Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, April 11, 2008
Pat Buchanan :: Townhall.com Columnist
Petraeus Points to War With Iran
by Pat Buchanan
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Is President Obama's Afghanistan plan a step in the right direction?


The neocons may yet get their war on Iran.

Ever since President Nouri al-Maliki ordered the attacks in Basra on the Mahdi Army, Gen. David Petraeus has been laying the predicate for U.S. air strikes on Iran and a wider war in the Middle East.

Iran, Petraeus told the Senate Armed Services Committee, has "fueled the recent violence in a particularly damaging way through its lethal support of the special groups."

These "special groups" are "funded, trained, armed and directed by Iran's Quds Force with help from Lebanese Hezbollah. It was these groups that launched Iranian rockets and mortar rounds at Iraq's seat of government (the Green Zone) ... causing loss of innocent life and fear in the capital."

Is the Iranian government aware of this -- and behind it?

"President Ahmadinejad and other Iranian leaders" promised to end their "support for the special groups," said the general, but the "nefarious activities of the Quds force have continued."

Are Iranians then murdering Americans, asked Joe Lieberman:

"Is it fair to say that the Iranian-backed special groups in Iraq are responsible for the murder of hundreds of American soldiers and thousands of Iraqi soldiers and civilians?"

"It certainly is. ... That is correct," said Petraeus.

The following day, Petraeus told the House Armed Services Committee, "Unchecked, the 'special groups' pose the greatest long-term threat to the viability of a democratic Iraq."

Translation: The United States is now fighting the proxies of Iran for the future of Iraq.

The general's testimony is forcing Bush's hand, for consider the question it logically raises: If the Quds Force and Hezbollah, both designated as terrorist organizations, are arming, training and directing "special groups" to "murder" Americans, and rocket and mortar the Green Zone to kill our diplomats, and they now represent the No. 1 threat to a free Iraq, why has Bush failed to neutralize these base camps of terror and aggression?

Hence, be not surprised if President Bush appears before the TV cameras, one day soon, to declare:

"My commanding general in Iraq, David Petraeus, has told me that Iran, with the knowledge of President Ahmadinejad, has become a privileged sanctuary for two terrorist organizations -- Hezbollah and the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard -- to train, arm and direct terrorist attacks on U.S. and coalition forces, despite repeated promises to halt this murderous practice.

"I have therefore directed U.S. air and naval forces to begin air strikes on these base camps of terror. Our attacks will continue until the Iranian attacks cease."

Because of the failures of a Democratic Congress elected to end the war, Bush can now make a compelling case that he would be acting fully within his authority as commander in chief.

In early 2007, Nancy Pelosi pulled down a resolution that would have denied Bush the authority to attack Iran without congressional approval. In September, both Houses passed the Kyl-Lieberman resolution designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.

Courtesy of Congress, Bush thus has a blank check for war on Iran. And the signs are growing that he intends to fill it in and cash it.

Israel has been hurling invective at Iran and conducting security drills to prepare its population for rocket barrages worse than those Hezbollah delivered in the Lebanon War.

Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, the Central Command head who opposed war with Iran, has been removed. Hamas and Hezbollah have been stocking up on Qassam and Katyusha rockets.

Vice President Cheney has lately toured Arab capitals.

And President Ahmadinejad just made international headlines by declaring that Tehran will begin installing 6,000 advanced centrifuges to accelerate Iran's enrichment of uranium.

This is Bush's last chance to strike and, when Iran responds, to effect its nuclear castration. Are Bush and Cheney likely to pass up this last chance to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities and effect the election of John McCain? For any attack on Iran's "terrorist bases" would rally the GOP and drive a wedge between Obama and Hillary.

Indeed, Sen. Clinton, who voted to declare Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, could hardly denounce Bush for ordering air strikes on the Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force, when Petraeus testified, in her presence, that it is behind the serial murder of U.S. soldiers.

The Iranians may sense what is afoot. For Tehran helped broker the truce in the Maliki-Sadr clash in Basra, and has called for a halt to the mortar and rocket attacks on the Green Zone.

With a friendly regime in Baghdad that rolled out the red carpet for Ahmadinejad, Iran has nothing to gain by war. Already, it is the big winner from the U.S. wars that took down Tehran's Taliban enemies, decimated its al-Qaida enemies and destroyed its Sunni enemies, Saddam and his Baath Party.

No, it is not Iran that wants a war with the United States. It is the United States that has reasons to want a short, sharp war with Iran.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Pat Buchanan is a founding editor of The American Conservative magazine, and the author of many books including State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Pat Buchanan's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
thwack
Someone should have whacked Ahmadinejad when he visited Iraq.

Let's just declare war to everybody
Why don't US attack Syria, Iran, Pakistan, China... so many option to get American soldiers killed for no reason, so little time.


I've got news for you conrad
If you're angry about Iranian involvement in Iraq your anger should be directed at the Bush administration.

One of the oft cited proofs of Iranian malignancy, as Petraeus puts it, is last year's high profile arrest and detainment of high ranking Quds Force officers in Iraq. What they don't tell you is that the arrest took place at the home of Abdul Al-Hakim, Maliki's coalition partner, the power behind the scenes in the Iraqi government.

So the next time the adminstration starts with their Iranian boogeyman routine, remind yourself that the leader of the Iraqi government for which they are expending $2,000,000,000 per week to defend, is hosting Quds Force officials.

I also ask you, what do you think they were doing, painting each other's nails and having pillow fights?


If It Weren't for the Oil
If not our need of oil, we could have done to the middle east as we to Cuba. There should be no need for war, in what should have been from the start a criminal investigation. If we'd left the middle east alone, if we'd practiced, from the very beginning, a policy of non-interference, we wouldn't be in this problem.

