations are best done from a position of strength, too. If you think you can "talk" the Muslim extremists out of killing innocents, by all means, have at it. Just let me know what kind of flowers to send when it doesn't work.

Comment by youranter

January 28th 2007 13:30

youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern

Howard, you say, ". If the US gives up diplomacy and the pursuit of happiness for all, we will be like the British Empire and be destroyed." Does this mean you are in favour of an American Empire?

Comment by Howard

January 28th 2007 13:42

Real Crash

That is sophistry. America was not created to be an empire. That is why we have to impeach Cheney and Bush.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 28th 2007 14:00

Howard, are you off your meds? Perhaps it's your education that's at fault. Do you know the difference between freeing millions from a brutal dictatorship and empire building? Maybe not. Let me enlighten you a little. We are NOT "empire building" in Iraq. We freed a suffering population (maybe you don't care about the troubles of others, but some of us do) and helped them to have their own FREE elections. 11 million of them voted in spite of the threats from the Ba'athists and other terrorists. Their OWN military and police are starting to work better and should be able to take full charge one day. Then we will stand down and they'll have their country to deal with, on their own. How can you translate that into "empire building?" As for impeachment, don't be silly. Bush and Cheney have done nothing to warrant it. On the other hand, if you're big on impeaching someone, how about John Kerry?

Comment by Howard

January 28th 2007 18:04

Real Crash

My friends, European civilization would not exist without the treaty of Westphalia of 1648 which ended religious warfare on the Continent after over 100 years (ending the famous Thirty Years War in Germany).

Turning democracy into some sort of religion will not be a way to promote democracy, a republic, etc.

As is well known, the so-called "Al-QueQueQue" organization, or whatever, is an offshoot of the efforts of George HR (the elder) Bush, and Brits such as Jimmy Goldsmith, to run a revenge for the Vietnam War, against the Russians in Afghanistan. The Bin Laden family was, and may be to this day very close to the Bush family (as in Osama). James Baker III may be many greedy things, but he has always been for an evenhanded approach between Arabs and Israelis. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been a US ally since the 1930s and FD Roosevelt.

Certain US, British and Israeli factions want to create endless war against Muslims and also inter-Muslim wars, such as the Sunni vs. Shiite situation in Iraq.

If we admit the problem of terrorism and its supporters and players-with is a problem in the US, the British Commonwealth, etc, as well as in Arab, Muslim, etc countries, this can be dealt with from the standpoint of the benefit of all. Even Israel could benefit greatly from peace and cooperation with its neighbors and the region. We (the US) have over 10,000 nuclear missiles, we are allowed to defend ourselves but not start aggressive war. Read my link to the old geezer (link) for more on this

You won't change Iran by nuking them to bits and killing millions. They have their own form of government. The threat of globalization and international cartels of banks is the new form of the Brutish Empire. War is used as a subterfuge to smash resistance to the financial globalization oligarchy. The Democratic victory in mid-term elections, sparked by the Dem-allied Larouche Youth Movement, portends a New Politics around these issues. Hope for the future, think about it.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 28th 2007 18:36

Quite a history lesson, Howard. But I repeat what I said before. You can't negotiate with terrorists. The UN tried under Kofi Annan and failed miserably. Sanctions are a waste of time. Diplomacy only works with willing participants. North Korea is beginning to turn a little more towards a diplomatic solution, I hope it lasts. Israel has tried diplomacy with the Palestinian terrorists many times without success. Hezbollah hasn't started playing nice as far as I know. Chamberlain tried peaceful diplomacy and negotiated with Adolph Hitler and look how well that turned out.

Comment by Howard

January 28th 2007 18:51

Real Crash

The real terrorists, and sponsors of terrorists, Hitler, etc is/are the Anglo-Dutch financial oligarchy.
They are also sponsoring this idiocy called "bio-fuels". Nuclear power is the only way to have sufficient energy-flux density to create hydrogen and other synthetic fuels.

The grain cartels (part of the British-Dutch oligarchy) like ADM/ Cargill, etc. aim to turn farmland, corn etc to "fuel production", which is totally wasteful, and will starve millions. We need a bankruptcy reorganization and a new FDRoosevelt style New Bretton Woods.

