Lieberman: U.S. Should Weigh Iran Attack

Sen. Joseph Lieberman said Sunday the United States should consider a military strike against Iran because of Tehran’s involvement in Iraq.

NPR

NewMexiKen suggests we bomb Connecticut instead for reelecting the stupid son-of-a-bitch.

10 thoughts on “Lieberman: U.S. Should Weigh Iran Attack”

  2. drop these 2 sayings n2 a blender and puree em till they’re prophesy:

    1) the chickens come home to roost.

    2) patriotism is a rooster crowing from atop a pile of his own shit.

  3. Something terrible is going to happen (even more terrible that what has already pased) before the end of Bush’s regime. I can just feel it a-comin’. I’m no doomsday’r but I’ll tell you… there’s some scary crap going on and someone, somewhere, is going to retaliate. Start stocking up on the canned goods.

    And Joe Lieberman? I say send HIM to Iran and let them at him.

  4. What is it about conservative thought that makes people on the other side want to kill?

    They’re political opponents, people, not mortal enemies!

    “Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for people as they commit suicide.”

    or murder!

  6. In the case of the current administration, it seems most of the hawks (including Lieberman) are those who managed to avoid combat, in some cases even leaving their cushy state-side National Guard sinecure 6 months early.

    Ironically, Lieberman was elected on an anti-Vietnam war platform.

    While we’re not really interested in killing people, Ephraim, I think it’s fair to say we’re deeply disturbed that people who’ve never heard a shot fired in anger like to make cavalier declarations of intent to attack a sovereign nation, to spill American and Iranian blood, to “sacrifice” untold thousands of civilians as “collateral damage”.

    This isn’t liberal versus conservative – Lieberman is liberal on domestic issues, after all – but rather moral outrage.

  7. NewMexiKen: “NewMexiKen suggests we bomb Connecticut instead for reelecting the stupid son-of-a-bitch.”

    Richard: “amen”

    OneKen: “2) patriotism is a rooster crowing from atop a pile of his own shit.”

    Natalie: “And Joe Lieberman? I say send HIM to Iran and let them at him.”

    Richard: “This isn’t liberal versus conservative – Lieberman is liberal on domestic issues, after all – but rather moral outrage.”

    Nowhere in these is there an answer to Liebermann’s point. What to do about Iran’s meddling in Iraq. What does anyone here think should be done about that? Anything?

  8. Excuse me Ephraim, but is there some hidden solution to Iran in your anti-liberal comment above that I missed?

    I’m not certain what should be done, if anything. But it sure as hell isn’t bomb them, a strategy that the military’s own lessons-learned studies have repeatedly shown to have failed as a persuasive instrument since World War II.

    Not to mention that it’s immoral.

  9. Ephraim writes: “Nowhere in these is there an answer to Liebermann’s point. What to do about Iran’s meddling in Iraq. What does anyone here think should be done about that? Anything?”

    Well, I would ask what the rest of the world thinks should be done about the United States meddling in Iraq? How do we have any more right to meddle than any other nation has? Our administration manufactured evidence to justify our meddling, and we know it now. (Some of us always knew it.) So why are we still meddling?

    The real crime here, in my opinion, is that we are spending billions upon billions of our tax dollars, literally bankrupting our nation, while our infastructure crumbles here at home. I think our people are at far more risk from failing to properly fund our schools, hospitals, police and fire forces, and programs to maintain and upgrade our roads, levees, port security, and so forth, and so forth, and so forth. If we can’t even provide basic needs for all our own people, what business do we have meddling anywhere else? Millions of Americans are struggling every day to provide food, shelter, medical care and a decent education to their families. The threat of terrorism is a pretty abstact concept when you’re wondering how you’re going to choose between a medically necessary prescription and/or surgery vs. food or electricity. Let’s take the mote from our own National Eye before we deign to tell the rest of the world how they should behave. It’s the lobbyists and insurance companies and lawyers (not all lawyers, just the overzealous-greedy ones who ruin it for everyone else) that we should be waging war upon.

  10. ‘chickens come home to roost’ aka ‘sow the tempest and reap the whirlwind’ is an easy one, not a big mystery. the present mideast debacle was given birth by reaganoid funding of afghan fundies and perpetual american support for zionist colonization of palestine. the bush/cheney clique is multiplying the danger to unimagined levels. the post ww2 so-called cold war era was easy going for the war racket, because the soviets were not ever going to strike america first but they were a hugely useful bogeyman for american war profiteering. in those days the military/industrial complex got to have its cake and eat it too for quite a long time. that’s no longer the case. america has chosen an islamic complex of right-wing enemies for scapegoating and domestic scare-mongering. the blowback of 9-11 will seem small potatoes as more and more of the empire’s assets are targeted around the globe, including assets within the united states itself. the neocons don’t really care what happens tomorrow as long as the money rolls in today. and besides, they have “undisclosed locations” to keep them out of harms way should they decide to bomb tehran.

    i don’t know who was the cynic that originally quipped the rooster/patriotism line, but it makes a suitable companion to johnson’s ‘last refuge’.

Comments are closed.