Bush/McCain joking about the war makes me sick...

"Those WMD's gotta be somewhere" *crowd laughs* "Nope..."

"Bomb Iran, Bomb Bomb Iran"

Geeeeezus... What the hell is wrong with these people? Since when did joking about the death of thousands of people become acceptable behavior for anyone let alone the LEADERS of America? How did/can anyone vote for them?

And THEY'RE the ones with "values"?!?!?

Hold on while I throw up...

An expcerpt from a real conversation overheard in the future:

Mccain: Bomb Iran.
General: Are you sure you mean Iran? just checking before I..
M: Wait no, I mean Al Queda. Bomb Al Queda.
G: Well, I would, but Al Queda's not a country.
M: Oh. Well in that case, bomb whatever country Putin is president of, I know he's in Al Queda
G: ummmm. well I'll give it a shot, Russia? I should bomb Russia?
M: No, Germany. Specifically Pakistan, Germany. Bomb them.
G: I'll get right on that. Sir. You just go back to eating your pudding.

upvote for "if you'd rather call it bombing iran with conversation..."

>> ^Irishman:
>> ^NetRunner:
Your definition of neocon is about as accurate as me calling Ron Paul an anarchist. They have a couple things they agree on, but they're definitely not one and the same. Pure flamebait, frankly.
Who do you think we should hand Iraq over to?

A couple of things they agree on. Like policy, and policy.
Obama is flying around the planet making speeches about fighting extremism, Iranian nukes, terrorists hiding in caves plotting to take over America, this is the same exact stuff we've had for 20 years now.
What is wrong with people's heads who can't see this. It's plain daylight stuff folks, the stuff Obama has been saying should really be scaring the shit out of people.
Wrong president America, wrong president. Europe and the rest of the world will NEVER forgive America for electing this man.


MrFisk actually preemptively gave much of my answer, which is that neocons and Democrats are in absolute opposition on domestic policy.

With foreign policy, Neocons are now in favor of a form of imperialism -- drum up casus belli, invade, substitute the old government with a new friendly one, and incidentally get some sort of contract to a material resource (like oil). That's why we invaded Iraq for WMDs that weren't there, while North Korea's nuclear test was met with mere diplomacy. It's why the same gambit is being run in Iran.

Obama just wants us to focus on just fighting to keep the Taliban from re-taking Afghanistan, and working with Pakistan to root out the Al Qaeda camps. Every other foreign policy issue out there, he wants to use diplomacy to solve, though he says he won't shy away from the use of military if necessary (to avoid appearing weak before the ravenous American populace).

As jwray said, all Obama does here is acknowledge that there is some threat, and in fact this is actually a clip of the very speech where he got attacked by McCain for downplaying Iran's threat, because he said it was less threatening than the Soviet Union.

McCain sings "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran", makes a joke about killing Iranians with cigarettes, and clearly says there will be more wars.

As much as I wish third party candidates had a shot of being President, they simply do not. One of these two will be President.

Between the two, which worries Europe more, the candidate who occasionally talks about potential threats against a backdrop of talking about the need for diplomacy, or the one who cavalierly uses the language of fear every time a camera is stuck in his face, and attacks his opponent for wanting to talk to the leaders of other nations?

I think Europe will be able to forgive us for electing Obama over McCain.

If you're hoping for Cynthia McKinney, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, or even Ron Paul, as much as I wish they had a fair chance of winning, they simply will not.

^well, what do you expect - he is a politician afterall. but at least he's less likely to start another war

If this is 'winning', I'd hate to see what losing looks like. Complete desecration of the entire region? Oh, wait. That's what we have. I guess "losing" would be the destruction of the entire planet into a desolate nuclear wasteland. Something I'm sure "President" McCain would have no trouble arranging.

Oh, and KP's right about oil. Buying oil futures might be a good bet, especially if Bush goes all psycho and starts bombing Iran. $200/barrel for oil would be a conservative estimate, then.

If Obama gets elected, you might wanna sell some, I bet the price of oil will drop $10-20/barrel immediately.

but.. then some of the "chosen ones" may die! zomg what a tragedy

In reply to this comment by twiddles:
Hmmm... if Israel has the evidence let them bomb Iran. They're big boys. They had no qualms about bombing Iraq or Syria.

Hmmm... if Israel has the evidence let them bomb Iran. They're big boys. They had no qualms about bombing Iraq or Syria.

Frankly I don't know how the American people (or anyone) would believe a word that "American Intelligence Experts" would say after all the bad intelligence and lies we fell for 5.5 year ago. But then again walruses are soooo cute!

Bush also said in his debates that he's not in the business of nation building. What is said
to gain the trust and the suport of a country while trying to take its top position can never be taken whole heartedly. While I think McCain will be somewhat of an impovement I fear that the Bush Admin. has rooted itself very deeply in the infrastructure (Supreme Ct, CIA, World Bank, Fed Reserve...). The President is one main in a machine that stays largely the same.

Plus, to be on topic, it's much easier to bomb Iran if we have bases next door.