We have made our bed, though, and we must now lay in it. The only choices we've left ourselves is to fight, or admit defeat. The question is which will do more damage to the country, in the long run.

I was there in 03
and all I will say is that Iran has been involved from the beginning.

General Petraeus Points To The Truth
What General Petraeus points to is the truth of Iran's support of terrorists in Iraq; as it is the truth, we need to face it. What would Buchanan have General Petraeus do? Censor out of his report to Congress the fact of Iran's support of terrorism in Iraq?

What Buchanan writes is hysteria-driven and counterproductive to fashioning an effective policy with respect to Iran. Buchanan jumps from General Petraeus's truthful report about Iran's suppport of terrorists in Iraq to imagining an attack on Iran. That will not be our response. What our response should be needs to be carefully worked out. That military options must be kept on the table along with diplomatic moves is not war mongering.

Buchanan's kind of hysteria would fit in well at Kos or the Huffington Post. It is yet another indication that on the subject of foreign policy, Buchanan is no conservative, but an isolationist who could have written George McGovern's "Come Home America" acceptance speech to the 1972 Democrat Party convention.

between "uhroc" and a hard place
If it can be established the Iranian government is behind the Quds forces, behind the attacks on American forces in Iraq, behind shelling the Green Zone, then logically the U.S. has every right eliminate the source of the attacks.

I don't see how any can argue it is wrong to eliminate the source attacking our troops.

Not knowing the specific circumstances on the ground, I don't know if our response must by necessity target Iran's government itself, or merely Quds facilities either on the border, or within Iranian territory.

I am NOT in favor of this conflagration in Iraq branching out into other nations.

But Bush's mindboggling ignorance in invading Iraq has made that admonition about not extending the Iraq war into neighboring nations moot.

His ignorance has in effect created a Shia-based movement, dominated by Iran but now including Iraq, that threatens the stability of the entire region(including critically important Arab states ruled by relatively secularist Sunni despots).

There are obvious repercussions were we perceived to be attacking another Muslim nation in the middle east. Quite negative, to be it mildly.

Perhaps that is why Cheney is visiting the area.

Attacking Iran would probably result in its people "rallying around the flag", supporting the regime, which obviously is not in our interests.

Any attack on Iran would probably drive oil prices to the sky, performing the "coup de grace" to our beleaguered economy and all but guaranteeing a severe recession..and in the process greatly damaging McCain's bid(as the GOP heir-apparent).




No need to strike into Iran
Iran may be fueling the turmoil in Iraq through proxies. It is still up to the Iraqi people to stop supporting such activities. Sadr needs to see that Iraqi interests are not served and stand his militias down He must encourage his supporters to participate in the peaceful civilian government. Shias will still call the shots after we leave. Does Sadr even control the process though? Standing at the head of the mob may look like control, but it is still a mob.

Prediction: no US military actions on Iran while we are a major presence in Iraq,

Excuse Me
Killing American soldier with the approval and support of the government and president of a country? Sound like some else other than the US is achin' for a fight.

Check with the ChiComs First!
Before we go with "more wars, many more wars" (to quote McAmnesty) we had better check with our Chinese Communist financiers to see if they will lend us additional money. (Isn't it true that you're not free if you're broke?) We are bankrupt, our borders are wide open to terrorists and illegal alien invaders, our "leaders" cannot wait for the next sellout fraud trade agreement, and we are looking for more war?! Let's hope we can rely on "our friends" the Chinese Communist running dogs of capitalism!

IRAN
THE IRANIAN "HULA BOOLA MULLAHS" NEED A REALITY WAKEUP! If they are behind attacks on Americans...give these wieners what they deserve. Stop bashing Bush. There has not been an American president with more backbone. If Bush doesn't take care of radical islamists before the end of his presidency - who will? Death to the hate-mongering Iranians!

WTF are we fighting in the ME for?
Ain't Bush something!! Christian America needs oil. The Muslim Middle East is oil rich. Bush is spending hundreds of billions of our tax dollars conducting a no-win war for the Muslim whackos, in the process killing and maiming 1000s of our Christian troops.... and Dubya doesn't take the Muslim oil to alleviate our shortage at home ... which would lower our energy costs to fuel our cars & homes. At the very least we should take the Arab oil to pay for 100% of our costs in conducting the ME wars and then continue taking the oil to pay us back for rebuilding their Muslim countries. To not do so is insanity.

Sit back,
and wait for Israel to take care of Iran. It would be preemptive - strictly for their own protection. Let it start there and see what happens. If Israel took out Iraq's nuclear facilities, why can't they do the same to Iran. Maybe I am totally missing something here??

Reality Intervenes
There is a continuing lack of reality in these threads. The military has repeatedly stated that they have no strategic reserves. The chairman needs forces to put into Afghanistan - whioch is deteriorating, has said so, and has also said that he has none to provide. Bush tried to convince our allies to fill this gap - and failed. Pakistan's new government is moving to accomodate, rather than fight, the Taliban in their Northern Territories, which will put more pressue on the forces we have in Afghanistan. Petraeus will not recommend reducing forces in Iraq, because the conditions are too fragile. If we cannot reduce those forces, we cannot stabilize Afghanistan. If we try to strike Iran, we will widen the war, yet if we have barely enough forces to maintain basic security in Iraq, we cannot widen the war without diluting those forces. And if we do that, we will undermine what the surge achieved. Further, we will also undermine the government in Iraq, whose ties to Iran are so strong - further undermining what the surge has achieved. Air strikes cannot destroy the Iranian forces. They may not even be able to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities, as intelligence has repeatedly stated that Iran learned from the Israeli strikes, and has buried and dispersed it's nuclear facilities - and that we don't even know where many are.

