Comments on: ‘you can’t still adore Obama if Israel bombs Iran…’

By: Marion

Marion — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:46:50 +0000

I am wondering how many of you have read this sound analysis on Iran and U.S. policy towards Iran by Terrel E. Arnold? Some how I think not many since since the so-called Left hardly picked up on it..... US Electoral Meddling Soft Coups & Regime Changes By Terrell E. Arnold 6-22-9 " target="_blank">http://www.rense.com/general86/regime.htm

By: Yoni C.

Yoni C. — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:15:49 +0000

Which part of Lebanon are you referring to? The Israelis crossed the border, that is an utter lie, that is laughable. Did the Israelis kill their own soldiers too? Cunning cunning Jews! And your analogy is horse shit. No one cares about Cynthia McKinney she is a nutcase who participated in that whole charade as a publicity stunt.

By: Citizen

Citizen — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:13:14 +0000

Or the glee expressed by those five van-topped Israelis who were quickly sent back home. And don't forget N's verbal slippage before he corrected himself.

By: moonkoon

moonkoon — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:25:05 +0000

"…Israel Bombed the suspected Syrian Nuclear site." It wasn't Olmert's administration. Olmert was making friendly gestures towards the Syrians right at that time. And Syria did not and does not have a graphite moderated nuclear reactor like the ones the North Koreans are said to have/had. The IAEA didn't find anything to indicate there was such a thing -a trace on one or two wipes does not a reactor make (but it is almost certainly an indication of tampering with the wipes). The finger of suspicion about who was behind the incident points to a group of rogue Israelis, some of them engaged in the weapons platform/delivery business. All things considered, an extremely dangerous group. A group that can only bring ruin to Israel. Peddling this 'Syria had a reactor' story just distracts attention from the fact that Israel is the real nuclear threat in the region. The ongoing failure of the media to highlight this issue demonstrates the amazing sway that the Zionist's talking points hold over the industry.

By: tommy

tommy — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:50:41 +0000

The Israelis are the ones who crossed the border. As a matter of fact, Israel still occupies parts of Lebanon. The terrorists manning that occupation are not in Israel. Nevertheless, the kidnapping of occupying terrorists should not have initiated an aerial war against the civilians of Beirut. An analogy of what Israel did to Lebanon would be for the US to raze Tel Aviv for imprisoning Cynthia McKinney. Not one American, even militant leftists, have advocated for the bombing of Israeli civilians for the harsh treatment of Americans trying to bring aid and liberty to Palestinians. They only advocate for ending military aid to Israel in the hopes it will end Israel's targeting of civilians.

By: bradallen

bradallen — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:11:44 +0000

By the way, for those who forgot about the attack against the Iraqi site, you might find this Wiki summary ineteresting. Although i think Wiki missed many facts, the summary is good enough to show you what took place. " target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera

By: Psychopathicgod

Psychopathicgod — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:10:16 +0000

Lamest argument, eh. My bad: I copied it from Jewish-American lawmakers who floated several attempts to persuade Congress to pass resolutions condemning Ahmadinejad as inciting genocide in violation of the UN Convention….. on the basis of his mistranslated remark that Israel will disappear from the pages of time. Another case of OK for Israel to do it/say it; not ok for anyone else.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:05:13 +0000

It won't succeed at any objective, and is dumb to pursue a strategy that cause great harm with no prospect of success. Iran DID burn its bridges with all prospective supporters by its appalling response to the election contention. No Russia, no China, no Islamic world supporting it in any way.

By: bradallen

bradallen — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:42:26 +0000

Would Iran retaliate by attacking Saudi and Gulf states sites, I doubt it. This would isolate them more and that would drag the US in. Even Israel can calculate this easily. The real threat comes from Syria and Hizballah in southern Lebanon. I don't think Syria will do anything beside make a lot of noise and mass its troops as a show of support for Iran. Hizballah will likely launch a few rockets but that's all, before the strike, Israel will mass its forces in the northern borders just to keep things checked. The initial strike on Iran's "select" nuclear sites will make everyone in the area think twice and apart from a lot of noise, i don't see WW3 in the air. The main impact might actually be a change in the Iranian political structure and now that we witnessed a strong opposition in Iran, Israel will be including this in its calculation. Obama will voice diappointment but will also fall in line like the rest of the world and repeat that tired old line, "Israel has the right to defend itself". ho hum…

By: bradallen

bradallen — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:33:52 +0000

Let's face it, when Israel Bombed the Iraqi Nuclear plant, officially, against US warnings, no one jumped, but later everyone celebrated. When Israel Bombed the suspected Syrian Nuclear site, initially the Bush admin said, no comments, then came out in full support, even Obama supported them. Israel attacked a column of trucks in Sudan carrying weapons to Hamas and everyone applauded. Israel will always do what Israel thinks is in its own interest and pre-emptive strikes are the basis of that policy. Israel can be expected to attack Iran's sites with sepcific objectives. I don't think it will try to attack ALL the sites, Israel has enough knowledge on the progress of each site and will chose its target to deliver a serious blow to make Iran think twice about continuing the program. If is not the question, When is.