The Iranian People's time is running out if they want to overthrow Mr. Dinner Jacket and the Mullahs by themselves.

I agree with Macker, it is time for the citizens of Iran to take this horrible man out. We do hear how there are groups there that would want this.

Iran has a government that reflects its religious hierarchy and has an elected leadership. This idea of separating a nations "people" and it's "government" is bogus. It has not turned out to be true anywhere.

We are not looking for "regime change". We are looking for the nation of Iran to act right.

But - Iran realizes that the Bush haters in America will virtually tie Americas hands in dealing with them. So long as half the nation opposes vehemently ANYTHING Bush does, they have nothing to fear from us.

,,,

We are not looking for "regime change". We are looking for the nation of Iran to act right.

Kahn

And if the nation of Iran does not act 'right', I suppose the only option left would be for the U.S. of A to once again mount a 'shock & awe' mission. Hope your answer would be a resounding NO, as in doing so you would surely lose the love and affection of the Iranian people.

CO,

It is in the US's best interest to keep Iran from gaining nuclear weapons. Best option, Iranian people overthrow the current regime, and cause the end of the research. Worst case, we take out those facilities, then let the Iranians muddle thru.

Option 3 - find a way to take out the facilities being used for nuclear weapons development - and facilitate a regime change that the Iranian people will support. This is the least likely, because of the lack of real intel on the people of Iran. I doubt we would go in the way we did in Iraq, given what we know we don't know.

I ran across this entry by following a link from a political satire site. I thought that the headline was hysterical and sat down for a quick laugh. After reviewing this site, though, I guess that it wasn't meant as a joke. My bad.

Who would of thunk it? The Iranian people like the United States more than liberals do.

CO,

We will have to do what right action requires - for the safety of America, Iran and the whole world, the current government of Iran may not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons...if no other way is open, then military action will be required.

These are some of the hard realities of the world that you just don't want to face up to.

Candian O, Oh no. I am converted. I completely agree with YOU.

I want Iran to be allowed to develop nuclear weapons so they can later seize southern Iraq and blackmail the world with oil. I want them to be able to fund Hizbollah and supply them with sophisticated and maybe even nuclear weapons so they can destroy the hated zionists. I want them to spread their particular brand of hatred all over the middle east and beyond. I'm looking forward to the day when they take a seat at the Security Council in the UN and rewrite history so that the holocaust never happened.

So long as Russia keeps selling them nuclear technology and weapons and China keeps buying their oil with money and political cover I'm sure it will happen.

I also look forward to the day when Iran makes their move and Israel kills all the people in their major population centers and vaporizes their military assets. Because that would be way better than doing something about it now.

kjstrouble

Option 4

Keep negotiations with Iran open. Iran does not have nuclear weapons and the research they are doing is for nuclear energy & medicine. U.S. Military aggression will result in nothing but more deaths, more destruction. It is not necessary and definitely not in the best interests of the U.S. to have the middle east in flames.

Kahn

I don't buy your doomsday theories.

Donate to Blogs For Bush to help keep us blogging!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Prime Sponsor
Advertise in our Prime Spot!

Premium Sponsors
Advertise in our Premium Strip

Visit Our Sponsors!

TechnoScout.com Scouting Report

Explore the latest in cool electronics and useful gadgets at TechnoScout. Read articles from industry insider, view videos and buy from our online store.
Read More...

Advertise on Blogs For Bush

More Sponsors
Advertise here
Advertise on B4B & GOPB!

GOP Bloggers

Subscribe To B4Bcast!

Site Credits
RSS 2.0

Powered by:
Movable Type 3.2

Design by:

« Political Tide Shifting to the GOP? | Main

September 04, 2006
Iranians Like Americans, Dislike Iran's "President"
This is no surrpise to those of us who have been paying attention for the past few years - but it will come as a surprise to all those who think that it is US actions which makes people mad at us, as well as those who are insistent that America under Bush has become a despised nation - from Steven Knipp in the Washington Post:

What took place over the next fortnight astonished me. Everywhere I went -- from the traffic-choked streets of Tehran in the north to the dusty desert town of Yazd in central Iran, to the elegant cultural centers of Isfahan and Shiraz -- I was overwhelmed by the warmth and, dare I say it, pro-Americanism of the people I met...
...Initially, when Iranians asked me where I was from, I'd suggest they guess. But this game quickly proved too time-consuming -- no one ever guessed correctly. So instead I would simply mumble "American." And then their faces would light up. For better or worse, Iranians are avid fans of America: its culture, films, food, music, its open, free-wheeling society.