Talk is cheap. Our refusal to put this country on a more realistic war footing, and to substantially increase our ground forces, has given us no strategic options.

Reality intervenes.

PAT
First of all, Saudi Arabia will not allow "US" to attack Iran,nor will China.If we were to attack Iran,Syria would help and others.Therefore,any attack on Iran would be impractical.However,if you support John McCain you want this election to be about "TERRORISM".The American people have been "DUPED" so many times,I would think they now see the "Invisible Hands".The "Surge" is under attack,due to remarks by Mr.McCain,and this talk of war against Iran, is a poor "DISGUISE"!SHAME on you,PAT...

Tom the Tinkerer
The only problem with your position is if we had left the ME alone, the our Cold War rival would have stepped in (and was attempting to while we were). We were the "winners" but now we can ask "At what price?" The ME doesn't mind accepting some modern "conveniences" but they want to rule their lands like they did at the time of Mohammed.

When we were re-deploying from Desert Storm, we stayed in the infamous Kohbar Towers. These were brand apartments and very nice, modern and spacoius (we "fit" over 30 of us in one apartment). The KT were built for the Bedouins...for free. They could live there as long as they like, all on the Kingdom's dime. Well, they moved in, along with their goats and camels. The government said "No!" to the animals, so they moved out, back into the desert, leaving the apartments empty.

That is the mentality of the ME...they don't like change and will only change on their terms.

Can We Please Drill For OUR OWN Oil Now?
Liberals bizch and moan about war in the ME, but then effectively shut off domestic oil exploration in favor of tundra grass. They would rather pay terrorists for thier oil, ship it 12000 miles through the most sensitive ecological system (our oceans), and then fund wars to keep the dog and pony show going.

Why not go to war against environmental lobbiests and the liberals that support them and start drilling 24/7, 365 days a year here at home?

Typical Buchanan
Pull the pin from the grenade and hand it to us. What do you want me to do with it Pat? Any suggestions?

Gee... If we would only had done nothing, everything would be rosey. What short memories you people have.

Tell me what you would have done, and how you guess it would have worked out. Don't forget the calculate the effect on our Afganistan operation if the Sadomists and Imams weren't occupied with us in Iraq, or would you have not attacked there either?

How about this suggestion;
START DRILL'in It's all about oil, stupid... Duh! That doesn't make it wrong. If we withheld food and water from the Arabs would they be wrong to attack us? Hell NO. The only thing wrong is that we arn't chasing are own resourses as dilligently as we are chasing theirs. It's long past time that we chucked the enviro fanatics out of power and put our own house in order.

Forgot....
As we continue to burn our food to power our cars we are effectively depriving the world food markets. You think people are pissed at us now because we use too much oil, wait to see how pissed they get when their hungry too.

Jim
We are willing to risk "Nuclear War" for oil.Do you really think, that our drilling for our own oil is the SOLUTION?Look for any audit of our "OIL" reserves,and you will find out, why desperation is driving "US" foreign policy.DUH....

NEOCON ?
Be advised I am no neocon but I am pro-American and unlike Pat Buchanan and Petraeus I hold every soldier's life to be precious. We do not need troops to defeat Iran, we need explosive power. We have spent trillions of tax dollars on our WMDs for the explicit purpose of defeating enemies and saving American lives. Overt killing of American soldiers is unacceptable, it is time to make an example of Iran. Religious zealots can only be stopped by declaring them dead--so be it.

Speaking of Islam
Stop by my blog for my latest entry.

It's sure to crack a few eggs!

I Hope Pat is RIGHT [for once]
If only we would take out the fanatics' training camps and nuclear facilities!

By the way, since the announcement of the 6000 centrifuges I haven't seen a new "intelligence" estimate now claiming that Iran has resumed it's nuclear program??? What gives with the leftist traitors in the intelligence apparatus? Just another day, another error from those boys!

Bush, unfortunately, tends to be TOO cautious and prudent!

Killer
Looking for and "auditing", oil reserves costs 100s of thousands of dollars. Who is going to bother when the reality is that no one will let you drill for it. We've had this "No new drilling" policy for decades, if you think our inventory records are up to date your simply ingnoring the fact that, "you can't find it if your not looking for it". Those same audits you point to show that exploration on US soil is the lowest of any oil producing nation. We get the largest % of our usage from Canada. Do you think the oil gods just stop depositing oil below the 49 parellel?

Drilling for oil won't solve the problem because our enemies arn't fighting us for the oil, but it will offer conciderable security, and maybe importantly to you, it buys us time. We can be patient if we are secure.

Back to my earier writing; so you think by doing nothing we don't risk nuclear war? Did we iliminate the risk of a nuclear war when we ingnored the words of Hitler and the build up of German forces in the late 30's? The nuclear age was born of our hesitation to confront threats before they became a crisis.

Oil will not be the cause of a nuclear war in the middle east. Oil is only the fasilitator through the revenue it offers those who wish to develope the means to cause the war. Words and actions are going to be the cause of war, and so far, all the hateful words and the action plans to carry out those words are coming from the leaders of Iran.

They won't stop hating us if we stop buying oil. That's the problem! That's why it's not really about oil... it's because of oil.