>> ^bcglorf:
The piece I was addressing was your final statement:
Under McCain I can only imagine what's next.
I quoted your whole post to keep it in context. If we can't believe anything about McCain because it comes through the American news Media, how can we say anything about any other candidate by comparison either? One thing that can provide some reliable insight to McCain's intentions compared to the other Rep candidates and Bush, is from debates. You'll notice there is absolutely no hedging or conditions on McCain's stance against waterboarding and on standing behind the Geneva convention. To me, that is a great big step forward from Bush and Cheney. It suggests that your statement,"Under McCain I can only imagine what's next" is inaccurate in suggesting that McCain will be oh so worse than Bush.

Alternative scenario.

The Democratic race ends, the super delegates break for Barack Obama in droves and Hillary's campaign is over. Barack offers a AG position to John Edwards, who surprisingly accepts, he picks Ron Paul as his vice-president. Ron Paul states that he cannot possibly accept the position, but Obama gives an astounding speech about unifying the parties to work for a better America, and that needs a man of Paul's caliber. Ron Paul accepts to rousing applause from Barack and the people. The campaign is underway.

However right on the eve of election results Barack Obama is assassinated at a political rally, within 30 minutes of the incident the CIA and FBI report that it is the work of Al Qaeda operatives, mass arrests occur across the country. President Bush reluctantly comes forward and states that it is necessary to under these heavy times to impose martial law on the citizens for their own safety.

The terrorists who killed Barack Obama are found to be an Iraqi, Afghani, Iranian and a North Korean. America starts bombing Iran and North Korea. Political dissent at home is suppressed due to 'National Security' concerns. Legislation is pushed through to allow The Bush Administration to continue under a special emergency mandate for preservation of the United States. Congress and Senate is dissolved. Retroactive protection and pardons are given to Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove and others.

A few kids hiding in a cellar scour footage of the assassination, raising large questions about the governments validity of events surrounding the assassination of Obama, they put together a video called "THEY FUCKED US aka Loose Change 3", however a covert CIA/FBI raid on their residence takes place over concerns of Terrorist activity. All evidence is destroyed. The kids are all killed due to an accidental and erroneous weapon discharge. Firemen report hearing explosions at the scene of the crime.

Bush commemorates a Barack Obama monument, making a long winding speech that he will continue to protect all of us and Barack would have support him in this. He tears slightly, his voice wavering a but as he recalls the times he used to see Obama's speeches live expressing here to unheard of admiration for the man, stating that all he is doing is for Obama.

The election results released later showed Obama winning an overwhelming landslide.

God Speed America, its now or never. Clinton needs a landslide to remain relevant. She's talking about bombing Iran on the eve, to win over the "scared shitless" voting block I presume. This to me feels like the Hope vs Fear referendum.

Sirex, there is at least one bad "X" come Nov. Give you a hint, "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Iran."

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

^I know you are just smarting still over Romney's withdrawal deedub- but really what's your beef with Obama? He's a Christian and by all acounts a man with a strong sense of morality - much like yourself.

Jesus would vote for Obama over "let's bomb Iran/100 year war McCain".

The leftist says 'Never'...."

My God, you love to lie, don't you?

>>> Well, "never" is a bit of exaggeration, but the last time the American left got mad enough to fight was over Hitler. Now they show support by waving the Mexican flag.

You understand that attacking a country which poses no threat to your own is a war crime, correct?

>>> You lefties like to proclaim you know the intentions of nations run by weirdos and tyrants, as if you were some kind of magickal seers. Before 9-11 no one would've thought 19 drugged-up virgin engineers with box cutters could take down two skyscrapers. There's damned good reasons no one trusts the left with national self-defense.

You understand that Nazi Germany was guilty of that in WWII, correct?

>>> And look what an awesome job the appeasement weasels did stopping Hitler with worthless pieces of paper!

You understand that your opinions regarding "national security" and "war with Iran" are equal to that of the Nazi Germans, correct?

>>> Mohammed (another leftist hero) believed in preemptive strikes against his enemies. So try to think of bombing Iran as 'celebrating multiculturalism'. We don't have to wipe them out, just scare the hell out of them. "Crazy Americans" is something even the hardiest tyrant understands from the safety of his spider hole.

Or are you going to tell us that Americans are firmly behind this war again, forgetting to add that the only people that you consider American are the people who agree with you?

>>> Public opinion so far favors survival and victory over defeat. I don't care what the appeasers favor, if we lose they won't get what they want anyway. Yeah, it's gotten that bad. One can't worship socialism and expect to gain anything in a free market system except through government extortion and manipulation of the courts. How many generations are going to tolerate these parasites and bandits remains to be seen.

In short, like Bush, are you going to cover your first lie with a second lie?

>>> Right. There's that Bolshevik thingy again...rewriting history and blaming the accuser of the very thing they're guilty of. You can have your lefty mythology if it makes you happy, starting when Bush "stole" the 2000 election and go from there.

Being on the left is matter of endurance and little else. How many times can you watch the same failed ideas fail again and act surprised?

Galloway is spineless weasel.