On terrorists: the policy of the British Privy Council, and their friends on the Continent is divide and conquer. Get the Americans to kill the Saudis, the Egyptians, the people who sold them oil for 70 years. Get the Jews to kill the Muslims, the Sunnis to kill the Shiites. The British Arab Bureau are the original sponsors in the 1920s in Egypt of the Muslim Brotherhood, aka the Ikwan, etc., which forms to tradition to this day of anti-western ideas around Hamas, etc... Is Osama hiding out at the Crawford ranch? Get real, before it's too late!

Anglo-Dutch oligarchy: the tradition of William of Orange (King of the Netherlands) and his english wife Queen Mary, who led a coup that took England over in 1688. The enemies of the American Revolution. The sponsors of dope, of Opium, and the opium wars in China. The original pushers of slavery. The backers of Hitler in the 1920s and 30s. The hateful enemies of the US Constitution, the Nation-State, the idea of harmony of iinterest among states and citizens.
Despite the Mad Bush, and thuggish Cheney, only the American economic system, going back to Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt is the enemy and antidote to this. We don't wish to hurt them, we seek to convert them and their supporters to join the human race. Is that enough???

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 28th 2007 19:27

Ah, Howard, the Conspiracy Theorist. The American economic system is called "free enterprise" and works very well. Even former communists agree. If all you can do is object to our ways, maybe you should consider going someplace where things are more to your liking. You probably won't have freedom of speech there, but what the hay, you'll be able to say all the politically correct hate speech you want.

Comment by Howard

January 29th 2007 01:20

Real Crash

Look at the conspiracy that Cheney ran to get Iraq invaded as having "weapons of mass destruction". Now his aide Lewis Libby is on trial for lies to a grand jury to cover up for Cheney. Small world.

Look, I'm tired of right-wing duplicity. Israel signed peace agreements with Palestine, Jordan and other Arab states under pressure from James Baker III in daddy Bush admin, and Clinton admin. Despite many failures, there were many sucesses. We can't join a conspiracy of hate, because we are pissed off, our living standard (as Amers, Aus, etc) is falling, and we can't afford gas. If we go back to state sponsored credit, we can rebuild this country. Some things are free enterprise (like who you get to marry, and things like that), but certainly not everything. There is a cost of production, of infrastructure, of education that must be paid in a physical economy, or else 90% of the population will go down the toilet. Ever heard of globalization???
Stop looking at war like it was a football game. Occupations of nations do not work, if there is not consent from the population. We will talk to nations diplomatically or become very democratically mass murderous, killing Iranians, Africans, Palestinians, and later Egyptians and maybe Israelis. Anyway, if nukes are dropped, it really is bad for "the environment".
You can give the good part of the West to even Iran, if you are willing to have some patience. And remember, Iran-Contra was exposed as a very public event, though in the beginning a dark conspiracy. We were helping the Iraqis kill the Iranians and viceversa, while helping Al QQQ in Afghanistan. So, get with it.

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 29th 2007 02:17

Strange, Howard. You write like someone with a little education. But your words prove otherwise. First of all, the WMD's did (and probably still do) exist. Saddam killed his own people with them, or had you forgotten the Kurd village? Also, it wasn't Cheney who spoke of the WMD's, it was Clinton, the UK, and the UN (among others). Yes, gas is pricey these days. But our standard of living is going up, not down. And slowly the gas prices are dropping. Free enterprise is working so well that the Stock Market is way up. More people own homes every day. More new business are starting every day. More people are going to work and the unemployment rate is very low (less than 5%). Yet you seem to see some sort of conspiracy where there clearly isn't one. People in Iraq are getting used to freedom and opening stores and businesses as their infrastructure is being rebuilt. The people of Iraq want us there to protect and teach them until they can stand on their own. How could you have missed all these things? You mention Scooter Libby, read my blog about the difference between him and Sandy Berger, I don't have the room to explain it all to you, since you obviously haven't done any research yourself.

Comment by Howard

January 29th 2007 17:01

Real Crash

yeah, and the Crusades were a little travel expedition. The bubonic plague was a little disease problem.... And if and when these bozos blow up all the M.east oil fields, we will all learn how to fly on magic carpets. I guess I worry too much. I should join George II and say, what me worry?!

Comment by S.L. Bradish

January 29th 2007 17:15

Howard, there are plenty of real things to worry about. I don't understand why some people have such a need to make everything look bad when it isn't. The Dems think they have to do it to bring down the Republicans (it's a bad idea and it won't ultimately work) but they don't have anything of their own to stand on. Maybe you've just been listening to the wrong media.

[ Previous - Rosie's New Target ]

[ Next - Harry and Al ]