I heard Rush
say a week or so ago that we do have more oil, there is a huge deposit under N and S. Dakota, inot MOntana and Wyoming, 400 billion barrels worth called the Bakken/Bakker field. We have offshore deposits, and of course ANWR. Bush could do an Exec. Order for our National Security but he hasn't, why?
Call me cynical but like everything else that's been turned upside down and inside out, I'd follow the money. There must be a lot of people in high places making tons of money off our oil shortage, and I'm willing to bet one reason the
War on Drugs (what a joke) hasn't gone anywhere and our Border Agents jailed is because, again
people in high places are making $$$$$.
There will be a war with Iran and China, it's in Ezekial 38/39.
Duncan Hunter tried to talk about the China trade but was sidelined..more money being made in portfolios of too many people in high places so he had to be shut down.

Oh, Dear Me!
What Shall We Do? What SHALL we do?

I know. Let's ask Jimmy Carter. We can boycott the Olympics! We can all wear sweaters and drive Schwinns to work! Maybe BJ Clinton has some advice...We could cash in on the peace dividend and severely scale back our military. Then we would pose NO THREAT to Islam.

Right?

The REAL Enemy
Is plain old American liberalism. These limp-wristed fascists are VICIOUS when it comes to protesting a furrier, or blocking a timber sale, or preventing any non-Luddite enterprise.

These PC fascist socialists HATE the Americanist ideal of Liberty. They are scattered liberally throughout the judiciary. They control the schools and universities which continue to pump out hoards of illiterate, over-schooled, under-educated VOTERS.

To hell with Iran. Fifteen minutes ought to accomplish that. Then hang all the professors and burn all the schools.

Don't leave out the Lawyers
No?

A subject is required
My theory is than Iran wanted a war with Iraq. Why wouldn't they? They were scared of that regime. We used to sell Iraq weapons, and they'd kill Iranians.

Iranians are scared of true democracy. If they like getting thrown in jail for speaking out...We shouldn't impose it on them. They don't want it. Unless they point weapons at us, Israel, and other nations AFTER we get out of Iraq, then there's a problem.

Also, I support talks with Iran. Keep in mind, you can always say "No, I don't like those propositions." It's one thing to show arrogance and not to speak with anyone. It's another thing to show assertiveness and say thanks but no thanks.

I'm not afraid of terrorists. I highly doubt they're swimming across the Atlantic with knives in our mouth wanting to destroy our freedom. If you look at the past with Iran, we've actually f'ed them over quite a bit. They just want a little attention, they want us to buy their oil, and they want us to give them food, since it's so hard to grow in the desert.

I would hold one talk, and one talk only. If my demands weren't met, I'd cut them off, and buy oil elsewhere, or drill over here. OR let our oil reserves go while we are the first nation to develop new technology. We have enough to last us until like 2051 or something.

Not as easy as you'd think
Often the comparison between our military and the "military" of terrorists, insurgents etc (pick your favorite term) is used to say that we can never win or that this is a failed policy or we should use diplomacy.

I remind you that on Sept 11, 2001, 19 determined people brought a nation to its knees and forever change the lives of everyone in this country. Iraq is comparable in size to California. Its population is a little above 26 million, California's population is about 36 million, about 10 million more. What if 99% of the population of Iraq wants us there but 1% does not. Would you consider 99% a majority ? If 1% of the population of Iraq (about 250,000) were willing to fight to the death and were in California, what would be the political climate in CA.?

The point is that a small number of determined, motivated people are capable of wreaking havoc and are not easily defeated. We cannot stop the flow of drugs across our own borders. We cannot stop the flow of millions of people many of which literally walked across our borders. This country cannot clean up drug infested neighborhoods.

Did the NAZIs ever stop the French resistance ? It is a difficult task to defeat a determined enemy, even when your forces are superior.

Oh by the way. It was a small group of determined individuals who once defeated the mightiest nation on earth when most of their own countrymen either were afraid to help or didn't believe in their cause. The nation was Great Britain, the small group were Americans.

Still think Iraq should be easy?

Tibby

We Don't Need To Attack Directly
We can fund and support our own guerilla army that blows up and kills Iranian government targets and facilities.

We should play the same game they are playing. The problem is the Democrats will side with the Iranians and subvert our retaliation against the Iranians.


We Can Also
Target known border terrorists and carry out surgical strikes like the Turks did to the Kurds.

No need for all out war. An occasional cruise missle killing a "known" Iranian terrorist. Make the mullahs edgey. Never knowing if they might be the next target.

If the Iranians retaliate that will give us cause to really hit them big time in a quid pro quo style.

Play the game.

Maybe Buchanan is reading us here
Sure wish Pat was here; I'd love to say something to him. Also to "Rufus" above, (1:21 AM)

Pat; why do you have to put those scare-quotes on words like terrorists ("terrorists") and special groups, and, worse, the words MURDER AMERICANS;

If not to DISARM the truth ? We all know there are really special Iranian groups, and the fact is, they're complicit in the murder of Americans and Iraqi citizens. Just because you (and "Rufus") hate the neocons so-called --and you're against defense of Israel;

Is no disgrace to Gen Petraeus or Bush or Cheney.

RUFUS said: "Let's just declare war to everybody
Why don't US attack Syria, Iran, Pakistan, China... so many option to get American soldiers killed for no reason, so little time."

Continue next post ----->>>


DUH
I waded about half-way through the blogs before posting.

There is so much ignorance being displayed today!

Anyway, the vasst majority of Americans DEMANDED Bush to follow-up on his promise to "find and destroy the terrorists, where ever they are." Iraq was the "foot in the door" of that war on terrorism.

Bush stepped on his ying-yang declaring the "war won". Yes, Saddam was deposed! Yes, terror camps in Iraq were neutralized (they were either killed or displaced)! No, the war was NOT won!

Bush's big mistake was failure to take a lesson from the Revolution War, the Civil War, World Wars I and II. Restoration did NOT begin until the British were defeated, the Confederacy was defeated, the Germans and Axis Powers were defeated. Iran, Afghanistan, et.al., should have been given the ultimatum to join the war on terrorists or face attack by Coalition Forces.