And about that Iranian "President":

...to me, few young Iranians seemed happy with their own government. I seriously doubt that if Iran had opinion polls, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's popularity ratings would be any higher than George W. Bush's.
One quick note: it is imposible to determine the real popularity of Iran's "President" - he wasn't elected in a free election, and there isn't a free press in Iran to keep tabs on him. This report is entirely anecdotal, but I bring it up because it tracks with what I've seen over the years - the Iranians like Americans. And, as it turns out, this American has liked ever Iranian he's every met. War between our two peoples would be a horrible tragedy - Iran and America are as much natural allies as America and Britain or America and Israel. But while even men rule in Tehran, we must do what is best.

Back to the issue at hand: It is good to keep in mind that while Iran's government spends vast sums on terrorism and nuclear weapons, the Iranian economy is in tatters and only barely kept afloat by oil sales. The Iranians love their country, not their government - our trick is to make clear, when we finally take the necessary actions, that what we do is only directed against the government of Iran - the mutual enemy of the United States, and the people of Iran.

Posted by Mark Noonan at September 4, 2006 09:20 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/crawford.cgi/7812

Comments
The Iranian People's time is running out if they want to overthrow Mr. Dinner Jacket and the Mullahs by themselves.

Posted by: Macker at September 4, 2006 11:40 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with Macker, it is time for the citizens of Iran to take this horrible man out. We do hear how there are groups there that would want this.

Posted by: WildThing at September 4, 2006 12:01 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iran has a government that reflects its religious hierarchy and has an elected leadership. This idea of separating a nations "people" and it's "government" is bogus. It has not turned out to be true anywhere.

We are not looking for "regime change". We are looking for the nation of Iran to act right.

But - Iran realizes that the Bush haters in America will virtually tie Americas hands in dealing with them. So long as half the nation opposes vehemently ANYTHING Bush does, they have nothing to fear from us.

Posted by: Kahn at September 4, 2006 12:16 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

,,,

Posted by: Kahn at September 4, 2006 12:18 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are not looking for "regime change". We are looking for the nation of Iran to act right.

Kahn

And if the nation of Iran does not act 'right', I suppose the only option left would be for the U.S. of A to once again mount a 'shock & awe' mission. Hope your answer would be a resounding NO, as in doing so you would surely lose the love and affection of the Iranian people.

Posted by: Canadian Observer at September 4, 2006 12:39 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CO,

It is in the US's best interest to keep Iran from gaining nuclear weapons

Mark says:
"Iran's government spends vast sums on terrorism and nuclear weapons"

Still repeating the propaganda I see.
I must remind you, the Nuclear issue with Iran is over enrichment of power plant grade uranium. I also have to remind you, Iran has a right to that technology, and they are not breaking any laws. Bush THINKS Iran will produce bombs WHEN they have the ability. It is propaganda because you imply they are obtaining weapons now, regardless of the facts, the point of propaganda is the impression. This is an impression that creates fear over suspicions we have no evidence to support.

Hezbollah, as an entity does not fit the term terrorist, regardless of Israel and Bush labeling them as such. The point of labeling Hezbollah as a terrorist group is to, justify the actions of Israel, and to label Iran as a sponsor of terrorism. Just more propaganda that creates fear to justify action by the Bush administration. Bush is bent on attacking Iran just like he was bent on attacking Iraq.

Doesn't any of this sound familiar to you people? Regime change, because the leader is evil. WMD the inspectors have no evidence of. All in an oil rich country, that doesn't have the nuclear capability of North Korea.

This time around is a bit different, Russia and China will not allow Bush to use force through the U.N. If Bush makes the decision to attack on his own, there is a good chance Venezuela, North Korea, Russia and China will get involved, and it wont be on our side. Bush isn't that stupid, he knows he lost this one, he isn't even going to get the sanctions he wants. The only hope Bush has for a war with Iran is for Israel to start it, an option that has already failed once.

Here is my favorite part of the story:
"if Iran had opinion polls, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's popularity ratings would be any higher than George W. Bush's."
Thats a good slap to the Iranian president, only as popular as Bush.

Macker, WildThing
Do you realize that is what people here in America are trying to do? There is a huge movement in America to over-through an evil leader, in command of WMD, that has a history of attacking other countries, and ambitions to attack more. They protest at his speeches with signs and chanting, Impeach Bush!

Yah James. That's cool. Iran just wants electricity. I wonder what they mean when they say this program will crush Israel? Think they're going to bombard them with electricity?

Really, I don't get it. And geezzzz you're so smart. Should I trust Iran and ignore their enriched uranium (and now plutonium) programs? Think it will all be OK if we just leave them alone?

Kahn, don't waste your time. You are arguing with someone who thinks Iran wants nuclear technology for energy purposes. The fact that Iran has so much freakin oil they are one of the world's biggest exporters means nothing. It's all about powering the nation. He also doesn't think Hezbollah is a terrorist organization.

OH my gosh, they protest at his speeches?!?!? Well then he must be guilty if THEY say so!!!

