Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skywatcher who wrote (20529)	4/6/2006 1:30:29 PM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Well, it's too bad if the country has to go through this. I would wish that Bush would be honorable and resign, but then we would have Cheney - which I think is even worse. Perhaps Cheney should resign, Bush appoints Frist as VP, then Bush resigns. Frist becomes President - so is an incumbent for the 2008 run. Even better - Bush appoints McCain VP after Cheney resigns, then Bush resigns - then President McCain - this year, not in 2009. Would be an interesting scenario, no?? Would be like Nixon/Ford all over again. Of course, President McCain would pardon both Bush and Cheney, then they can both go duck hunting again....

To: Skywatcher who wrote (20529)	4/9/2006 4:03:39 PM
From: tsigprofit	Respond to of 20773

Bush 'is planning nuclear strikes on Iran's secret sites' By Philip Sherwell in Washington (Filed: 09/04/2006) The Bush administration is planning to use nuclear weapons against Iran, to prevent it acquiring its own atomic warheads, claims an investigative writer with high-level Pentagon and intelligence contacts. President George W Bush is said to be so alarmed by the threat of Iran's hard-line leader, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, that privately he refers to him as "the new Hitler", says Seymour Hersh, who broke the story of the Abu Ghraib Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad: 'The new Hitler' Some US military chiefs have unsuccessfully urged the White House to drop the nuclear option from its war plans, Hersh writes in The New Yorker magazine. The conviction that Mr Ahmedinejad would attack Israel or US forces in the Middle East, if Iran obtains atomic weapons, is what drives American planning for the destruction of Teheran's nuclear programme. Hersh claims that one of the plans, presented to the White House by the Pentagon, entails the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One alleged target is Iran's main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, 200 miles south of Teheran. Although Iran claims that its nuclear programme is peaceful, US and European intelligence agencies are certain that Teheran is trying to develop atomic weapons. In contrast to the run-up to the Iraq invasion, there are no disagreements within Western intelligence about Iran's plans. This newspaper disclosed recently that senior Pentagon strategists are updating plans to strike Iran's nuclear sites with long-distance B2 bombers and submarine-launched missiles. And last week, the Sunday Telegraph reported a secret meeting at the Ministry of Defence where military chiefs and officials from Downing Street and the Foreign Office discussed the consequences of an American-led attack on Iran, and Britain's role in any such action. The military option is opposed by London and other European capitals. But there are growing fears in No 10 and the Foreign Office that the British-led push for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear stand-off, will be swept aside by hawks in Washington. Hersh says that within the Bush administration, there are concerns that even a pummelling by conventional strikes, may not sufficiently damage Iran's buried nuclear plants. Click to enlarge Iran has been developing a series of bunkers and facilities to provide hidden command centres for its leaders and to protect its nuclear infrastructure. The lack of reliable intelligence about these subterranean facilities, is fuelling pressure for tactical nuclear weapons to be included in the strike plans as the only guaranteed means to destroy all the sites simultaneously. The attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings among the joint chiefs of staff, and some officers have talked about resigning, Hersh has been told. The military chiefs sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans for Iran, without success, a former senior intelligence officer said. The Pentagon consultant on the war on terror confirmed that some in the administration were looking seriously at this option, which he linked to a resurgence of interest in tactical nuclear weapons among defence department political appointees. The election of Mr Ahmedinejad last year, has hardened attitudes within the Bush Administration. The Iranian president has said that Israel should be "wiped off the map". He has drafted in former fellow Revolutionary Guards commanders to run the nuclear programme, in further signs that he is preparing to back his threats with action. Mr Bush and others in the White House view him as a potential Adolf Hitler, a former senior intelligence official told Hersh. "That's the name they're using. They say, 'Will Iran get a strategic weapon and threaten another world war?' " Despite America's public commitment to diplomacy, there is a growing belief in Washington that the only solution to the crisis is regime change. A senior Pentagon consultant said that Mr Bush believes that he must do "what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do," and "that saving Iran is going to be his legacy". Publicly, the US insists it remains committed to diplomacy to solve the crisis. But with Russia apparently intent on vetoing any threat of punitive action at the UN, the Bush administration is also planning for unilateral military action. Hersh repeated his claims that the US has intensified clandestine activities inside Iran, using special forces to identify targets and establish contact with anti-Teheran ethnic-minority groups. The senior defence officials said that Mr Bush is "determined to deny Iran the opportunity to begin a pilot programme, planned for this spring, to enrich uranium".

To: Skywatcher who wrote (20529)	4/9/2006 4:04:45 PM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

RE: The Bush planning going on now to strike Iran with nuclear weapons: If Bush does this, it is a war crime, and the UN should condemn the US, force the US to remove and punish Bush and all involved, just like we did in Bosnia. It is nuclear genocide, worse than what happened to us on 9-11, is a crime against humanity, and cannot go unpunished. The rest of the world would cut off trade with the US, stop loaning us money, and treat us as a pariah state - which we would then be. The people of the US will not allow this to stand, this would destroy the US.

To: Skywatcher who wrote (20529)	4/9/2006 4:16:19 PM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Don't you believe also that all this anti-immigrant sentiment is being stirred up by the right-wing here, that sees their power slipping away? When Bush and McCain are being criticized from the RIGHT - you know we have some very dangerous people in the US trying to preserve their power - or push people here to be fearful: * fearful of Mexican immigrants that only want to work here * fearful of Iran * fearful of terrorism And they keep telling us we are AT WAR!! The only war was started by Bush when he attacked Iraq illegally. 9-11, if we are to believe all that we have been told - was done by a group of terrorist thugs, who took advantage of our nonexistent security to fly our own planes into a building. How is this WAR? We are being manipulated at all levels now - notice the main news items are Katie Couric, Tom Cruise's baby issue with Katie Holmes, and this immigrant issue - all designed to focus our attention on the trivial - away from a planned nuclear strike by the USA on a country that did not attack us. This is not the US I grew up in.