The mistake made by our military was failure to provide "total force" in Iraq. That would have sent a clear messgae that we, and our allies, were VERY serious. It, also (at least at that time) would have been totally supported by Americans.

So far, terrorism has been removed from US shores, but Ahmadinejab and his ilk have been emboldened and encouraged by the failure of "follow through".

Bush's "foot in the door" became a "foot in the mouth", and we are now being forced into a situation of "do or die".

Rufus and Buchanan same as above:
"Let's just declare war to everybody
Why don't US attack Syria, Iran, Pakistan, China... so many option to get American soldiers killed for no reason, so little time."

Dear Rufe,

Just let's place a few bunker-busters on the labs where Iranians are enriching uranium; and shoot down any jets that rise from there to get in our bombers' faces, blow up some radar installations and ant-aircraft guns below; and come back to whwere we are today in Iraq. That's all.

When Syria, Iran, Pakistan, China... don't forget No Korea-- see it all happening on TV, they'll feel cold chills down their spines just as the Iraq war did to al Qaddafi in Libya. In just a few weeks he dismantled all his weapons labs and became quite a docile little African junior state.

They respect force. That's all they ever respect. They'll respect Petraeus, respect Bush/Cheney and neocons, and respect America. It becomes clear Rufus and Pat don't respect America very much today. Maybe later.


Another War We Won't Fight to Win?
America's problem with wars is that we won't fight to win since we might offend somebody. In Vietnam, we were afraid the Chinese or Russians would come in if we fought to win. With Iraq, we just don't want to anger any 'moderate' Muslims, converting them to radicals.

Reports suggest that "only" 10-15% of the 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, i.e., only 120-180 million Muslims are fanatics. We sure can't afford to make any more! Of course, 9/11 required only 19 fanatics...

If we are going to bomb Iran, we'd better make it Tehran when Ahmadinejad is reviewing his parading troops. Perfect time for a neutron bomb...the nuke that minimizes collateral damage and just fries people.

If we aren't willing to win the war, we'd best not start it. Let's wait until they nuke us. Then we can rise up (if we still can) in righteous indignation and retaliate.

MDogg is Delusional
Is your display of stupidity and ignorance an innocent, accidental, or intentional display?

You have posted so many times blaming Bush for the numerous incidents of terrorism in Iraq, and now you ask where terrorism has gone (in response to my statement that terrorism has basically left American shores). I usually just "smile inwardly" at the ineptitude of your posts.

Incidentally, terrorists have been active in other countries (England, Spain, France, and others - especially Iraq), but, so far, have been "quiet" in our own country since the start of the "war on terrorism".

I surmise all those big words in newspapers and used by newscasters are beyond your comprehension (1. the act or capacity for understanding; 2. the attributes implied by a term in logic). Otherwise, you would not need to ask me where the terrorists have gone.

I agree 100%--
I agree 100% with the 11:21 post by Tea Party. Yes, recently I read about the vast possibilities of oil deposits in West North Dakota, and Montana areas.

Let's see if this pursued or if it is put on the back burner because of some usual weak excuse by some paid off agency....

BUCK writes
Very good situational deciphering! I do wish you had compleed your post with a description of "U.S. National Interests".

May I do that for you?

As many posts claim, oil is some part of U.S. interests. However, the primary interest is to secure America from terroristic attacks - and there have been none since the beginning of the war.

However, failure to achieve victory from the outset through total committment, the Bush administration's inept conduct of the war, and (especially) the dimmies waffling have resulted in Americans becoming disillusioned. This, in turn, has handed the terrorists a victory of sorts.

Can I possibly be wrong about this? NOT! Just check the numerous posts.

WAR of WORDS
The only war against Iran,will be a "WAR" of words.Since the real purpose behind this "Drumbeat", is to frame the election in military terms,so as to give McCain a fighting chance.I hope, we don't anger the Chinese and force them to flood the financial markets,with $100,000,000,000.00 of "US" bonds.That talk of WAR,won't be cheap then.Iran is about as "SAFE" as New York.Maybe safer...

Thanks for the clarification...
"If the Iranians retaliate that will give us cause to really hit them big time in a quid pro quo style."

I see... if we shoot into Iran at them, it's just a police action... all in fun. But if they should shoot back at us (we're in Iraq, not the US, btw) then it's an ACT OF WAR!!!

ex-Wyomingite
11:52 and 12:59 postings are most appreciated.

Cost of war
claims to be $3 Trillion US
$3 trillion divided by 360 million US citizens =
$8,333 each.
A mere pitance compared to what we pay in taxes for special interests.
Git'er done and shut up.

good post, toro
Yeah; money was made for spending; it's been well-spent.

Just look at those gazillions Hillary's seen vanishing without any returns, from our impoverished Americans--"Can't afford the yearly vacation in Hawaii, got tapped out fixing to elect Hillary--Oh, well."

Over how many millions contributed by citizens rich and poor --? This economy must not be as scary as the talking heads want us to think. Apparently, the people have a few shekels socked away in case Obama calls for support. What recession ?

Now we'll see the "out of pocket" when the Republicans vs. Democrats all dig deep. Um glad I own several oil wells.

The last sentence says it all....
"No, it is not Iran that wants a war with the United States. It is the United States that has reasons to want a short, sharp war with Iran."

When will these bungling fools in the white house being led around by their noses by Cheney and the neo-cons learn.

Now they want to give us another of their "short" wars like, um, let me see Iraq? Afghanistan?