The only thing that bothers me is that when Iran does develop a nuke and drops it on Tel Aviv and unleashes armageddon on the middle east, guys like James will be nowhere to be found.

Be sure to check out the "al-Jihad" booklet used by Hizballah and probably other terrorists planning the next attack on us. Read an analysis about it in "The Terrorist's Nightmare" blog

Kahn
" I wonder what they mean when they say this program will crush Israel? "
Maybe you can provide a link for that, because I can't find it anywhere that Iran referred to it's nuclear program crushing Israel.
I saw several comments that " Iran will crush Israel IF it attacks the Persian state".

And "Israel is prepared to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.".

So maybe in your fear of Iran's Nuclear program crushing Israel, the "they" refers to analysts talking about the situation. That's my best guess of your paranoia. Why don't you provide a link to the exact quote you are referring to.

Realistically, how many bombs are there out there, Israel is about as trigger happy as Bush and even they haven't Nuked anyone yet. A nuclear armed Iran means Israel can't use the Nuke option against them. And at this point the only solid evidence we have is Bush thinks Iran wants a Nuke. Bush has you, where he wants you, and thats sad.

NC Cop
"The fact that Iran has so much freakin oil they are one of the world's biggest exporters means nothing."

Hmmm, sell the oil or burn the oil? Ah what the hell, it's not like we will ever run out.

I wonder, if Iran stopped burning oil, would that effect the supply and demand that has an effect on gas prices?

What if Bush creates international tension over Iran's Nuclear program, starts a war in Iraq, and refuses calls for Israel to stop bombing civilians, will that effect gas prices? Yep it sure did, each and every case caused spikes. Thanks G.W.B., you're doing such a good job.

So NC Cop, do you have anything to support the terrorist label for Hezbollah? Or was that just an empty attack? It's not like they picked a country, spun up a reason to attack them, crushed them with a force intended to cause such fear, that everyone would know how dangerous it is to be on their bad side. Nope, that form of terrorism has only been used by Bush and Israel.

And not that it means Bush is guilty or not, but there is a lot of people pushing to Impeach him, in contrast to the discontent of some Iranians with their president.

"Hmmm, sell the oil or burn the oil? Ah what the hell, it's not like we will ever run out.

I wonder, if Iran stopped burning oil, would that effect the supply and demand that has an effect on gas prices"

I'd love to respond to this, but I have no idea what the hell it means, so I'll move on.

Need some evidence that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, you say? Try this:

http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=3101

Be sure and take note of the hundreds of U.S. Marines who were murdered by Hezbollah while the Marines were in Lebanon on a PEACEKEEPING mission.

They have stated that their mission is to destroy Israel. What do you call that?

It never ceases to amaze me how Bush critics like yourself will liken his actions to terrorists without a thought, yet defend Hezbollah and Hamas whenever you can. It sounds to me like you are terribly misinformed on this subject and need to learn a little more about it.

NC Cop
Of course you don't understand about the oil issue, that was obvious in your first post. I'll give you a hit. Nuclear power vs. oil burning power. One of those could be used to fuel your car, and the supply wont hold out as long as the other.

Hezbollah is a resistance group, they don't want U.S. occupying their territory. Yes they killed hundreds of marines. How many foreign soldiers have we bombed. It's only different because you label them as terrorist, otherwise it is military casualties. They want "the elimination of Western influences from the region". What is the difference between killing with a car bomb, and killing with cluster bombs?

Was that car bomb attack against the marines an attempt to invoke terror, or kill a perceived enemy? They bombed the U.S. embassy there too, killing CIA agents. Can you think of a type of building in Iraq we didn't bomb? Is there a difference? Yes, we bombed our enemy, away from home. Hezbollah didn't have that option. But they were peace keepers right? Would you put up with, Iranian troops here, Russian, China? After being at war with them or their allies? When your considered to be their enemy?

Israel was a mistake, Jews came from all over the world to set up Israel on the religious belief it was their right. Read the history on it, if you can get past you preconceived notions, you may understand the problem a little better. Also you may need to consider what the conditions are like in Gaza and the West Bank, where the Palestinian refugees live. It contributes significantly to Israel not being accepted as a peaceful neighbor. And try putting yourself in their shoes.

You need to realize, there is another world out there, where we are the enemy, and they have allies too. It's a place where, the U.S. is not trusted, and for good reason. If we believe we do nothing wrong and they are always at fault, the only option is to kill or be killed.

I don't expect you to understand, you couldn't even figure out why Iran would want Nuclear power with all that oil they have.

"Israel was a mistake"

Well that's all I need to hear out of you, Adolph. That and your love of Hezbollah let's me know that you are just another left wing Anti-Semite. Don't pull a muscle goose stepping around.

NC Cop
Look into the history.

BTW I'm not on the left.