Speaking on the CBS show “Face the Nation,“ Sunday, Senator Joseph Lieberman said that the United States should consider attacking Iran.
Curiously, his apparent reasoning was not based on Iran’s potential nuclear threat but, rather, on the charge that Iran is training insurgents to go into Iraq and kill Americans. He even knew how many Americans have been killed in this fashion – 200, he said.
And, all this despite the fact that our intelligence agencies have so far been unable to find hard evidence that the government of Iran is behind any assistance, training or arming of the insurgency.
In calling for military action, he said much of the action could be by air, but that he would leave it up to the generals.
Lieberman’s inflamatory comments come at a time when the war hawks in the administration seem to be losing much of their influence.
The apparent demotion of Stephen Hadley on Thursday took the most prominent supporter of the “surge” out of the equation.
Then, the decision, announced on Friday, to drop General Pace as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff effectively removes one of the last original architects of the war in Iraq.
With America’s satisfaction of the country’s direction at one of its lowest points, according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll, Lieberman’s comments seem particularly out of place.
It is quite apparent that public opinion would not be warm to another preemptive attack on a country based – once again – on seemingly questionable claims - apparently, that is, to nearly everyone but Lieberman.
In a more reasonable interview, Sunday, presidential candidate Bill Richardson, appearing on CNN’s Late Edition, recommended negotiating with Iran. He also said that we could start building an international coalition with the objective of imposing economic sanctions, if necessary.
So, what can we take away from all this? Well, if nothing else, we might take comfort in the thought that George W. Bush might not have been the worst choice for president. Imagine having Joe Lieberman’s finger on the proverbial button.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 22
It's a good bet he'll be home counting his money from all the war profits that he makes while others die for his good.
For thousands of years the Middle East has been home for the Arab peoples. They have been enduring invasions from Europe for well over 2000 of those years. And the "returning home" of the Jews in 1948 was seen as just another invasion from Europe. The problem with the Middle East biols down to the fact that they don't want us or any other outsiders there. It's not that they wouldn't want to do business with us. In fact, I dare say that if it weren't for all our meddling, we'd probably be paying a lot less for crude right now. I know that Gops say if we pull out of the Middle East, the terrorists will follow us home. I say that is bull, why would they do the one thing that would guarantee we would return.
Europe initiated Jewish settlers to Palestine prior to WWII. To fail to see how the Muslim/Arab world could construe this as Imperialism is simply denying looking at life through anything other than rose colored glasses.
If we invade another country, may God forgive our soldiers and country.
The history given in the two above sites is filled with errors. This is more than bias, although it may be from ignorance. This site: www.masada2000.org even promotes the very modern mythical account of Masada. Masada is a tourist attraction and the invented story was accepted as "fact" by the UN .
Much is also smuggled in from Saudi Arabia, but we don't hear any accusations that the Saudi government is involved.
Unfortunately, the situation does require hard evidence, and, if it's out there, I hope they find it.
YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT, SPARTAN. SO FAR EVERY PROJECTED STRATEGY WE'VE DREAMED UP HAS BLOWN UP IN OUR FACE. WHAT GUARANTY WOULD WE HAVE IF WE LAUNCHED AN ATTACK AGAINST IRAN THAT THEY'D JUST ROLL OVER AND DIE. THEY'VE BEEN EXPECTING A SUMMER ATTACK BY THE US FOR MANY MONTHS, AND MY GUESS WOULD BE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN GETTING PREPARED.
FURTHERMORE, THEY'RE WELL AWARE OF OUR EXTREME WEAKNESSES WITH TROOPS SPREAD TOO THIN, AND THAT COULD BE THE FOCUS OF THEIR COUNTER STRATEGY.
I BELIEVE AN ATTACK AGAINST IRAN WOULD BE A COLOSSAL BLUNDER, WHICH TENDS TO MAKE ME THINK THAT THIS GANG IN WASHINGTON MIGHT JUST CONSIDER IT.
THANKS ALL FOR STOPPING BY....
I've read plenty of material that points to the contrary; that the EFP's could easily be produced in Iraq, with munitions left behind from Saddam's army, stolen from ours (or munitions given to new Iraqi soldiers from us, then smuggled inot insurgent hands), or even smuggled in from Saudi Arabia. The EFP's can then be made out of any copper bowls and metal funnels easily purchased at any marketplace in Iraq.
Our government isn't really the most trustworthy source of information these days, ya know?
It just doesn't make sense, anyhow. A vast majority of IED bombings are done by the hand of Sunni insurgents. Why would Iran be arming Sunni insurgents, when those Sunni's are also at war with the Shiite's, and Iran is a Shiite nation?
The administrations' lack of credibility has been earned. Bush said recently , "My Plan B is Plan BH (Baker Hamilton)" after he had said it wasn't , and then he says something else. Rice has done the same in her way. She sometimes lectures on a strategy, and then finds another strategy. But she spends little time meeting and listening to the people she has to deal with. Putin plays the game effectively. He doesn't lecture on his strategy, but he will meet you in discussion and make moves like in a chess game and adjust.
Most "official" reports in the media are scripted PR stuff. Some government and military people are told to give it out. Burns works to appear very knowledgeable and serious, but that's his job. Both Secretary Gates and the the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, General Dan McNeil, made clear statements aimed at discounting the ones like Burns', this week about Iranian involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush has made statements in line with Gates'. This is discussed in this article, which suggests- no surprise - that Cheney is pushing his line against others' in the administration.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IF13Ak02.html
"Gambit to link Iran to the Taliban backfires"
"Even the US defense secretary has rejected media reports that Iran has been "caught red-handed" supplying arms to the Taliban..."
What General McNeil says in his interview is quoted differently in the general US media than in other media, as in the above . This is typical. All stories are likely to be slanted.
The American media kowtows too much. Not for reasons of national security. Sometimes that is important. I recall Kennedy knew about the Russian missiles in Cuba for some months. He had to make it public because the story got out. That created a crisis. But the American media tells less of what's going on today compared to other sources.
Mitch R.,
I am familiar with the archeological work on masada. The "official" account is not supported by the evidence or the historical sources, although some academics and archeologists defend it. The group who lived there was a rogue one, who had been driven from the regular community and Jerusalem . They terrorized and robbed neighbors. The Romans didn't consider them revolutionaries and ignored them for several years after the revolt. There is no evidence they committed suicide for any reason. The heroic story is a modern invention. Obviously, suicide is considered wrong in Judaism, but the myth was used for patriotic reasons by the state.
The problem is that for several months we have been hearing the same rumors over and over again. But where is the proof that Iran has actually been doing it?
Lie-berman, like his fellow neoKKKons, continually spreads the same rumors as Bush did with his lies about WMD, but nobody in the controlled reich wing media challenges him to produce that so-called evidence.
Are we to have another war based on more lies???
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19219412/
AP June 14, 2007
"BRUSSELS, Belgium - Afghanistan's defense minister on Thursday dismissed claims by a top U.S. State Department official that there was "irrefutable evidence" that the Iranian government was providing arms to Taliban rebels.
"Actually, throughout we have had good relations with Iran and we believe that the security and stability of Afghanistan are also in the interests of Iran," Abdul Rahim Wardak told The Associated Press.
On Wednesday, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said in Paris that Tehran was directly supplying weapons to the Taliban. He told CNN there was "irrefutable evidence" that arms shipments were coming from Iran's government.
The State Department later appeared to step back from Burns' assertion, but stressed that the United States has proof that weapons from Iran were reaching Taliban fighters in Afghanistan."