Our military is exhausted but the military issue isn't the point. We won the military battles in Iran and Afghanistan very quickly. What we don't do well is deal with all the issues that come afterward.

If this lame duck administration starts another war without explicit declaration by Congress before they are kicked out of office in January Bush and Cheney should be tried as traitors and thrown in jail or worse. Send them to Gitmo. Permanently. With no possibility of parol.

how truly ironic !
Sure does take the cake!

A pundit named "Slacker"

who denounces the "bungling fools in the White House," who says

WE -- "We won the military battles in Iran and Afghanistan very quickly," We ?

You have what part in this war run by bungling fools, Kimo Sabe ? You're well named; a slacker.

Don't give yourself credit for winning or losing any war; it's America who wins our battles; and our American President is Commander in Chief, not a bungling fool. __We__ bungling fools --is your own participation in America.

wow, oliver wendell slacker
He is judge and jury,

"If this lame duck administration starts another war without explicit declaration by Congress before they are kicked out of office in January Bush and Cheney should be tried as traitors and thrown in jail or worse. Send them to Gitmo. Permanently. With no possibility of parol."

Oh, my. Are you allowing the lame duck an attorney, or should they lock him up as soon as possible without saying good-by to his lame duck wife and lame duck daughters ? How are things in your part of the Halls of Justice, Judge Slacker ?

I am SICK of Islam and the Mid East
If Iraq does not cough up the 2 trillion it cost (and it will cost that with future cost), USA should get the hell out.

I know the old Islam BS is to whine and complain and justify all their evil crap for some reason. Being in Mesopotamia, Babylon (look it up) is an affront to these folks. This gives them carte blanche to do their violent crap.

I am against this war and hate it so much, but now we have to leave it so it can stand and not be overrun by Iran or Al Qaeda. That is the end game, ASAP.

Iran? They can't get the bomb. We have many years before these jokers get enough fissionable material for a bomb. However it they got it and used it, Israel or the USA would make Iran a glass parking lot. (The heat of the nukes would fuse the sand into glass.)

The solution is simple strategic strikes on their nuke plants. The IRAN PEOPLE are actually pretty moderate and not anti-America, more educated than many mid-east s*** holes.

Lets not forget they want to make a one world Islamic theocracy by force and violence, Allah willing (as they say).

I don't believe in Mohammad or the Quaran, but fine if you or anyone does, as long as they can live in peace.

Until the Islamic world becomes united in condemning (really condemning not duplicity) 9/11 and their stated objective of wiping Jews out, they are on my s*** list.

God blesses the Western countries. Of the 52 Islamic countries, with poverty, illiteracy, disease, corruption and atrocities. I wounder if God is sending a message. Humm. I'm tired of the Muslim whining and blaming the consequences of their own sins and evil on every one else. The mass of Muslims need to speak up and out against Hamas, Al quada and Clerics preaching hate.

Help!!!
George Bush has more backbone than any other

president before him? That comment ranks right up

there with,"Good job,Brownie!"

Ha ha ha ha!
Better put your hip waders on, cause the crapola is gonna get deep again, just like it did before we attacked Iraq. And now we all know it was due to out right lies and fabrications on the part of the present admin, for us to attack. Now over 4000 American soldiers are dead and who knows how many contractors, of course a mention should be made of the 1,000,000 Iraqi's dead.

Hey, we are Americans and if we make a mistake and kill a million people, tough cookies, aint that right my sicko freaks?

They talked funny anyways and wore towels on their heads. That is as good a reason, as the lies we were told, to kill them.

Now those gibberish talking, towel head wearing Iraqi's are learning first hand what American freedom is all about and are personaly experiencing the new world order and all the beauty it can bestow on them.

Can't you just feel the love?

We all should be a little envious of them, cause they are living the new world dream right now and we are stuck over here paying for it, as our children will be and our grand children and our great grand children.

Hey, we are American and I know we don't mind paying half our wages to the gov, so whats a few more generations having to pay their share. I mean really, they aren't even born yet, so who does it hurt anyways and why should we care, we will be dead anyways. I say screw em, just like Bush is doing anyways.

My take on "neocons"
Don't you just love labels? Isn't it just swell to "cubby-hole" intentions and the pending reality of having to address the increasing aggressions from Iran by deriding that reality couched in labels?

For me, I loved those "neocon" ice cream sandwiches as a kid. The strawberry was a little tart but the chocolate and vanilla were just a delight.

Play to win
Nuke'em till they glow, then shoot'em in the dark.

Mid East was made for nuclear war. Let's splash a few arab cities and get this whole mess ended rather quickly.

In a nutshell
So, let me get this straight, Israel is at the root of all evil. Does this mean that all who post angst against the state of Israel are rooting for Mahmoud?

And why not?
Things are going so well in Iraq, who could blame the Wilsonian wing of the Republicrat Party for wanting to drag knuckle through Tehran? Shia, Sunni and Kurd have set aside centuries of strife to build a unified Baghdad and thereby prep the folks living under global tyranny for similary unsolicited deliverance per America's World Democratic Tour. Watch out, Moscow!

The oil we're pumping out of Mesopotamia is more than covering the cost of the authorization of force (Congress having evolved beyond declarations of war) strengthening the dollar and reducing the national debt all while creating captive profit centers for shareholders and prospective investors alike.

Indulging my blasphemous streak, however, by what right does America deny to others the luxuries she claims for herself? If a nation bigger and more bellicose than we were to promote us to the dread "axis of evil" and proceed to destroy our likewise designated neighbor, wouldn't we pursue weaponry sufficient to dissuade such an aggression against us? I know the constitution is just a damned piece of paper, but somebody please throw me a line here. Where emperialism has failed time and time and time and time and time again, how do we think we'll make it work? And for consistency's sake, how soon until we depose the Royal Family? The Saudis' contributions to global terrorism rival those of the Persians, yet they are for some reason a moderate (cough cough petrodollars cough) ally (cough the Bush family is their purchased property cough cough).

Still, I thank our Decider for continuing to push my gold investments through the roof.

No need for terrorists
We have so many anti-Americans right here that there is no need to import hateful jihadists, we can simply call on our own home grown. Timothy McVey must be laughing in hell at the naivety of idiots like Tim Chchullaine.

Neocons?

Does Patrick forget? When the statue of Saddam fell in Bagdad, the Iranians and Syrians had to change their underwear. Even Libya started to "dump" it's chemical weapons program.

At that significant point in World History, Bush had Iran and Syria where he wanted them.

If the Surrender Democrats didn't scream "Foul", Bush could have held the honed edge of America's Military Sword at their throats. Instead of planting road-side bombs, Iran would be disassembling it's Nuclear bomb program, and Syria would still be cleaning it's britches. Instead, Reid and Murtha gave these Regimes the green-light to blow the arms and legs off our brave teenagers.

Anti Semitic
Sigh, Buchanan exposes his anti-Semitic agenda again.

Ajacks

We get out
and we hang those who got us into that useless quagmire!

How can anyone justify an error of such great magnitude, when everyone admits that it was an error. Iraq posed no threat because there were no WMD. duh.

So, who got us there. Listen to the questioners: Lieberman, perhaps. He wonders why we aren't going after Iran right now. Are we a puppet state of Israel. Don't forget that Pelosi's father is listed as one of the Founders of Israel, having been the only member of FDR's cabinet to fully support the foundation of that illegal state. She's not Italian - Argentine Jew.

Look up the U.S.S. Liberty, if you want to know where the relations between the U.S. and Israel really stand. You'll understand why all the jewish neo-cons are so rabid.

Dan
Analysis beyond flags flapping and eagles soaring seems the devil's work to some, since mathematical and economic verities do not respond to one's feelings of big-balled patriotism, but do refrain from name calling. This is an adult forum. And please entertain the possibility that informed opinions exist beyond the pale of secular progessive liberalism and neoconservatism. For if we keep up this isolationist jingoism, we just might run afoul of a country that can fight back. The nerve, I know.

Perhaps you could try your hand at answering one or more of the questions I put forth.

Mind you that those who undertake these battles that our Halfwit-in-Chief is so eager to engage are flesh and blood human beings, as opposed to philosophical abstractions. They break down. Have you ever known the singular pleasure of caring for a parent as he disintegrated emotionally, psychologically and spiritually from the insidious but inexorable pathos of having killed, having seen his friends killed and having nearly been killed as part of a war predicated on deceit, ivory tower ideology and sheer greed? It's kind of like living through a Dostoevsky novel but without the exotic women.

war with IRAN
I have read many of the uninformed and illiterate comments. They know nothing of the history of America and Democracy. One single item that most don't know about a democracy, it's one purpose is to protect the people from all enemies both internal and external. But our liberals want to change it to socialism where the government supplies and controls everything. We allowed the clinton admin. to strip this nation of military and security. And got 9/11 because of it. Now we blame BUSH for all he has tried to do to protect Americans. He has made some mistakes. Tell me that FDR and Churhill didn't make any mistakes when they lost 8000 men in one day on the beaches of Normandy. And by the way check your statistics, During 8 yrs Clinton lost 8000 men in military conflict. What war was he fighting to protect the American people? You might check Carter's four yrs.lost of military men Bush four Last question Have we had an attack on U.S soil since 9/11? How many planned attack have been Prevented? The Liberal Media won't tell you. Read "Sleeping into a nightmare" Google search will work. By the way read the KORAN and you tell me what Radical Islam is. I too believe you go to war to WIN with everything we have and as fast as we can. BUT as most of us don't know there is a lot of control of how wars are fought by powers to be that we never ever hear about and it is not necessarily Washington D.C. And definitely not the President. KOREA and Vietnam were good examples of that. I served during both of them.
So wake up America and support your country and your president and our military as we did not get to be the greatest country in the world by surrendering in any war we fought. Vote for the President that knows how to win wars and not surrender. Unless you would rather be an Islam. And believe me that will be a CHANGE if you are looking for a CHANGE.

Petraeus and Iran
Like Pat Buchanan, I think there is a real danger the Bush White House plans to attack Iran before leaving office, especially if it can timed in such a way to help McCain--and the Bush policy--get elected for another fout years.

As for teh Surge, it was never intended to get us out of Iraq. It was intended to cut the casualty figures so the american peoplle will agree to stay in Iraq "100 years", like some people eidently want us to remain in Japan, Korea, etc.

Two disgraceful policies that only a throwback to the WWII/Cold War Generation can embrace--like John McCain.

Watosh
You put things in perspective nice and simple.
Thanks

Ajax
I'm sorry but that's a jerky comment.

You can bet....
...that before Bush leaves office he will order military strikes of some sort against Iran. Why? For the same reason we invaded Iraq. TO DRIVE UP THE PRICE OF OIL! You know--oil--the business the Bush family is in. The answer to your "why can't we drill domestically?" question is the same as the answer as to why the Bush administration was adamant that Iraq include membership in OPEC as part of their contitution. So the amount of oil exported by Iraq (who has the second largest proven-easily accessable- oil reserves in the world) can be controlled.

An earlier poster asked why we did not take Iraq's oil to pay for our expenses in "liberating" them. Because Iraq is not going to be allowed to sell enough of their oil to cover their own needs. Much less repaying the USA.

This is but a small piece in the larger puzzle being assemble right in front of our faces. Check out this article and see if you agree.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2174

MDoggg Lunacy
Yesterday, at 13:38 PM, MDoggg attacked my reliance on General Petraeus and atatcked General Petraeus as untruthful. I take it that MDoggg is a lefty troll who probably thought that moveon.org's ad last September atatcking General Petraeus was cool.

General Petraeus is one of the most gifted, straight shooting generals we have had.

Phil Byler
"General Petraeus is one of the most gifted, straight shooting generals we have had."

This is utterly true, but he also makes mistakes, as in a 2004 newspaper op-ed. The thing to remember Rumsfield and Bush purged the military of people who wouldn't agree with them or had the guts to disagree with them.

Maybe it was good to be in Iraq because
They didn't have WMD?

The Iraquis would have been the first to get run over by a Nuclear Iran.

damage control
1) The iranians would never nuke us because we could retalite them into nothing

2) the goal here is to keep our JR hewing life styles as long as possible, not fix the world.

Danger of nuclear iran to other moslems
NOT America or Israel, we would wipe them out so they would use them on easier targets like sadams army.

Bigger psychos like NOrth Korea have nukes and but they don't have oil so it doesn't make the headlines.

Prov 16:7 And Reagan's success enemys
They were haveing a big prayer meeting by the white house when Regan came into office and the Iranians let the hostages go.

Godless capitalism is just as dangerouse as Godless socialism.

Sure, free market is the best. But the Iraq debacle is being in part caused by Regan economics devoid of Regan spirituality.

Socialized medicine might have short term benefits since America seems to be on a path spiraling downward with a sudden crash at the end.

Re Taft at 10:53 AM
So you say that General Petraeus made a mistake in 2004 in a newspaper op-ed and that Bush and Rumsfeld purged generals who did not agree with them?

General Petraeus led the 101st in the 2003 Iraq invasion and was brilliant then. See Rick Atkinson's book "In The Company of Soldiers." General Petareus was put in the top command in Iraq in January 2007 after Rumsfeld was fired. General Petraeus's record in the top command in Iraq has been brilliant. If the worst you can say is that General Petraeus made a mistake in 2004 in a newspaper op-ed column, then you really don't have anything on him.

Also, there was actually a debate within the military about how to handle the Iraq war. General Casey's "light footprint" strategy was criticized and, after the 2006 election, Bush was convinced that a change in Iraq strategy to the clear and hold surge strategy was needed, and it was implemented with General Petraeus put in charge.

Pointing to war with Iran?
We are already at war with Iran.
Iraq is just the main battlefield.
I believe that it has been long known to anyone who was in a position to have a high level security briefing, at least since Gulf War I (including president Clinton and his cabinet) that Iran was going to be a problem, and that we'd better secure some high ground when the time presented itself, Iraq being the best place to do that.

People who theorize that President Bush is just some kind of warmongering bloodluster spoiling for a fight...well that's naive at best.

Amazed
Thanks jimP

I am amazed I got no more comments.

I sincerely believe anyone who belittles a highly decorated General has no respect for our military at all. Freedom in the U.S.A has always been bought with the sacrifice of our fighting men that serve our country with dignity and their life so the stupid can have the right of free speech to condemn any and everything that America stands for. Like the cable guy says you can cure an ear ache but there is no cure for STUPID.

Is this Townhall, and do they allow
such blaringly honest truth....

I can't believe I am about to say this, Buchanan actually makes sense. The neocons(hahaha pseudo-conservatives get mad when using the term neocons) are beating the war drums supported by the Likud Party. I always wondered how come Israel is called the greatest/closest ally ahead of Britian, Germany or France? When Israel can't provide any troops to any of the wars being fought, can't provide a dime to fight these wars( actually 3 billion in aid goes every from the US), and yet called the closest ally? If you talk about these things, you are called an anti-semite. Evey one in the world knows, Iran has gained by these wars, and not weakened in any sense. The only country that has been weaskened by this never ending wars perpetrated by the Military Industry Complex/Allied industries, and right-wing Israelis, is the US.

Old Middle Eastern games
Mr. Buchanan, regarding Iran, perhaps the Administration knows something that you don't.

The fact is, we are looking at Iran from both sides now, from Afghanistan, and Iraq.

And if they want to keep us guessing, we can keep them guessing.


Watosh
I haven't seen your posts before, but I'm sure glad I saw them here. Well done.

I believe people do not fully appreciate what war is. To whine about "mistakes" and the fact that it's "taking so long", many are more like consumer advocates than patriots. I find myself wanting to say "it's a WAR stupid!!"

THanks also for making the point about military deaths. A great deal of political spin is made of the 4,000+ who have died in this war, without any perspective of comparison with previous wars, or in fact as you point out, previous administrations in which there was no "war".
I have no quarter with those who don't realize that it's our soldiers who keep us free, unlike many countries whre it's the soldiers who keep people in line. And I have no quarter for criticism of General Petraeus. He has done a brilliant job.

Anyway, you put it all better than I could.

Yttrium
You wrote "Mr. Buchanan, regarding Iran, perhaps the Administration knows something that you don't. "

What an excellent point. All the opinionators behave as if they have all the facts. In truth, we are all like the 10 blind men and the elephant.
I have noticed a decided backing off in stridency from some members of congress after they've had a full security briefing. That tells me there's a great deal we don't know, and we certainly don't have the perspective to know, and I also appreciate that most of it can't be told to us. Not because the administration is so 'secretive', but because they are waging a war. Some people seem to think they should put it in the newspapers or something. I'd like to play poker with them (perhaps they show you their hole cards--or maybe they just expect you to show yours.)
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.